acronyms and abbreviations · goi government of india ireda indian renewable energy development...

India GEF ACE Project Design

ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS

ACE APR

Access to Clean EnergyAnnual Project Review

AWP Annual Work PlanC-WET Centre for Wind Energy TechnologyCO Country OfficeCP Country ProgrammeCPAP Country Programme Action PlanEOI Expression of InterestEOP End of ProjectFSP Full Scale ProposalFYP Five Year PlanGEF Global Environment FacilityGHG Green House GasGOI Government of IndiaIREDA Indian Renewable Energy Development AgencyJNNSM Jawaharlal Nehru National Solar Missionkgoe Kg of Oil equivalentkWth Kilo Watt ThermalLPG Liquefied Petroleum Gas M&E Monitoring and EvaluationMNRE Ministry of New & Renewable EnergyMoEF Ministry of Environment and ForestsMt Million TonnesMTE Mid-Term EvaluationMtoe Million ton of oil equivalentMW MegawattNABARD National Bank for Agriculture and DevelopmentNAPCC National Action Plan on Climate ChangeNISE National Institute of Solar EnergyNPC National Project CoordinatorNPDOECD

National Project DirectorOrganisation of Economic Cooperation and Development

PAC Project Advisory CommitteePIF Project Identification FormPIR Project Implementation Reports PMU Project Management unit PPGPPP

Project Preparatory GrantPurchasing Power Parity

PPR Project Progress ReportsPSCRE

Project Steering CommitteeRenewable Energy

RGGVY Rajiv Gandhi Grameen Vidyutikaran Yojana 3

RPO Renewable Purchase ObligationRTA Regional Technical Advisor (UNDP)SSS NIRE Sardar Swaran Singh National Institute of Renewable

EnergySERC State Electricity Regulatory CommissionSNA State Nodal AgencytCO2 Ton of carbon dioxide

3 RGGVY is the Government of India’s programme for rural electrification.


UAC Unit Abatement CostUNDAF United Nations Development Action FrameworkUNDP United Nations Development ProgrammeUNFCCC UN Framework Convention on Climate ChangeUSAID US Agency for International DevelopmentUSD or US$ US Dollar


TABLE OF CONTENTS

ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS ........................................................................................................ 3

TABLE OF CONTENTS .............................................................................................................................. 5

LIST OF TABLES ........................................................................................................................................ 6

PART A. SITUATION ANALYSIS ............................................................................................................... 7

1 Project context – rural livelihoods and energy in India ....................................................................... 72 Baseline analysis – energy access and rural livelihoods in the targeted states...............................153 Barrier analysis .................................................................................................................................364 Key stakeholders ..............................................................................................................................40

PART B. PROJECT STRATEGY .............................................................................................................. 47

5 Project rationale, design principles and strategic considerations.....................................................476 Policy conformity and country ownership .........................................................................................507 Project objectives, outcomes and outputs ........................................................................................518 Key indicators, risks and assumptions .............................................................................................669 Cost-effectiveness; GEF incremental reasoning ..............................................................................6910 Sustainability and replicability...........................................................................................................6911 Project results framework .................................................................................................................7112 Total budget and work- plan .............................................................................................................7613 Management arrangements..............................................................................................................8214 Monitoring framework and evaluation...............................................................................................8615 Legal context.....................................................................................................................................91

PART C. ANNEXES .................................................................................................................................. 92

Annexure – A: Risk Analysis ..................................................................................................................92Annexure – B: Agreements.....................................................................................................................96Annexure – C: Terms of References ....................................................................................................102Annexure – D: Emission Reductions Calculation..................................................................................108Annexure – E: Renewable Energy Technology Compendium..............................................................111Annexure – F: Summary information on identified clusters for demonstration projects .......................112Annexure – G: Summary Report on Stakeholders Consultations.........................................................119Annexure – H: Country Office Support Service (COSS) Agreement....................................................122Annexure – I: Project Annual Targets ...................................................................................................125


LIST OF TABLES

Table 1: Cumulative installed capacity of RE as on January 1, 2014...........................................................9Table 2: Status of three states on key development parameters ...............................................................18Table 3: Share of the states in national output in various sectors ..............................................................19Table 4: Details of solar lighting solution for back-yard poultry farm ..........................................................25Table 5: Details of biogas plant for layer poultry farms...............................................................................25Table 6: Details on briquetting of biomass waste from poultry farms .........................................................26Table 7: Details of solar power pack for milk collection centres .................................................................26Table 8: Details of milk chiller for milk collection centres............................................................................27Table 9: Details of biogas plant for dairy farms...........................................................................................27Table 10: Details of solar pumps ................................................................................................................28Table 11: Details of farm level solar cold rooms.........................................................................................28Table 12: Details of solar dryers for horticulture sector ..............................................................................28Table 13: Details on solar aeration .............................................................................................................29Table 14: Details on solar fish dryer ...........................................................................................................29Table 15: Details of solar lighting solution for artisan's houses ..................................................................30Table 16: Details of solar power pack for common facility centers.............................................................30Table 17: Details of gasification system for power generation ...................................................................30Table 18: Details of Solar Charkha .............................................................................................................31Table 19: Details of Solar Powered Loom ..................................................................................................31Table 20: Details of biomass cook-stoves ..................................................................................................32Table 21: List of potential clusters for demonstration phase ......................................................................33Table 22: Barrier Analysis ...........................................................................................................................37Table 23: Key stakeholders involved in the project ....................................................................................40Table 24: Project Components and Outcomes...........................................................................................52Table 25: Outputs and Activities Contributing to the Achievement of Outcome 1......................................53Table 26: Outputs and Activities Contributing to the Achievement of Outcome 2......................................57Table 27: Outputs and Activities Contributing to the Achievement of Outcome 3.1 ...................................59Table 28: Outputs and Activities Contributing to the Achievement of Outcome 3.2 ...................................60Table 29: Outputs and Activities Contributing to the Achievement of Outcome 3.3 ...................................61Table 30: Outputs and Activities Contributing to the Achievement of Outcome 4.1 ...................................63Table 31: Outputs and Activities Contributing to the Achievement of Outcome 4.2 ...................................63Table 32: Outputs and Activities Contributing to the Achievement of Outcome 4.3 ...................................65Table 33 Project Planning Matrix ................................................................................................................71Table 34: Outcome wise detailed budget....................................................................................................76Table 35: Allocation of MNRE's co-financing contribution ..........................................................................80Table 36: Summary of Funds:.....................................................................................................................81Table 37: Estimate of direct project services (DPS) (US$).........................................................................85Table 38: M & E work-plan and budget.......................................................................................................90Table 39: Emission reduction from demonstration projects......................................................................109Table 40: Year wise and cumulative emission reduction..........................................................................110Table 41: Summary details of stakeholders' workshops...........................................................................119Table 42: Project Annual Targets .............................................................................................................125

7

PART A. SITUATION ANALYSIS

1 PROJECT CONTEXT – RURAL LIVELIHOODS AND ENERGY IN INDIA

1. India has emerged recently as the third largest economy in the world in purchasing power parity (PPP) terms. However, in terms of per capita GDP, in PPP terms, India ranks very low at 127 in the 199-country ranking. After robust economic growth by around 9% annually, the country is now dealing with slowing economic growth rates at just around 5%.

2. Of the 1.21 billion people in India, 833 million (68.8%) live in rural areas. The rural population of India lives in 640,867 villages, as identified by the 2011 Census. The number of rural households is estimated to be 138 million. According to the Economic Survey of India 2013-144, the poverty ratio in the country has declined from 37.2% in 2004-05 to 21.9% in 2011-12 and the latest poverty ratio estimates are 25.7% and 13.7%, for rural and urban areas respectively. However, going beyond defined poverty lines to the larger context of livelihoods deprivation, it can be said that nearly half of India’s rural householdsare poor in terms of insecure livelihoods options and high levels of vulnerability to risk factors5, with limited coping ability. The issue of rural livelihoods in India needs to be understood in this context.

3. Though a majority of rural households depend on farm income, low land holding and low agricultural productivity make it necessary for farmers to look for additional sources of income. Animal husbandry, dairy farming and fisheries help supplement family incomes. A number of small enterprises based on local handicrafts and other activities such as tea stalls and hotels are also important sources of income for some rural families. Recognising the need to improve livelihoods security in India’s villages, the Ministry of Rural Development, Government of India launched Aajeevika - National Rural Livelihoods Mission (NRLM) in June 2011. The Mission aims at “creating efficient and effective institutional platforms of the rural poor enabling them to increase household income through sustainable livelihood enhancements and improved access to financial services”. NRLM proposes to reach out to rural poor households through “self-managed Self Help Groups (SHGs) and federated institutions and support them for livelihoods collectives”. In addition, the poor would be facilitated to achieve increased access to their rights, entitlements and public services, diversified risk and better social indicators of empowerment. NRLM believes in harnessing the innate capabilities of the poor and complements them with capacities (information, knowledge, skills, tools, finance and collectivization) to participate in the growing economy of the country”6.

4. India is the fifth largest energy consumer in the world, accounting for nearly 5% of the world’s total energy consumption. However, India’s per capita energy use at around 614 kgoe7/year is just a third of the world average and one-eighth of the average per capita energy consumption in OECD countries. The Twelfth Five-Year Plan (2012-2017) document predicts an average annual growth rate in energy consumption of 5.7 percent per year in the Plan period, pointing out that this is in part a reflection of the need to satisfy unmet energy demands. The Plan document predicts that domestic energy supply

4 The Planning Commission has updated the poverty lines and poverty ratios for 2011-12 based on the recommendations of the Tendulkar Committee using Household Consumer Expenditure Survey 2011-12 data of the National Sample Survey (NSS) 68th round Accordingly, with the poverty line at all India level at monthly per capita expenditure (MPCE) of 816 for rural areas and 1000 for urban areas in 2011-12. The Planning Commission constituted an Expert Group under the Chairmanship of Dr. C. Rangarajan in June 2012 to ‘Review the Methodology for Measurement of Poverty’. The term of the Expert Group has been extended up to 30 June 20145 Risk factors include delayed or weak monsoon, inadequate rains, inadequate river flows, dropping water table levels, increased oil prices, communal tensions and violence, disease or pest outbreaks, inability to more produce to markets, high interest rates, high inflation rates, a family member becoming sick and needing expensive hospital treatment, inability to repay high interest loans from moneylenders, rural policy changes, corruption, and so forth.6 http://aajeevika.gov.in/7 Kilogram of oil equivalent (WDI, 2014)

8

of about 670 Mtoe8 will be supplemented by energy imports of 937 Mtoe by 2017. Thus the Indian energy sector is expected to witness an expansion of energy demand, with a persistently high dependence on imported fossil fuels. In addition, energy access issues are a persistent concern, as outlined below.

1.1 Energy scenario in India: energy access, energy imports and fossil fuel dependence are important concerns

5. India’s energy consumption is marked by large inequities, most starkly between rural and urban areas. Energy access is a major concern in India as depicted by the figures of a generally low dependence of households on “modern” fuels such as electricity and LPG - for lighting and cooking respectively.

6. In rural India, over 85% of households in rural India continue to depend on “traditional” cooking fuels (firewood and wood chips and other biomass, dung cake and coal/ charcoal) for cooking, with only 11% using LPG. About 66% of households in rural India used electricity for lighting while about 33% used kerosene.9 Even among those households having access to electricity in rural India, electricity demand is generally very low, with only 11% of those connected to the grid using over 100 kWh per month10.

7. Though fossil fuel subsidies such as on LPG and kerosene were intended to help alleviate energy poverty in India, this has not actually occurred on account of leakages and mis-targeting of subsidies. Also, analysis of past trends in household energy consumption shows that besides fuel prices, factors such as fuel availability, culture, geography, the extent of urbanization, and the design of state policies also influences fuel choices.

8. As mentioned above, another major concern in India is its high level of fossil fuel energy import dependence, primarily comprising oil and coal. Domestic production of crude oil in India has remained essentially constant during the last two decades - at 32.2 Million tonnes (Mt) in 1990-91 and 37.8 Mt in 2012-1311. The combination of rising oil consumption and relatively flat production has left India increasingly dependent on imports to meet its petroleum needs. In 2009, India was the sixth largest net importer of crude oil in the world, importing about 70 percent of its needs. India is expected to become the fourth largest net importer of oil in the world by 2025, behind the United States, China, and Japan.

9. Over the years, India’s energy import bill has also grown on account of a rising reliance on imported coal as local production has failed to match increasing coal demand. Importing about 150 million tonnes of coal a year, India is the world’s third-largest importer of coal even though it has the world’s fifth-largest coal reserves. Rising oil and coal imports raise serious concerns about India’s energy security, in particular its ability to physically source the necessary oil requirements or to cope with the negative economic impacts of any constrained global oil supply, or major oil price rises.

10. Although, on a per capita basis, India is among the lowest GHG emitters, India is the fourth largest global emitter of GHG on the basis of total annual emissions. Given that India emits more than 5% of global CO2 emissions and that India’s GHG emissions are showing a rapidly increasing trend (with emissions nearly trebling in the last two decades), India’s growing fossil fuel consumption – with fossil fuel demand being the largest source of CO2 emissions globally – is a cause for concern.

8 Million tonnes of oil equivalent9 Energy sources of Indian households for cooking and lighting, Ministry of statistics and Programme Implementation, Government of India, September 2012 10 An overview of Indian energy trends: Low carbon growth and development challenges. Prayas Energy Group, September 200911 http://petroleum.nic.in/pngstat.pdf

9

1.2 Renewable energy potential and initiatives

11. The per capita electricity consumption in India is approximately 778 kilowatt-hours (kWh)12 (as of March 2012), which is just 30 percent of the global per capita average of 2,600 kWh. The impetus to provide improved and eventually universal energy access, reduce dependence on both energy imports and fossil fuels, are the key drivers for India to turn to renewable energy options.

12. India is endowed with large renewable energy resources. According to the Ministry of New and Renewable Energy (MNRE), among the various renewable energy resources, solar energy potential is the highest in the country. In most parts of India, clear sunny weather is experienced 250 to 300 days a year. The annual radiation varies from 1,600 to 2,200 kWh/m2, which is comparable with radiation received in the tropical and sub-tropical regions. The equivalent energy potential is about 6,000 million GWh of energy per year13. The Potential for wind power generation for grid interaction has been estimated at about 48,500 MW taking sites having wind power density greater than 200 W/m2 at 50 m hub-height with 1% land availability in potential areas for setting up wind farms @12 ha/MW14. It is also estimated that on average, India has 300 sunny days per year and receives an average hourly radiation of 200 MW/km2. It is estimated that 12.5% of India’s land mass, or 413,000 km2, is potentially available for harnessing solar energy. The estimated potential for small hydro in India is 20,000 MW over 6,474 prospective sites15. MNRE estimates India’s biomass-based electricity potential at 18 GW from around 120-150 million tonnes per year of available biomass resources. This estimate is in addition to about 5 GW of power generation that is possible from bagasse-based cogeneration in sugar mills16.

13. The Government of India recognizes that ongoing aggressive development of its renewable energy resources is critical to ensure that it is able to meet both its economic and environmental objectives. Consequently, renewable energy development is promoted through a range of policies and actions.

14. MNRE is the nodal Ministry of the Government of India for all matters related to new and renewable energy. MNRE has evolved through several steps from the Commission of Additional Sources of Energy that was established in 1991. The Ministry works in close collaboration with state level renewable energy development agencies (State Nodal Agencies - SNAs). The Ministry has been instrumental in setting up and supporting a wide range of institutions to develop and promote renewable energy technologies and applications in India. These include public financial institutions such as the Indian Renewable Agency Development Agency (IREDA) and research institutes such as the National Institute of Solar Energy (NISE), Centre for Wind Energy Technology (C-WET), Alternate Hydro Energy Centre (AHEC), Sardar Swaran Singh National Institute of Renewable Energy (SSS NIRE), and the more recent addition - the Solar Energy Corporation of India (SECI).

15. The Government of India’s MNRE reports that India has over 30 GW of installed renewable electricity generation capacity, which is approximately 15% of India’s total installed grid electricity generation capacity. However, generation of electricity from renewable energy sources is estimated at just over 5% of total grid electricity generation.

Table 1: Cumulative installed capacity of RE as on January 1, 2014

Grid Interactive Power (capacities in MW)

Wind Power 20,299

Small Hydro Power 3,774

Biomass Power & Gasification 1,286

12 http://mospi.nic.in/mospi_new/upload/Energy_Statistics_2013.pdf13 http://mnre.gov.in/information/solar-rpo/14 http://www.mnre.gov.in/schemes/grid-connected/solar-thermal-2/15 http://www.mnre.gov.in/schemes/grid-connected/small-hydro/16 http://www.mnre.gov.in/related-links/grid-connected/biomass-powercogen/

10

Bagasse Cogeneration 2,513

Waste-to-Energy 99

Solar Power 2,208

Total 30,178

Off-grid or Captive Power (capacities in MW)

Waste to Energy 120

Biomass (non-bagasse) Cogeneration 517

Biomass Gasifiers Rural 18

Industrial 146

Aero-Generators/Hybrid systems 2

Solar PV Systems 160

Water mills/micro hydel 10 (2,547)

Biogas based energy systems -

Total 973

Other renewable energy systems

Family Biogas Plants 4.7 million

Solar Water Heaters 7.5 million m2

Source: MNRE website accessed in April 2014

16. A wide range of Government of India (GoI) policies and schemes17 have sought to support the expansion of renewable energy, as follows:

Electricity Act 2003: Mandates that each State Electricity Regulatory Commission (SERC) must establish minimum renewable power purchases; allows for the Central Electricity Regulatory Commission (CERC) to set a preferential tariff for electricity generated from renewable energy technologies; and provides open access of the electricity transmission and distribution system to licensed renewable power generators.

National Electricity Policy 2005: Allows SERCs to establish preferential tariffs for electricity generated from renewable sources.

National Tariff Policy 2006: Mandates that each SERC must specify a renewable purchase obligation (RPO) with distribution companies in a time-bound manner with purchases to be made through a competitive bidding process.

Rajiv Gandhi Grameen Vidyutikaran Yojana (RGGVY) 2005: Supports extension of electricity to all rural and below poverty line (BPL) households through a 90% subsidy of capital equipment costs for renewable and non-renewable energy systems.

Eleventh Plan 2007–2012: Established a target that 10% of power generating capacity should be based on renewable sources by 2012 (a goal that has already been reached); it also supported the phasing out of investment-related subsidies in favour of performance-oriented incentives.

17. In June 2008, India’s first National Action Plan on Climate Change (NAPCC) was released. It outlined existing and future policies and programs addressing climate mitigation and adaptation. The plan identified eight core “National Missions” running through 2017.

17 Indian Renewable Energy Status Report. Background paper for DIREC 2010. NREL/TP-6A20-48948 October 2010

11

18. The Jawaharlal Nehru National Solar Mission (JNNSM) is part of the NAPCC. JNNSM has a target for the deployment of 20,000 MW of solar power, 20 million m2 of solar thermal collector area and 20 million solar lighting systems by 2022. The objective of JNNSM is to create a policy and regulatory environment that provides a predictable and effective incentive structure that enables rapid and large-scale capital investment in solar energy applications and encourages strong technical innovation and the lowering of costs. The Mission adopted a 3-phased approach, spanning the remaining period of the 11th Plan and first year of the 12th Plan (up to 2012-13) as Phase 1, the remaining 4 years of the 12th Plan (2013-17) as Phase 2 and the 13th Plan (2017-22) as Phase 3. At the end of each plan, and mid-term during the 12th and 13th Plans, there will be an evaluation of progress and a review of capacity and targets for subsequent phases – to be based on emerging cost and technology trends, both domestic and global.

19. Many states have introduced state-level renewable energy policies with their own schemes and tax incentives for renewable energy. Various states have implemented provisional measures such as concessional open access charges for captive renewable energy projects and waivers on cross-subsidy surcharges. These measures are meant to reduce the burden resulting from the generally lower plant load factors of renewable energy projects.

20. SERCs also set state-specific targets for distribution companies to purchase a certain percentage of their total power requirement from renewable energy sources through targets set in the form of Renewable Purchase Obligations (RPOs). As part of its policy to promote renewable energy, India launched the Renewable Energy Certificate (REC) Mechanism in 2010. Under this scheme, generators of renewable energy are granted an REC per unit of green energy that they contribute to the grid. RECs have begun to be traded on the power exchanges, with the RECs being purchased by states / agencies that are otherwise unable to meet their RPOs.

21. The National Clean Energy Fund was created in 2011 as a funding mechanism for research and development in the field of clean energy technologies. The fund is created by levying a nominal cost on coal. Though the fund is large (expected to grow to INR 100 billion) the guidelines for utilisation of this Fund have been found to be very broad-based with the result that the Fund is now being used for routine energy projects including those in the new and renewable energy sector.

1.3 Rural livelihoods in India

22. Over 85% of rural incomes in India are generated from agriculture, although the sector’s contribution to the Gross National Product (GNP) is just around 35%. More than 12-15% of rural families are landless. About 90% of rural families own less than 51% of the land available, with an average per capita holding of only 0.19 ha. Out of the 147 million ha of agricultural lands, about 60 million ha are located in arid zones, which are mostly owned by poor families. That rural agricultural workers spend about 75% - 80% of their earnings on food is an indicator of their low level of income and their limited spending capacity. As the chances of crop failure on these arid lands is very high, the farmers generally do not invest in external inputs like improved seeds, fertilisers and plant protection measures and end up with poor crop yields, even during normal rainfall years.

23. Agricultural production in India is largely based on rain-fed irrigation where rainfall is the main source of water. However, in the absence of adequate soil and water conservation practices, it is estimated that over 65% of rainwater runs off, leading to high levels of flooding when it rains. About 28% of the total cropping area in the country is under irrigation. As a result of poor soil and water conservation measures, the average yield of food crops in India is only 1.9 tonnes/ha as compared to 4.0 tonnes/ha in China. Due to excessive use of water for irrigation, over 9 million ha of formerly fertile lands have turned into wastelands, thereby posing a serious threat not only to food security and employment generation but also to community health, biodiversity and the environment.

24. Livestock is an important source of supplementary income. India has over 500 million head of livestock, which include cattle, buffaloes, sheep and goats. Among them, cattle and buffaloes are popular for milk production. Over the last three decades (1982 to 2012), average productivity of Indian cows has grown from 1.9 to 3.9 kg of milk per day. This is still significantly lower than global standards — UK, USA, and

12

Israel are at 25.6, 32.8 and 38.6 kg per day, respectively18. The poor and landless prefer to maintain sheep or goats and let them loose for grazing on community pastures.

25. Poor productivity of the land and livestock and the inefficient use of forests are the causes of seasonal employment in villages. Small farmers have work only for 100-120 days for growing one crop in a year, which is not adequate to sustain their livelihoods. Hence, they have to struggle to earn additional wages by working in irrigated areas or they migrate to urban areas. The migration pattern varies with the region, opportunities and socio-economic status of the families. The poorest families, particularly the landless and marginal holders owning poor quality land tend to migrate with the entire family. Many tribal families migrate to cities as construction workers and return at the onset of the rains. Such migrations severely affect the quality of life, due to poor health, lack of education and social pressures leading to the erosion of moral values.

26. Forests have been providing many direct and indirect benefits to rural communities. As against the recommended 33% of the total geographical area to be placed under forest cover; only 24% land is under forest cover, according to the India State of Forest Report 2013. An estimated 275-400 million people depend on forests for a variety of goods and services. These includes collection of edible fruits, flowers, tubers, roots and leaves for food and medicines; firewood for cooking (some also sale in the market); materials for agricultural implements, house construction and fencing; fodder (grass and leaves) for livestock and grazing of livestock in forest; and collection of a range of marketable non-timber forest products.19

1.4 Livelihoods Interventions in India

27. In agriculture, until the 1960s the predominant livelihood interventions covered irrigation through large dams and canal systems, followed by the introduction of the high yielding crop varieties during the Green Revolution, influencing the livelihoods of over 40 million farmers and a similar number of landless labourers. India has added over 40 million hectares of irrigation since independence in 1947; the largest increase in irrigated land in human history. This has generated or stabilized the livelihoods of millions of people.

28. Originally called the National Rural Employment Program (NREP), and later the Sampoorna Gram Samriddhi Yojana (SGSY), wage-employment was generated in the lean season through public works such as road building. In 2006, this approach was substantially revised with the National Rural Employment Guarantee Act, which guaranteed 100 days of employment to any citizen wanting to work. The resulting Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Scheme has generated over 16 billion days of work and generated rural incomes to the range of INR 2.48 trillion since its inception.

29. In the field of self-employment, the interventions from Government started with the Integrated Rural Development Programme in 1980, later re-fashioned into the Swarna Jayanti Grameen Swarozgar Yojana (SJGSY), to promote self-employment among the poor through acquisition of an income-generating asset with the help of a bank loan and a government subsidy. The National Rural Livelihood Mission (NRLM) was launched in 2012; taking the SGSY idea forward by creating institutions of the poor that would anchor rural livelihoods development in a sustainable manner.

30. In addition, there are a number of programmes run by sectoral institutions such as the National Dairy Development Board, the Central Silk Board, the Coir Board, the National Horticultural Board, the National Fisheries Development Board, the Khadi and Village Industries Commission and the Development Commissioners for Handloom and Handicrafts, focusing on specific sectors of the economy.

31. Also noteworthy are programmes run by non-governmental organisations (NGOs), for promoting livelihoods in different regions and sectors. NGOs such as SEWA, BAIF, MYRADA, AKRSP, PRADAN,

18 http://www.thehindubusinessline.com/opinion/indian-cow-may-your-yield-increase/article5835726.ece 19 http://envfor.nic.in/sites/default/files/redd-bk3_0.pdf

13

RGVN and BASIX have been active in this field. The Self Employed Women’s Association (SEWA) works with over 750,000 self-employed women of low-income households, while the Bharatiya Agro-Industries Foundation’s (BAIF) programmes support one million livelihoods, comprising cattle cross-breeding, pasture development, horticulture, etc. Yet another intervention has been that of Venkateswara Hatcheries to develop the poultry sector, culminating in the National Egg Coordination Council, which serves over 200,000 poultry producers. Various micro-finance interventions by banks and NGOs have influenced the livelihoods of more than twelve million people.

1.5 Energy and Rural Livelihoods Linkage

32. Of the livelihoods sectors that are the most significant and critical for rural India i.e. farming, horticulture, dairy, poultry, fisheries, handicrafts such as bamboo, cane and weaving and a range of other cottage / village industries – several suffer from low productivity and income insecurity, as described above. Higher and stable productivity is associated with higher energy intensity. As a result, access to reliable energy is an imperative. Energy requirements are typically for electric, mechanical and / or thermal applications.

33. Recognition of the need for energy in livelihoods activities is most evident in pump-sets for irrigation. Indian pump-sets have largely been running on diesel, or grid electricity when it is available. It is estimated that India has over 21 million pump-sets, of which nearly 9 million run on diesel, while the rest are electric and depend on the electricity grid20. Nearly 20-25% of India’s electricity consumption is accounted for by irrigation, and this figure is likely to increase given that less than 40% of India’s cultivated land is irrigated (the rest being rain-fed). It is to be noted that the use of diesel pumps result in huge subsidies. According to the CEA, despite many upward revisions, electricity tariffs for agriculture (pumping) remain low and cover just 30 percent of the average cost.21 In addition, not just are diesel costs rising, but the use of diesel for water pumping also has implications for high diesel subsidies and high foreign exchange outgoings. Thus, there is a strong motivation to find alternatives to the use electric and diesel pump sets. As an early RE intervention in this area, MNRE announced in March 2014 a programme to launch 17,500 solar PV based pumping systems in a number of states22.

34. Other specific energy-requiring applications have also been emphasised for some of the key livelihoods sectors. In particular, it is estimated that about 25% of India’s horticultural produce is wasted due to lack of facilities for post-harvest processing (including cold storage, drying, pulp making etc.) for horticultural perishable output. A National Centre for Cold Chain Development (NCCD) has been established to work in close collaboration with industry and other stakeholders to promote and develop an integrated cold chain in India for perishable agricultural commodities to reduce wastage and to substantially improve both farmers’ incomes and reduce prices for consumers. Similarly, fish storage and drying facilities are expected to considerably reduce wastage and increase income of fisher-folk. Schemes for solar fish drying (with LPG back-up) indicate recognition of this opportunity. However, access to the necessary adequate “modern” energy (24/7 reliable grid electricity supply and/or reliable LPG supplies) for major rural livelihoods activities is currently low in rural India.

1.6 India and Climate Change

35. India is undertaking a wide range of initiatives to address the threat of climate change on issues ranging across forestry, glaciology, energy efficiency and climate change mitigation technology. India is an active participant in international negotiations on climate change under the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC). The Ministry of Environment and Forests (MoEF) is the UNFCCC focal

20http://www.cstep.in/sites/default/files/CSTEP_%20Harnessing%20Solar%20Energy%20Options%20for%20India_Shubha%20Raghavan%20et%20al_Solar%20Studies.pdf21 http://www.cea.nic.in/reports/monthly/executive_rep/jun14.pdf22 http://www.ctara.iitb.ac.in/tdsl/pastreports/autumn2012/solarpvpumpingsurvey.pdf

14

point as well as the operational focal point of the Global Environment Facility (GEF), while the Department of Economic Affairs (DEA) of the Ministry of Finance is the GEF political focal point.

36. The eight missions under India’s National Action Plan on Climate Change (NAPCC) are the: National Solar Mission; National Mission for Enhanced Energy Efficiency; National Mission on Sustainable Habitat; National Water Mission; National Mission for Sustaining Himalayan Ecosystems; National Mission for a Green India; National Mission for Sustainable Agriculture; and National Mission on Strategic Knowledge for Climate Change. The NAPCC’s relevance relating to this project includes:

Achieving national economic growth objectives through a qualitative change in direction that enhances ecological sustainability, leading to mitigation of greenhouse gas emissions;

Devising efficient and cost-effective strategies for end-use demand-side management;

Developing new and innovative forms of market, regulatory and voluntary mechanisms to promote sustainable development.

1.7 Assistance by UNDP in the Area of Environment and Energy

37. The India UN Development Action23 Framework (UNDAF) provides the objectives of the wider UN system’s assistance to India for the period 2013 – 2017, and is harmonised with the Twelfth Five Year Plan of the GoI (Government of India).

38. The India UNDAF “is a strategic framework document that sets out six outcomes which focus on achieving inclusive growth, improving food and nutrition security, promoting gender equality, ensuring access to quality basic services, strengthening decentralization and delivering sustainable development. All these outcomes are in line with the fundamental principles contained in the Approach Paper to the Twelfth Five Year Plan.” The UNDAF 2013 – 2017 also states “The critical requirement for inclusive growth is to generate sustainable livelihoods, which in turn requires synergistic action -building skills with accessible financial services including partnering with private sector initiatives.” The UNDAF 2013 – 2017 has two outcomes (out of six) that are highly relevant to this GEF-ACE project, namely inclusive growth and sustainable development. The Inclusive Growth Outcome includes “sustainable livelihoods” and “environmental sustainability”, and the Sustainable Development Outcome includes “clean energy for productive use”.

39. UNDP was an active partner in the development of the UNDAF and is also a lead agency for many of the thematic areas of interventions by the UN system in India under the UNDAF. The UNDAF states that the UN proposes to work in nine (9) States of India with the highest proportion of people living in poverty - Assam, Bihar, Chhattisgarh, Jharkhand, Madhya Pradesh, Maharashtra, Odisha, Rajasthan and Uttar Pradesh. Among these, Odisha, Assam and Madhya Pradesh are targeted states in this project.

40. UNDP operations in India fall under the “Country Programme Action Plan” (CPAP) 2013 – 2017 agreed between the GOI and UNDP. Under the Sustainable Development Outcome of the CPAC 2013 - 2017, “UNDP’s objective in this area is to expand access to clean energy and help build the capacity of communities to manage natural resources and withstand climate change and disasters. Specifically, at the request of the Government and in consultation with partners, UNDP will intensify its support for initiatives that increase access to clean energy for productive uses in off-grid, underserved rural regions. UNDP will support decentralized electricity generation through renewables, particularly in off-grid areas. Under the Ministry of New and Renewable Energy, UNDP will also support formulation of

23 “The ‘A’ in the acronym UNDAF now stands for “action” rather than “assistance” as in the past. This is a subtle, but important change, which reflects an evolving partnership between the UN and the Government of India. This emphasis on action is reflected in the commitment of the UN to joint work which will bring greater coherence and synergy to its work in India” – Deputy Chairman of Planning Commission of India, the UN nodal partner from the Government of India (GoI).

15

policy frameworks and help to address barriers to expanding and scaling up energy access in rural areas to strengthen livelihoods. Support will be provided to set up pilot demonstration projects that promote entrepreneur-based business and delivery models that can be further scaled up. UNDP will help to strengthen the capacities of local communities to deploy new technologies and of market-based service providers to adapt and maintain technologies.”

41. The Government of India, through its designated nodal department, the Department of Economic Affairs (DEA) in the Ministry of Finance, has exercised the necessary national ownership and direction of UNDP program activities by approving and signing the Country Programme Action Plan (CPAP) 2013-2017 with UNDP. Specific mention is made in the CPAC 2013 – 2017 that nearly 40% of the estimated $260 million resource requirement is expected to be mobilized from UN Trust Funds, including the GEF.

2 BASELINE ANALYSIS – ENERGY ACCESS AND RURAL LIVELIHOODS IN THE

TARGETED STATES

42. The proposed project targets three states: Odisha, Assam and Madhya Pradesh24. The state of Odisha is in eastern India, Assam is one of the north-eastern states, and Madhya Pradesh is a central state. Though situated in three different regions of India, and with varying geographic and socio-cultural profiles, the three states have a lot in common. On the Human Development Index and total poverty fronts, all three States belong to the bottom eight in India and are way below the national averages. Brief geographic and socio-economic profiles of the three states are provided below.

2.1 Geographic and socio-economic profile

2.1.1 Assam

43. Assam is spread over a geographical area of 78,438 square km accounting for 2.4 percent of India's total land area. Of this area, about 25 percent is classified as forest area and about 4 percent is under tea estates. Assam is also known for its abundant natural resources, perennial rivers, fertile lands and its long history. Assam has a significant oil and gas industry and the Brahmaputra valley is thought to still hold a large quantity of ‘yet-to-find’ oil25. Assam also has large quantities of low ash coal resources, limestone and dolomite deposits. Petroleum (crude oil) is the principal mineral produced in Assam. In spite of being resource-rich, Assam has remained one of the poorest states in India.

44. Most of the Assam’s population lives in the lush and verdant valleys of its two major river systems, with twenty-four districts in the Brahmaputra Valley and the three districts of the Barak Valley. Less densely populated are the two hill districts of Karbi-Anglong and the North Cachar Hills, set in the low-lying hills that separate the two river valleys.

45. With 32.91 million people, Assam accounts for 2.58% of the total population of India. Assam has 85.90% of its total population living in rural areas, which is higher than the national average of 68.90% as per the 2011 Census. The combined population of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes in the state is nearly 19.26 percent.

46. Assam is among top five states with the highest percentage of its population living below the poverty line. According to the Tendulkar Committee Report, the Poverty Headcount Ratio in Assam is 34.4%. The rural poverty rate is 36.4% and urban poverty rate is 21.8%. Assam’s economy continues to be

24 With scope for the project to potentially be extended to Jharkhand and Meghalaya25 Directorate General of Hydrocarbons, under Ministry of Petroleum and Natural Gas, Govt. of India, see http://www.dghindia.org/3.aspx

16

predominantly an agrarian economy with more than 52% of the total labour force engaged in agriculture and allied activities.

Figure 1: District map of Assam

2.1.2 Odisha

47. Odisha has a land area of 155,707 square km (4.74 percent of India’s landmass) and a population of 36.8 million people (3.47% of India’s population). Administratively the state is divided into 30 districts. The extensive ranges of hilly forests, several lofty peaks, rolling highlands, a long stretch of coastline, an extensive riverine system, brackish waters, coastal mangroves, and coastal plains together have endowed the state with a wide range of ecological habitats for a diverse and broad spectrum of flora and fauna.

48. About 23 percent of Odisha’s population comprises the indigenous tribal population, mostly concentrated in the north-western and south-western districts of the state with traditional means of livelihoods. The tribal population has a heavy dependence on forests for their livelihood. The north-western districts (Sundargarh, Keonjhar, and Mayurbhanj) account for 35.3 percent of Odisha’s tribal population and the south-western districts (Koraput, Kalahandi, Malkangiri, Nawrangpur, Nuapada, Rayagada, Kandhamal, Boudh, Balangir and Saharanpur) account for another 39.1 percent. The forces of modernization have largely bypassed them and marginalized them in economic terms, threatening their livelihoods security. The population belonging to Scheduled Castes constitutes a little more than 16 percent of the state’s population. Unlike the tribal population, they are mostly concentrated in the coastal districts, namely Balasore, Bhadrak, Cuttack, Jajpur, Jagatsinghpur, Kendrapara, Khurda, Ganjam, Nayagarh and Puri, which together account for 52.8 percent of the state’s Scheduled Caste (SC) population.

17

49. On the basis of physical features and agro-climatic conditions, it is possible to divide Odisha into four zones:(i) Northern Plateau; (ii) Central Table Land (iii) Eastern Ghats and (iv) Coastal Plains. Odishareceives about 1500 mm (60 inches) of rainfall normally, with a variability of 25–30 percent. About 77 percent of the rainfall comes from the southwest monsoon (June to September). However, the southwestern districts of Kalahandi, Balangir, and Koraput fall in the rain shadow zone of the southwest monsoon and hence receive highly erratic rainfall.

Figure 2: District Map of Odisha

2.1.3 Madhya Pradesh

50. Madhya Pradesh (MP), commonly known as the Heart of India has its capital in Bhopal. In the year 2000, the eastern part of Madhya Pradesh was formed into the separate state of Chhattisgarh. Madhya Pradesh with a geographical spread of 308,140 square km is the second largest state in the country by area and constitutes more than 9% of the total geographical area of India. The forest cover of Madhya Pradesh constitutes 30.73% of its geographical area. Madhya Pradesh has 50 districts consisting of 313 blocks and 55,393 villages. Madhya Pradesh is one of the foremost Indian States to implement the three tiers Panchayat Raj System in the country and has 50 Zila (District) Panchayats, 313 Janpad (Blocks) Panchayats and 23,040 village panchayats having their own elected representatives with a 50% reservation for women.

51. The total population of Madhya Pradesh is 72.59 million, of which 52.5 million live in rural areas. Madhya Pradesh also has one of the largest tribal populations with 18 districts being predominantlytribal districts. The share of scheduled tribes (ST) and the scheduled castes (SC) is 20.27% and 15.17% respectively.

52. The BPL (Below Poverty Line) survey of 2002-03 with updated figures to October 2010 highlight that 4.65 million (47.4 percent) households in rural Madhya Pradesh are living below the poverty line. Madhya Pradesh accounts for nearly 11 percent of the total rural population of India. Tribal households are the poorest among the most deprived social groups in India.

18

Figure 3: District Map of Madhya Pradesh

Error! Reference source not found. below outlines the similarities and differences among the three states on various basic geographic and socio-economic aspects as relevant to energy access and rural livelihoods activities.

Table 2: Status of three states on key development parameters

Parameter National AssamMadhya Pradesh

Odisha

Basic indicators – geographic and demographic

Population (in millions) 1,210 31.16 72.59 41.94

Population Rank (29 States)26 14 6 11

Population density (persons per square km) 382 397 235 269

Number of districts 672 27 51 30

Number of inhabited villages 593,731 26,395 52,117 47,529

Geographical area (square km) 3,287,590 78,438 308,252 155,707

Socio-economic indicators

Income per capita (INR per capita real Net State Domestic Product at 2004-05 prices)

35,993 21,406 22,264 23,875

Human Development Index (HDI) 0.467 0.444 0.375 0.362

HDI rank in India (of 23 recorded States) 16 20 22

Poverty (% below poverty line) 21.92 31.98 31.65 32.59

Poverty rank (of 29 States) 22 21 23

26 Ranking of states before the division of Andhra Pradesh

19

Parameter National AssamMadhya Pradesh

Odisha

Rural Unemployment rate (Nos. Per 1000 population)

16 39 7 30

% rural population below the poverty line 26% 34% 36% 36%

Share of agriculture in state economy 28% 25% 18%

% of villages electrified 94.4% 96.1% 97.8 % 81.9 %

% of rural households with electricity used as the primary source of lighting energy

28% 35% 58%

% of rural households with modern fuels (LPG / PNG/biogas / solar) as the primary source of cooking energy

12% 2% 4% 2%

53. The three States also have middling to low shares in the value of output in the primary sector. The Error! Reference source not found. below gives a comparative picture of the value of output.

Table 3: Share of the states in national output in various sectors27

As % of total value for India Assam Madhya Pradesh Odisha

Value of total agricultural output 2.35% 5.50% 2.95%

Value of total forestry output 1.53% 5.58% 3.85%

Value of total livestock output 1.01% 4.59% 2.24%

Vale of total egg output 1.19% 1.20% 4.36%

Value of total milk output 0.91% 5.30% 1.21%

Value of total fish output 4.09% 0.87% 4.12%

Value of total inland fish output 6.94% 1.50% 4.52%

2.2 Livelihood activities in the three states

2.2.1 Assam

Primary Sector livelihoods – agriculture, animal husbandry, fisheries

54. Agriculture and its allied activities play an important role in the socio-economic development of Assam, as this sector is the major contributor to Assam‘s economy, as well as providing livelihoods for a significant proportion of the population of the State. However, about 23% of the net sown area is either flood or drought prone and more than 83 percent of the farmer families are small and marginal farmers.

55. Animal Husbandry sector has a significant impact on employment generation in Assam and plays a vital role in income generation of both the rural and semi-urban economy. The fisheries sector has a higher growth rate than other agriculture and allied sectors. Besides swamps and low lying areas, the two major rivers and their tributaries have a high growth potential for scientific fish farming/ fishing and could play a pivotal role in the socio-economic development and employment generation in Assam. There are about 3,910 sq. km of water area in Assam in the form of rivers, ponds and tanks.

27 Compiled from data provided by Ministry of Statistics and Programme Implementation, Government of India

20

56. Fish farming in Assam to date in natural water bodies has been mostly traditional capture fishery only. The scientific fish farming is practiced generally in individual and community tanks. Recently, emphasis has been given for scientific fish farming in ponds and community tank through awareness, training, Government support and subsequent bank linkages. But Assam is yet to reach self-sufficiency in fish production in respect of economic as well as minimum nutritional requirement of 11 kg/person/year, considering that 90% of Assam’s population eat fish. The gap is partially maintained by imported fish from other States.

Production Sector livelihoods – handloom and silk

57. Handloom Weaving is a way of life and intensely linked with Assamese culture and heritage. The Handloom Industry of Assam is known for its rich tradition of making handloom and handicraft products. It also plays a very important role in the socio-economic development of Assam. Assam has more than 1.3 million looms out of the total 2.8 million looms in the country. In spite of being intensely connected with the culture of the State, the Handloom Industry has not flourished in the commercial sphere. At present, about 280,000 looms are being utilized for commercial weaving in the true sense. About 570,000 looms run semi-commercially and provide subsidiary income. The rest are domestic looms and are run to meet domestic requirements.

58. Traditionally, sericulture is a major cottage industry in the State. Non-mulberry silk in general and muga silk in particular has been closely associated with the rituals and traditions of Assam and thus, silk production and its uses has been an important household activity in Assam over the years. Rearing of eri, muga and mulberry silk worms plays an important role in the economic development of a large section of the rural population of Assam. Sericulture is practiced in more than 10,532 villages and provides employment to 260,000 families. Assam accounts for the highest production of muga and eri silk in India. Further Assam has the near monopoly in the world in the production of muga, the “golden silk” as about 99% of the muga silk is produced in Assam. Assam has also achieved Geographical Indication for muga Thread. It is also noteworthy that more than 65% of the people obtaining their livelihood from sericulture in Assam are women.

Livelihoods support initiatives in Assam

59. The Assam State Rural Livelihoods Mission (ASRLM) will anchor the planning and implementation of rural livelihoods activities in the State. Under the broad framework of the National Rural Livelihoods Mission, the ASRLM will promote self-help groups (SHGs) of women and their federations. This community institutional structure will anchor the livelihoods promotion activities in Assam.

60. Non-governmental organizations such as Action North East Network (ANT), Rural Volunteers Centre, Rashtriya Gramin Vikas Nidhi and a number of organizations supported by the Khadi and Village Industries Commission are also active in the livelihoods development sphere in rural Assam.

61. As per the figures for year 2012 from the National Bank for Agriculture and Rural Development (NABARD), there are 276,565 self-help groups in Assam. These groups are reported to have collective savings of close to INR 950 million. Of these, 28,000 SHGs are reported to have obtained bank loans through the NABARD supported SHG-Bank linkage programme, to the tune of INR 1.87 billion.

Challenges

62. The promotion of rural livelihoods in Assam faces significant challenges on two counts. First, the topography of Assam is such that, large tracts of land are prone to annual flooding, leading to disruptions in normal occupation cycles. Several parts of Assam are also prone to violence, led by separatist or sub-national identity demands for independence/autonomy.

2.2.2 Madhya Pradesh

Primary sector Livelihoods: agriculture, animal husbandry, fisheries, and bamboo

21

63. Madhya Pradesh presents the co-existence of a large subsistence agriculture sector along with a small but modern industrial sector. The agriculture sector contributes 33 percent of the Gross State Domestic Product (GSDP). In Madhya Pradesh 71% of the population in rural areas is employed in agriculture. Interestingly, 20.3 percent of the urban population is also engaged in agriculture and related activities. The share of marginal and small farmers in the total landholding area and the number of holdings in Madhya Pradesh increased from 9.6% in 1970-71 to 21.5% in 1995-96, an increase of 75% in terms of land under small and marginal farmers.

64. Fisheries resources in MP include the following: (i) total inland water bodies spanning 287,000 hectare (ha); (ii) Rivers and canals extending over 17,088 km; (iii) 227,000 ha of reservoirs and (iv) Tanks and ponds comprising over 60,000 ha. Madhya Pradesh has a total of 38 Fish Farmer Development Agencies, covering a fish production area of 92,000 ha of water bodies. More than 112,000 fish farmers are attached to these agencies. Average productivity reported is about 1,300 kg of fish per hectare per year. The reported total production of fish in 2012-13 was 8.5 million tonnes.

65. Madhya Pradesh accounts for 1.20% of the total value of egg production in India. Its estimated poultry population, at 7.3 million birds, accounts for 1.14% of the total poultry population in India.

66. Madhya Pradesh has 20.3% of the area and 12% of the growing stock of bamboo in India. The production of bamboo in Madhya Pradesh is close to 400,000 tonne/year.

Other livelihoods

67. It is estimated that only 6% of the population of Madhya Pradesh are engaged in the organized sector. The majority of workers (94%), including agricultural labour, construction labour and workers in traditional industries like leather-tanning, forestry, fishing, beedi-rolling, household workers and village artisans are in the unorganised sector.

68. About 400,000 families are dependent on handlooms production. 18 clusters of handloom weavers spread over 13 districts of Madhya Pradesh account for the production. Under the Ambedkar Hastashilp Vikas Yojana of the Ministry of Textiles, Government of India, 67 clusters of handicrafts production have been identified and supported.

Livelihoods support initiatives in Madhya Pradesh

69. The Madhya Pradesh Rural Livelihoods Project was an externally aided livelihoods project that ran from 2004 to 2012 in selected parts of Madhya Pradesh. In several other districts, the District Poverty Initiative Programme (DPIP), also an externally aided project, was implemented. DPIP has been implemented since 2001 in 53 blocks of 15 districts.

70. The Madhya Pradesh Rajya Aajeevika Forum (MPRAF) implements the National Rural Livelihoods Mission activities in the State. MPRAF and DPIP together will cover 99 blocks in 25 districts in an intensive manner, while the remaining 214 blocks in 25 districts will be taken up in a non-intensive manner.

71. As per the figures for year 2012 from the National Bank for Agriculture and Rural Development (NABARD), there are 1.6 million self-help groups in Madhya Pradesh. These groups are reported to have collective savings of close to INR 1.12 billion. Of these, 8,000 SHGs are reported to have obtained bank loans through the NABARD supported SHG-Bank linkage programme, to the tune of INR 950 million.

Challenges

72. Eight of the 50 districts in Madhya Pradesh are considered to be left-wing extremism affected, leading to issues of law and order and internal security. These are among the most backward districts in Madhya Pradesh, and generally comprise those districts with a substantial forest cover. While the reported rate of rural unemployment is very low for Madhya Pradesh, in actual terms productive

22

engagement of the population is a serious challenge, with very high rates of under-employment, especially in the primary sector.

2.2.3 Odisha

73. The specific agro-ecological conditions of Odisha define the broad contours of livelihoods options for its people. These conditions, however, are not static and are liable to change according to the patterns of human intervention and the modes of utilization of natural resources. As a result, the natural conditions of production and livelihoods security are coming under increasing threat due to deforestation and soil erosion, floods, water logging and soil salinity, as well as vulnerability to cyclonic storms.

74. The coastal region of Odisha presents a virtual mono-cultural landscape and the predominant crop, paddy (rice), is grown in two-crop combinations with pulses, oilseeds, or jute. Paddy is also the most important crop in highland Odisha and is widely cultivated in river valleys. A large number of miscellaneous crops such as coarse millets, pulses, oilseeds, jute, and sugarcane are also grown.

Primary sector livelihoods

75. The agriculture sector contributes only about 26 percent of the GSDP, with more than 70% population dependence resulting in low per capita income in the farm sector. The average size of agriculture holdings in Odisha is 1.25 ha. Small and marginal farmers constitute about 83% of the farming community. Agriculture in Odisha is characterized by low productivity on account of various factors. These factors include problematic soil (acidic, saline and waterlogged), lack of assured irrigation, low seed replacement rate, low level of fertilizer use, low level of mechanization etc. The serious gaps in yield potential and the technology transfer provide an opportunity to Odisha to substantially increase its production and productivity.

Livestock

76. 80% of the rural households own livestock of one species or the other and this livestock earns supplementary income for the family. The livestock sector contributes 7.27% of Odisha’s net domestic product. The predominant farming system in Odisha is the mixed crop-livestock farming system and over 90 percent of farms of all categories conform to this farming system. During 2008-09, Odisha’s annual milk production was 1.6 million tonnes, and egg production was 1.44 billion. The annual production of chicken meat is about 70,000 tonnes and the per capita availability is 1.8 kg. As per the Livestock Census 2003, Odisha had 14.3 million cattle and 1.4 million buffaloes. The State also has sizeable number of small animals i.e., 5.97 million goats, 1.75 million sheep, and 0.6 million pigs.

Fisheries

77. Odisha has both marine and inland fisheries, providing livelihoods to a substantial number of households. Some key fisheries related data for Odisha are as follows:

o Length of coastline – 480 km

o Number of fishing villages – 813

o Families dependent of marine fishing – 114,238

o Total inland water bodies – 980,000 ha

o Rivers and canals – 4500 km

o Reservoirs – 256,000 ha

o Tanks and ponds – 114,000 ha

o Flood plain lakes – 180,000 ha

23

o Brackish water – 430,000 ha

78. During 2008-09, the total annual fish production of the State was 374,822 tonnes (131,000 tonnes marine and 244,000 tonnes inland). There are around 1 million fishermen in Odisha, of whom 450,000 are marine fishermen and the rest are inland fishermen.

Forestry

79. The Forest Survey of India assessment reveals that the actual forest cover in Odisha (very dense forest, moderately dense forest, open forest, and mangrove forest) is 48,366 sq. km, which is 31.06% of the total land area in Odisha. The actual tree cover is 6381 sq. km, which is 4.10% of the total land area in Odisha. Odisha is among the first States in India to ensure a policy on Non-Timber Forest Produce (NTFP) collection and marketing, recognizing the livelihoods implication on NTFP collectors. The most important forest products are kendu leaves, bamboo and sal seeds. About 22% of Odisha's population belongs to Scheduled Tribes, more than two-thirds of whom are dependent on forests for their livelihoods.

Other livelihoods

80. The share of the informal sector in total non-agricultural employment is estimated to be around 71%. Odisha has a dominance of artisan-based enterprises in the industrial sector. The handloom industry provides livelihoods to about 200,000 households. Handicrafts and sericulture are two other major activities in the non-farm sector.

Livelihoods support initiatives in Odisha

81. For improving livelihoods of tribal and other vulnerable communities, several schemes are being implemented in Odisha with the active support from a number of external donors. These schemes include the Odisha Tribal Empowerment and Livelihood Programme (OTELP), Western Orissa Rural Livelihood Programme (WORLP), Jeevika and Orissa Fund for Development Initiative (OFFDI). Other initiatives include, Targeted Rural Initiative for Poverty Termination and Infrastructure (TRIPTI), improvement of traditional water bodies and tanks through community participation, and improving rural growth and productivity opportunities for the poor in Odisha. The Odisha Livelihoods Mission implements the National Rural Livelihoods Mission in the State.

82. As per the figures for year 2012 from the National Bank for Agriculture and Rural Development (NABARD), there are 540,000 self-help groups (SHGs) in Odisha. These groups are reported to have collective savings of close to INR 3.3 billion. Of these, 49,000 SHGs are reported to have obtained bank loans through the NABARD supported SHG-Bank linkage programme, to the tune of INR 5 billon.

Challenges

83. Fifteen out of the thirty districts in Odisha are identified as left-wing extremism affected. The high proportion of Scheduled Tribe population, along with the high dependence on forest resources poses a significant challenge to livelihoods development interventions in Odisha.

2.2.4 Energy access context in the three states

84. Concerns regarding access to energy across all the three states are evident through the indicators in Error! Reference source not found. above which show a low percentage of households using “modern” fuels such as electricity and LPG - for lighting and cooking respectively. As in the case of the national level figures, village electrification has gathered considerable momentum, yet progress is very slow in terms of the actual electrification of individual rural households. It should be noted that a village is considered to be electrified if 10% of all households of the village have an electricity connection and if electricity is provided to public places like schools, panchayat offices, community centres, health

24

centres and dispensaries. Therefore, an “electrified” village can still have 90% of households not connected to the electricity supply.

85. In addition, even when electricity connections are available and taken up, discussions during the project formulation field visits reveal that electricity supply is generally unreliable with power being available for just 4-8 hours a day, and voltage fluctuations are also large and frequent.

86. It is also important to note that un-electrified villages tend to be located in clusters around remote, hilly or forested areas. For instance, in Assam there are around 2,200 un-electrified villages categorised as remote villages of which 818 are in Karbi-Anglong district, 311 in Dhemaji and 237 in NC Hills. These are also typically areas with low level of human development, and a high prevalence of tribal populations.

87. Electricity tariffs are typically low and BPL (Below Poverty Line) families do not need to pay connection charges. For households with metered connections, the tariffs per kWh are around INR28 1.40 in Odisha, INR 2.35 in Assam and INR 3 in Madhya Pradesh. Such electricity tariffs are well below real electricity supply (generation, transmission and distribution) costs. The low tariffs that are set below cost are a major reason for the unreliable and poor voltage of most rural electricity supply in India.

88. RGGVY is a national program where Rural Electrification Corporation (REC) is a nodal agency. RGGVY focuses of establishing infrastructure and improving access to electricity in rural and remote locations. RGGVY is being implemented in all the three states. An evaluation of the RGGVY implementation conducted in 2012 in Assam29 and 2013 in Madhya Pradesh30 low hours of electricity availability (8-14 hours of electricity per day, availability during peak hours is just 2- 4 hours); low benefits reported on income and employment as compared to education, security and overall comfort. In case of Madhya Pradesh, overloading resulting in burning of transformers points to poor user-orientation in assessment of actual and potential demand. In Odisha, tardy progress of the RGGVY is traced to the use of small contractors by the central public sector organisations responsible for RGGVY implementation in the state.

89. National Biogas and Manure Management Programme (NBMMP) programme targets implementation of family type biogas plants and supports (a) biogas based distributed/grid power generation; (b) demonstration of integrated technology-package in entrepreneurial mode for medium size (200 to 100 m3 per day) biogas plants for generation, purification/enrichment, bottling and piped distribution of biogas; and (c) setting up plants having capacity of 1,000 m3. Its major activities are specifically on the diversification of energy access to clean and improved technologies in thermal applications (such as cooking as well as mechanical energy and power applications) through the use of biogas. For 2013-14, the NBMMP has set a target of 106,000 biogas plants across the country with target figures of 6,000, 10,000 and 6,500 for Assam, Madhya Pradesh and Odisha respectively31.

2.3 Renewable Energy Technology Packages for Rural Livelihoods (RETPRLs)

90. Through various stakeholder consultations (workshops, one to one meetings and field visits), the most promising rural livelihoods sectors that emerged for this India GEF ACE project were poultry, dairy, horticulture, fisheries and khadi and village industries. The renewable energy technology packages that are most relevant for these sectors are briefly described in the following sections. A detailed description of the technology packages is provided in Annexure E.

28 60 INR = 1 USD at 24 June 201429 http://www.recindia.nic.in/download/IRADe_Assam.pdf30 http://www.rggvy.gov.in/rggvy/rggvyportal/evaluation/Tetratech_MP.pdf31 http://pib.nic.in/newsite/PrintRelease.aspx?relid=103386

25

2.3.1 Poultry

91. Poultry is one of the fastest growing segments of the agricultural sector in India. Increasing at a rate of 8-12% annually. India is the 3rd largest global producer of eggs and the 4th largest global producer of broiler chickens. Poultry provides a source of livelihood to more than 3 million families, among which there is a high concentration of landless, marginal and small farmers. The number of families engaged in poultry is expected to reach 5 million by 202532.

92. In the market oriented small poultry farm model, there are centralised large layer farms and hatcheries, which supply day old chicks to families for rearing in the backyard farms. Each family usually has 300-800 birds, which they rear for 35-40 days and then sell to the market. The families (300-500 in numbers) are organized in the form of cooperatives or producer companies.

93. The most promising renewable energy interventions for the poultry sector are:

i. Solar PV based lighting and ventilation of back-yard poultry farms:

The feeding habits of birds are sensitive to light and sufficient light is required for proper feeding and growth of the birds. Also the birds became restless when the surrounding temperature goes above 35-38°C. In that case ventilation is required. Two applications based on solar PV can be possible – solar lanterns for lighting and solar power packs for lighting and ventilation. The cost and specification of these systems are provided in Table 4:

Table 4: Details of solar lighting solution for back-yard poultry farm

Solar lantern Solar power pack Capacity range (Wp) 5 – 10 12 – 24 Details LED or CFL light, small battery 2 - 4 LED lights and/or 1 DC fan, Cost per system (INR) 2,200 – 2,700 5,400 – 10,800

ii. Biogas plant based on poultry litter for captive use in layer farms and hatcheries33:

Poultry litter can be utilised in a biogas plant for generating electricity for captive use in the farm. The specification and cost details for an appropriate biogas plant for a 10,000 bird layer farm areprovided in Table 5.

Table 5: Details of biogas plant for layer poultry farms

Number of birds 10,000

Poultry litter produced (kg/day) 1,000

Cost of constructing a 200 m3 digester (INR) 3,400,000

Cost of a 30 kVA engine (INR) 370,000

Biogas yield (m3/kg of litter) 0.1 to 0.15 m3/kg of litter

Total cost of biogas plant with engine (INR) 3,770,000

Electricity that can be produced (kWh/day) 300 – 350

32 Presentation by Anish Kumar, Poultry, Available online at: http://sapplpp.org/files-repository/information-hub/presentations/rural-backyard-poultry-development, Last accessed on 14th may 201433 Layer farms are where chickens are used to produce eggs, while hatcheries are where fertilized eggs are hatched and the subsequent day old chicks are then sold to either broiler or layer farms.

26

iii. Energy generation from biomass waste from backyard poultry farms:

Sawdust or rice husks are used as a bedding layer in the backyard broiler farms, which are replaced with a fresh bedding layer every rearing cycle (40-45 day cycle). The used sawdust or rice husk is currently either dumped or burnt. This biomass, which is being wasted, can instead be collected from these farms and converted into briquettes, which can then be used or sold as a thermal fuel. The details related to the quantity of biomass waste, capacity of briquetting machine and its cost are provided in Table 6.

Table 6: Details on briquetting of biomass waste from poultry farms

Average quantity of biomass used per rearing cycle per farm (kg) 400

No of rearing cycles in a year 5

No of backyard farms in a cluster 300 – 500

Approximate collection of biomass waste (ton/year) 600 – 800 Capacity of the briquetting machine required (kg/h) (Assuming 5-6 hours of operation per day for 250 days/year)

400 – 600

Cost of briquetting machine (INR) 100,000 – 120,000

Selling price of briquettes (INR/kg) 4 – 6

2.3.2 Dairy

94. The dairy sector contributes about 5.3% of India’s agricultural GDP. India is the world's largest milk producer with an annual output of 121.8 million tonnes in 2011-12 - about 13% of the world’s total milk production. As per the estimates in 2004, the dairy sector is the major source of income for an estimated 27.6 million people. Among these, 65 to 70 percent are small, marginal farmers and land-less labourers. The dairy sector also supports around 10 million members / farmers through 100,000 cooperative societies in India. The cooperative dairy model is the prevalent dairy model used in India. The milk produced by individual farmers is collected at village-level milk collection centres, twice a day. Milk collected from several milk collection centres is transported to a milk chilling centre and the chilled milk is then transported to the central milk processing unit.

95. The most promising renewable energy interventions for the dairy sector are:

i. Solar PV power pack for lighting and powering small equipment at milk collection centres:

Lighting is required during the collection, weighing and testing of milk at the milk collection centres, which occurs during morning and evening hours. Also, at some of these collection centres, electronic weighing and testing equipment are being used which require power. Solar PV power packs can be used for lighting and powering such equipment or for lighting only where manual equipment is being used. Details regarding the specification of a solar power pack and its cost are provided in Table 7.

Table 7: Details of solar power pack for milk collection centres

Solar power pack only for lighting

Solar power pack for lighting and powering equipment

Capacity (Wp) 12 – 24 100

Details 2 - 4 LED lights 2 - 4 LED lights, powering testing and/or weighing machines

Cost (INR) 5,400 – 10,800 22,000 – 28,000

27

ii. Solar PV power for milk chilling at milk collection centre:

Milk from all the collection centres has to be transported to the chilling centres twice daily. A thermal battery concept based chiller has been developed and is now being used at a few collection centres. This thermal battery enables the cool storage of the milk for 1-2 days at the collection centres itself and thus reduces transportation costs and expands the reach of the milk collection centres. The charging of the thermal batteries requires electricity and renewable energy based chillers have not yet been tested. However, it is planned to run such chillers with solar PV, and most likely in the next few months there would be some useful operational experience on this. The cost and specification details of these milk chilling systems are given in Table 8.

Table 8: Details of milk chiller for milk collection centres

Chilling capacity (litres per day) 1,000

Electricity consumption per day (kWh) 12

Cost in INR (chiller including thermal battery) 580,000

Cost in INR (Solar PV panels of 3 kWe capacity) 300,000

iii. Biogas plant based on cattle dung for captive use in dairy farms:

In small dairy farms having 50-200 cattle, dung can be utilised in a biogas plant for generating electricity for captive uses. The specification and cost details for an appropriate biogas plant for a 100 cattle farm is provided in Table 9.

Table 9: Details of biogas plant for dairy farms

Number of cattle 100

Cattle dung produced (kg/day) 1,500

Cost of constructing a 85 m3 digester (INR) 1,450,000

Cost of a 30 kVA engine (INR) 370,000

Biogas yield (m3/kg of dung) 0.05 m3/kg of dung

Total cost of biogas plant with engine (INR) 1,820,000

Electricity that can be produced (kWh/day) 150

2.3.3 Horticulture

96. Horticulture accounts for about 30% of India’s agricultural GDP from 13.08% of cropped area. IHorticulture also provide about 37% of India’s total exports of agricultural commodities. Presently, India is the 2nd largest producer of fruits and vegetables in the world. India produces nearly 11% of all the world’s vegetables and 15% of all fruits. Annual average growth rate of Indian Horticulture was about 5% in the 11th five-year plan period (2007-12). In recent years, horticulture producer companies are being promoted which are collectives of horticulture farmers and provide technical services and inputs to farmers or pooling produce for collective marketing.

97. The most promising renewable energy interventions for the horticulture sector are:

i. Solar Pumps

Irrigation is a critical requirement for horticulture and due to poor access to electricity, or the poor reliability of electricity if it is available, the farmers have to depend on diesel pumps. Experience with solar pumps has been quite successful in India. A wide range of solar pumps is available ranging from micro pumps of few hundred Watts capacity to relatively larger pumps of a few kW capacities. The cost and specification of such solar pumps are provided in Table 10, as below:

28

Table 10: Details of solar pumps

Micro solar pumps Larger solar pumps

Capacity 100 W 3 hp

Capacity of solar PV module (Wp) 200 2,700 – 3,000

Discharge (litre per day) 2,50060,000 - 150,000 (head: 20 - 50 m)

Cost (INR) 50,000 510,000 - 570,000

ii. Solar PV based small cold rooms

In recent years, small farm level cold rooms have been developed which can store local agricultural produce for 6 - 14 days. These small cold rooms are helping the farmers in aggregating their produce and selling it based on the optimum price trend in the market over a 6 -14 day period. Trials on integrating these cold rooms with solar PV are being undertaken, and this possibility can be explored more comprehensively and systematically during implementation of this India GEFACE project. The technical features and cost of the local cold rooms are provided in Table 11, asbelow:

Table 11: Details of farm level solar cold rooms

Model – I Model – II Model – III

Capacity (tonnes of produce) 2 5 10Refrigeration capacity of Air-conditioner (tonnes of refrigeration)

2 3 4

Rating of diesel generator (in kVA) 2.8 5 5Electricity consumption (running: 15 - 16 h/day) (in kWh/day)

16 - 17 50 80

Total costs (INR)* 250,000 790,000 1,170,000*The cost also includes the cost of diesel generators (that are provided for backup), insurance and civil construction costs.

iii. Solar dryers for drying spices, vegetables and fruits

Solar drying is a promising option for drying and preserving spices, vegetables and fruits to increase their storage life. The dried produce can also fetch better returns from the market. Details on some of the commonly used solar dryers are provided in Table 12, as below:

Table 12: Details of solar dryers for horticulture sector

Dryer Type Green house dryerSolar air heaters with drying chambers

Natural convection based solar conduction dryer

Capacity (kg) 300, 600 and 1000 70 to 1000 10 to 100

Cost (in INR)700,000 (for 300 kg dryer)

500,000 (for 100 kg dryer)

25,000 (for 10 kg dryer)

2.3.4 Fisheries

98. India is the third largest producer of fish in the world and second in inland fish production. Constituting about 4.4% of the global fish production, the sector contributes to 4.7% of the agricultural GDP. The

29

total fish production of 6.57 million metric tonnes presently has a nearly 55% contribution from the inland fisheries sector.

99. The most promising renewable energy technology applications for the fisheries sector are:

i. Solar aeration

Aeration is required to maintain a high enough dissolved oxygen level, which is critical for fish productivity in the lake/pond. Various types of aerators such as paddle type surface aerators or diffuser type sub-surface aerators are being used. There are some successful examples of operating these aerators on solar power. The key features of a paddle type aerator developed by the Indian Institute of Technology, Guwahati that has been demonstrated in Assam, are provided in Table 13, as below:

Table 13: Details on solar aeration

Power rating of the motor (hp) 1

Hours of operation (hour per day) 4 - 5

Cost of aerator (INR) 60,000 – 65,000

Capacity of SPV module required 1 – 1.2 kWp

ii. Solar fish dryers

Fish drying is done to preserve fish for later use. It is mostly done for marine fishes. Solar dryers have been tried for fish drying at several locations across the country. However, different varieties of fish have different drying requirements viz. drying time, drying rate, etc. and there is a varying mix of different fish species in the catch caught daily by fishermen. Designing an appropriate solar dryer with this flexibility remains a challenge. Details of existing solar fish dryers are provided in Table 14, as below:

Table 14: Details on solar fish dryer

Dryer type Solar air heaters with drying chamber

Capacity range (kg) 70 – 1,000

Cost (INR) 500,000 (for a 100 kg dryer)

2.3.5 Khadi and village industries (KVIC)

100. The term Khadi is used for hand-spun and hand-woven fabric. A significant part of the rural population in the three focus states is dependent on garment making and other small village industries such as processing of minor forest produce, oil mills, spice processing, etc. Potential renewable energy technology applications for this sector can be:

i. Solar lights for lighting of artisan’s houses

The artisan’s family at their house usually does the artisanal work. Insufficient lighting due to poor access to electricity during morning and evening hours is affecting their work. Providing them with solar lanterns or solar home lights will help in increasing their productivity.

30

The cost and specification of these systems are provided in Table 15, as below:

Table 15: Details of solar lighting solution for artisan's houses

Solar lantern Solar home light system

Capacity range (Wp) 5 – 10 12 – 24

Details LED or CFL light, small battery 2 - 4 LED lights and/or 1 DC fan

Cost per system (INR) 2,200 – 2,700 5,400 – 10,800

ii. Solar PV based power for lighting and powering equipment at common facility centers

One of the models being implemented by Khadi and Village Industry Commission (KVIC), are the common facility centres developed in the artisan clusters to provide them with a common work shed and equipment for mechanised and specialised work. Poor access to power is affecting the usability of these centres. Based on the requirement of typical common facility centres, the capacity and cost for 3 suitable solar PV systems are provided in Table 16 below:

Table 16: Details of solar power pack for common facility centers

Capacity of solar PV (kWp) (With battery bank)

2 3 5

Cost (INR) (as per MNRE benchmark cost)

380,000 570,000 950,000

iii. Biomass gasifiers based on bamboo waste for power generation for lighting and powering equipment at common facility centers of bamboo clusters

Bamboo and cane are used for manufacturing furniture and various decorative and utility items. Large amounts of bamboo waste are generated in the process, which can be utilised for power generation and powering the common facility centre. The technical details and cost of a typical gasification system are provided in Table 17, as below:

Table 17: Details of gasification system for power generation

Capacity of the gasifier (kWe)34 10

Raw material (bamboo waste) input (kg/hour) 16 - 18

34 A large number of small sized biomass gasifiers of 10-20 kWe capacity installed in remote rural areas have faced sustainability challenges primarily due to non-availability of skilled manpower for operation and maintenance, problems in ensuring year-long availability of processed dry biomass and problems in the timely collection of revenue. Despite these past experiences, small power biomass gasifiers are being proposed for bamboo clusters as the availability of processed biomass (in this case bamboo waste from bamboo processing) is assured and the systems are to be used for the electrification of common facility centres, which are expected to have some technical staff for the operation and maintenance of the processing machines. The same technical personnel can potentially be utilized for the operation and maintenance of the biomass power gasifiers. However, as the situation may differ from one cluster to another, feasibility of small power biomass gasifiers for each cluster needs to be ascertained before implementation.

31

Cost of the gasification system (INR) 1,000,000

iv. Solar charkha,35 based on solar PV, for artisans or the common facility centre

The traditional charkha is manually operated. Mahatma Gandhi Institute for Rural Industrialization (MGIRIR) has converted manually operated charkha into solar operated charkha by incorporating a specially designed 12 volt PMDC (permanent magnet direct current) motor and pulleys which can be directly mounted on the charkha. The specifications and costs of solar charkha is given in Table 18.

Table 18: Details of Solar Charkha

Solar PV Motor Drive Battery Production capacity

Cost (INR)

8 Spindle charkha

60 Wp 12 V DC, 30 W 12 V, 26 A-h 1 kg/day 30,000

24 Spindle charkha

200 Wp NA NA 3 kg/day 60,000

v. Solar powered loom based on solar PV, for artisans and common facility centre

A loom is a device used to weave cloth. Mahatma Gandhi Institute for Rural Industrialization (MGIRIR) has developed a solar powered loom. The specifications and costs of solar powered loom is given in Table 19.

Table 19: Details of Solar Powered Loom

Solar PV Production capacity Cost Solar powered loom

160 Wp 15 meter fabric/day INR 150,000

2.3.6 Biomass fuel based informal industries/ small business

101. There are a range of unorganised small industries/businesses operating in rural areas with thermal energy demands, including commercial cooking, arecanut (betel nut) boiling and drying, jaggery36 and khova37 production, rubber-band vulcanizing, ayurvedic medicine production, silk reeling, textile bleaching and drying, cashew processing and the making of snacks. Most of these units burn biomass for their thermal energy requirement. Biomass cook-stoves, which burn biomass fuel more efficiently and with reduced emissions, can be applied in several of these units. The details of some of the commonly used cook-stoves are provided in Table 20 as below:

35 Charkha or spinning wheel is a device for spinning thread or yarn from natural or synthetic fibres36 Jaggery (also transliterated as jaggeree) is a traditional uncentrifuged sugar consumed in Asia and Africa. It is a concentrated product of date, cane juice, or palm sap (see palm sugar) without separation of the molasses and crystals, and can vary from golden brown to dark brown in colour37 Dried whole milk or milk thickened by heating

32

Table 20: Details of biomass cook-stoves

Type of stove

Other specifications

FuelFuel

consumption (kg/h)

Cost of the

stove (INR)

Tava(1m length and 0.7m diameter)

Firewood 4 – 5 24,500

Multiuse Stove

Stove diameter of 0.3m

Firewood 2.5 9,000

Briquette 1 – 1.5 11,000

Charcoal 0.7 10,250

Loose bio-fuel stove

Stove diameter of 0.7m

Cashew shells, wood shavings, tamarind

shells, coconut shells, etc.

4 – 5 18,000

33

2.4 Promising clusters for pilot / demonstration projects

102. During the course of project design, some key livelihood sector clusters were identified that could be taken up for the implementation of RETPRLs during the demonstration phase of the project. These clusters have been identified in consultations with the relevant government agencies and NGOs, and most of these clusters have also been visited to assess their requirements and identify appropriate RE technology solutions. The list of identified clusters along with some of their key salient details is provided in Table 21 as below:

Table 21: List of potential clusters for demonstration phase

# Location Livelihood Sector

Key details of the cluster Possible RETPRLsDistrict Block (s)

Assam

1 Barpeta Chakchaka KVIC (bamboo)

-3,000 artisan families (5 villages within 5 km radius)

-Artisanal work being done at individual houses

-One common facility center (CFC) for mechanized/specialized work

-Main products – furniture, decorative and utility items

-Solar lighting systems for artisans houses

-Biomass gasifier power system to generate electricity from bamboo waste to power the CFC

2 Nalbari and Kamrup Rural

Mukalmua and Dhamdhama (Nalbari); Rangia (Kamrup Rural)

KVIC (khadi and silk)

-2,000 artisan families

-Spinning being done at individual houses

-Common facility centers for weaving and stitching

-Solar lighting systems for artisans houses

-Solar PV based micro-grid for the CFC

-Solar charkha and looms

3 Darrang Pachim Mangaldai

Horticulture -15,000 families spread over 30 villages

-Main produce: tomato, pumpkin, papaya, assamese lemon

-Presently using diesel pumps for drawing water from bore-wells for irrigation

-Solar pumps for irrigation (specially for winter crops)

4 Udalguri Biomass fuel based small businesses

-50-60 dhabas (road side small restaurants) and tea shops along major roads around tea gardens

-Presently using firewood from nearby forests for cooking in a very inefficient way

- Improved biomass cook-stoves

34



5 Goalpara Agia Fisheries -100 families spread across 20-30 villages are involved in fisheries

-Large number of ponds, wet lands and rain fed tanks

-Typical pond size: 0.1 – 3 ha per family

-Typical fish production: 50,000 kg per ha per year

-Solar powered aerators for fish ponds

Madhya Pradesh

6 Hoshangabad

Kesla Poultry -1000 families having backyard poultry farms with 300-800 birds in each farm.

-These families are associated in the form of a cooperative society

-The cooperative has a centralised layer farm with hatchery and feed preparation units

-Solar systems for lighting and ventilation of backyard farms

-Poultry litter based biogas plant for captive use in layer farms

-Briquetting unit for palletisation of waste biomass from backyard farms

7 Betul and Hoshangabad

Shahpur (Betul) and Kesla (Hohangabad)

Horticulture -800 families spread across 40-45 villages around border of two districts

-Main produce: tomato, okra, cauliflower and oyster mushroom

-Presently drying of mushroom in open sun

- Irrigation mainly through diesel pumps

-No facility for cold storage of vegetable produce

-Small solar conduction dryers at household level for mushroom drying

-Solar pumps for irrigation

-Solar based small cold rooms for vegetables

8 Raisen Bareli Dairy -Around 50 milk collection centres, each managed by a village level cooperative, collecting milk from 1500 members.

-Every member usually owns 2-4 cattle and sells the surplus milk to cooperative.

-Milk testing and weighing is usually done manually

-Milk to be transported to chilling centres twice daily

-Solar lighting systems for milk collection centers

-Solar powered milk chillers based on thermal battery concept for milk collection centers

35



9 Balaghat Waraseoni KVIC (bamboo)

-600 artisan families



-Main products – furniture, decorative and utility items

-Solar lighting systems for artisans


10 Dhindori Mehadwani Horticulture -1,000 farmer families

-Organised as common water user groups for irrigation

-Main produce: wheat, maize, mustard, flaxseed, soya bean, pulses, etc.


Odisha

11 Koraput Jeypore Horticulture -450-500 families spread across 30 villages are dependent on horticulture.

-Main produce: vegetables, spices, mustard, paddy and maize

- Irrigation mainly through diesel pumps


-Solar powered small farm level cold rooms

-Small solar dryers for spice drying

12 Puri Nimapara (Chandrabhaga)

Fisheries -The coast area near Chandrabhaga has been leased to a cooperative society

-This society is working for developing the livelihoods around fish drying and its marketing along with the business of fresh fish.

-Solar fish dryers

13 Kalahandi

Kokasara Dairy -4 milk collection societies each having 30-50 members

-100-200 litres of milk collected daily at each society

-Electronic milk testing and weighing machines are being used

-Solar PV systems for lighting and powering equipment at milk collection centers

-Solar powered milk chillers based on thermal battery concept for milk collection centers

36



14 Keonjhar Poultry -200 families having 600 birds each in their backyard poultry farms.

-These families are associated in the form of a cooperative society

-Only around half of these families have access to electricity; others use LPG lights.

-The cooperative has a centralised layer farm with a hatchery and feed preparation units

-Solar systems for lighting and ventilation of backyard farms

-Poultry litter based biogas plant for captive use in layer farm

-Briquetting unit for palletisation of waste biomass from backyard farms

15 Khurda Bolagarh (Arikama)

KVIC (bamboo)

-600 artisan families spread across 23 villages within 30 km radius



-Main products – decorative and utility items

-Solar lighting systems for artisans


3 BARRIER ANALYSIS

103. MNRE (the Ministry of New and Renewable Energy) is the nodal Ministry of the Government of India for all matters relating to new and renewable energy. MNRE provides considerable funding and other support for all forms of new and renewable energy in India. MNRE funding and support programmes are generally delivered through related state nodal agencies, who also often add further state-level support and funding mechanisms of their own to the MNRE funding and support programmes. MNRE currently operates “Grid Connected Power”, “Decentralised Systems” and “Off-Grid Power” programmes. MNRE currently has no programme focused on areas that are in villageswhich are nominally connected to the electricity grid, but which in practice have many unserved or underserved existing and potential new rural household livelihood enterprises.

104. In India, as in many other developing countries, the primary energy focus has been, and continues to be, on achieving universal “village-level” electrification, whilst also providing low-cost and sometimes even free electricity access to the rural poor, farmers and other groups. The result is that many parts of the electricity supply system operate at substantially below the real cost of supply, making it uneconomic to establish, maintain or strengthen distribution and transmission networks. As a result,electricity is generally unreliable and is usually supplied for only a few hours per day in the most remote areas. The interconnection of decentralised renewable electricity supplies to the grid is hampered by unclear or unhelpful technical and financial grid interconnection rules and tariffs. So adding local renewable energy based capacity to the grid is very problematic. Therefore, for the many unserved or underserved areas in rural India, the default reliable electricity supply option is captive diesel generators.

37

105. For thermal energy supply, agricultural wastes are increasingly now commercial products that need to be purchased, and diesel and fuel oil are now expensive as they are steadily approaching price levels set by international markets. LPG is still highly subsidized. Oil companies bear a large proportion of the burden of LPG subsidies, and are therefore not motivated to expand LPG supply particularly to locations that are remote or have low population density or have low LPG demand. As a result, LPG supply is frequently restricted and unreliable in rural areas.

106. On the rural livelihoods side of the ledger in India, there is a growing realisation that supporting rural livelihoods is a critical element of poverty reduction efforts.

107. The National Rural Livelihood Mission (NRLM) of the Ministry of Rural Development, Government of India, is focused on promoting self-employment and organization of rural poor, and NRLM now leads this rural livelihoods support activity. The basic concept of NRLM is to organize the rural poor into SHG (Self Help Groups) and make them capable of self-employment. NRLM is based on the positive resultsin India of the Andhra Pradesh (Indira Kranti Patham) and Kerala (Kudumbashree) experiments of mass SHG programmes. The World Bank is supporting the NRLM programme with credit of about $1 billion,in continuation of its long-term engagement in the sector38. At this stage, NRLM does not have any explicit acknowledgement or support activity for the unserved or underserved grid electricity supply situation in the many rural livelihoods applications in India. In fact, the NRLM does not explicitly recognize the critical role of energy access in securing and strengthening many livelihoods activities.

108. The key RE and rural livelihoods barriers that this India ACE GEF project will address are presented in Table 22, as below.

Table 22: Barrier Analysis

38 See http://www.moneylife.in/article/national-rural-livelihood-mission-understanding-the-vulnerability-of-low-income-groups/19452.html

(1) RE – rural livelihoods package barriers

Key RE and rural livelihoods applications are poorly understood, lack suitable technical specifications and lack compliance mechanisms for meeting specifications

The use of RE in rural livelihoods applications is not being developed in a systematic way. For some of the RE rural livelihoods applications e.g. solar PV pumps for horticulture applications, a few states in the past had announced state level programmes with additional subsidies. Several hundreds of systems had been installed under these programmes, but as this was done in an ad-hoc fashion it has not led to systematic learningor the development of the market for the RE technologies. Technical specifications are poorly defined and there is no proper mechanism in place for ensuring that RE for rural livelihoods systems actually meet any of the technical specifications that are set. In the absence of standardised performance specifications and compliance testing protocols and methods, it is very difficult to properly measure the performance of RE for rural applications systems. Therefore poor performance, low quality and unreliable systems continue to be favoured by the existing ad-hoc RE for rural livelihoods subsidy schemes, notwithstanding the large funds that are allocated to such schemes.

Key RE – rural livelihoods packages have not been systematically demonstrated,

Many of the key RE in rural livelihoods applications have already been piloted through very generous subsidy schemes in one or more of the states of India, but this has not been done in a

38

replicated, scaled up or documented

systematic way. Standardised RE technology in rural applications packages are lacking, and pilot and demonstration focused initial uptake schemes are not undertaken in an integrated way, so theknowledge gained and the potential to utilise economies of scale achieved are not able to be harnessed through subsequent well managed replications and mass scale up approaches.

The uptake of key RE – rural livelihoods packages is not effectively supported in an integrated fashion at the central, state and district levels

RE and rural livelihoods are supported in a disjointed fashion by MNRE and NRLM and key likelihoods related ministries at the central level, and also similarly treated in a disjointed fashion at the state and district levels. So RE subsidies focus primarily on RE uptake, and rural livelihoods support activities ignore the role of the reliable energy supply that is required for the rural livelihoods to actually be realised and be sustained. In unserved and underserved electricity and LPG rural supply locations, the rural livelihoods are either not implemented, or are less profitable, or need to rely on diesel generators or expensive fossil fuels for thermal applications to get the necessary reliable energy supply needed to be viable.

There is a lack of awareness and institutional capacity for key RE –rural livelihoods packages

India is a vast country and with 29 states there is a tendency for user awareness to be focussed on just a particular state, so a key RE – rural livelihoods package can be reasonably well understood with reasonable potential user awareness in one state but poorly understood in another state. In addition, institutional capacity also varies from state to state and between the states and the central government level,

RE technology and service providers do not always know how to effectively pool the many central and state level funding and other supports available

A large number of constantly changing subsidy and other support funding schemes are made available at the central and state levels for RE for rural livelihoods technology and service providers. Opportunities for the effective pooling of RE and rural livelihood funding and other support schemes are not taken up, and the available funding is therefore not fully utilised.

(2) Supply chain barriers

There is a lack of suitable and active RE – rural livelihoods technology and service providers

The unpredictable, ad-hoc and subsidy driven primary drivers of RE for rural livelihoods makes it very difficult for suitable RE technology and service providers to identify suitable market niches, to establish appropriate business plans, to access the necessary business finance, to effectively market their sales and service models, to grow their businesses, and to expand their technology sales and after sales service provision businesses.

(3) Policy and regulatory barriers

National and State level rural livelihood mission statements and documents do not emphasise the critical role of RE in meeting

NRLM and key livelihoods related ministries at the central level, and also SLRMs and livelihoods related departments at the state level, do not recognise the key role of a reliable energy supply, and hence do not emphasise an important role for RE in rural

39

unserved and underserved rural livelihoods energy needs

livelihoods in unserved and underserved energy related geographical areas. The recognition of the key role of RE in rural livelihoods is not recognised in relevant mission statements, policies, guidelines, and circulars that do not explicitly mention RE as a critical success factor.

There is no formal and focussed MNRE funding and support programme specifically focussed on RE in rural livelihoods

MNRE runs a wide range of RE subsidy and support programmes, but does not have a specific programme aimed at supporting the use of RE to support rural livelihoods. The MNRE support for RE used in rural livelihoods is therefore unfocussed, and does not match the importance of enhancing rural livelihoods given by governments across India at the central and state levels.

Decentralised RE applications focused on rural livelihoods face significant problems in setting suitable cost recovery tariffs in stand-alone applications, and in grid interconnection applications the financial and technical interconnection issues are generally unclear and problematic for RE entrepreneurs to access

Decentralised RE in India often faces significant barriers from regulators and customers in charging a suitable tariff when supplying electricity to stand alone customers. RE is competing with a prevailing mind-set that electricity should somehow be supplied at a low tariff in rural areas. In most states there is an ongoing political decision for grid electricity for water pumping to be free (a zero tariff). For grid-interconnected RE for rural applications, suitably remunerative feed-in-tariffs (FITs) are generally difficult to access in practice, and technical grid interconnection issues are often unclear and/or make it difficult or impossible to access the grid in practice.

(4) Financial barriers

Subsidies and other financial supports for RE in rural livelihood applications are often complex, are often very difficult to access, often favour the RE systems with the lowest initial cost and not the RE systems that meet the best technical specifications, and investment risks are generally overestimated.

The subsidies and supports for RE for rural livelihoods applications are generally a mix of MNRE and state level RE supports, as well as sometimes rural livelihoods supports at the central and state level. The RE applications for rural livelihoods are competing with subsidised electricity grid extensions and subsidised grid electricity supply, to the extent that such grid electricity supply is actually available. LPG for rural livelihood thermal applications is also highly subsidised, and hence LPG supply is frequently restricted in rural areas. So the RE for rural livelihoods subsidies and supports are to some extent just levelling the playing field with subsidised grid electricity and LPG. The central and state level RE for rural livelihoods subsidies and supports are often ad-hoc and are available for only limited periods or for limited total funding. Hence the financial support schemes are often poorly understood,unevenly accessed, and inadequately pooled by RE technology and service providers. The central and state level RE for rural livelihoods subsidies and supports are often poorly specified in terms of the RE systems to be subsidised and supported, and technical specifications are poorly checked and inadequately tested for compliance. Investment risks for decentralised RE for rural livelihoods are poorly understood by financial debt providers, and hence high collateral is generally required to cover the funds that need to be borrowed for the RE systems for rural livelihood

40

4 KEY STAKEHOLDERS

109. The strong participation of a large number of stakeholders from central government, state governments, NGOs, financial institutions, industry, and academic institutions, international organizations and financial institutions is required for the project’s interventions in the RE and rural livelihoods application area in India to be successful. A brief description and proposed role of the project’s key stakeholders is presented in Table 23 as below.

Table 23: Key stakeholders involved in the project

Stakeholder Role39

Government – Central Level

Ministry of New and Renewable Energy (MNRE)

MNRE is responsible for framing policy and implementing programmes for the development and promotion of new and renewable energy technologies in India. MNRE serves as the main client (Implementing Partner) in this project. MNRE will provide the strategic steering for the project, oversee the accomplishment of project objectives and tasks, lead co-funding requirements, initiate policy actionson its own and through other departments, and facilitate coordination with other key stakeholders including the Ministry of Rural Development (for NRLM), Ministry of Agriculture (for relevant agricultural sector Missions), Ministry of Power (for decentralised RE tariffs and grid interconnection), etc.

Ministry of Environment and Forests (MoEF)

MoEF is the GEF focal point for GEF projects in India and thus will liaise with GEF and provide overall coordination of the project.

Ministry of Agriculture (MoA)

MoA is the administrative ministry for several govt. agencies/missions including: Department of Agriculture and Cooperation; Department of Animal Husbandry, Dairying and Fisheries; National Horticulture Mission; etc. which cover a wide spectrum of agriculture, horticulture, dairy, fisheries and animal husbandry livelihoods. These subordinate departments/missions have the mandate for formulation and implementation of policies/schemes for their corresponding livelihoods sectors. MoA will be a member of the Project Steering Committee (PSC) and in particular will be responsible for facilitating and maintaining coordination linkages with its relevant programmes and support schemes.

Ministry of Rural Development (MoRD)

MoRD is involved in improving the socio-economic status of rural areas through various development and welfare activities. It will be a member of the PSC and will support the project through facilitating coordination with relevant rural development schemes/agencies.

National Rural Livelihood Mission (NRLM)

NRLM, a mission launched by MoRD, aims at creating efficient and effective institutional platforms of the rural poor enabling them to increase their household incomes through sustainable livelihood enhancements and improved access to financial services. NRLM will be a member of the Project Executive Committee

39 This column describes the role of the stakeholder in implementation of this proposed project.

applications. Investment risk mitigation and risk sharing mechanisms (such as partial risk guarantees) are poorly developed and are not widely available.

41

Stakeholder Role39

(PEC) and will provide crucial linkages with the relevant livelihoods sectors and local communities.

Khadi and Village Industry Commission (KVIC)

KVIC is a statutory government body under the Ministry of Micro, Small and Medium Enterprises. It has the mandate for planning and implementing programmes for the development of khadi (homespun garments) and other village industries in rural areas. KVIC will be a project co-financing partner and will be a member of the PSC.

Rural Electrification Corporation (REC) Limited

REC has a mandate for the promotion and financing of the electrification of rural areas. It is also a nodal agency designated by the Ministry of Power for the implementation of the Rajiv Gandhi Grameen Vidyutikaran Yojana (RGGVY), a scheme to electrify all un-electrified villages / habitations and to provide access to electricity to all rural households in un-electrified and electrified villages in India. REC will be consulted on project issues related to rural electrification aspects.

Ministry of Power (MoP)

MOP closely works with REC in meeting its targets under the RGGVY. MOP will be a member of the PSC and will be responsible to facilitate close coordination and to avoid duplication of efforts when it comes to rural electrification.

Government – State Level

State Nodal Agencies (SNAs) for renewable energy

The SNA’s are the state level agencies for the promotion of renewable energy and will have a role in the MNRE subsidy disbursement component for the various renewable energy technologies.

State Departments for Rural Development

The State Departments for Rural Development are the key state level rural livelihoods agencies, which are also involved in the implementation of the central government schemes/programmes related to rural development in their state. They also formulate and implement state specific schemes on rural development. They will be important stakeholders in the scaling-up of the renewable energy interventions for rural livelihoods applications in the three states.

State Rural Livelihood Missions

The State Rural Livelihood Missions are the implementing arms of NRLM in the respective states. They will be important stakeholders in the scaling-up of the renewable energy interventions for productive applications in the three states.

State Departments for Agriculture/ Horticulture/ Animal Husbandry/ Dairy/ Fisheries

These state level Departments have the mandate for the implementation of central government schemes and programmes in the respective sectors of their states. These Departments also formulate and implement independent state level programmes. They will be approached for the integration of renewable energy in their on-going programmes and in accessing additional subsidies/assistance available under their programmes.

State Electricity Regulatory Commissions (SERCs)

The SERCs have the responsibility for determining electricity tariffs and for regulating power purchase and procurement processes within their state. SERCs will be key project partners as it is expected that tariff structures for off-grid electricity generation would ideally be updated through project activities. The SERCs are responsible for the guidelines for off-grid as well as small-scale on-grid solutions.

Financial Institutions

42

Stakeholder Role39

Indian Renewable Energy Development Agency (IREDA)

IREDA is a Government Public Limited Company established in 1987 thatoperates under the administrative control of MNRE. IREDA’s role is to promote, develop and extend financial assistance for renewable energy and energy efficiency/conservation projects in India. IREDA will be a member of the Project Steering Committee (PSC) and is expected to play an important role in making finance available for the scaling-up of project interventions.

National Bank for Agriculture and Development (NABARD)

NABARD is an apex development bank in India. The mission of NABARD is to promote sustainable and equitable agriculture and rural prosperity through effective credit support, related services, institutional development and other innovative initiatives. NABARD is expected to play an important role in providing credit support to the rural livelihood beneficiaries and to the renewable energy enterprises.

YES Bank YES Bank is a private sector commercial bank in India, which is also involved in providing credit for livelihood activities. YES Bank can play an important role in providing credit support to the rural livelihood beneficiaries and to the renewable energy enterprises.

Grameen/Regional Rural Banks (RRBs) and micro finance institutions

Grameen/Regional Rural Banks (RRBs) and micro finance institutions are expected to play an important role in providing credit support to the beneficiaries and renewable energy enterprises.

Corporate Organisations for CSR (Corporate Social Responsibility)

National Thermal Power Corporation (NTPC)

NTPC is a public sector enterprise, which has significant operations in Madhya Pradesh and Odisha. It will be approached to provide support in theimplementation of the pilot projects and for scaling-up activities, by contributing CSR funds and technical expertise.

National Aluminium Company Ltd. (NALCO)

NALCO is a public sector enterprise, which has significant operations in Odisha. NALCO will be approached to assist in the implementation of the pilot projects and in the scaling-up phase by contributing CSR funds and technical expertise.

Oil and Natural Gas Corporation Ltd. (ONGC)

ONGC is a public sector enterprise that has significant operations in Assam. It can be involved in implementation of the pilot projects and scaling-up by contributing CSR funds and technical expertise.

Private sector enterprises involved in developing / delivering specific renewable energy solutions

Bayer Material Science

Bayer Material Science, under its Social Business Initiative is involved in the promotion of cold rooms and solar dryers, which are key project rural livelihood application areas. These technologies are proposed as part of the technology packages to be implemented in the project.

Promethean Power Systems

Promethean Power Systems designs and manufactures rural refrigeration systems for commercial cold-storage applications in both non-electrified and in partially electrified areas. The technology (based on a thermal battery concept) is enabling milk producers to reliably store and preserve milk. This concept can also be used for the cool storage of fruits and vegetables. The thermal battery concept is part of the technology packages proposed in the project.

Science for Society (S4S)

Science for Society (S4S) is a research and innovation based enterprise, which has developed a low cost solar conduction dryer for individual use for the drying

43

Stakeholder Role39

of agro products. The S4S dryers could be part of the technology packages to be implemented in the project.

Claro Energy Pvt Ltd Claro Energy is a small energy service provider company formed in 2011 that offers solar powered water pumping solutions to meet the irrigation water needs of rural farmers in power�deficit regions in India. Claro’s solar water pumping systems could be part of the technology packages to be implemented by the project in rural regions of India.

Jain IrrigationSystems Ltd

Jain Irrigation Systems Ltd (JISL) is a multinational organisation based in Jalgaon, Maharashtra, India with over 9,000 employees and 28 manufacturing plants. JISL manufactures a number of products, including drip and sprinklerirrigation systems and components, integrated irrigation automation systems, PVC and PE piping systems, plastic sheets, greenhouses, bio-fertilizers, solar water-heating systems, biogas plant on turnkey basis, wind hybrid energy and photovoltaic system. JISL’s solar water pumping systems could be part of the technology packages to be implemented by the project in rural regions of India.

Shakti Pumps Shakti Pumps is a leading pump manufacturer in India and is also a manufacturer of Solar PV pumps. Solar PV pumps from Shakti Pumps could be part of the technology package.

Perfect Gas Generators Pvt Ltd

Perfect Gas Generators Pvt Ltd is a specialist manufacturer of biogas engines and also undertakes turnkey installation of biogas power generation systems in poultry farms and dairies. They could be one of the biogas systems technology providers.

Jay Khodiyar Machine Tools

Jay Khodiyar Machine Tools is one of the manufacturers of biomass briquetting machines in India. They could be one of the technology providers for the briquetting systems.

Infinite Energy Pvt Ltd

Infinite Energy Pvt Ltd is one of the manufacturers of biomass briquetting machines and biomass gasifiers in India. They could be one of the technology providers for the biomass briquetting and biomass gasifier systems.

Radhe Engineering Company & Radhe Renewable Energy Development Pvt Ltd

The two companies belonging to the same group are manufacturers of biomass briquetting machines and biomass gasifiers in India. They could be one of the technology providers for the biomass briquetting and biomass gasifier systems.

SELCO Solar Pvt. Ltd

SELCO Solar Pvt. Ltd, a social enterprise that provides sustainable energy solutions and services to under-served households and businesses. They could be one of the technology providers for solar PV solutions in the project.

Cold Chain Solutions Cold Chain Solutions are involved in setting-up of cold rooms for post-harvest management in Odisha. They could be one of the solution providers for the Solar based cold room applications.

Planters Energy Network (PEN)

Planters Energy Network (PEN) provides solar-based dryers for processing of fruits, fish, vegetables, spices, etc. They could be one of the solution providers for the Solar drying solutions.

NRG Technologies Pvt Ltd

NRG provides solar drying and solar hot air generation systems for drying of fruits & vegetables, fish, mushrooms, spirulena, etc. They could be one of the solution providers for the Solar drying solutions.

44

Stakeholder Role39

Sustaintech India Private Limited

Sustaintech India Private Limited is a social enterprise, which manufactures and sells sustainable energy products, primarily fuel-efficient commercial cook stoves. They could be one of the solution providers for the commercial biomass cooking stove solutions.

Ecozen Solutions Ecozen Solutions has developed an innovative micro-cold storage product that is powered by solar energy. They could be one of the solution providers for the Solar based cold room solutions.

Ankur Scientific Energy Technologies Pvt Ltd

Ankur Scientific Energy Technologies Pvt Ltd are one of the leading manufacturers of biomass gasifier systems in India. They could be one of the technology providers for biomass gasifier systems

Fosera Solarsystems

GmbH & Co.

Fosera Solar systems GmbH & Co is a manufacturer of pico solar lighting solutions. They could be one of the technology providers for solar lighting solutions.

Supernova Technologies Pvt Ltd

Supernova Technologies Pvt Ltd has developed mobile solar energy based aeration system as well as wind-solar aeration system to be used for the aeration of fisheries ponds. They could be one of the solution providers for the renewable energy based aeration systems for fisheries.

Sun Edison They are a large manufacturing firm in solar solutions. They were the first company to install the 1 MW canal top solar power plant in Mehsana, Gujarat. They not only sell products, but are involved providing financing to dealers. Hence, they may be useful partners in piloting innovative markets with solar solutions.

Academic/Research Institutions:

IIT Guwahati, Assam The Department of Design and Rural Technology Action Group at IIT Guwahati have been working on research and development of innovative technological solutions and the improvement of existing technologies for rural livelihoods. They are also providing training support to the rural enterprises. In the proposed project, IIT Guwahati could assist in the performance assessment, development of specifications, technological improvements and technical training for RETPRLs.

Tezpur University, Assam

The Department of Energy at Tezpur University is involved in research and technology development and training work on various renewable energy technologies. In the proposed project, Tezpur University could assist in the performance assessment, development of specifications, technological improvements and technical training for RETPRLs.

National Institute of Science and Technology (NIST), Berhampur, Odisha

NIST is an academic institute and some of its faculty members are involved in the development and implementation of innovative renewable energy solutions and business models for rural enterprises. In the proposed project, NIST could assist in the performance assessment, development of specifications, technological improvements and technical training for RETPRLs.

The Energy and Resources Institute (TERI)

TERI is a not for profit research institute. The institute is involved in development of renewable energy based technological solutions for decentralised applications. In the proposed project, TERI could assist in the performance assessment, development of specifications, technological improvements and technical training for RETPRLs.

45

Stakeholder Role39

Entrepreneurship Development Institute of India (EDI)

The Entrepreneurship Development Institute of India (EDI), an autonomous body and not-for-profit institution. EDI runs regular academic programmes and a variety of training programmes aimed at developing entrepreneurship. In the proposed project, EDI could assist in Component 2 - i.e. in the development of the supply chain for RE technology supply and service providers.

Mahatma Gandhi Institute for Rural Industrialization (MGIRI)

MGIRI is an institute promoted by the Ministry of Micro Small and Medium Enterprises (MSME). MGIRI is involved in developing new technologies for rural entrepreneurs, enterprises and industries related to their products. In the proposed project, MGIRI could assist in the performance assessment, development of specifications, technological improvements and technical training for RETPRLs

Civil Society Organisations/NGOs

Action for Food Production (AFPRO)

AFPRO strives for the enhancement of livelihoods and the quality of life of the rural poor and marginalized communities through the management of natural resources (land, water and forests); with the main supported economic activities revolving around agriculture, livestock, fishery and forestry. AFPRO is active in Assam, Jharkhand, Madhya Pradesh and Odisha. AFPRO could be a potential CLIA in the project

Rashtriya Gramin Vikas Nidhi (RGVN)

RGVN is a national level multi-state development and support organization working in the states of Assam, Jharkhand, Meghalaya and Odisha. RGVN aims for the development of sustainable livelihoods of the rural poor with a priority for women in the agri and allied sectors through financial, institution building and capacity building support activities. RGVN could be a potential CLIA in the project

Ajagar Social Circle Ajagar Social Circle is an initiative to bring about a change in the socio-economic condition of the people of India’s north eastern region through increasing livelihood opportunities and through providing social and economic security. The organization, at present, is engaged in a number of farming, allied and non-farming activities with communities living in the Assam-Meghalaya belt. Ajagar Social Circle could be a potential CLIA in the project

Green Valley Forest and Wildlife Protection Society (GVFWPS)

GVFWPS is primarily working with the communities in and around wildlife rich areas of Assam. The majority of these communities are dependent on forest-based livelihoods such as firewood and timber businesses. GVFWPS aims at reducing human-animal conflict, saving flora and fauna and conserving natural resources by providing alternative livelihoods and encouraging efficient use of natural resources. GVFWPS could be a potential CLIA in the project

Bethany Society Bethany Society is a NGO based in the state of Meghalaya. The key areas of their work include capacity building and livelihood enhancement, institution building (development of SHGs) and improving access to finance with a special focus on the disabled. Bethany Society could be a potential CLIA in the project

NB Institute for Rural Technology (NBIRT)

NBIRT works for the development of rural communities through development, promotion and implementation of innovative renewable energy technologies for rural applications, training and development of human resources and creating green jobs. NBIRT is based in Guwahati in Assam. NBIRT could be a potential CLIA in the project

PRADAN PRADAN has significant and wide-ranging experience in promoting improved livelihoods with the rural poor. The key areas of PRADAN’s work are forest-based livelihoods, natural resource (land and water) management, livestock

46

Stakeholder Role39

development, promotion of SHGs and micro enterprises. PRADAN has an active presence in Jharkhand, Madhya Pradesh and Odisha. PRADAN could be a potential CLIA in the project. They could also be involved in training activities.

Action for Social Advancement (ASA)

ASA is working for the livelihood improvement of the rural poor mainly in the agriculture and allied sector in the state of Madhya Pradesh. The main areas of ASA’s work are land and water resource management, enhancement of agriculture productivity, agribusiness promotion for small holders, and micro credits for agriculture and research and training. ASA could be a potential CLIA in the project.

Samaj Pragati Sahayog (SPS)

SPS, a NGO based in Madhya Pradesh, is working towards the improvement of the socio-economic conditions of the tribal and marginalized rural poor through technical and financial support to the communities and policy advocacy. The main sectors of their work are water resource management, agriculture, livestock development and handicrafts. SPS could be a potential CLIA in the project.

Mahila Chetna Manch (MCM)

MCM is an NGO with a focus towards the empowerment of women so as to enable them to take a lead role in the social, economic and political spheres. MCM is providing support to women and communities in establishing suitable institutions (SHGs, cooperatives, producer companies, etc.), improved institutional management, the development of livelihoods (in particular agriculture, horticulture and dairy) and establishing forward and backward linkages. MCM is based in Madhya Pradesh. MCM could be a potential CLIA in the project

Centre for Advanced Research and Development (CARD)

CARD has been established to promote action research and to apply its findings for the protection and development of society and the environment. The focus areas of their work are research studies, monitoring and evaluation of development programmes, capacity building and policy advocacy. CARD could be a potential CLIA in the project

ACCESS Development Services (ADS)

ADS is a national level livelihoods promotion organization with a focus on incubating innovations and sustainable models for the livelihoods promotion of the poor. It offers specialised technical assistance in the microfinance and livelihoods areas. ADS have a significant presence in Madhya Pradesh and Odisha. ADS could be a potential CLIA in the project

Rural Development and Self Employment Training Institute (RUDSETI)

RUDSETI has been established to train, support and promote self-employment entrepreneurial ventures in the field of rural development. RUDSETI offers several entrepreneurship development programmes of 1-4 weeks duration in agriculture, and in allied and non-farm based livelihood sectors. RUDSETI could be a potential CLIA in the project

Agragamee Agragamee is working with the marginalized and underprivileged communities in the tribal districts of Odisha. Agragamee are focusing on policy advocacy and formulation of people centred development programmes, food security, water resource management, and the development of women’s organization and training programmes. Agragamee could be a potential CLIA in the project

Samvedna Samvedna, an NGO based in Odisha, is working for the fishing communities and marginalised farmers. Samvedna are involved in the implementation of various government programmes/schemes and in strengthening livelihoods through providing technical support and access to finance. Samvedna could be a potential CLIA in the project

47

Stakeholder Role39

Development Alternatives

Development Alternatives (DA) is both a research and an action-oriented organisation, involved in designing and delivering eco-solutions for the poor and the marginalised. Development Alternatives could be a potential CLIA in the project. They could also be involved in training activities.

PART B. PROJECT STRATEGY

5 PROJECT RATIONALE, DESIGN PRINCIPLES AND STRATEGIC CONSIDERATIONS

5.1 Project Rationale and Design Principles

110. This UNDP-MNRE-GEF India Access to Clean Energy project (the India GEF ACE project) has been designed as a project in three selected Indian states, with a potential scope to extend its activities to other states if there is a strong interest – in particular to the neighbouring states of Jharkhand and Meghalaya.

111. This project will involve working with a carefully chosen limited set of RE - Rural Livelihoods application packages for an initial group of rural districts with a strong unserved and underserved energy supply situation for key rural livelihoods. The selected RE – Rural Livelihoods applications will be developed into carefully integrated packages and then demonstrated, replicated and scaled up in the India GEF ACE project. Further extensive scale-up actions will continue after the project’s end with the help of a new MNRE programme (to be established by the project) that will be specifically focused on the enhanced use of RE for rural livelihoods applications in India.

112. The India GEF ACE project will make an early implementation start (even before GEF approval) with the India UNDP-MNRE ACE $2.4 million project, where $0.8 million will be provided from UNDP core funding sources, and no GEF funds will be utilised. The India MNRE-UNDP ACE project will establish: the PSC (Project Steering Committee); the PEC (Project Executive Committee) and UNDP-MNRE implementation arrangements; the project’s PMU (Project Management Unit); suitable CLIA’s (Cluster Level Implementing Agencies); and will enable early development of some of the RE – Rural Livelihoods applications. The India UNDP-MNRE ACE project will integrate with the India GEF ACE project at its time of inception, and the UNDP-MNRE ACE project implementation arrangements will then transition into the GEF ACE project.

113. The India GEF ACE project is closely aligned with the Sustainable Energy for All (SE4ALL) global initiative led by the Secretary-General of the United Nations, Ban Ki-Moon to achieve universal energy access, double the rate of improvement in energy efficiency, and double the share of renewable energy in the global energy mix by 2030. This initiative was launched in September 2011 and United Nations

General Assembly unanimously declared the decade 2014‑2024 as the Decade of Sustainable Energy

for All.

114. The India GEF ACE project will not explicitly deal with domestic uses of RE as there are fundamental differences between the domestic uses of energy and the productive uses of energy in

48

India as follows: (1) even when villages in India are “electrified”40, many productive uses will not be connected as they are located away from the village electrified area; (2) households in unconnectedvillages or households that are not connected in an “electrified” village just generally do without an electricity supply rather than make use of captive diesel generator sets as is the case for many productive uses where an available and reliable electricity supply is a prerequisite of the livelihoods activity being viable at all; (3) households have an expectation of low cost (actually below full supply cost) electricity and would rather do without an available or reliable supply rather than pay the full cost of electricity supply, whereas productive uses are often prepared to pay the high cost of diesel generator sets if the alternative is no electricity supply at all. So adding domestic uses of energy, as an explicit focus of the project, would result in a project that tried to address two fundamentally different energy supply markets. Finally, even just focusing on productive uses in three states in the project is already very ambitious with only a GEF $ 4,006,849 budget.

115. The India GEF ACE project will work through local CLIAs with an initial group of rural livelihood applications that already have well-established market linkages. The India GEF ACE project will utilise a mix of RE technologies that range from well-established technologies with large scale up potentials (e.g. solar water pumping) to RE applications that are less well developed but where the potential development impact is very large and where the RE application could be of significant future strategic importance (e.g. RE for local crop cold storage and RE for fish pond aeration).

116. The India GEF ACE project will be a key RE enabling activity as India continues to develop and roll out its National Rural Livelihoods Mission (NRLM) - but where unserved and underserved energy supplies would otherwise be a major constraint to the desired development of rural livelihoods into the future in rural India – and where diesel generators are the default electricity supply option in the unserved and underserved areas being targeted.

117. This proposed India GEF-supported ACE project will: help develop suitable RE – Rural Livelihoods technology applications packages; identify and implement new risk-sharing financial mechanisms (including but not limited to partial risk guarantees); mobilise and pool existing RE and rural livelihood subsidies and support mechanisms at the central and state levels; identify and implement improved pilot RE tariff and grid interconnection mechanisms; and remove the key barriers to enable RE applications to be strategically deployed in rural livelihoods in India. The overarching rationale for the India GEF ACE project is to position RE for further ongoing sustained growth in the Indian rural livelihoods sector after the formal end of the GEF project. More specifically, the proposed project will:-

(i) Address RE- rural livelihood technology barriers by:

Supporting the development and deployment of ten (10) key cost-effective RE – rural livelihoods application packages for deployment in selected specific rural livelihoods sectors; demonstrate and document the RE – rural livelihood application packages in fifteen (15) clusters covering approximately 30 villages and benefitting 1,500 household enterprises; run training programmes and training of trainers activities for the replication and scale up of seven (7) sectoral master training packages; replicate and document the replication of the RE – rural livelihoods application packages to 28,500 household enterprises; and develop scale-up plans for each sector/technology application in each applicable state.

40 In India a village is considered to be “electrified” when the government buildings (school, health clinic etc.) are electrified and 10% of the houses are connected. However electricity supply can be as little as four to six hours per day (say 2 hours in the afternoon and two to four hours in the early morning when everyone is asleep, and voltage regulation can fluctuate widely.

49

(ii) Address the supply chain barriers to the RE technology supply and service providers providing an increased uptake of RE in rural livelihoods in India by:

Supporting the business development of 100 RE technology and service providers for rural livelihoods applications; identifying suitable RE technology supply and service providers; developing business plans for these providers; facilitating access to suitable business finance; providing site visits, study tours and training to enhance replication and scale up phase marketing, sales and after sales service provision. This will then ensure the wider ongoing post project-end replication of RE in rural livelihoods applications in India.

(iii) Deliver policy and regulatory support to RE utilisation in rural livelihoods applications by:

Ensuring that national and state level rural livelihood mission statements emphasise the use of RE as a critical success factor by: developing suitable RE guidelines / statements and circulars as required; documenting and publicising these new RE elements of rural livelihoods mission statements through the project website; and participating in suitable regional and international fora that focus on the interface between RE and rural livelihoods for knowledge transfer from the India GEF ACE project to other relevant regional and international initiatives.

Working with MNRE to develop a specific new RE in rural livelihoods programme, and support this new MNRE programme with suitable training workshops.

Improving the tariff and grid interconnection regulations for decentralised RE41 through: developing a roadmap for supporting improved tariff structures for small scale captive and off grid RE; and improving the regulatory, technical and tariff guidelines for decentralised RE systems’ grid interconnection.

(iv) Identify and remove financial barriers to the support of decentralised RE – rural livelihoods applications by:

Identifying, developing and promoting improvements to existing decentralised RE subsidy schemes and supports; developing and providing support under new financial support models for REtechnology and service providers that meet updated technical specifications and (quality et al) compliance testing guidelines; identify, develop and promote mechanisms and guidelines for the pooling of existing financial resources for RE – rural livelihoods applications; and assess, designand undertake training, and provide implementation support for improved risk mitigation (including but not limited to partial risk guarantees) for RE – rural livelihoods providers and end users.

5.2 Strategic Considerations and Consistency with UNDP Programme

118. The overall strategy for the project is to create an enabling environment for the wider market development of the use of RE for rural livelihoods applications in India. The project activities will greatly assist the Government of India in the implementation of the National Rural Livelihoods Mission (NRLM), and in the enhanced uptake of RE as led by MNRE.

119. As mentioned earlier, UNDP operations in India fall under the “Country Programme Action Plan” (CPAP) 2013 – 2017 agreed between the GOI and UNDP. Under the Sustainable Development Outcome of the CPAC 2013 - 2017, UNDP’s objective in this area is to expand access to clean energy and help build the capacity of communities to manage natural resources and withstand climate change

41 Decentralised RE includes both fully captive applications and also grid connected applications where the grid connection sales are not the primary purpose of the RE installation

50

and disasters. With MNRE, UNDP will also support formulation of policy frameworks and help to address barriers to expanding and scaling up energy access in rural areas to strengthen livelihoods. Support will be provided to set up pilot demonstration projects that promote entrepreneur-based business and delivery models that can be further scaled up. UNDP will help to strengthen the capacities of local communities to deploy new technologies and of market-based service providers to adapt and maintain technologies.

120. The India GEF ACE project is fully aligned with the India UN Development Action Framework (UNDAF) 2013-2017, which defines its sixth (Sustainable Development) outcome as “Government, industry and other relevant stakeholders actively promote more environmentally sustainable development….” and “It will also focus on clean energy for productive uses”.

121. The UNDP-MNRE-GEF ACE project is closely linked to the UNDP Strategic Plan 2014-17 with its emphasis on fostering supporting Sustainable Development Pathways as one of its three key focus areas. The UNDP focus on sustainable development pathways includes boosting the prospects of the poor for employment and livelihoods. Energy, and in this case RE, is clearly then linked to UNDP’s core mandate for 2014-17. UNDP has a specific focus on policy, legal and regulatory frameworks as well as institutional capacities that can lower investment risks, broaden and deepen markets, and strengthen private- and public-sector capacities to expand investment and increase access to sustainable energy at the national and sub-national levels to create better conditions to find and scale-up inclusive market-based solutions to achieving clean energy access, especially to off-grid sources of renewable energy.

6 POLICY CONFORMITY AND COUNTRY OWNERSHIP

6.1 Policy Conformity

122. The India GEF ACE project fully conforms to the GEF-5 climate change mitigation focal area strategic objective CCM-3 to “Promote investment in renewable energy technologies.”

6.2 Country Eligibility

123. India ratified the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) on 01 November 1993. India has submitted its Second National Communications Report to UNFCCC on 04May 2012 (see http://unfccc.int/resource/docs/natc/indnc2.pdf).

6.3 Country Drivenness

124. India has an excellent potential to accelerate the use of its considerable renewable resources to power its growing economy with more secure and affordable renewable energy supplies in underserved and unserved areas and specifically to support the ongoing development of rural livelihoods. The Government of India recognizes that the enhanced utilisation of local renewable energy resources is critical to ensure that it is able to meet both its economic and environmental objectives, and it has promoted this development through appropriate policies and actions. MNRE is the nodal ministry of the Government of India for all matters related to renewable energy.

125. India has a strong focus on expanding renewable energy supplies. India’s electricity supply from renewables is expected to increase rapidly from 24,503 MW by the end of the Eleventh Five-Year Plan (2011) to 54,503 MW by the end of the Twelfth Five-Year Plan (2017).

51

126. The Government of India has enacted a wide range of policies to support the expansion of renewable energy. There has also been a strong policy emphasis on achieving universal electrification, in particular through the Rajiv Gandhi Grameen Vidyutikaran Yojana (RGGVY) scheme that supports the extension of electricity supply to all households in India. Under RGGVY, the Ministry of Power has sanctioned 921 projects to electrify 124,139 villages and to provide free electricity connections to 40.73 million below poverty line (BPL) rural households. As on 31st March 2014, electrification work in 108,280 villages have been completed and 21.68 million free electricity connections have been released to BPL households42. By the end of the Eleventh Plan (2011), out of the total of 593,732 villages in India (Census 2001), 556,633 villages (93.8 percent) had been electrified43. However, ongoing constraints with the supply of electricity still leaves many unserved and underserved villages and household enterprises without the necessary reliable electricity needed for their household enterprises. So there will remain a role for decentralised RE to provide reliable electricity supply for rural enterprises for many years yet in India. However, tariff setting and grid interconnection issues will mean that decentralised RE will still face many challenges into the future.

127. For the thermal energy needs of rural livelihoods enterprises, agricultural wastes are increasingly now commercial products that need to be purchased, and diesel and fuel oil are steadily approaching price levels set by international markets. LPG is still highly subsidised, however the subsidy available is not sufficient to cover all the actual LPG demand, so LPG supply is frequently restricted in rural areas. Renewable energy for rural livelihoods thermal needs is therefore in demand, and hence is also a focus of the India GEF ACE project.

7 PROJECT OBJECTIVES, OUTCOMES AND OUTPUTS

7.1 Project Goal and Objective

128. The India ACE project goal is the reduction of GHG emissions, which is achieved through the objective of enhancing reliable and affordable clean energy access for rural livelihoods in un-served44

and underserved45 areas. This will be achieved by the integrated removal of the key barriers that prevent the wider adoption of RE – rural livelihood technology and services packages in India. The project’s emission reduction estimates are quantified in Annexure D.

129. The project focus is on access to clean energy for rural livelihoods. The project is based on the premise that lack of access to affordable and reliable energy hinders the growth of various critical rural livelihoods activities such as agriculture, animal husbandry, fisheries, and village industries. It is expected that decentralised renewable energy for electrical, thermal and mechanical applications will catalyse rural livelihoods activities to reduce poverty and improve the rural quality of life. While project benefits are likely to be in the tangible form of reduction in GHG emissions where fossil fuels are replaced partly or completely by efficient and clean renewables, more significant albeit gradual and less tangible co-benefits will flow in terms of improved incomes and quality of life especially for marginalised rural communities.

42 http://powermin.nic.in/bharatnirman/bharatnirman.asp, accessed on 05 July 201443 However, the limitations of RGGVY include that some of the villages which have been “electrified”, that is formally connected to the grid, have not yet been energised, and in many “electrified” villages a large proportion of houses are still not connected to grid electricity supply, and that many villages do not receive more than a few hours a day of electricity supply

44 Un-served: Scattered inhabited areas, hamlets or clustered villages without any grid electricity supply are defined as “un-served” areas.

45 Under-served: Areas that are connected to a grid electricity supply but do not get continuous or adequate supply, or where not all livelihoods applications have practical access to grid electricity supply - e.g. water pumping in remote fields

52

7.2 Project components, outcomes, outputs and activities

130. The major project component outcomes and activities are summarised in Table 24 as below:

Table 24: Project Components and Outcomes

The outcomes, outputs and activities are described as below:

7.2.1 Component 1: Development and deployment of key RE - rural livelihood application packages

Outcome 1: Deployment of RE – rural livelihood application packages

This outcome addresses the need to develop and deploy RE technology packages to suit specific applications in rural livelihoods sectors that contribute significantly to employment and incomegeneration and that are important for the welfare of marginalised rural communities. The first step involves the identification of specific energy uses (existing or potential) in the applicable livelihoods sector where energy needs can be met reliably through decentralised renewable energy technologies. At least ten such RETPRLs (Renewable Energy Technology Packages for Rural Livelihoods) were identified. The suitability of these RE technologies, their demand for and scale of deployment, and likely


Project components Outcomes

1. Development and deployment of key RE - rural livelihood application packages

1. Deployment of RE-rural livelihood application packages

2. Supply chain for RE technology supply and service providers forenhancing rural livelihoods

2. Increased supply of RE technology and service providers for rural livelihood applications

3. Policy and regulatory support for RE - rural livelihoods applications

3.1 Inclusion of RE applications in national and state level rural livelihoods policies for key livelihood sectors in rural areas

3.2 Future MNRE programs also cater to actions towards enhanced RE utilisation in rural livelihoods

3.3 Improved tariff and grid interconnection regulations for decentralised46 RE

4. Financial support for decentralised RE - rural livelihoodsapplications

4.1. Improved decentralised RE subsidies and support for rural livelihoods

4.2. Enhanced provision of financial support for decentralised RE in rural livelihoods applications

4.3 Improved investment risk mitigation for decentralised RE in rural livelihoods applications

53

costs were estimated. A brief description of identified RETPRLs is available in Section 2.3 with detailed assessments available in Annexure E.

Table 25: Outputs and Activities Contributing to the Achievement of Outcome 1

Outputs Activities

1.1. At least ten (10) cost-effective RE technology packages developed for rural livelihood (RETPRL) applications and established technical specifications

1.1.1 Assess performance (cost - benefit and technical performance) of existing RETPRL packages (Year 1 & 2)

1.1.2 Assess the market for existing RETPRL packages (Year 2)

1.1.3 Update technical specifications and compliance testing guidelines to improve RETPRL packages’ performance (Year 2)

1.1.4 Formalise technical quality specifications and compliance testing mechanisms for RETPRL packages (Year 2)

1.1.5 Conduct training program for MNRE, technology providers and users on the new testing and compliance mechanisms (Year 3)

1.2 Demonstrated and documented RE – rural livelihood application packages in 15 clusters47 and benefitting 1,500 household enterprises

1.2.1 Review suitability of clusters identified during the project design phase (Year 1)

1.2.2 Finalise the 15 clusters (Year 1)

1.2.3 Identify and contract suitable CLIAs48 and state coordinators (Year 1)

1.2.4 Prepare CLIA cluster level RETPRL package implementation plans (Year 1)

1.2.5 Implement cluster level RETPRL package implementation plans (Year 1, 2 & 3)

1.2.6 Assess demonstrated RETPRL packages and implementation mechanisms for replication and scale up (Year 2 & 3)

1.2.7 Document implementation activities (results, uptake and impacts) throughout the project (Year 2 & 3)

1.3 Completed training programmes and training of trainers activities49 for replication and scale up of RE – rural livelihood application packages

1.3.1 Develop seven (7) sectoral50 master training packages51 (Year 2)

1.3.2 Conduct master training packages for potential CLIAs, government agencies, sector experts, federations, etc. (Year 3 and 5)

1.3.3 Identify potential replication and scale up locations in the targeted states (Year 3)

1.4 Completed promotion of replicated and documented RE – rural livelihood application packages to other districts / states and applied to 28,500 household enterprises

1.4.1 Develop district wise state-level sectoral replication plans (Year 3)

1.4.2 Implement district level sectoral replication plans through cluster support units/CLIAs (Year 4 & 5)

1.4.3 Document replication implementation activities’ results, uptake and impacts throughout the project (Year 4 & 5)

47 Each cluster may have more than one RE technology – rural livelihood application package demonstrated. A cluster can consist of up to 30 villages in a particular geographical area, and of no more than 25 km radius to reduce travelling distances from a given base or common facility.

48 Cluster Level Implementation Agencies49 For selected cluster level implementing and other relevant agencies personnel50 E.g. dairy, poultry, irrigation, MFP processing, agro-processing, fisheries, small scale textiles 51 Covering technologies, financing, risk mitigation and implementation issues

54

1.4.4 Develop scale-up plans for each sector / technology application in each state (Year 4 & 5)

Output 1.1: At least ten (10) cost-effective RE technology packages developed for rural livelihood (RETPRL) applications and established technical specifications

(GEF Grant US$ 278,399 Investment; Co-financing: MNRE US$ 6,000 and Others US$ 0)

131. As described in section 2.3, a set of RETPRLs has been identified during the project design phase. The identification of the RETPRLs during the project design phase has been based on information collected through desk research, interactions with technology suppliers and other stakeholders, and through field visits. No field performance monitoring studies have been carried out during the project design phase and the analysis of technologies is based purely on secondary data. During year 1 and 2, a detailed assessment of the proposed RETPRLs will be carried out (Activity 1.1.1). This assessment will also include collection of field performance data on the relevant RETPRLs. Several of the RETPRLs e.g. solar PV based cold rooms or milk chilling systems are still under development at the time of the project design phase. It is expected that these RETPRLs would have evolved during the intervening period i.e. in the period between project design and initiation of the implementation of the GEF project.The assessment will take into account the technology development and, apart from monitoring and analysing technical performance of RETPRLs, will also cover cost-benefit analysis. The cost-benefit analysis will include analysis of investment required; operational costs; returns, payback period, etc. Some of the field performance data collection is also likely to take place at the clusters selected for the demonstration projects.

132. An assessment of the market for the relevant RETPRLs will be carried out during year 2 (Activity 1.1.2). The work will initially involve carrying out a market survey. The assessment will then take into account an understanding of demand (existing and potential) for the package, willingness and ability to pay, and the existence of suitable supply chains. The market assessment exercise will be undertaken after the results of Activity 1.1.1 are available as technical performance and cost-benefit analysis for RETPRLs will be the inputs required for carrying out the market study.

133. After the completion of Activity 1.1.1 i.e. assessment of performance of existing RETPRLs hasbeen completed; detailed technical specifications of RETPRLs and compliance testing guidelines to test the performance of RETPRLs will be developed (Activity 1.1.3). These would cover the following: (a) a brief description and performance specifications for the system; (b) a brief description of technical details and specifications of individual components e.g. SPV panel, battery, pump, etc. The specifications would refer to relevant India/international/MNRE standards for specifications of components. In case standard specifications are not available, a set of specifications will be developed.Implementation mechanisms for ensuring compliance with specific quality standards will be developed(Activity 1.1.4). This would also involve the identification of suitable testing centres / laboratories. The test standards and compliance testing guidelines/mechanisms would be developed in partnership with these testing centres / laboratories, end-users and manufacturers. In some cases, capacity development of testing laboratories, users and suppliers may be required for the adequate testing / compliance of specific RETPRLs. Detailed technical specifications and a fully functional compliance testing mechanism will ensure that the RETPRLs procured/implemented during the project are of a suitable high quality, and meet the required specifications.

Output 1.2: Demonstrated and documented RE – rural livelihood application packages in 15 clusters and benefitting 1,500 household enterprises

(GEF Grant US$ 733,650 Investment; Co-financing: MNRE US$ 860,768 and Others US$ 694,580)

55

134. To ensure a reasonable degree of success, the demonstration of the identified RETPRLs needs to be carried out in clusters based on the following initial criteria:

The applicable livelihoods sector is of sufficient size for significant numbers of potential replications;

The applicable livelihoods sector has a clear need for improved access to clean and reliable energy for specific applications;

End users are likely to adopt the packages and likely to derive significant economic and/or other benefits;

The RETPRL is sufficiently user friendly and the need for regular O&M for continued viable operation is in line with the capacity of the proposed and potential users52; and,

The area for RETPRL deployment has suitable facilitation agencies that are comfortable with technology adoption and have a strong community connection.

The identification of the initial 15 clusters has been carefully undertaken taking these initial criteria as above, and in consultation with relevant local government officials as well as NGOs during the project design phase. However, at the time of actual project site implementation, a further round of verification of ground realities in these clusters is highly desirable. Thus, a review of the suitability of clusters identified during the project design phase will be carried out (Activity 1.2.1). A framework of indicators will be developed for the suitability of locations to various RETPRLs focusing on the likelihood of success. Data on these indicators will be collected through secondary sources and primary surveys of the clusters. At this stage, it is expected that most of the clusters identified during the project design phase will be found suitable for undertaking demonstration activities, however, if project management is not sure about the suitability of some of the clusters, they will be able to replace these clusters with new more suitable clusters. Finally, a list of the most suitable 15 clusters for undertaking demonstration projects will be prepared (Activity 1.2.2)

135. The choice of Cluster Level Implementation Agencies (CLIA) is critical to the success of the demonstration projects. The qualifications and roles envisaged for a CLIA is outlined in Annexure C. A CLIA needs to demonstrate the following key characteristics:

Last mile contact with the relevant community (mobilization, follow-up, coordination etc.)

Project Management experience and capacity at the cluster level

Livelihoods sectoral expertise, including backward-forward linkages for specific businesses

Coordinate training of end-users and beneficiaries in sustained operation and maintenance of devices/technologies disseminated in a cluster through technology supplier/technical expert.

UNDP and MNRE have empanelled/ short-listed potential CLIAs during the project design phase (refer to Annex B 3.2). Once activity 1.2.2 is complete, the activity to finalise and contract CLIAs will be undertaken. State coordinators will be hired who will coordinate the activities at state level and provide support to CLIAs (Activity 1.2.3).

136. Detailed project implementation plans will be prepared by the CLIA in consultation with the PMU (Project Management Unit) for each cluster (Activity 1.2.4). The implementation of cluster level demonstration projects in the various clusters will be led by “cluster level implementation agencies” (CLIAs). CLIAs will be responsible for: consultations with target groups, identification of end-users, providing assistance in mobilising /accessing financing, assistance in the identification of the most appropriate technology supplier, supervision of the implementation, training of end-users, providing

52 For example gasifiers for thermal uses have lower ongoing O&M and operator skill level requirements than gasifiers used for electricity generation operating through the use of a gas engine

56

handholding support post-installation, reporting and documenting the demonstration project progress, etc. (Activity 1.2.5). Concurrent to the implementation of the demonstration projects in the 15 clusters, the CLIAs with the support from the PMU, will be documenting implementation activities (Activity 1.2.7) and undertaking assessment of RETPRLs and implementation mechanisms for replication and scale up (Activity 1.2.6)

137. In the course of implementation of cluster-level demonstration projects that will be led by the CLIA, appropriate working level Cluster Support Units (CSUs) will be developed with the help of CLIAs to take forward the replication and scale-up of the RETPRLs in more clusters across the state(s). However, a completely different CSU can be selected depending on the situation e.g. if a CLIA has not been able to perform or if the capabilities required to replicate is different to piloting.

138. The CSU, to be housed within the CLIA during the project implementation period and with a dotted line reporting to the PMU (refer to Figure 4), is to be set up comprising two staff of CLIA dedicated to the project for the implementation of demos and replications plus about 3 “barefoot practitioners” to be identified from among the locals. The main criterion for selection of this team is not only exposure to livelihoods activities and some technical expertise but also importantly business or entrepreneurial orientation. Eventually, the CSU would be spun off as an independent enterprise with a practical implementation focus for the replication and scale up phase, first within the applicable state and then in other states as relevant. It is suggested that the CSU team’s remuneration be based on a mix of fixed and variable remuneration with the ratio skewing towards variable remuneration in the course of the project.

Output 1.3: Completed training programmes and training of trainers activities for replication and scale up of RE – rural livelihood application packages

(GEF Grant US$ 236,500 Investment; Co-financing: MNRE US$ 0 and Others US$ 0)

139. In some sectors the use of RE may be entirely new, and in others the use of RE may be new in a specific application; hence the need for training and handholding programmes for providers and users / adopters of the RETPRLs at the sector-level. Suitable sector-level institutions/ academic institutions(governmental or non-governmental) will be identified for the design and execution of such training and handholding programmes. These institutions will be given the task of preparing seven (7) sectoral53

master training packages (Activity 1.3.1). In order to ensure the smooth replication and post-project end scale up activities, extensive training programmes based on the master training packages will be conducted for technology providers, users, facilitators and implementers as well as relevant local government officials (Activity 1.3.2). These training programmes will be conducted during Year 3 for replication (14 training programmes54) and in Year 5 for post-project end scale up activities (14 training programmes).

Output 1.4: Completed promotion of replicated and documented RE – rural livelihood application packages to other districts / states and applied to 28,500 household enterprises

(GEF Grant US$ 1,471,400 Investment; Co-financing: MNRE US$ 8,890,232 and Others US$ 7,922,801)

140. Based on the demonstration project results in which 1,500 end-users are expected to be benefitted directly through RETPRLs, activities will be undertaken to replicate RETPRLs in other similar clusters within the project implementation period, so as to benefit a total of 28,500 end-users. State-level

53 E.g. dairy, poultry, irrigation, MFP processing, agro-processing, fisheries, small scale textiles 54 2 training programmes each for 7 livelihood sectors

57

replication plans will be prepared towards facilitating sector-wide state wide adoption of the packages developed (Activity 1.4.1). During the preparation of these plans, other similar clusters will be identified and a survey of these identified clusters will be undertaken. Discussions with both state-level government and non-government agencies that are engaged with these clusters will be held and cross-linkages with ongoing development programmes will be established. The replication plan will be implemented through the relevant CSUs (Activity 1.4.2). The replications will take place in Year 4 and 5. It is expected that by the end of Year 3 there will be substantial progress made on expanding the base of technology and service providers (through activities undertaken under Outcome 2.1) and development of more conducive policy environment for RE- rural livelihood applications (through activities undertaken in Outcome 3.1 and 3.2). The facilitation and handholding support required from the project for replications is expected to be lower compared to the level of support required for the demonstration projects.

141. The replication projects will be evaluated and documented and this analysis will be used for developing scale-up plans beyond the project period (Activity 1.4.2 and 1.4.3). The important thing inthe documentation is not just the process followed, but also the feedback and iterations that led to any modifications in implementation details. The focus will be on information and knowledge management and not just on simple documentation. The documentation of the replication project results will be actively disseminated through appropriate and regular regional, state and local meetings, exhibitions and trade shows, through print and other media, site visits and so forth. The impact of the dissemination activities will be tracked and refined in a continuous improvement process.

7.2.2 Component 2: Supply chain for RE technology supply and service providers forenhancing rural livelihoods

Outcome 2: Increased supply of RE technology and service providers for rural livelihoodsapplications

142. The outputs and activities foreseen under this outcome are outlined in Table 26 as below. This outcome is focused on ensuring that a suitable supply chain for RE technology packages is established. A reliable and user-centric supply chain will be a critical success factor.

Table 26: Outputs and Activities Contributing to the Achievement of Outcome 2

Outputs Activities

2. Business development aspects55

supported for 100 RE technology supply and service providers for rural livelihoods applications

2.1. Identify suitable RE technology supply and service providers (Year 1 & 3)

2.2. Develop business plans (at the state or cluster level) with technical experts in RE, livelihoods sectors, and finance and management (Year 2 & 4)

2.3. Facilitate access to business finance for RE technology and service suppliers (Year 2 & 4)

2.4. Conduct of site visits, study tours, and training56 to enhance replication and scale up phase marketing, sales and after sales service provision (Year 3)

55 Business development includes: business plan development; support in development of business financing; the provision of site visits, study tours, and training to enhance replication and scale up phase marketing; and sales and after sales service provision

56 To selected personnel from technology supply and service providers

58

Output 2: Business development aspects supported for 100 RE technology supply and service providers for rural livelihoods applications

(GEF Grant US$ 301,000 TA; Co-financing: MNRE US$ 0 and Others US$ 416,386)

143. During year 1, around 20 suitable RE technology supply and service providers will be selected to be involved in the demonstration projects; another set of around 80 RE technology supply and service providers will be selected in Year 3 & 4 for undertaking replication activities (Activity 2.1). The selection of RE technology supply and service providers will be undertaken through a suitable EOI process. The RE technology supply and service providers could be equipment manufacturers, dealers, local entrepreneurs from clusters, spun-off entities of CLIAs, etc. The initial 20 RE technology supply and service provider can be provided a grant support of up to US $ 7,500 each57 to help them in establishing their supply and service chain around the identified clusters. The remaining investment amount would be contributed by the technology supply and service providers as equity or loan. Building on this supply chain network from the demonstration phase of the project, and the results of existing RE applicationssuch as off-grid electricity supply pilot projects from other project initiatives, a network of 80 additional RE technology suppliers / service providers will be set up during the replication and planning for the scale-up phase of the project. This expanded network will need to handle the required equipment supply, service delivery and maintenance of the RETPRLs.

144. This expanded network of RE enterprises will be provided with critical inputs in the form of support in preparation of business plans, technical training, linkages with potential markets in livelihoods sectors, access to finance from the various central and state level support schemes, as well as from Banks and other financial institutions, and improving the access to existing financial risk sharing mechanisms such as partial credit guarantees (Activities 2.2 & 2.3). To provide critical inputs and to build capacities of the RETPRL providers, the services of suitable consultants specialising in entrepreneurship, financing and business development will be contracted. Training programmes, site and study tours will also be used to enhance the exposure of RE technology suppliers and enable them to develop technology packages that are in line with livelihoods user requirements (Activity 2.4). Thisis an important aspect of supply chain development as the technology packages are likely to require some degree of customisation to enhance rural livelihoods user acceptance.

7.2.3 Component 3: Policy and regulatory support for RE – rural livelihood applications

Outcome 3.1: Inclusion of RE applications in national and state level rural livelihoods policies for key livelihood sectors in rural areas

145. The project focuses of decentralised RE solutions for various applications in key rural livelihoods sectors. Some of the applications identified include: water pumping; cooling of milk; cold storage of fruits and vegetables; processing of spices; drying of fish, spices, mushrooms; aeration of fish ponds;etc. The demonstration projects referred to in Outcome 1 indicate the interventions that are seen ashaving a strong potential in addressing energy needs and in improving the productivity of livelihoods activities. While the demonstration projects may provide leads on the existing policy barriers / incentives for larger scale adoption of these packages, the user sectors themselves as well as the livelihoods

57 It is assumed that a capital investment of around US $ 20,000 to 50,000 would be required from a RE technology supply and service provider to establish its sales and service network around a cluster. It is expected that the entrepreneur will invest in the basic infrastructure and hiring of staff. It is proposed that a technology and service provider will be provided a grant up to US$ 7500 to ensure good quality installations and service support (e.g. technical training of staff, purchase of special equipment/tools, etc.) and for the development of its business (targeted advertisements, participation in local events, etc.). The financial support can be spread over 2 years. This grant support will be available only to the 20 technology supply and service providers during the demonstration phase. For availing this grant support, the technology supply and service providers will have to submit a short proposal to the PMU.

59

initiatives in the state need to explicitly recognise the potential of these interventions. Work on the facilitation of the inclusion of these packages in appropriate policy statements / documents of the national and state livelihoods missions as well as for relevant sectors will be carried out. Going a step further, specific new support mechanisms, including but not limited to subsidies, may be needed for some packages to be viable.

Table 27: Outputs and Activities Contributing to the Achievement of Outcome 3.1

Outputs Activities

3.1.1 National and State level rural livelihoods mission statements / documents emphasising the use of RE58

3.1.1.1 Assess National and State level rural livelihoods mission statements / documents for mention of energy and/or RE as a critical success factor (Year 2 & 3)

3.1.1.2 Develop suitable RE guidelines / statements for the National and State level rural livelihoods mission statements and documents (Year 2 &3)

3.1.1.3 Hold workshops and high level meetings to assist relevant Ministries/Departments to officially adopt mission statements explicitly mentioning RE as a critical success factor (Year 3)

3.1.2 National and State level policies that support the use of RE for key rural livelihoodssectors

3.1.2.1 Assess National and State level rural livelihoods policies for mention of energy and/or RE as a critical success factor (Year 2 & 3)

3.1.2.2 Develop suitable National and State level draft RE for rural livelihoods policies / circulars (Year 2 & 3)

3.1.2.3 Hold workshops to assist relevant ministries / departments to officially adopt supportive policy statements / circulars mentioning RE as a critical success factor in rural livelihoods (Year 2 & 3)

3.1.3 Documented experiences and lessons on RE applications for rural livelihoods at suitable regional and international fora

3.1.3.1 Document and share experiences regarding RE and rural livelihoods via a suitable project website and other communications mechanisms (Year 1 to 5)

3.1.3.2 PMU participate and make presentation in relevant national, regional and international conferences and fora focusing on RE and rural livelihoods (Year 1 to 5)

Output 3.1.1: National and State level rural livelihoods mission statements/documents emphasizing the use of RE

(GEF Grant US$ 16,800 TA; Co-financing: MNRE US$ 8,000 and Others US$ 0)

146. In some cases, RE technologies already find a place in some policy documents and some even have governmental incentive schemes. For instance, there is already a government initiative for dissemination of solar pumps in some states. The National Cold Chain Development recognises the potential for Solar PV interactive cold chains and the use of phase change materials59. The National Fisheries Development Board supports the setting up of solar fish dryers with LPG back up. However, these examples are few and have not yet resulted in much activity in the field. This project seeks to promote the adoption of specific RE-based applications at the national and state levels. To achieve this objective, an assessment of the National and State level rural livelihoods mission statements / documents for mention of energy and/or RE as a critical success factor will be carried out (Activity 3.1.1.1). The assessment would

58 This will draw on the RE – rural livelihoods packages developed in Output 1.1.1

59 Materials that can store thermal energy

60

be followed by the development of RE guidelines / statements (based on the feasibility and potential for RE integration) for the National and State level rural livelihoods mission statements and documents (Activity 3.1.1.2). Meetings and workshops with the senior officials who are in-charge of National and State level rural livelihood missions will be conducted for the promotion of the adoption of RE guidelines (Activity 3.1.1.3).

Output 3.1.2: National and State level policies that support the use of RE for key rural livelihood sectors


147. Inclusion of RE guidelines in the mission statements and documents may not still lead to the adoption of RE technologies. For this to happen, the next step would be to include RE technologies in the National and State level rural livelihoods policies, programmes and schemes. For example, the recently announced Odisha Fisheries Policy60 identifies setting-up of cold storages, ice plants, as well as hygienic post-harvesting facilities as priority areas for fisheries development. For post-harvesting facilities, the Odisha Fisheries Policy states: “Use of low cost energy sources in fish processing, particularly nonconventional energy sources will be considered and promoted”. However, for ice plants and cold storage plants where again renewable energy solutions can be utilised, the policy does not mention such possibilities. All such National and State level rural livelihoods policies and schemes related to the seven sectors (Activity 3.1.2.1) will be assessed. Appropriate modifications in the policies (Activity 3.1.2.2) will be suggested and would reach out to the concerned Ministries and Departments to ensure inclusion of suitable RE possibilities in their relevant polices and schemes (Activity 3.1.2.3).

Output 3.1.3: Documented experiences and lessons on RE applications for rural livelihoods at suitable regional and international fora


148. The documentation of the experiences of RE applications for rural livelihoods (please refer to activity 1.1.1, activity 1.2.7, activity 1.4.3, etc.) will be carried out. This documentation will be made available to the public through a suitable project web site and through printed case studies. Given the increasing importance of the Internet for communications, it is proposed that the project web site would become functional by the end of year 1. The website and case studies will be continuously updated during the project lifetime of 5 years (Activity 3.1.3.1). It is also important that these packages and schemes for their promotion are widely publicised at appropriate national-level fora. Information on these initiatives would also be shared in relevant regional (Asian) and international fora. Thus the PMU staff and experts will participate in relevant national, regional and international conferences and fora focusing on RE and rural livelihoods (Activity 3.1.3.2).

Outcome 3.2: Future MNRE programs also cater to actions towards enhanced RE utilisation in rural livelihoods


Outputs Activities

3.2.1 Developed MNRE-supported programme for

3.2.1.1 Assess the extent and effectiveness of MNRE support of RE for rural livelihoods applications (Year 1)

60http://www.orissafisheries.com/File/comprehansive-REVISED-DRAFT-ODISHA-FISHERIES%20POLICY%202014.pdf last accessed on 08 July 2014.

61

enhanced RE utilisation in rural livelihoods

3.2.1.2 Develop a new MNRE programme focused on RE used to develop rural livelihoods (Year 2)

3.2.1.3 Conduct workshops to design and implement the new MNRE RE – rural livelihoods programme (Year 2)

Output 3.2.1: Developed MNRE-supported programme for enhanced RE utilisation in rural livelihoods


149. Closely connected with the inclusion of RE packages in sectoral and livelihoods policy documents, is the mainstreaming of these packages within MNRE and in state-level RE programmes. An analysis of existing MNRE and state level schemes targeted at specific livelihoods sector applications (e.g. solar pumps) and field level assessments conducted during the demonstration projects outlined in Outcome 1.1 will provide the necessary background to develop and launch a separate programme within MNRE on RE for rural livelihoods. A review of application/ sector-specific schemes at MNRE and state level agencies such as the use of solar pumps for irrigation, distributed RE for stand-alone and grid connected applications, gasifiers for thermal and electricity generation purposes, and so forth will also provide useful insights(Activity 3.2.1.1).

150. The design of a programmatic approach will be done in close consultation with stakeholders to improve the acceptance and effectiveness of the initiative (Activity 3.2.1.2). The relevant stakeholder consultations and workshops for this purpose will be carried out (Activity 3.2.1.3).

Outcome 3.3 Improved tariff and grid interconnection regulations for decentralised61 RE

151. Tariff setting for RE-based micro grids is currently largely ad hoc, and RE-based micro grids are typically much more expensive than (the unreliable) grid power. Tariff-setting guidelines will considerably improve the sustainability of decentralised electricity generation from renewables. RE-based micro grids are in direct competition with the electricity grid, which is intrinsically cheaper (primarily through cross –subsidies) even though the grid is generally low on availability (hours per day) and reliability. Grid-compatible micro grids will benefit enormously from a suitable regulatory framework that facilitates and guides grid interconnection. The scale-up of several of the proposed RETPRLs will significantly benefit from clear guidelines on tariff setting and grid-interconnection. This project though not directly involved in regulatory reform, will facilitate creation of a knowledge base to help develop appropriate tariff-setting and grid-interconnection policy and regulatory frameworks.


Outputs Activities

3.3.1 Completed roadmap and workshops for supporting improved tariff structures for small scale captive and off-grid RE

3.3.1.1 Assess existing tariff structures and rules/regulations for small scale captive and off-grid RE (Year 2)

3.3.1.2 Develop improved tariff structures for decentralised RE (Year 2)

3.3.1.3 Facilitate adoption of improved tariff structures for decentralised RE (Year 4)


62

3.3.2 Developed and implemented regulatory, technical and tariff guidelines for RE based captive/decentralised systems’ grid interconnection

3.3.2.1 Assess existing arrangements and barriers for captive/decentralised RE grid interconnection (Year 2)

3.3.2.2 Develop recommendations for improved captive/decentralised RE grid access mechanisms (Year 2)

3.3.2.3 Approval and implementation of improved captive/decentralised RE grid access mechanisms

Output 3.3.1: Completed roadmap and workshops for supporting improved tariff structures for small scale captive and off-grid RE


152. Activity 3.3.1.1 will involve carrying out an assessment of the existing tariff structures and rules/regulations for small-scale captive and off-grid RE applications. This review will include the current norms and practices of tariff setting for RE-based micro grids; comparison of current tariff levels with tariffsfor grid power, willingness and ability of users to pay for reliable and clean power; and, review of previous work on guidelines for tariff-setting for off-grid electricity from renewable. Activity 3.3.1.2 will recommend guidelines for tariff setting for captive and off-grid RE applications. The recommendations will also take into account the field-level data collected from the demonstration projects.

Output 3.3.2: Developed and implemented regulatory, technical and tariff guidelines for RE based captive/decentralised systems’ grid interconnection


153. Activity 3.3.2.1 will involve carrying out an assessment of existing arrangements and barriers for captive/decentralised RE grid interconnection. The review will include current norms and practices for grid-connection of RE-based micro grids; review of technical and regulatory requirements for grid-compatible and grid-interactive micro grids; and the review of grid interaction norms in various countries. Activity 3.3.2.2.will entail the development of recommendations for technical and regulatory guidelines for grid interaction of off-grid RE.

7.2.4 Component 4: Financial support for decentralised RE - rural livelihood applications

Outcome 4.1: Improved decentralised RE subsidies and support for rural livelihoods

154. Like the rest of the energy sector in India, decentralised RE has also enjoyed large subsidies, largely in the form of upfront capital subsidies. However, high upfront capital subsidies (of up to 90%)generally mean that the beneficiary’s interest is short-lived and the subsidy is viewed merely as a discount on the RE equipment cost. There is generally no subsidy linkage with the actual in-use performance of the RE equipment, and therefore the subsidy is limited as a long-term sustained RE support mechanism. There are also generally operational issues in the way the subsidies have been disbursed. The RE subsidy regime is reportedly often characterised by significant delays, and inefficiencies in the disbursal of subsidy.

63


Outputs Activities

4.1.1. Assessed RE subsidy and support models62 for increased effectiveness63 of decentralised RE

4.1.1.1 Evaluate the effectiveness of existing RE subsidy schemes and other support models (Year 1)

4.1.2 Improved RE subsidy and support models for increased effectiveness of decentralised RE for rural livelihoods funding

4.1.2.1 Develop improved decentralised RE subsidy and support models (Year 1)

4.1.2.2 Conduct workshops and outreach activities to promote increased effectiveness RE subsidy and support models for rural livelihoods (Year 2)

Output 4.1.1 and Output 4.1.2

(GEF Grant US$ 25,200 investment and US$ 39,600 TA; Co-financing: MNRE US$ 22,000; and Others: US$ 0)

155. In line with views expressed in the pre-project stakeholder consultations, an evaluation of the existing subsidy schemes in terms of their effectiveness, reach and efficiency will be carried out (Activity 4.1.1.1). Alternate RE subsidy and support models, e.g. performance based subsidy models will be reviewed, and improved decentralised RE subsidy and support models will be developed (Activity 4.1.2.1). These recommended new and improved financial models will be shared widely through workshops and other outreach modes (Activity 4.1.2.2).

Outcome 4.2: Enhanced provision of financial support for decentralised RE in rural livelihood applications

156. This outcome focuses on better meeting the actual financing needs of RETPRL users, technology and service providers. It is important to flag here that distributed and renewable energy (DRE) financing needs are quite different from other energy financing needs. DRE financing is characterized by: (i) small and geographically scattered requirements; (ii) high risks resulting from a sometimes low ability to repay loans and high level of uncertainty around DRE policy; (iii) uncertainty around approval and price aspects of possible carbon savings; and, (iv) over estimation of risks and undervaluation of savings / benefits. These characteristics have been recognized and highlighted by the financial and DRE sectors in some quarters, but gaps remain in the sensitization of the financial sector to the fact that environmental, social and frequently economic benefits from DRE often far outweigh their financial costs. Keeping in mind these issues, the existing DRE financial support mechanisms to improve their reach and relevance will be reviewed, while also devising new mechanisms.


Outputs Activities

62 Capital and/or ‘soft cost’ grants, MNRE et al interest rate subsidies, low or no interest loans, import / sales / VAT tax exemptions, performance-linked payments, free / subsidised DPR (detailed project report) development, project or portfolio oriented (partial) risk guarantees, O&M subsidies, tax support for leasing, mobilization of CSR and international multilateral and bilateral development bank concessional funds, subsidised interest rates via national development banks, commercial lending through banks such as YES Bank, etc.

63 Effectiveness includes update, impact, predictability, accessibility, flexibility, and sustainability

64

4.2.1 Implemented financial support packages for RE technology – rural livelihoods applications

4.2.1.1 Develop financial support packages for RE technology and for service providers meeting updated technical specifications and compliance testing guidelines64 (Year 3)

4.2.1.2 Develop financial support packages for RE technology users / adapters (Year 3)

4.2.2 Pooled available financial resources for supporting viable livelihood business models and enhanced market linkages65

4.2.2.1 Identify existing financial models and resources available for financial pooling for RE - rural livelihoods (Year 2)

4.2.2.2 Determine mechanisms by which financial resources can be better pooled / bundled together (Year 2)

4.2.2.3 Develop guidelines for pooling financial resources for RE – rural livelihoods (Year 2)

4.2.2.4 Communicate financial pooling opportunities through reports, leaflets, workshops and meetings with sectoral partners(Year 2)

Output 4.2.1: Implemented financial support packages for RE technology – rural livelihoods applications


157. As explained earlier, under Outcome 2.1, assistance will be provided to RE technology and service providers in drawing-up or improving their business plans. These business plans will also cover the financing needs of the RE technology and service providers. Based on these financing needs identified in the business plans and in consultation with financial institutions/experts, financial support packages for RE technology and service providers will be developed (Activity 4.2.1.1).

158. Financial support packages for RE technology users will be developed. The aim will be to pool financial resources available in the form of subsidies, soft loans, etc. from both renewable energy and livelihoods sectors (drawing from the work done under output 4.2.2). Simplified processes will be suggested so that these financial resources available from different sources can be accessed through a single window by the RE technology users (Activity 4.2.1.2).

Output 4.2.2: Pooled available financial resources for supporting viable livelihood business models and enhanced market linkages


159. This project has a unique feature in that it can potentially pool renewable energy subsidies as well as for a number of livelihoods sectors. While this widens the pool of financial resources available, it raises cross-institutional issues that need to be identified and resolved. The first step will be the identification of existing financial models and resources available for financial pooling for RE - rural livelihoods (Activity 4.2.2.1). Some of the potential sources of financial resources at the national level could be National Rural


64 Capital and/or ‘soft cost’ grants, MNRE et al interest rate subsidies, low or no interest loans, import / sales / VAT tax exemptions, performance-linked payments, free / subsidised DPR (detailed project report) development, project or portfolio oriented (partial) risk guarantees, O&M subsidies, tax support for leasing, mobilization of CSR and international multilateral and bilateral development bank concessional funds, subsidised interest rates via national development banks, commercial lending through banks such as YES Bank, etc.

64 Effectiveness includes update, impact, predictability, accessibility, flexibility, and sustainability65 Through NRLM, SRLM, NABARD, KVIC, National Mission on Horticulture (NMH), rural livelihood sector support

ministries / departments and central / state funding agencies, etc.

65

Livelihood Mission; Khadi & Village Commission; National Horticulture Board; Department of Animal Husbandry, Dairying & Fisheries, etc. Similarly there are other financial assistance sources available at the state-level. After identifying these financial assistance resources, suitable mechanisms by which financial resources can be better pooled / bundled together will be determined (Activity 4.2.2.2). In several cases, pooling of financial resources is not allowed i.e. if the end-user is getting a subsidy from one department then he/she is debarred from accessing any other subsidy. Work towards reaching out to senior officials in the relevant ministries/departments of livelihoods sectors to resolve these issues will be carried out. Resolution of these issues will lead to the development of guidelines for pooling financial resources for RE – rural livelihoods (Activity 4.2.2.3). Financial pooling opportunities through reports, leaflets, workshops and meetings with sectoral partners will be communicated to the relevant stakeholders (Activity 4.2.2.4).

Outcome 4.3: Improved investment risk mitigation for decentralised RE in rural livelihood applications

160. As mentioned above, financial risks around DRE tend to be poorly understood and in many cases are over-stated. This is true not just of financial risks but also of the technical and institutional risks that also need to be better understood. In this project, several factors add to potential risks, viz-a-viz, application of RE in several cases to relatively new applications, dealing with first-time users of DRE, working in clusters that have a low familiarity with RE or have a low capacity to pay. Nevertheless, there are mechanisms to mitigate these risks and these will be evaluated closely and facilitate the employment of suitable mechanisms in the demonstration, replication and scale-up activities. Training workshops will help demystify risks around DRE and generate awareness about various risk mitigation mechanisms and their suitability to various DRE applications and situations.


Outputs Activities

4.3.1 Enhanced risk mitigation mechanisms66 designed and supported for RE enterprises and RE technology adopters / end-users in rural livelihoods applications

4.3.1.1 Undertake comparative assessment of key methods and mechanisms for providing investment risk guarantees (Year 2)

4.3.1.2 Assess risks and their mitigation in the RE - rural livelihoods context (Year 3)

4.3.1.3 Design suitable risk guarantee mechanisms (Year 3)

4.3.1.4 Undertake training workshops to share the improved risk guarantee mechanism findings (Year 3)

4.3.1.5 Establishment of a fund to provide implementation support to RE technology supply and service providers as well as livelihood enterprises (Year 3)

Output 4.3.1: Enhanced risk mitigation mechanisms designed and supported for RE enterprises and RE technology adopters / end-users in rural livelihoods applications


161. A comparative assessment of key methods and mechanisms for providing investment risk guarantees e.g. grants, subsidies, loan guarantees, concessional/flexible loan terms, insurance, etc. for RE enterprises and RE end-users will be carried out (Activity 4.3.1.1). As there are a variety of risks e.g. risks related with policy, technology, macroeconomic and capacity; these risks and their mitigation in the RE-rural livelihoods context will be assessed (Activity 4.3.1.2). Based on the work done during Activities 4.3.1.1 and 4.3.1.2, improvements of existing risk guarantee mechanisms for RE enterprises and RE end-users

66 Including but not limited to project or portfolio level partial risk guarantees to reduce loan collateral requirements and reduce perceived lender repayment risks

66

will be designed (Activity 4.3.1.3). Training workshops to share the improved risk guarantee mechanism findings will be implemented (Activity 4.3.1.4) and established a fund, with around US$ 0.3 million to provide implementation support to RE technology supply and service providers as well as livelihood enterprises (Activity 4.3.1.5). This fund will be utilized as per the mechanism(s) developed under activity 4.3.1.3. This activity will link with activities 2.2 and 2.3 where RE technology and service providers are developing their business plans and obtaining the necessary business finance for their companies.

8 KEY INDICATORS, RISKS AND ASSUMPTIONS

8.1 Indicators

162. Overarching key indicators of the project’s success include:

i. At least ten (10) RE – rural livelihoods application packages are designed, technical quality specifications and compliance testing guidelines developed, packages utilised, and packages available for ongoing RE – rural livelihoods technology and market refinement, policy support, and funding support at the end of the project implementation period.

ii. At least 1,500 household enterprises in 15 clusters benefit from the direct demonstration of RE –rural livelihood application packages, and the results are documented.

iii. At least 28,500 household enterprises benefit from the replication of the RE – rural livelihood application packages, and the results are documented.

iv. Cumulative CO2 emission reductions achieved from start to end of project (EOP) will be 69,115 tCO2e.

v. Seven (7) sectoral master training packages training programmes are developed and training of trainers activities are undertaken for replication and scale up of the applicable RE – rural livelihood application packages.

vi. A new programme / scheme(s) is (are) developed and supported by MNRE for enhanced RE utilisation in rural livelihood applications.

vii. Appropriate national and State level statements / documents /guidelines of the relevant rural livelihoods missions and of relevant livelihoods sectors emphasise the use of RE.

viii. 100 RE technology supply and service providers are supported in their business development aspects for RE - rural livelihoods applications.

ix. Enhanced risk mitigation mechanisms are designed and supported for RE enterprises and RE technology adopters / end-users in rural livelihoods applications.

163. The project results framework outlined in section 11 below provides a detailed list of project progress indicators for the various outputs of the project.

8.2 Risks

164. The project can be considered to face two categories of risks: external (political / policy / India / international events related) and internal (risks that are inherent to the project implementation where the risk can be substantially controlled by the project’s management or in the project’s implementation):

165. The key external risks include:

67

a) Failure to secure the necessary effective ongoing policy, management or financial support from MNRE, which will be the main project implementing agency and is the provider of most of the project’s co-financing – for example due to adverse impact changes in MNRE’s management, or from reduced MNRE funding, or if the proposed MNRE new programme focus on RE for rural livelihoods does not eventuate.

b) Current levels of funding available to support the development of rural livelihoods such as NRLM, National Horticulture Mission, or National Fisheries Mission etc. at the central and state government level are reduced and hence there is less funding support available to be accessed by the project for the rural livelihoods aspects of project activities.

c) (Decentralised) RE does not remain an important item on the relevant central and/or state political agendas.

d) Large and ongoing subsidies for certain favoured RE technologies or REPTL applications (e.g.solar water pumping for agriculture) leads to significant and unavoidable market distortions.

e) Supporting rural livelihoods does not remain a high central or relevant state government priority.This is somewhat unlikely, though the design of the livelihoods initiatives could undergo significant changes in the project’s 5-year implementation timeframe.

f) Civil, political or communal disorder or natural disasters (e.g. delayed or weak monsoon or other rains, cyclonic storms, disease outbreaks in monoculture crops, an outbreak of insect plagues like locusts, major outbreak of animal or human diseases, major forest fires, etc.) negatively impact on the project’s remote rural areas and their ability to export the relevant commercial goods.

g) Grid electricity supply is significantly extended to remote household enterprises instead of just some government facilities and some centrally located households in rural villages - and/or the hours per day, predictability, or quality (e.g. voltage regulation) of rural grid electricity supply improves significantly in the applicable project districts. This would make decentralised renewable electricity less attractive for rural livelihoods applications.

h) There is a sustained reduction in the international oil price, or large subsidies are re-introduced and sustained for diesel used for captive power generation, or funds available for LPG subsidies is significantly increased, or the price of electricity for rural livelihoods end uses falls – hence significantly undermining the economics of RE for rural livelihoods in India.

i) Prices of relevant rural livelihoods sector outputs (e.g. dairy products or fish or broiler chicken meator eggs) collapse and stay down for a significant period during the project’s implementation, or market linkages of the relevant livelihoods sector outputs (e.g. high quality dried fish) are weaker than anticipated.

j) Applicable rural enterprises are unable to fund the necessary minimum level of equity (20%) of theirRE technology cost to ensure strong enough beneficiary ownership of the RE – rural livelihoods applications.

k) Major adverse economic or political conditions significantly force up interest rates and/or curtail bank lending for a significant period in India during the project’s implementation, hence reducing the affordability of the bank loans that beneficiaries need to take out to cover part of their RE capital costs.

68

166. The internal risks include:

a) The project is not able to find or to motivate additional RE technology and/or service providers to enter the market and to grow their businesses in rural livelihoods applications areas.

b) The project is not able to foster the more effective pooling and access of the multiple RE and rural livelihood capital subsidies in a timely fashion without excessive transaction costs or excessive time delays - to grow the number of RE–rural livelihoods applications through demonstrations, replications and scale up project activities.

c) The project is not able to get MNRE, NRLM, national livelihoods missions, and relevant state based RE, SRLM and other sectoral livelihoods efforts to remain engaged or to effectively work together to support the growth of RE for rural livelihoods.

d) The project is not able to mobilise the necessary 30-50% debt financing from banks or microfinance institutions for the replication and scale up projects in the relevant RE – rural livelihoods applications.

e) Project Co-financers such as KVIC or IREDA or NTPC are unable to keep to their commitments to financially support the project.

f) Relevant RE – rural livelihoods projects are successfully demonstrated, but then do not get replicated by a factor of nineteen for a variety of internal or external factors. This could lead to a negative circular effect in terms of credibility around the project.

g) There is a significantly slow start of on-the-ground project activities.

h) There is significant RE technology underperformance or failure in project activities (technical risk).

i) There is a lack of necessary leadership and/or slow or low quality decision-making in the PMU.

j) There are significant delays in completing the recruitment process for Cluster Level Implementing Agencies (CLIAs) and other India GEF ACE project consultancy assignments.

k) The project is unable to hire competent consultants in a timely fashion because of MNRE or UNDP administrative or management constraints in the process of selection and/or recruitment.

167. A detailed risk-analysis table is available in Annexure A. This also includes suggestions for countermeasures to deal with outlined risks to ensure successful implementation of this GEF project.

8.3 Assumptions

168. The key assumptions for this project revolve around expectations from both the government and the market sides of RE and its use in rural livelihoods.

169. All the feedback received during the project preparatory phase is that the Indian government (through MNRE and other relevant ministries / departments) will continue to support RE for rural livelihoods development through ongoing capital subsidies and other supports, and that MNRE is prepared in principle to set up a dedicated new programme focused on the enhanced use of RE for rural livelihoods applications.

170. The feedback received during the project preparatory phase is also that the Indian central and state governments (led through NRLM and relevant central rural livelihoods missions at the centre) will continue to support the development of relevant rural livelihoods through ongoing capital subsidies and other supports.

69

171. The project also depends on a positive response from the market consisting of the applicable RE technology and service providers and rural livelihood support organisations (including but not limited to the project supported CLIAs) and of course the rural livelihood focused household enterprises. The assumption is that both the number and focus of the RE suppliers and the interest of the rural livelihoods related household enterprises will grow from the current levels with the interventions provide by this India GEF ACE project.

172. The RE solutions envisaged offer distinct advantages with reasonable payback on investment and entrepreneurs would be ready to make investments. Sometimes, the RE products did not match with the exact requirement or stopped working after first few months. The project assumes that the RE products are matured and the matching is appropriate and the RE product will operate for duration as claimed.

9 COST-EFFECTIVENESS; GEF INCREMENTAL REASONING

173. This UNDP/MNRE India GEF ACE project has been designed as an integrated and suitably co-funded series of components and activities to remove the multiple barriers facing the widespread adoption of key RE for rural livelihoods application in three specific states (Assam, Madhya Pradesh and Odisha) in India, with a possible extension into the neighbouring states of Jharkhand and Meghalaya. A specific new MNRE RE for rural livelihoods programme, and the enhanced utilisation of applicable existing state level RE programmes and interventions will support the project. The project will also be supported by central and a state level rural livelihood programmes, and will be supported by appropriate NGOs, financial institutions, industrial companies, and academic institutions. The project will directly support rural livelihoods, and hence directly provide socioeconomic poverty reduction efforts. Women head many rural livelihoods enterprises, or work on or are employed by rural livelihoods enterprises, so the project will have a very positive overall gender impact as well.

174. In the absence of the project’s interventions: the market for RE for rural livelihoods will be subject to continued ad-hoc and hence inefficient central and state government funding for RE for rural livelihoods applications; and it will continue to be difficult for RE technology and service providers and household enterprises to access and pool the myriad central and state government RE and rural livelihoods capital grants and other supports that are available. Key RE technology and rural livelihoods application packages will remain poorly specified in terms of their performance and there will continue to be a lack of quality compliance testing. There will be an inadequate number and limited capacity of RE technology and service providers. There will continue to be significant constraints for RE for rural livelihoods providers in setting suitable tariffs and in accessing the electricity grid to export any surplus RE generated electricity.

175. The GEF contribution of USD 4,006,849 will result in direct GHG emission reductions of 69,115tonnes CO2 from the 1,500 demonstrations and 28,500 replication RE – rural livelihoods projects implemented during the 5-year lifetime of the project. Assuming an average economic lifetime of the RE systems (used to support rural livelihoods) as 10 years, the cumulative direct emission reduction will be 662,742 tonnes CO2. If the GEF contribution (USD 4,006,849) is divided by the direct project emission reductions, this gives a corresponding GHG unit abatement cost (UAC) (i.e. GEF$ per tCO2) of USD 6.05US$/tonne CO2.

10 SUSTAINABILITY AND REPLICABILITY

10.1 Sustainability

176. After completion of the proposed GEF project, it is expected that the impetus for developing the enhanced use of RE for rural livelihoods will continue in India. The post project-end sustainability of this GEF-supported project will be ensured by:

70

Emergence of a stronger and more diverse RE for rural livelihoods technology and service provider industry in India, with stronger supply chains and improved quality RE-livelihoods technology and service offerings that meet defined standards, and improved delivery mechanisms for RE for rural livelihoods.

A significantly increased proportion of successful RE for rural livelihoods projects working at the defined performance levels that are specified in government funding supports and that work as expected by the rural livelihoods household enterprise end users.

Availability of suitably documented demonstrations and replications of key RE for rural livelihoods applications in real-world operating environments in India.

A higher level of awareness of the value of well-designed and suitably specified RE for rural livelihoods technologies and services amongst the potential household enterprises and their key intermediaries in India.

A more supportive policy and regulatory framework that fosters the supply and adoption of RE for rural livelihoods activities

10.2 Replicability

177. The implementation and documentation of the application of RE for rural livelihoods in 1,500 rural enterprises, followed by replication in a further 28,500 household enterprises, will showcase the relevance, usefulness and cost-effectiveness of RE technologies and services in real-world rural livelihoods applications in India. The availability of ten (10) well developed and integrated RE – rural livelihoods application packages in a range of key rural livelihoods sectors will form the basis for a further scaling up of RE for rural livelihoods projects post project-end.

71

11 PROJECT RESULTS FRAMEWORK

This project will contribute to achieving the following Country Programme Outcome as defined in the UNDP Strategic Plan 2014-2017 and the UNDP India CPAP 2013-2017: Project: Scale Up of Access to Clean Energy for Rural Productive67 Uses (India ACE Project)Outcome: Expanded access to clean energy.Output: Support for initiatives that increase access to clean energy for productive uses in off-grid, underserved rural regions.Output indicators: number of REPTRL packages developed and trialled, number of RE for rural livelihoods applications fostered by project.

Country Programme Outcome Indicators:Outcome: Progress towards meeting national commitments under multilateral environmental agreementsOutput: Supporting national development objectives with co-benefits of mitigating climate changeOutput indicators: (a) Annual reductions in greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions in India; (b) million USD flowing annually to India from GEF through UNDP for this programme; (c) number of additional UNDP initiatives for achieving global and national targets under multilateral environmental agreements.

Primary applicable Key Environment and Sustainable Development Key Result Area): Strengthened national capacities to mainstream environment and energy concerns into national development plans.

Expanding access to environmental and energy services for the poor.Applicable GEF Strategic Objective and Program:Strategic Objective: Climate Change Objective 3: Promote investment in renewable energy technologiesApplicable GEF Expected Outcomes: Increased market uptake of RE systems for rural livelihoodsApplicable GEF Outcome Indicators:a. Extent to which EE policies and regulations are adopted and enforcedb. Volume of investment mobilized c. Tonnes of CO2 equivalent avoided

Table 33 Project Planning Matrix

StrategyObjectively Verifiable Indicators

Means of Verification Critical AssumptionsDescription Baseline Target

Project goal: Reduced GHG emissions achieved through renewable energy systems in rural livelihood sectors

Cumulative CO2 emission reduced from start of project to End-Of-Project (EOP), (tCO2e)

0 69,115 M&E reports of the demonstration and replication projects

Continued support and participation from co-financing institutions, MNRE, CLIAs and other stakeholders

67 The original PIF and documentation referred to “and Domestic (Uses)” but in the PPG phase the feedback and analysis firmly supported a narrowing of the project scope to be limited to productive uses. In a country of over 1.2 billion people (India) even just focusing on productive uses in three states is very ambitious with only a GEF $4 million budget. Adding domestic uses would increase project implementation complexity and risks as domestic users expect low cost (subsidised) electricity supply and it would also make the project scope and ambition too great. This reduction in scope to just productive uses will also address GEF STAP and Council comments at the PIF stage of the project scope being too ambitious and that the original project was too unfocussed.

72



Project Objective: Enhancing reliable and affordable clean energy access for rural livelihoods in un-served and underserved areas

Total energy savings achievedfrom implemented RETPRLs by EOP MWhe

MWhth

00

112,7371,376,631

M&E reports of the demonstration and replication projects

Selected end users for demos and replications have sufficient finance and favourable business environment

Component 1: Development and deployment of key RE-rural livelihood application packages

Outcome 1: Deployment of RE-rural livelihood application packages

No. of household enterprises adopting RETPRLs through demonstrations and replications in the targeted states by the EOP

0 30,000 M&E reports of the demonstration and replication projects

Sufficient finance is available for the implementation of developed packages for RE-rural livelihood

Output 1.1: At least ten (10) cost-effective RE technology packages developed for rural livelihood (RETPRL) applications and established technical specifications

No. of RETPRLs developed by Year 2

0 10 Performance assessment reports on RETPRLs

RE technology suppliers willing to provide services as required for technology packages in rural areas


No. of demonstration project clusters by EoP

0 15 Reports from CLIAs

M&E reports of the demonstration

Household enterprises are convinced with RE application benefits in livelihood activities

No. of household enterprises adopting RETPRLs in the demonstration clusters by Year 3

0 1,500 Reports from CLIAs

M&E reports of the demonstration

End-users are interested and have the sufficient finance

Output 1.3: Completed training programmes and training of trainers activities for replication and scale up of RE – rural livelihood application packages

No. of training programmes conducted by EoP

0 14 Report of training programmes


No. of training packages developed by Year 2

0 7 Training package material Continued support and participation from co-financing institutions, MNRE, CLIAs and other stakeholders

No. of persons trained by EoP 0 280 Report of training programmes


Output 1.4: Completed promotion of replicated and documented RE – rural livelihood application packages promoted to other districts / states and applied to 28,500 household enterprises

No. of household enterprises adopting RETPRLS through replications by EoP

1,500(at the end of demonstration)

30,000 M&E reports of the replication projects

Implementing agencies and end-users are interested, accept RETPRLs and are equipped to implement the project

Component 2: Supply chain for RE technology supply and service providers for enhancing rural livelihoods

Outcome 2: Increased supply of RE technology and service providers for rural livelihood applications

No. of RE technology supply and service providers for rural livelihood applications by EoP

0 100 M&E of supply chain development activity

There is sufficient demand for RETPRLs amongst existing and new RE technology and service providersEnterprises have sufficient technical and financial capacity

73



Output 2: Business development aspects supported for 100 RE technology supply and service providers for rural livelihoods applications

No. of RE technology supply and service providers for rural livelihoods applications by EoP


No. of business plans developed for RE technology supply and service providers by Year 2

0 20 M&E of supply chain development activity/ business plan reports

No. of financial mechanism to access finance for RE technology supply and service suppliers by Year 2


Component 3: Policy and regulatory support for RE - rural livelihood applications


No. of states enforcing policies on the RE applications as part of their SRLM and in line with the same policies at the national level by year 3

0 4 NRLM (1) and SRLMs (3 states) policy documents

NRLM and SRLMs that support RE applications for rural livelihoods is sustained

Output 3.1.1: National and State level rural livelihood mission statements / documents emphasising the use of RE

No. of Ministries/Departments that officially adopt mission statements that support RE applications for rural livelihoodsby Year 3

0 4 Policy documents of NRLM and SRLM, meeting/ workshop reports


No. of livelihood sectors where RE is promoted in 3 targeted states by year 3

0 20 Central (e.g. KVIC) and state livelihoods sectors /departments policy documents



No. of peer reviewed publications sharing experiences regarding RE and rural livelihoods by EoP

0 7 Published reports


Output 3.2.1: Developed MNRE-supported programme for enhanced RE utilisation in rural livelihoods

No. of MNRE programs that espouse RE applications for rural livelihoods programme by Year 3

No. of replication projects implemented by MNRE in new programme using RETPRLs by EoP

0

0

1

28,500

MNRE policy document

Documentation of MNRE-supported RET operated rural livelihood projects


Outcome 3.3: Improved tariff and grid interconnection regulations for decentralised RE

No. of state regulatory commissions (SRCs) implement policy guidelines of improved

0 3 Continued support and participation of SRCs

74



tariff structure for decentralised RE by year 3


No. of state level workshops to implement the revised tariff structures by Year 3

0 3 Workshop reports Continued support and participation from co-financing institutions, MNRE, CLIAs and other stakeholders especially SRCs


No. of SRCs implement policy guidelines for captive/decentralised RE grid interconnection by year 3

0 3 National level study report Continued support and participation from co-financing institutions, MNRE, CLIAs and other stakeholders especially SRCs, where SRCs see RE grid interconnection as an important issue.

Component 4: Financial support for decentralised RE - rural livelihood applications


No. of developed improved overall subsidy and support models by Year 2

0 1 Review report

Output 4.1.1: Assessed RE subsidy and support models for increased effectiveness of decentralised RE

No. of completed study on existing subsidies and supports by Year 1

0 1 Review report Continued support and participation from co-financing institutions, MNRE, CLIAs and other stakeholders in subsidising and supporting decentralised RE

Output 4.1.2: Improved RE subsidy and support models for increased effectiveness of decentralised RE for rural livelihoods funding

No. of RE subsidy and support models for rural livelihoods available by year 1

0 3 Report on recommendations

Outcome 4.2: Enhanced provision of financial support for decentralised RE in rural livelihood applications Output 4.2.1: Implemented financial support packages for RE technology –rural livelihood applications

No. of financial institutions supporting RETPRL by Year 3

No. of household enterprises adopting RETPRLs that were funded by the established financial support packages by EOP

0

0

3

28,500

Report on new financial support packages developed

Continued interest, and participation from co-financing institutions, MNRE, CLIAs and other stakeholders such as IREDA

Output 4.2.2: Pooled available financial resources for supportingviable livelihood business models and enhanced market linkages

No. of completed studies on inter-institutional linkages for finance pooling to support viable livelihood business models and enhanced market linkages covering three states and centre by Year 2

0 1 Study report Institutions are willing to continuously pool their financial resources and other financing institutions continued to provide support

Outcome 4.3: Improved investment risk mitigation for decentralised RE in rural livelihood applications

Number of states implement designed suitable risk guarantee/mitigationmechanisms by Year 3

0 3 Communication by the state governments / Review report

75




No. of completed studies on risk assessment and risk mitigation in applicable sectors by Year 3

0 1 Study report Continued interest, and participation from co-financing institutions, MNRE, CLIAs and other stakeholders such as IREDA

No. of designed suitable risk guarantee/mitigationmechanisms by Year 3

0 1 Study report

76

12 TOTAL BUDGET AND WORK- PLAN

Award ID: 00080379 Project ID(s): 00090089

Award Title: Scale Up of Access to Clean Energy for Rural Productive Uses (India ACE Project)

Business Unit: IND10

Project Title: Scale Up of Access to Clean Energy for Rural Productive Uses

PIMS no. 4605

Implementing Partner (Executing Agency) Ministry of New and Renewable Energy, Government of India

Table 34: Outcome wise detailed budget

GEF Outcome / Atlas

Activity

Responsible Party

(Implementing Agency)

SourceBudget Code

ERP/ATLAS Budget Description/Input

Annual Expenses (USD) Total (USD) #

Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5


MNREGEF

62000

71200 International Consultants 12,000 24,000 0 0 0 36,000 1

71300 Local Consultants 191,500 213,500 147,500 117,500 141,500 811,500 2

71600 Travel 77,400 97,400 77,000 81,400 84,200 417,400 16

72100Contractual services -companies 36,000 142,000 153,000 504,000 567,000 1,402,000 3

72500 Supplies 5,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 25,000 17

74200 Audio Visual and Printing 2,000 4,000 4,000 0 0 10,000 4

74500 Miscellaneous 700 4,900 2,100 5,550 4,799 18,049 18

Total Outcome 1.1 324,600 490,800 388,600 713,450 802,499 2,719,949

Total Component 1 324,600 490,800 388,600 713,450 802,499 2,719,949


MNREGEF

62000

71200 International Consultants 0 0 0 0 0 0

71300 Local Consultants 5,000 0 15,000 42,000 0 62,000 5

71600 Travel 3,000 14,000 12,000 8,400 0 37,400 22

72100Contractual services -companies 0 0 45,000 0 0 45,000 23

72600 Grants 0 150,000 0 0 0 150,000 6

74500 Miscellaneous 500 2,500 2,100 1,500 0 6,600 18

Total Outcome 2.1 8,500 166,500 74,100 51,900 0 301,000Total Component 2 8,500 166,500 74,100 51,900 0 301,000

MNRE 71200 International Consultants 0 0 0 0 0 0

77

GEF Outcome / Atlas

Activity

Responsible Party


SourceBudget Code



Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5Outcome 3.1: Inclusion of REapplications in national and state level rural livelihoods policies for key livelihood sectors in rural areas

GEF 62000

71300 Local Consultants 0 32,000 32,000 0 0 64,000 7

71600 Travel 3,600 15,700 17,700 3,600 3,600 44,200 22

72100Contractual services -companies 11,420 21,920 24,920 11,420 11,420 81,100 24

74500 Miscellaneous 600 2,700 2,900 600 600 7,400 18

Total Outcome 3.1 15,620 72,320 77,520 15,620 15,620 196,700Outcome 3.2: Future MNRE programs also cater to actions towards enhanced RE utilization in rural livelihoods

MNREGEF

62000


71300 Local Consultants 6,000 8,000 0 0 0 14,000 8

71600 Travel 2,400 7,400 0 0 0 9,800 22

72100Contractual services -companies 0 21,000 0 0 0 21,000 25

74500 Miscellaneous 400 1,400 0 0 0 1,800 18

Total Outcome 3.2 8,800 37,800 0 0 0 46,600

Outcome 3.3: Improved tariff and grid interconnection regulations for decentralized RE

MNREGEF

62000


71300 Local Consultants 0 43,200 0 0 0 43,200 9

71600 Travel 0 14,400 0 0 0 14,400 22


74500 Miscellaneous 0 2,600 300 0 0 2,900 18

Total Outcome 3.3 0 60,200 9,300 0 0 69,500Total Component 3 24,420 170,320 86,820 15,620 15,620 312,800

Outcome 4.1: Improved decentralized RE subsidies and support for rural livelihoods

MNREGEF

62000


71300 Local Consultants 22,000 0 0 0 0 22,000 10

71600 Travel 8,800 0 0 0 0 8,800 22

72100Contractual services -companies 4,500 27,000 0 0 0 31,500 27

74500 Miscellaneous 1,700 800 0 0 0 2,500 18

Total Outcome 4.1 37,000 27,800 0 0 0 64,800

Outcome 4.2: Enhanced provision of

GEF 62000

71200 International Consultants 0 0 16,000 0 0 16,000 11


71600 Travel 0 10,000 9,600 0 0 19,600 22

78

GEF Outcome / Atlas

Activity

Responsible Party


SourceBudget Code



Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5financial support for decentralized RE in rural livelihoods applications

MNRE

72100Contractual services -companies 0 38,000 0 0 0 38,000 28

74500 Miscellaneous 0 2,900 1,400 0 0 4,300 18

Total Outcome 4.2 0 80,900 39,000 0 0 119,900

Outcome 4.3: Improved investment risk mitigation for decentralized RE in rural livelihoods applications

MNREGEF

62000

71200 International Consultants 0 8,000 8,000 0 0 16,000 13


71600 Travel 0 4,800 13,800 0 0 18,600 22


72600 Grants 0 0 50,000 100,000 50,000 200,000 15

74500 Miscellaneous 0 700 2,400 0 0 3,100 18

Total Outcome 4.3 0 19,500 129,400 100,000 50,000 298,900Total Component 4 37,000 128,200 168,400 100,000 50,000 483,600

Project Management

UNDPGEF

62000


71400Contractual Services-Individual 27,100 27,100 27,100 27,100 27,100 135,500 20

71600 Travel 1,000 1,000 1,000 1,000 1,000 5,000 30

72200 Equipment and Furniture 200 200 200 200 200 1,000 31

72500 Supplies 1,000 1,000 1,000 1,000 1,000 5,000 32

72800 Info Tech Equipment 2,000 1,000 1,000 1,000 1,000 6,000 33

74100 Professional Services - Audits 3,000 3,000 3,000 3,000 3,000 15,000 21

74599 Direct Project Services 7,000 7,000 3,500 4,000 500 22,000 19Total Project Management 41,300 40,300 36,800 37,300 33,800 189,500

Project Total 435,820 996,120 754,720 918,270 901,919 4,006,849

General notes to the budget:

- International consultants are budgeted at $ 4,000 per week and short-term national consultants at $ 1,000 per week - Travel cost (DSA and ticket) is budgeted at 30% of international consultant’s fee and 15% of national consultant’s fee as a general rule-of thumb

- The cost of workshops has been divided in various budget lines as per UNDP ATLAS budget which does not have a separate budget line for training / workshops. For example, budget line 'international consultant' will have a % allocation for international experts to support workshops. The number of workshops for each output is given in the 'results framework'. A workshop having more than 20 participants will cost about USD 3,000 per day; workshop

79

having less than 20 participants will cost about USD 1,500 per day. A half-day high-level meeting with about 10 participants will cost around USD 750 per day.

- Miscellaneous is for unforeseen expenses that are difficult to anticipate. It is budgeted at 3% of the total cost as a general rule-of-thumb.

Specific notes (the numbers correspond to the last column of Error! Reference source not found.):

1. 9 person-weeks of international expertise to support development of technology packages, its demonstration and scaling up. 2. 591 person-weeks of local short-term consultancy for technology package development, market assessment, and demonstration and scale up of technology

packages. 3. Cost against hiring and contracting of CLIAs and CSUs for implementation of demonstration and replication projects is budgeted under the ‘subcontract’

head. A part of this cost, as mentioned in above table, will be borne by GEF trust fund and the remaining part will be contributed by UNDP CORE project. 4. Printing and reproduction cost of technology application packages and knowledge dissemination documents 5. 62 person-weeks of local short-term consultancy for identifying suitable technology suppliers, developing their business plans and facilitating access to

finance. 6. A grant support of US $ 7,500 will be provided to initial 20 RE technology supplier and service providers to support them in expanding/establishing their

supply and service network. 7. 64 person-weeks of local short-term consultancy for assessment of existing livelihoods policies, drafting policies supporting use of RE and providing support

for its adoption in the mainstream livelihoods policies. 8. 14 person-weeks of local short-term consultancy for providing support to MNRE in developing specific programmes focused on RE for rural livelihoods. 9. 43 person-weeks of local short-term consultancy for developing improved tariff structure for off-grid RE and improved regulatory support for decentralised

RE – grid interconnection. 10. 22 person-weeks of local short-term consultancy for evaluating the effectiveness of existing subsidy schemes, developing improved subsidy and support

models and providing support to MNRE for its adoption.. 11. 4 person-weeks of international expertise to support development of financial support packages and bringing in international success experiences. 12. 42 person-weeks of local short-term consultancy for development of financial support packages for RE technology and service providers and end users. 13. 4 person-weeks of international expertise to support development of risk mitigation mechanism and bringing in international success experiences. 14. 40 person-weeks of local short-term consultancy for development of risk mitigation mechanisms for RE technology and service providers and end users. 15. US $ 0.2 million (from GEF grant) has been kept to support the relevant existing risk management mechanisms with some carefully targeted funding to help

mitigating the risk of both RE technology supply and service providers as well as livelihood enterprises.16. This includes travel to the focused states under the project. It was assessed based on the assumption that travel for international consultants will be at the

cost of 30% of their fee, travel for local consultants is assessed at 20% of their consultant fee, and travel for CLIAs and CSUs will be at 10% of CLIA/CSU fee. International consultant fee is assumed in the calculation is US$ 4,000/week and local consultants is assumed to be US$ 1,000/week.

17. This is for office supplies and small communication expense.18. Reserve for exchange loss & contingency expense.19. UNDP recovery cost for recruitment of project consultant/staff, procurement of goods & services, financial payment and workshop. Breakdown of services

provided in LOA, annexed to the Project Document.20. Costs related to Inception Workshop & Report, and Consultants for Mid-Term review and Terminal Evaluation21. Costs of consultants for Audits

Budget for travel reserved for local consultants and relevant stakeholderspersonnel for works related to: build capacities of RETPRL service providers personnel for works related to: develop suitable RE guidelines/statements for national and state level rural livelihoods, and hold workshop

to adopt policy statementCosts for hiring personnel for works related to: hold workshop to adopt policy statement (follow up work from note 24)Costs for hiring personnel for works related to: Improved tariff and grid interconnection regulations for decentralized RE

personnel for works related to: conduct workshops and outreach activities to promote increased effectiveness RE subsidies (outcome 4.1)Costs for hiring personnel for works related to: conduct workshops and outreach activities to promote increased effectiveness RE subsidies (outcome 4.2)Costs for hiring personnel for works related to: share improved risk guarantee mechanism findingsTravel budget reserved for Project Management UnitBudget reserved for equipment to be used in Project Management UnitBudget reserved for office supplies/stationeryBudget reserved for IT rentals

financing contribution:

financing contribution of US $ 10 million has been allocated as explained in the table below:

Table 35: Allocation of MNRE's co-financing contribution

Expenditure head Amount (US $)

Subsidies for RETPRLs (activities 1.2.5 and 1.4.2) 8,997,000

A fund of US $ 400,000 (US $ 100,000 each in years 2, 3, 4 and 5) has been kept for providing additional financial support (in addition to the existing MNRE subsidy) for selected RE interventions on a case-by-case basis (activities 1.2.5 and 1.4.2)

400,000

Salary of the three state coordinators will be provided from MNRE’s fund for the whole project duration (five years)

360,000

Activities under component 3 and 4 will be partly supported by MNRE’s fund 180,000

Project Management Component 63,000

Total 10,000,000

81

Table 36: Summary of Funds68:

Donor Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 TotalGEF 435,820 996,120 754,720 918,270 901,919 4,006,849

MNRE 116,180 494,364 466,864 4,461,296 4,461,296 10,000,000 Others 59,374 423,628 319,531 4,115,617 4,115,617 9,033,767 Total 611,374 1,914,112 1,541,115 9,495,183 9,478,832 23,040,616

68 Summary table should include all financing of all kinds: GEF financing, co-financing, cash, in-kind, etc...

82

13 MANAGEMENT ARRANGEMENTS

Project Organization Structure

178. The project is co-financed with funding from GEF, and UNDP acts as the GEF Executing Agency. The project will be implemented by MNRE, who will assume the overall responsibility for the achievement of project results as the Implementing Partner (GEF Local Executing Agency). UNDP will provide overall management and guidance from its New Delhi Country Office (CO) and from the Bangkok Regional Hub (BRH) in Bangkok. UNDP will be responsible for the monitoring and evaluation of the project as per standard GEF and UNDP requirements.

179. The India MNRE-UNDP-GEF ACE (GEF ACE) project institutional structure has been developed to provide an effective and integrated means to oversee and manage the multiple cluster-level projects that are specified in the Project Document. Effective project management of the India GEF ACE project will require a combined mix of expertise in renewable energy, rural livelihoods, project administration, and project management. It is critically important that all key project financial contributors and stakeholders have a strong ownership in the project design and execution at the strategic level. At the operational level on the ground, day-to-day activities will be carried out by cluster level agencies (CLIAs/CSUs) with their activities co-ordinated at the state-level by co-ordinators for each state. All activities at the cluster and state-levels will be supported and guided by a central Project Management Unit (PMU) located in MNRE.

180. Based on this overall project structure, the broad institutional arrangement for this project is shown below. Annexure C contains details of the TORs for the key PMU positions. The Project Operations Manual provides details of the key project roles, positions and proposed assignments that are required to undertake and manage the project’s main activities.

181. An EoI to shortlist potential suitable CLIAs was advertised on the UNDP India website, through UN solution exchange- climate change community with an aim to receive expression of interest from the interested agencies in becoming CLIAs and to shortlist a maximum of five agencies per cluster/district. To increase the response from grass root level and local agencies, pre-EOI meetings were conducted at state headquarters namely Guwahati, Bhubaneswar and Bhopal in the states of Assam, Orissa and Madhya Pradesh. UNDP representatives from programme and procurement divisions in the all the three locations and Ministry representative in Guwahati were present to respond to the queries on EOI by the interested agencies. 79 people participated in these pre-EOI meetings. 45 applications have been received. A short list is under progress at the time of finalising this full-sized project document finalisation.

83

Figure 4: Project Management Structure69

182. At the strategic level, a Project Steering Committee (PSC) will provide strategic guidance for the project, while a Project Executive Committee (PEC) will oversee operational project aspects. The Project Management Unit (PMU) will constitute the core team for the project’s implementation. The PMU will supervise, co-ordinate and provide the integrated coherence of all project activities. At the District level, project activities will be led by Cluster Level Implementation Agencies (CLIAs). The CLIAs will form Cluster Support Units (CSUs) that will provide the day-to-day practical on the ground support at the village and rural household enterprise level. At the state level, there will be a State Level Coordinator mechanism to co-ordinate activities. More detailed descriptions follow in subsequent sections. A brief description of the different levels of project implementation is given below.

183. Project Steering Committee: The PSC is an oversight and governance focused high-level group that will be constituted by organisations that are core supporters and/or significant co-financiers of the project. Besides MNRE, UNDP and GEF (through MOEF), this Committee is also expected to include NRLM, IREDA, KVIC, NABARD, NTPC, DEA (Dept. of Economic Affairs) as well as representatives of

69 Normally, the PMU will communicate with the CLIAs through the respective state coordinators. However, the dotted line in the above organization structure represents that depending on the requirement, the PMU is free to directly communicate with the CLIAs.

Project Management Unit

1. National Project Director (1)

2. National Project Manager (1)

3. Renewable Energy Expert (1)

4. Rural Livelihoods Expert (1)

5. Finance and Administration Manager (1)

Project Steering Committee

Project Executive Committee

State Coordinator – 1 State Coordinator – 2 State Coordinator – 3

CLIAs

1a,…1n

CLIAs

3a,…3n

CLIAs

2a,…2n

CSUs

1a,…1n

CSUs

3a,…3n

CSUs

2a,…2n

84

state-level agencies that bring a significant contribution to the project. The Secretary MNRE will chair the PSC meetings. The Committee will meet at least once a year for a two-to-four hour duration review meeting focusing on the Annual Project Report/Project Implementation Report (APR/PIR) for the last year, and the review and formal endorsement of the Annual Work Plan (AWP) for the upcoming year of project operations.

184. Project Executive Committee: The PEC will comprise all major stakeholders who are actively involved in project activities and who are interested in the project’s results. The PEC will include representatives of MNRE, UNDP, NRLM and State representatives. The Joint Secretary, MNRE, will chair the PEC meetings. This group will meet at least four times a year for a two-to-four hour duration meeting on each occasion. The PEC will review the Quarterly Progress Report (QPR) for the past quarter, and review what practical project implementation steps are needed to maximise the project activity success in the upcoming quarter. The group is also expected to act as the forum for resolving major implementation level issues that may arise between different government departments or other key stakeholders. It is recommended that each quarterly meeting be held in a different state, so that PEC meetings are held in each participating state at least once a year. The rotating PEC meetings will give an opportunity for local project partners and project staff in each state to interact with the Committee. It is recommended that the opportunity be provided for interested PEC members to review nearby project activities on site, in conjunction with the quarterly PEC meetings.

185. Project Management Unit: The PMU is the core team for managing the operations of the project. The PMU will meet at least once a month in a formal structured meeting (with comprehensive meeting minutes taken and promptly distributed to all PEC members). The PMU will be headed by a high-level MNRE official (Director) acting as the part-time primarily oversight focused National Project Director (NPD). The PMU will also comprise a full-time operational level National Project Manager (NPM) and three staff members (working full time, and with part of their salary being paid under administration and the rest being paid under technical components - keeping in mind the GEF funding limit on allowable project management costs). The three members of the unit will represent three different types of expertise, i.e., Renewable Energy (technical expert); Rural Livelihoods (social expert) and Finance & Administration. Additionally, the PMU may hire technical experts for inputs on particular technical and rural livelihoods interventions and sectors as required. Thus the PMU will comprise the following five members.

a. National Project Director (head of PMU)b. National Project Manager c. PMU Member – Renewable Energy Expert d. PMU Member – Rural Livelihoods Expert e. PMU Member – Finance and Administration Manager

While the NPD’s services will be provided as an in-kind project contribution by MNRE, the professional costs for full-time engagement of the NPM and for the three other members will be primarily borne by GEF.

186. Cluster Level Implementation Agencies (CLIAs): During the initial demonstration phase (please refer to output 1.1.2 in the Project Document), the project will be implemented in around 15 clusters across the three states. Relevant focal agencies identified in each cluster will lead the project. Funds are expected to flow directly from the PMU to implementation agencies / enterprises. CLIAs are likely to be paid a fee in the form of grant to be paid in instalments over the first three years of the project70. The CLIAs will be tasked to liaise closely with relevant RE equipment suppliers and to provide the required handholding to rural household enterprises towards building their preparedness for RE adoption in their rural livelihoods applications. Proposal development and verification is another important role of the CLIAs. Supervision and monitoring on a day-to-day basis is one of the key roles of the CLIAs, this will feed into the larger more macro-level monitoring and verification task of the PMU.

187. Cluster Support Units (CSUs): After completion of the demonstration phase, state level replication plans will be completed and replication activities will be undertaken in the selected states (please

70 It is assumed that the task of implementation of the demonstration in 15 clusters will be completed by year 3.

85

refer to output 1.1.4). The Cluster Support Units will facilitate the replication and scale-up activities. In a normal case, a state would have one CSU for each livelihood sector e.g. Madhya Pradesh would have 1 CSU for the 2-3 poultry clusters identified for implementation under the implementation phase in the state. As explained later, CSUs are likely to be entities that are spun off from the CLIAs.

188. State-level coordinators: While the CLIAs will report and engage with the PMU, it is felt, given the complexity of the project and the multiplicity of agencies involved, that a mechanism for coordination of activities at the state-level would strengthen project management arrangements. State level coordinators are primarily extended arms of Project Management Unit. SLC will monitor the project on behalf of PMC, liaise and provide support to CLIA. SLC can be an individual or an agency hired by PMU. The PMU will engage/ communicate with the CLIAs both directly as well as through the state co-ordinators.

189. The following table highlights the essential differences between CLIAs and CSUs, as follows:

CLIA CSU

The main task of CLIAs is to facilitate implementation of cluster level projects during the demonstration phase (output 1.1.2)

The main task of CSUs is to facilitate implementation of replication activities (output 1.1.4)

It is expected that for each of the 15 clusters, there would be one CLIA per cluster i.e. there would be 15 CLIAs in total for the project

A state would normally have one CSU for each livelihood sector e.g. Madhya Pradesh would have 1 CSU for its poultry clusters

The CLIAs are expected to work at the district level for a single cluster

The CSUs are expected to work in several clusters of a particular livelihood sector across a state e.g. a CSU in Madhya Pradesh would be responsible for undertaking replication activities in 3 poultry clusters

The role of CLIAs are expected to end by year 3

The CSU will normally be active during years 4 & 5

General

UNDP support services

190. MNRE may enter into an agreement with UNDP for direct project support services in the form of procurement of goods and services during the project implementation process. In such a case, appropriate cost recovery will be charged as per UNDP rules and regulations. The support services will be outlined in the form of Letter of Agreement signed between MNRE and UNDP. The table below indicates the cost of UNDP direct project services (DPS) anticipated over the project implementation period of five years.

Table 37: Estimate of direct project services (DPS) (US$)

Year 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 Total (US$)

ISS (support for recruitments, procurement, selection & awarding of sub-contracts, approvals, etc.)

7,000 7,000 3,500 4,000 500 22,000

Total (US$) 7,000 7,000 3,500 4,000 500 22,000

Prior obligations and prerequisites

191. No prior obligations or prerequisites have been identified.

86

Audit Arrangements

192. The project will be audited in accordance with UNDP Financial Regulations and Rules and Audit policies. The Government of India will provide the UNDP Resident Representative with certified periodic financial statements, and with an annual audit of the financial statements relating to the status of UNDP (including GEF) funds expended on the project according to the established procedures set out in the appropriate UNDP programming and finance manuals. The audit will be conducted by the legally recognized auditor of the Government of India, or by a commercial auditor engaged by the Government.

Agreement on the intellectual property rights and use of logo on the project’s deliverables

193. In order to accord proper acknowledgement to GEF for providing funding, a GEF logo will appear on all relevant GEF-supported project publications, including among others, project hardware, if any, purchased with GEF funds. Any citation on publications regarding projects funded by GEF should also accord proper acknowledgement to GEF. The UNDP logo should be prominent – and separated from the GEF logo. Alongside GEF and UNDP logo, the MNRE logo may also feature as the Implementing Partner of the project.

Assets

194. The ownership of the assets procured under the project from GEF grant money lies with the UNDP Resident Representative until the end of the project. At the end of the project, the assets would be transferred to the implementing ministry of the Indian government (MNRE in this case) following UNDP applicable rules and regulations.

14 MONITORING FRAMEWORK AND EVALUATION

195. The project will be monitored through the following M&E activities. The M&E budget is provided in the Error! Reference source not found. as below.

Project start:

196. A formal Project Inception Workshop will be held within 2 months of the project’s start. The Inception Workshop must include the active participation of:

The responsible MNRE Director and other relevant MNRE staff

Relevant UNDP India Country Office Environment and Energy branch staff, and where feasible regional technical policy and programme advisors

Representatives from the key project livelihoods “Missions”

CLIA staff from the prior India MNRE-UNDP ACE project

Relevant target state (Assam, Madhya Pradesh and Odisha71) government officials and key stakeholders

Other stakeholders such as (but not limited to) relevant RE equipment and service suppliers.

71 And from Jharkhand and Meghalaya as appropriate

87

The Inception Workshop will be a crucial formal step to building the necessary strong local ownership for the project’s focus, scope and ultimate results, and to confirm (and where required refine) the project’s first year Annual Work Plan (AWP).

197. The Inception Workshop will address a number of key issues including:

a) Assist all project partners to fully understand and take ownership of the project. Detail the roles, support services and complementary responsibilities of UNDP CO and BRH staff vis-à-vis MNRE, the PSC, the project team, and the project’s CLIAs. Discuss the roles, functions, and responsibilities within the project's relevant decision-making structures, including reporting and communication lines, and conflict resolution mechanisms. The Terms of Reference for project staff will be discussed as required and as relevant.

b) Based on the project results framework and the relevant GEF Tracking Tool, finalize the project’s first annual work plan. Review and agree on the indicators, targets and their means of verification, and recheck the project’s assumptions and risks.

c) Provide a detailed overview of reporting, and monitoring and evaluation (M&E) requirements. The M&E work plan and budget should be agreed and M&E activities should be scheduled.

d) Discuss financial reporting procedures and obligations, and arrangements for, annual project audits.

e) Plan and schedule PSC (Board) meetings. The roles and responsibilities of project organisation structures should be clarified and the schedule for PSC meetings should be planned. The first PSCmeeting should be planned for and held within the first 12 months following the Inception Workshop.

198. A detailed Inception Workshop report is a key reference document and must be prepared and shared with participants to formalize the agreements, plans and next steps decided during the Inception Workshop.

Quarterly review:

199. The quarterly monitoring will involve:

Project progress shall be monitored in the UNDP Enhanced Results Based Management Platform.

Based on the initial risk analysis submitted, the project risk log shall be regularly updated in ATLAS. Risks become particularly critical when their impact and probability are high72.

Based on the information recorded in ATLAS, a Project Progress Report (PPR) can be generated in the Executive Snapshot.

Other ATLAS logs can be used to monitor issues, lessons learned etc. The use of these functions is a key indicator in the UNDP Executive Balanced Scorecard.

Annual Review:

200. Annual Project Review/Project Implementation Reports (APR/PIR): This key report is prepared to monitor progress made since project start and in particular for the previous reporting period (30 June to 1 July). The APR/PIR combines both UNDP and GEF reporting requirements.

The APR/PIR includes, but is not limited to, reporting on the following:

72 Note that the project does not have the high financial risks associated with financial instruments such as revolving funds, microfinance schemes, or capitalization of ESCOs – which are automatically classified as critical on the basis of their innovative nature (high impact and uncertainty due to no previous experience justifies classification as critical).

88

Progress made towards project objective and project outcomes - each with indicators, baseline data and end-of-project targets (cumulative)

Project outputs delivered per project outcome (annual)

Lesson learned/good practices AWP and other expenditure reports Risk and adaptive management ATLAS Project Progress Report (PPR) Portfolio level indicators (i.e. GEF focal area tracking tools) are used on an annual basis as

well

Periodic Monitoring through site visits:

201. The UNDP CO and the UNDP BRH will conduct visits to project sites based on the agreed schedule in the project's Inception Report/Annual Work Plan to assess first hand project progress. Other members of the PSC may also join these visits. A Field Visit Report/Back to Office Report (BTOR) will be prepared by the CO and UNDP BRH and will be circulated no less than one month after the visit to the project team and PSC members.

Mid-term of project cycle:

202. The project will undergo an independent Mid-Term Review (MTR) at the mid-point of project implementation (scheduled for 2017). The MTR will determine the project’s progress being made toward the achievement of its outcomes and will identify any recommended project mid-course corrections. The MTR will focus on the effectiveness, efficiency, relevance, timeliness and impact of the project’s implementation to date; will highlight issues requiring decisions and actions; and will present initial lessons learned about project design, implementation, and management. The findings of the MTR will be incorporated as recommendations for enhanced implementation during the final half of the project’s term. The organization, terms of reference and timing of the MTR will be decided after consultation between the parties to the project document. The TOR for this MTR will be prepared by the UNDP CO based on guidance from the UNDP BRH and UNDP-GEF. The management response and the evaluation will be uploaded to UNDP corporate systems, in particular the UNDP Evaluation Office Evaluation Resource Center (ERC).The relevant GEF Focal Area Tracking Tools will also be completed during the MTR.

End of Project:

203. An independent Terminal Evaluation (TE) will take place three months prior to the final PSCmeeting and will be undertaken in accordance with UNDP and GEF guidance policies. The TE will focus on the delivery of the project’s results as initially planned (and as corrected after the MTR, if any such correction took place). The TE will look at the impact and sustainability of the project’s results, including the contribution to capacity development and the achievement of global environmental benefits/goals. The TOR for this TE will be prepared by the UNDP CO based on guidance from the relevant UNDP RSC and UNDP-GEF. The TE should also provide recommendations for follow-up activities and requires a management response, which should be uploaded to PIMS and to the UNDP ERC. The relevant GEF Focal Area Tracking Tools will also be completed during the Final Evaluation.

204. During the last three months of the project’s implementation, the project team will prepare the Project Terminal Report. This comprehensive report will summarize the results achieved (objectives, outcomes, outputs), lessons learned, problems met and areas where results may not have been achieved.It will also include recommendations for any further steps that may need to be taken to ensure the sustainability and replicability of the project’s results.

89

Learning and knowledge sharing:

205. Results from the project will be disseminated within and beyond the project intervention zone through existing information sharing networks and forums The project will identify and participate, as relevant and appropriate, in scientific, policy-based and/or any other networks, which may be of benefit to project implementation though lessons learned. The project will identify, analyse, and share lessons learned that might be beneficial in the design and implementation of similar future projects. Finally, there will be a two-way flow of information between this project and other projects of a similar focus.

Communications and visibility requirements:

206. Full compliance will be undertaken with UNDP’s Branding Guidelines. These can be accessed at http://intra.undp.org/coa/branding.shtml, and specific guidelines on UNDP logo use can be accessed at: http://intra.undp.org/branding/useOfLogo.html. Amongst other things, these guidelines describe when and how the UNDP logo needs to be used, as well as how the logos of donors to UNDP projects should be used. For the avoidance of any doubt, when logo use is required, the UNDP logo needs to be used alongside the GEF logo. The GEF logo can be accessed at: http://www.thegef.org/gef/GEF_logo. The UNDP logo can be accessed at http://intra.undp.org/coa/branding.shtml.

207. Full compliance is also required with the GEF’s Communication and Visibility Guidelines (the “GEF Guidelines”). The GEF Guidelines can be accessed at: http://www.thegef.org/gef/sites/thegef.org/files/documents/C.40.08_Branding_the_GEF%20final_0.pdf. Amongst other things, the GEF Guidelines describe when and how the GEF logo needs to be used in project publications, vehicles, supplies and other project equipment. The GEF Guidelines also describe other GEF promotional requirements regarding press releases, press conferences, press visits, visits by Government officials, productions and other promotional items.

208. Where other agencies and project partners have provided support through co-financing, their branding policies and requirements should be similarly applied.

90

Table 38: M & E work-plan and budget

Type of M&E activity

Responsible PartiesBudget US$

Excluding project team staff time

Time frame

Inception Workshop and Report

Project Manager UNDP CO, UNDP GEF

Indicative cost: 10,000

Within first two months of project start up

Measurement of Means of Verification of project results.

UNDP GEF RTA/Project Manager will oversee the hiring of specific studies and institutions, and delegate responsibilities to relevant team members.


Start, mid and end of project (during evaluation cycle) and annually when required.

Measurement of Means of Verification for Project Progress on output and implementation

Oversight by Project Manager Project team

Indicative cost: 5,000(to be determined as part of the Annual Work Plan's preparation)

Annually prior to ARR/PIR and to the definition of annual work plans

ARR/PIR Project manager and team UNDP CO UNDP RTA UNDP EEG

None Annually

Periodic status/ progress reports

Project manager and team None Quarterly

Mid-term Evaluation Project manager and team UNDP CO UNDP BRH Independent External

Consultants (i.e. evaluation team)


At the mid-point of the project’s implementation.

Terminal Evaluation Project manager and team, UNDP CO UNDP BRH Independent External

Consultants (i.e. evaluation team)


At least three months before the end of the project’s implementation

Project Terminal Report

Project manager and team UNDP CO Local consultant

0At least three months before the end of the project

Audit UNDP CO Project manager and team

Indicative cost per year: 3,000

Yearly

Visits to field sites UNDP CO UNDP BRH (as appropriate) Government representatives

For GEF supported projects, paid from IA fees and operational budget

Yearly

TOTAL indicative COST

Excluding project team staff time and UNDP staff and travel expenses

US$ 150,000(+/- 5% of total

budget)

91

15 LEGAL CONTEXT

209. It is understood that the Government of India has signed the Standard Basic Assistance Agreement (SBAA) with UNDP on 19 December 1994, and that therefore the following standard text has been quoted:

This document together with the CPAP signed by the Government of India and UNDP, which is incorporated by reference, constitute together a Project Document, and all CPAP provisions apply to this document.

Consistent with the Article III of the SBAA, the primary responsibility for the safety and security of the implementing partner (MNRE) and its personnel and property, and of UNDP’s property in the MNRE’s custody, rests with MNRE. MNRE shall therefore:

o Put in place an appropriate security plan and maintain the security plan, taking into account the security situation in India; and,

o Assume all risks and liabilities related to MNRE’s security, and the full implementation of the security plan.

UNDP reserves the right to verify whether such a plan is in place, and to suggest modifications to the plan when necessary. Failure to maintain and implement an appropriate security plan as required hereunder shall be deemed a breach of this agreement.

210. MNRE agrees to undertake all reasonable efforts to ensure that none of the UNDP funds received pursuant to the Project Document are used to provide support to individuals or entities associated with terrorism and that the recipients of any amounts provided by UNDP hereunder do not appear on the list maintained by the Security Council Committee established pursuant to resolution 1267 (1999). The list can be accessed via http://www.un.org/Docs/sc/committees/1267/1267ListEng.htm. This provision must be included in all sub-contracts or sub-agreements entered into under this Project Document.

92

PART C. ANNEXES

ANNEXURE – A: RISK ANALYSIS

Risk73 Level of Risk

Mitigating Actions

The multiple key central and state level rural energy and rural livelihoods capital subsidies do not remain fully available during the project’s implementation period.

M The use of multiple subsidies reduces the project risks arising from changes to any single subsidy. The use of beneficiary equity investments and bank or microfinance loans also reduces the project risk from any changes to individual subsidy levels or eligibility rules.

The Demonstration, Replication and Scale-Up RE - rural livelihoods projects are not able to pool and/or access the available capital subsidies in a timely fashion without excessive transaction costs and/or time delays.

M A high-level Project Steering Committee (PSC) project oversight and governance focussed meeting will be held at least once a year in Delhi. A Project Executive Committee (PEC) meeting comprising all major project stakeholders will be held four times a year on a rotational basis in the 3 applicable project states and in Delhi. Site visits will be held back-to-back with state level PEC meetings to highlight project successes and challenges. The PSC and PEC structures will together facilitate the necessary ongoing high-level ownership of the project to facilitate ongoing access to available capital subsidies. In addition, strong project engagement and ownership will already start in 2014 with the initial UNDP-MNRE Core ACE project’s pilot phase activities. To ensure that both RE and rural livelihoods capital subsidies are fully considered and mobilised, the PMU and CLIs/CSUs will contain equal level staff from both the RE and livelihood sides to ensure that both sources of subsidies are equally considered in the project’s implementation.

The duration, scope and/or funding of key National or State Rural livelihoods ‘Missions’ like NRLM, horticulture, or fisheries are significantly curtailed during the project’s implementation period.

L The project will work with basic livelihood focussed missions that are highly likely to have durable mandates and funding into the future.

Decentralised Renewable Energy (DRE) does not remain an important item on the relevant central or state political agendas.

L The scale of the electricity supply deficit, and the inarguable paramount importance of the rural livelihoods sector in India for rural employment, is highly likely to ensure that there will be a suitable ongoing central and local commitment to decentralise rural RE.

Grid electricity supply is significantly extended and/or the reliability of rural grid electricity supply improves

M While India has made strong progress with extending grid electricity to an increasing number of villages in rural India, the under-pricing of this rural grid electricity for populist political gain, the size of

73 Applicable to 2019/20 end of GEF funded 5-year FSP (Full Scale Project)

93


Mitigating Actions

significantly in the project period in the applicable states and districts.

the electricity supply sector’s accumulated past financial debts, and the size of the electricity sector’s ongoing supply and financial deficits are such that reliable 24/7 local grid electricity is highly unlikely to be available for rural livelihood applications in all relevant districts of the 3 applicable states during the project’s duration.

The price of grid electricity in applicable districts goes down significantly.

L The price of grid electricity for rural livelihood uses can hardly go down significantly, as in many cases it is already sold at very low tariffs or the grid electricity for rural likelihoods is not even metered at all.

The world price of diesel goes down significantly and/or subsidies on diesel significantly increase in India

L As in the 2008 GFC, even a strong global financial crisis is unlikely to lead to sustained lower world crude oil prices as lower oil prices would lead directly to a lower global new oil field development rate and hence would be quickly self-correcting as occurred in 2009. An increase in diesel subsidies in India is unlikely as here is a strong political consensus and momentum towards reducing the remaining diesel subsidies in India.

The many relevant Central Government Ministries do not cooperate and/or do not remain engaged for the project period through changes in Central Government, Ministers and bureaucrats (institutional risk).

H The project will: establish a strong Central-level PSC and a strong Central/State-level PEC; hold frequent (annual PSC and quarterly PEC) meetings that involve key ministries; and engage and retain the strong interest and ownership of suitable high level champions in key central Ministries, in particular MNRE, NRLM, and in Ministries covering key rural livelihoods.

The many relevant State, Local and District level agencies do not co-operate and do not remain engaged for the project period through changes in State Governments, Ministers and bureaucrats (institutional risk).

H The quarterly PEC meetings will be rotated around the applicable states to ensure that each state hosts at least one PEC meeting a year for ongoing local project engagement and ownership.

The project is not able to mobilise a minimum level (20%) of equity financing from beneficiaries to ensure strong enough ownership and hence ensure the sustained the use of the project supported or influenced RE – rural livelihoods applications.

M The project’s RE - rural livelihoods applications will focus on livelihoods sectors with well-established existing commercial sales channels to maximise the chances of obtaining the necessary beneficiary equity financing.

The project is not able to mobilise the necessary 30-50% debt financing from banks or microfinance institutions for the replication and scale up projects in the relevant RE – rural livelihoods applications.

M The project’s RE – rural livelihoods applications will be targeted at RE suppliers and rural livelihoods users with strong existing commercial business models that utilise established marketing and commercial sales channels - to maximise the chances of obtaining the necessary debt financing.

The project is not able to mobilise grants from other (e.g. CSR) sources.

L The project will utilise where available, but not rely on, CSR funding.

94


Mitigating Actions

Major adverse economic conditions force up interest rates and/or curtail bank lending for a significant period during the project’s implementation.

L The Indian economy has strong internal growth drivers and has a low risk of significant domestically led major adverse economic conditions. The Indian economy is significantly nationally self-contained and is only weakly linked to potential internationalfinancial crises and events. Development of RE –rural livelihood applications is therefore not greatly at risk of major interest rate rises or significant bank lending restrictions.

Prices of relevant rural livelihoods sector74 outputs collapse and stay down for a significant period during the project’s implementation.

M The project’s rural livelihoods sectors cater to basic needs of domestic food supply and nutrition and hence demand and prices have a low risk of sustained major reductions.

Market linkages of the relevant livelihoods sector outputs are weaker than anticipated.

M The project will focus on rural livelihoods sectors that have well-established and strong existing market linkages.

Relevant RE – rural livelihoods projects are successfully demonstrated but then do not get replicated by a scale of ten and do not then get further increased by a further factor of ten at the scale up stage.

M The project will take a strongly pro-active approach to publicising demo project results and to actively supporting subsequent replication projects with suitable project information and support activities. The scale up phase will be closely monitored will be actively supported.

There is a significantly slow start to on-the-ground project activities.

H In 2014 a RE-Rural Livelihoods PMU will be established in MNRE and local CLIs will be recruited under the already approved and already funded UNDP-MNRE ACE Core Project. This will ensure that once all the necessary UNDP-MNRE GEF project approvals are obtained that the project can then be implemented with the least possible delays.

Significant RE supply chain weaknesses arise during the project’s implementation phase.

L Most of the RE technology packages are either proven plug-and-play RE technologies or are only modest risk rural application extensions of conventional RE technologies.

There is significant risk of RE technology underperformance or failure in project activities (technical risk).

L The project’s mix of RE – rural livelihood technology packages is carefully balanced between well proven RE- rural livelihoods applications and the extension of proven RE technologies into new rural livelihoods applications.

There is a lack of necessary leadership and slow decision making in the project’s implementation.

M A detailed Project Operations Manual has already been developed to define key accountabilities, management responsibilities, and operational procedures for all levels of the project’s implementation. A strong PSC and PEC structure will be established and will be given strong support to ensure the ongoing effectiveness and efficiency in the project’s implementation.

74 E.g. fresh or dried fish, tomatoes, raw milk, eggs, chicken, khadi, etc.

95


Mitigating Actions

Users lose interest in decentralised RE solutions.

L The project will focus on using only well-establishedRE technologies and to locations where there are clear links to already well-established rural livelihoods. Geographical locations have already been chosen for project implementation that have significant underserved or unserved areas for grid electricity supply where diesel captive power or LPG would be the only reliable energy alternative for the applicable rural livelihoods energy end uses.

Overall risk rating is Medium.

96

ANNEXURE – B: AGREEMENTS

B.1 GEF OFP endorsement letter

97

B.2 Co-financing letter from MNRE

99

B.3 Co-financing letter from UNDP

B.3.1 UNDP co-financing letter

100

B.3.2 UNDP confirming co-financing letters received from potential Cluster Level Implementing Agencies (CLIAs)

101

------------------------------------------------------------------------------

102

ANNEXURE – C: TERMS OF REFERENCES

Project Management Unit (PMU)

National Project Director (NPD)

The NPD will lead and provide strategic direction to the PMU while also actively providing the necessary linkages and co-ordination with PSC and PEC members as well as with other high-level state and central level government officials.

Scope of work

The following is the proposed scope of activities for the NPD:

Organize/convene PEC and PSC meetings as per UNDP and MNRE procedures.

Facilitate interaction and communication with other Ministries and Governmental departments, and agencies and missions, at both the central and state levels.

Provide overall guidance to the Project Management Unit (PMU).

Approve Terms of Reference for PMU staff.

Review project budget revisions, annual progress reports, quarterly progress reports, FACE (Fund Authorisation and Certification of Expenditures) annual work plan, facilitate audits, and facilitate any other administrative arrangements as required by MNRE and/or UNDP.

Ensure that the independent mid-term and terminal evaluations occur at appropriate times in the project cycle, and have overall responsibility for the consideration and implementation of the evaluations’ recommendations.

Ensure timely progress of activities and project implementation as per the ProDoc. Ensure that all required changes to the ProDoc take place, are based on changing project circumstances or on lessons learned during project implementation, and all significant changes are fully documented and justified, and are formally signed off by the NPD/PEC/PSC.

Ensure that the necessary central and state government and key NGO and other stakeholder support required is mobilised to achieve the project’s milestones, and to ensure the high quality and relevance of project outputs.

Guide the preparation of Annual Work Plans and adhering to physical and financial progress; timely submission of QPR [Quarterly Progress Reports], FACE [Fund Authorisation and Certificate of Expenditure] and APR/PIR [Annual Progress Reports/Project Information Report].

National Project Manager (NPM)

The NPM will oversee all aspects of the implementation of the project. The NPM will also have to effectively co-ordinate all activities of the project and interact closely with the CLIAs, reporting progress and problems if any to the NPD on a regular basis.

Scope of work

The scope of activities envisaged for the NPM is as follows:

103

As co-ordinator of the project and with inputs from other PMU members and CLIAs

Oversee the day-to-day planning, implementation and monitoring of all project activities.

Coordinate and manage the project’s Inception Workshop and the timely preparation of a comprehensive Inception Report.

Prepare project work plans, including technical requirements, their timing, and their budgets.

Facilitate the work of project consultants, and CLI’s, and their CSUs.

Monitor project progress towards project results by maintaining a hands-on overall knowledge of, and personal involvement with, all project activities.

Identify any gaps in project activities and pro-actively make any required adjustments.

Prepare progress reports (quarterly and annual), FACE, annual work plans and budgets, facilitate audits, and be responsible for any other necessary documentation required by UNDP, MNRE and the PSC, and report recommendations to the PEC/PSC and implement PEC/PSU recommendations as appropriate.

Manage the day-to-day timely progress of activities and project implementation as per the ProDoc or any agreed changes to the ProDoc. Ensure that any significant changes as per the ProDoc are fully documented and formally signed off by both the NPD and the PEC/PSC.

Manage and support the undertaking and elaboration of project monitoring and evaluation reports (midterm, terminal etc.) to MNRE and UNDP/GEF.

Prepare and approve the Terms of Reference for consultants and subcontracts and for any equipment procurement.

Manage disbursement of funds, maintenance of accounts as per requirements of UNDP, and provide inputs to internal and external audits.

Liaise with counterparts and main stakeholders to ensure their roles are appropriately integrated into the project as envisaged, or as agreed as the project progresses.

Manage the day-to-day work priorities, workload and outputs of the PMU members (Renewable Energy, Rural Livelihoods) and Administration & Finance).

Be responsible for the recruitment, coordination, and outputs and funding of the CLIAs and their CSUs.

Supervise the performance of the project team members to ensure that all tasks areexecuted in a

sound and timely manner, in order to meet the objectives of the project.

Manage procurement, including supervision of contracts and staffing requirements of the project, to

comply with UNDP and MNRE/Indian Government rules andregulations.

Ensure the project’s coordination and coherence with other programs, projects and activities

onenergy, climate change and environment carried out by other UN Agencies, other international

organizations, the private sector, NGOs, Academia and the Government in India - and regionally and worldwide as relevant.

Prepare and present timely and accurate project status reports to the PEC/PSC.

104

Preparation of Annual Work Plans, ensuring physical and financial progress as per AWP; timely submission of QPR [Quarterly Progress Reports], FACE [Fund Authorisation and Certificate of Expenditure] and APR/PIR [Annual Progress Report/Project Information Report].

Renewable Energy Expert (PMU member)

Scope of Work

Coordinate the Renewable Energy (RE) aspects of all project activities.

Maintain an ongoing updated knowledge and interaction with the key RE technology and service providers whose activities are relevant to the project activities.

Organize the selection of consultants for carrying out the RE aspects of project activities.

Coordinate the RE aspects of the RETPRL applications packages’ development and deployment in the project including close coordination with CLIAs.

Closely coordinate with rural livelihood expert while finalising RETPRLs.

Coordinate the RE aspects of the RETPRL supply and service providers involved in the project.

Coordinate the conduct of the RE aspects of RE policy and regulatory project aspects of the project RETPRL aspects.

Coordinate the assessment, development and deployment of the RE aspects of the financial and other support for project RETPRL applications.

Organize the RE aspects of the development, launch and management of the project website, publications, communications and knowledge management under the project.

Oversee the design, delivery and evaluation of the RE aspects of awareness and training programmes.

Network with all RE stakeholders to strengthen the awareness, capacity building and dissemination work under the project.

Rural Livelihoods Expert (PMU Member)

Scope of work

Coordination the livelihoods aspects of all project activities.

Maintain an ongoing updated knowledge and interaction with the key livelihoods counterparts whose activities are relevant to project activities.

Organize the selection of consultants for carrying out the livelihoods aspects of project activities.

Coordinate the livelihoods aspects of the RETPRL applications packages development and deployment in the project including close coordination with CLIAs.

Closely coordinate with renewable energy expert while finalising RETPRLs

105

Coordinate the livelihoods aspects of the RETPRL supply and service providers involved in the project.

Coordinate the conduct of the livelihoods aspects of policy and regulatory project aspects of the project RETPRL aspects.

Coordinate the assessment, development and deployment of the livelihoods aspects of the financial and other support for project RETPRL applications.

Organize the livelihoods aspects of the development, launch and management of the project website, publications, communications and knowledge management under the project.

Oversee the design, delivery and evaluation of the livelihoods aspects of awareness and training programmes.

Finance and Administration Manager (PMU Member)

Scope of work

Responsible for processing all payments

Produce the required financial statements as needed, keep sound checks and balances in place to ensure proper use of finances under appropriate headings, and report on financial expenditure and commitments.

Coordinate timely completion of annual audit.

Prepare quarterly expenditure reports and ensure their timely submission to UNDP.

Be responsible for administrative and secretarial matters. Arrange logistics, including travel and organization of meetings/workshops etc.

Assist in the processing and reporting of all project co-financing and expenditures.

State Coordinators

The state coordinators will coordinate with state level agencies, provide need-based support to CLIAs, monitor the implementation of activities and report the field level issues to the PMU.

Scope of work

Co-ordinate project activities within the state in co-ordination with the CLIAs/CSUs operating in the state

Collate information and documentation for the clusters in the state and report on progress and / or problems to the NPM

Co-ordinate with state-level agencies to ensure participation and co-operation as required and solicit advice through the NPM from the state representatives on the PEC if required

Dialogue with the NPM and other state-level co-ordinators on a regular basis (informally at least once a month and formally at least once a quarter through the quarterly reporting process) to facilitate cross pollination of ideas and learnings

106

Provide relevant state-level information and contacts to facilitate consultancy assignments

Field visits and monitoring of the given set of clusters.

Cluster Level Implementation Agencies (CLIAs)

The implementation of RETPRLs under the project during demonstration phase will be led by the “cluster level implementation agencies (CLIAs)”.

Scope of work

The activities envisaged for a CLIA is broadly as follows:

For the development and implementation of demonstration projects (to be guided and structured by the PMU)

o Consultations with target groups: The CLIA will carry out ongoing consultations with the target groups in the selected clusters to create awareness about the proposed initiative and get feedback.

o Preparation of the Detailed Project Report (DPR) for demonstration projects in line with PMU templates: The CLIA will carry out survey/field work to prepare a DPR for the demonstration project in the selected clusters. The DPR will give details of the number of potential demonstration, replication and scale up installations, applicable financing mechanisms, implementation schedule, cost-benefit analysis, etc.

o Preparing a plan and providing assistance in mobilising /accessing financing for the demonstration projects: The capital expenditure on renewable energy-livelihood interventions are likely to be met through a combination of grants/subsidies, equity investment by the end-users, and bank loans. The CLIA will prepare a financing plan, which will include the pooling of grants/subsidies/ loans available under various government programmes and will assist the end-user(s) in accessing this finance.

o Assistance in identification of technology supplier: The CLIA will assist the PMU in identifying/short-listing one or more technology /service suppliers for the applicable cluster.

o Facilitating and supervising the implementation phase: While the physical implementation will be undertaken by the relevant technology/service providers, the CLIA on behalf of thePMU will facilitate and supervise the implementation by closely involving Renewable Energy and Rural Livelihoods experts at PMU.

o Training of beneficiaries: The CLIA will coordinate the training of beneficiaries in the appropriate and optimal utilisation of the technology. The technical experts for conducting the training will be provided by technology suppliers and/or by the PMU.

o Handholding support post-installation: The CLIA will provide handholding support to the user/beneficiary after the installation of the relevant RE – rural livelihoods systems. The CLIA will ensure that appropriate after-sales and servicing support is made available to the end user/ beneficiary by the technology supplier(s).

107

Reporting on progress of implementation – to the PMU: The CLIA will send monthly progress reports to the PMU as per the format supplied by the PMU.

Documentation of experience and lessons: The CLIA will document the progress and results of the demonstration project(s). The documentation will follow the template(s) provided by the PMU.

Facilitation of study tours and training towards replication and scaling up: Post-installation, the CLIA will provide local facilitation to study tours by potential end-users from other clusters as well as helping conduct trainings for the replication and scaling-up phases.

Facilitate/nurture the formation of CSUs

Cluster Support Units (CSUs)

The development and implementation of a replication and scale-up plan is foreseen through the establishment of a Cluster Support Unit (CSU) by a CLIA. While each CSU may not strictly correspond to a specific CLIA, the broad arrangement for replication and scale up will be as follows. Specific details will be worked out by the applicable CLIA(s), in consultation with the PMU.

The evolution of a CSU is expected to be as follows:

Each CLIA would provide at least 2 dedicated staff with RE technical and livelihoods backgrounds (from within their current cadre or from others within the local area) to constitute the CSU75.

During the course of the implementation of the demonstration project, an additional 1-2 local persons will be identified to act as “barefoot” practitioners (to be chosen from among the beneficiaries, technology suppliers, service technicians, etc.) to join the CSU.

In this regard, there are lessons from the livelihoods sector where there has been considerable focus and investment in developing community resource practitioners who act as resource persons and facilitate replications.

The idea of a CSU is based on lessons learned from successful livelihoods sector projects, which recognise the need for development of a suitable cadre of trained and experienced people for replication and scale up activities. The CSU members would not only have significant exposure to livelihoods activities and some technical expertise but critically will also have a clear business or entrepreneurial orientation. The CSU team will be responsible for implementation and knowledge management of the demo project(s) as well as planning for subsequent replication and scale up activities. Eventually, the CSU will spinoff as an independent enterprise with implementation and / or focal mentoring point for the replication first within the relevant state and then in other states as relevant.

75 Cluster support unit will be set up the CLIA within 6-9 months of project Initialization. To begin with, the CSU will be housed within the CLIA and have a dotted line reporting to the PMU. The CSU will initially be an integral part of the project, then it will gradually become independent of the project, then after the project-end it will work totally independently. The CSU will initially lead the implementation and knowledge management for the demo project. The CSU will also later on be responsible for and incentivized to take up replication and scale up activities across the state and to other states as far as possible.

108

ANNEXURE – D: EMISSION REDUCTIONS CALCULATION

Emission ReductionsDirect Emissions Reductions

The 1,500 demonstration and 28,500 replication RE-rural livelihood projects implemented through support from India ACE project will result in direct greenhouse gas emission reductions of 69,115 tonnes of CO2

equivalent during the 5-year lifetime of the project. Assuming an average economic lifetime of the RE systems (used to support rural livelihoods) as 10 years, the cumulative direct greenhouse gas emission reduction will be 662,742 tonnes CO2 over the lifetime of the investments.

Direct Post-Project Emission Reductions

The project does not explicitly include the establishment of financial mechanisms that will continue to operate post-project end. Although some risk mitigation mechanism will be developed during the project which may continue to operate post-project end, however the project is not putting any fund for its continuance. These mechanisms may be continued to operate on financial support from MNRE or any other agency. Therefore, as a conservative assumption, no direct post-project greenhouse gas emission reductions are claimed.

Indirect emissions reductions

The India ACE project has several elements for addressing the barriers in implementation of RE-rural livelihood technology packages. These elements include developing policy and regulatory support, capacity building, strengthening supply and service chain, etc. This will have significant impact on post project replication and consequently on the indirect emission reductions. However, it is also taken into the consideration that the majority of the users of these RE-rural livelihood technology packages are the marginalised section of society and a conservative approach is followed while estimating the indirect emission reduction.

As per the GEF manual76, using the bottom-top methodology, the indirect emission reductions attributable to the project is estimated to be 1,325,485 tonnes of CO2 equivalent. This is calculated by using the replication factor of 2 as per the GEF guidelines for rural electrification type of projects (see para 43(a), GEF/ C.33/ Inf.18, April 16, 2008).

In the alternative scenario (top-down methodology), it is assumed that 10,000 RE-rural livelihood projects may be implemented per year after completion of the India ACE project. The RE-rural livelihood projects that will be implemented in the 10 years duration after the completion of this project will result in cumulative reduction in emission of 2,103,944 tonnes of CO2 equivalent. On the conservative side, using the GEF causality factor of 60%, the indirect emission reduction that can be attributed to India ACE project is 1,262,366 tonnes of CO2 equivalent (see para 47(c), GEF/ C.33/ Inf.18, April 16, 2008).

The indirect emission reductions that can be attributed to the India ACE project is in the range of 1,262,366 – 1,325,485 (average of 1,293,925.5) tonnes of CO2 equivalent.

76 Manual for calculating GHG benefits of GEF projects: Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy. GEF/ C.33/ Inf.18, April 16, 2008.

109

Cost effectiveness

If the GEF contribution (USD 4,006,849) is divided by the direct emission reductions of 662,742 tonnes CO2

equivalent, this then gives a corresponding direct CO2 unit abatement cost (UAC) (i.e. GEF$ per tCO2) of USD 6.05/tCO2.

Detailed Calculation of Direct Emission Reductions Several types of RE technology interventions have been proposed depending upon the livelihood sector requirements. Reduction in emission is calculated by taking into account the emission reduction corresponding to each RE technology. Table 39 below provides the calculation for emission reduction per year from the demonstration projects.

Table 39: Emission reduction from demonstration projects

S. No.

Proposed technology

Unit capacity of proposed

technology

Reference/ baseline technology

No of units of proposed technology to be commissioned

during demonstration phase

Net reduction in GHG

emission (tCO2/year)

1Solar home lighting system

2 lighting units

Kerosene lamp 1,000 269.20

2Solar power pack for CFCs

1 kWp Grid electricity 19.5 25.23

3 Solar garment unit 1.24 kWp Grid electricity 4 6.42

4 Biomass gasifier 10 kWp Grid electricity 3 48.51

5 Solar aerators 1 hp Diesel generator 20 22.40

6 Micro solar pump200 W

/householdDiesel pump 75 25.20

7 Solar pump1 hp

/householdDiesel pump 175 294.00

8Improved cook-stoves

1 unit Traditional cook-stoves

50 869.92

9Biogas based power plant in poultry farm

400 kWh Grid electricity 1 117.60

10Waste biomass briquetting plant in poultry cooperative

800 t/year Diesel /furnace oil 2 1,361.30

11Solar based cold rooms

5 MT Diesel generator 6 53.76

12 Solar dryers Open Sun drying 80 0.00

13Solar based milk chiller

1000 l/d Grid electricity 2 8.58

14Solar power pack for milk collection centre

100 W Grid electricity 1 0.14

15Biogas based power plant in dairy farm

150 kWh Grid electricity 1 53.66

Total GHG emission reduction from demonstration projects (tCO2/year) 3,155.92

110

The ratio of number of RE-rural livelihood projects to be implemented in replication phase to the demonstration phase is 28,500/1,500 = 19. So it is assumed that the reduction in emission per year from the implementation of replication projects would be 19 times the reduction in emission per year from demonstration projects.

Table 40 below provides the year-wise and cumulative emission reduction during the 5-year of project duration and the net direct emission reduction over the average economic lifetime of the RE technologies.

Table 40: Year wise and cumulative emission reduction

Emission reduction per year (tCO2/year)

Cumulative emission reduction (tCO2)

Assumption on implementation status of RETPRLs at the end of each year and explanation for calculation

Year 1 - - No installations in year 1

Year 2

631

631

40% of the demonstrations projects implemented in year 2. As the projects get commissioned at different points of the year, only 50% of the CO2 reduction is accounted in the year in which they are implemented. From next year onwards, full CO2 reduction will be accounted.

Year 3

2,209

2,840 Remaining 60% of the demonstration projects implemented in year 3. CO2 reduction in year 3 = (Full CO2 reduction from 40% of demonstration projects) + (50% of CO2 reduction from 60% of demonstration projects)

Year 4

18,147

20,987 50% of the replication projects implemented in year 4. CO2 reduction in year 4 = (Full CO2 reduction from 100% of demonstration projects) + (50% of CO2 reduction from 50% of replication projects)

Year 5

48,128

69,115

Remaining 50% of the replication projects implemented in year 5. CO2

reduction in year 5 = (Full CO2 reduction from 100% of demonstration projects) + (Full CO2 reduction from 50% of replication projects) + (50% of CO2 reduction from 50% of replication projects)

Net direct emission reduction over the lifetime of investment

662,742

Assuming an average lifetime of RE systems as 10 years, the RETPRLs will continue to function and mitigate emission till 7 – 9 years after the project completion.=69,115 +(0.4*3155.92*7+0.6*3155.92*8+0.5*19*3155.92*9+0.5*19*3155.92*10)

0.4*3155.92*7: 40% of the demonstration projects will be installed in year 2. As the GHG emission reduction from these installations for 3 years (year 3, 4 & 5) has already been accounted in the calculation of cumulative emission reduction for the project period (which is 69,115 tCO2), so for calculation of lifetime emission reduction, 7 years of the post project duration is considered (=0.4*3155.92*7).

0.6*3155.92*8: Similarly for the installations in year 3 (60% of the demonstration projects), 8 years of the post project duration is considered (=0.6*3155.92*8).

0.5*19*3155.92*9 & 0.5*19*3155.92*10: In replication phase, the number of installations are 19 times the installations in demonstration phase. Assumed that 50% of these will be installed in year 4 and rest in year 5. For installations in year 4, for calculation of lifetime emission reduction 9 years of post-project duration is considered [=0.5*(19*3155.92)*9]. Similarly for the installations in year 5 [=0.5*(19*3155.92)*10].

111

ANNEXURE – E: RENEWABLE ENERGY TECHNOLOGY COMPENDIUM

Provided as a separate document, which is part of this Project Document.

112

ANNEXURE – F: SUMMARY INFORMATION ON IDENTIFIED CLUSTERS FOR

DEMONSTRATION PROJECTS

Brief descriptions of the clusters which are identified for the implementation of RETPRLs during the demonstration phase of the project are provided below:

1. Barpeta, Assam

Livelihood sector : Khadi, silk and village industries (bamboo cluster)

Location : Chakchaka block in Barpeta district

Brief description of livelihood activity in the cluster: There are about 3,000 artisan families in this cluster who depends upon bamboo and cane processing activities for their livelihoods. The main products manufactured at the cluster are furniture and decorative and utility items. The cluster is spread over 5 villages within a radius of 5 km. The artisanal work is mainly done at individual houses. Khadi and Village Industry Commission of India (KVIC) is providing support to the artisans of this cluster in the form of technical training, access to finance and market linkages. KVIC has also provided grant for setting-up of a common facility centre (CFC) which provides the artisans a common work-shed equipped with some necessary equipment for bamboo splitting, cutting, etc. The power requirement of these equipment ranges from 700 W to 1,500 W. The electricity supply situation in the cluster is poor which affects the productivity of artisans due to inadequate lights during morning and evening hours and under-utilisation of the equipment at CFC.

Potential renewable energy interventions:

(i) Solar lighting systems for artisan’s houses: Productivity of the artisans can be increased by providing them with solar lighting systems at their houses which can improve the lighting conditions during morning and evening hours.

(ii) Biomass gasifier based on bamboo waste for power generation at CFC: A large amount of bamboo and cane waste is generated which can be used for power generation to power the equipment and lights at the CFC.

2. Nalbari and Kamrup Rural, Assam

Livelihood sector : Khadi, silk and village industries (khadi and silk cluster)

Location : Mukalmua and Dhamdhama blocks in Nalbari district and Rangia block in Kamrup Rural district

Brief description of livelihood activity in the cluster: There are about 2,000 artisan families in the cluster involved in garment making (spinning, weaving and stitching) for their livelihoods. The cluster is spread over 2 adjacent districts. All the spinning work and to some extent weaving work is being done by the artisans at their houses. Khadi and Village Industry Commission of India (KVIC) has set-up common facility centres to provide them a common work shed with handlooms, sewing machines and other equipment. KVIC is also helping them through training, access to finance and establishing market linkages. The spinning and weaving work are being done by manual charkhas and hand-looms, however, for stitching, normally powered sewing machines are being used. The electricity supply situation in the cluster is poor which affects the productivity of artisans due to inadequate lights during morning and evening hours and under-utilisation of the equipment at CFC.

113



(ii) Solar PV power pack at CFC: Solar PV power packs can be installed at CFCs to power lights, fans, sewing machines and other equipment at the CFC.

(iii) Solar charkha/loom: Solar charkhas and solar looms can be introduced to reduce drudgery and improve productivity.

3. Darrang, Assam

Livelihood sector : Horticulture

Location : Pachim Mangaldai block in Darrang district

Brief description of livelihood activity in the cluster: There are around 15,000 families spread over 30 villages, who are dependent upon horticulture for their livelihoods. Typical land holding per family for horticulture is around 70 square meters. The main crops in the cluster are tomato, pumpkin, assamese lemon and papaya. Farming is done throughout the year. During monsoon, majority of the water requirement for irrigation is fulfilled through rains and the main requirement for the irrigation pumps is during the winter crops. Usually, diesel pumps are being used to draw water from bore wells for irrigation. The pump is usually owned by a user and rented out to others.


(i) Solar pumps: The diesel pumps presently being used in the cluster can be replaced by solar pumps.

4. Udalguri, Assam

Livelihood sector : Biomass fuel based small businesses

Location : Around the tea gardens in Udalguri district

Brief description of livelihood activity in the cluster: Udalguri district in Assam has large spread of tea gardens and forests. There are around 50-60 dhabas (road side small restaurants) and tea shops on the highways/roads around the tea gardens. These dhabas and tea shops use fuel wood from the nearby forest for cooking in traditional and inefficient stoves. Typical usage of fuel wood is around 70-75 kg per day per dhaba.


(i) Improved cook-stoves: The traditional stoves being presently used can be replaced by the improved cook-stoves which are efficient and less polluting.

114

5. Goalpara, Assam

Livelihood sector : Fisheries

Location : Matia, Jaleswar and Lakhipur blocks of Goalpara district

Brief description of livelihood activity in the cluster: The cluster is spread over 20-30 villages with more than 100 families are involved in fisheries for their livelihoods. This cluster has large number of rain fed tanks, wet lands and ponds. Usually the ponds (0.1 – 3 hectare) are owned by individual fishermen family while the large wetlands are owned by group of fishermen or fishermen cooperative. The fishing activity is carried out round the year and typical production is around 50,000 kg per hectare per year. The main fish species produced are Indian major carps, freshwater prawn, air breathing fish, feather back, etc. Electric/diesel motor based paddle type aerators developed by IIT Guwahati, are being introduced in the cluster to maintain the oxygen level in eater and improve the productivity.


(i) Solar aerators: The aerators can be run on solar PV power.

6. Hoshangabad, Madhya Pradesh

Livelihood sector : Poultry

Location : Kesla block in Hoshangabad district

Brief description of livelihood activity in the cluster: There are about 1,000 families in the cluster involved in the poultry farming activity. Usually each family has a backyard poultry farm with 300-800 birds in each farm. These families are associated in the form of a cooperative society. The cooperative owns and operates a centralised layer farm with hatchery (with around 40,000 parent birds) and feed preparation units (prepares 30-40 tonnes of feed per day). The annual turnover of the cooperative is around INR 300 million. Net income per family from poultry ranges from INR 30,000 to 80,000 per year. Not all these backyard farms have electricity connection and these usually use kerosene lamps for lighting of the farms. These farms use saw-dust/rice husk as bedding material which are replaced every rearing cycle.


(i) Solar lighting systems for back yard poultry farms.

(ii) Poultry litter based biogas plant for power generation for captive use in centralized layer farm.

(iii) Biomass briquetting machine for briquetting of waste saw-dust/rice husk which can bring in additional income to the cooperative from the selling of briquettes.

7. Betul and Hoshangabad, Madhya Pradesh


Location : Shahpur block in Betul district and Kesla block in Hoshangabad district

115

Brief description of livelihood activity in the cluster: This cluster is located around the border of two districts – Betul and Hoshangabad. In Betul, there are around 600 families spread across 30 villages who are engaged in vegetable farming. Their main produce are tomato, okra and cauliflower. Presently these farmers are using diesel pumps for irrigation purpose. They do not have cold storage facilities, due to which some part of their produce gets wasted. In the Kesla block of Hoshangabad districts, there are around 200 families involved in oyster mushroom growing. This variety of mushroom is required to be dried before selling in the market. Presently the farmers are drying their produce in open Sun. In the cluster the farmers are organized in the form of cooperatives.


(i) Solar pumps for irrigation in vegetable farms.

(ii) Solar power based small cold rooms for storage of vegetables

(iii) Solar conduction dryers for mushroom drying

8. Raisen, Madhya Pradesh

Livelihood sector : Dairy

Location : Bareli block in Raisen district

Brief description of livelihood activity in the cluster: There are around 1,500 milk producer families in the cluster. The surplus milk produced by small producers is collected at the local milk collection centre, tested, weighed and then transported to the milk chilling centres. Milk is transported to the chilling centres twice a day – morning and evening. The milk collection centres are run and managed by small cooperatives and the milk producers are members of the appropriate cooperative. There are around 50 such milk collection centres in the cluster.


(i) Solar lighting systems for lighting of collection centre.

(ii) Solar powered milk chillers for collection centre: It will reduce the frequency of transportation of milk to the chilling plant.

9. Balaghat, Madhya Pradesh


Location : Waraseoni block in Balaghat district

Brief description of livelihood activity in the cluster: There are about 600 artisan families in this cluster who depends upon bamboo and cane processing activities for their livelihoods. These artisans are associated through 24 SHGs (self-help group). The main products manufactured at the cluster are furniture and decorative and utility items. The artisanal work is mainly done at individual houses. Khadi and Village Industry Commission of India (KVIC) is providing support to the artisans of this cluster in the form of technical training, access to finance and market linkages. KVIC has also provided grant for setting-up of a common facility centre (CFC) which provides the artisans a common work-shed equipped with some necessary equipment for bamboo splitting, cutting, etc. The electricity supply

116

situation in the cluster is poor which affects the productivity of artisans due to inadequate lights during morning and evening hours and under-utilisation of the equipment at CFC.




10. Dhindori, Madhya Pradesh


Location : Mehadwani block in Dhindori district

Brief description of livelihood activity in the cluster: This cluster has around 1,000 farmer families. The main crops in the cluster are cereals (wheat, paddy, maize, etc.), oil producing seeds (mustard, soyabean, flaxseed, etc.) and pulses. The farmers are organized in the form of water user groups which uses a common irrigation facility among them. Usually diesel pumps of capacities 3-5 HP are being used.


(i) Solar pumps for irrigation.

11. Koraput, Odisha


Location : Jeypore block in Koraput district

Brief description of livelihood activity in the cluster: In this cluster there are about 450-500 families spread across 30 villages involved in horticulture for their livelihoods. Farming is done year round and the main produce are grains (maize, paddy, ragi, etc.), vegetables (tomato, potato, brinjal, cabbage, cauliflower, beans, lady finger, etc.) and spices (mustard, garlic, chilly, ginger, turmeric, etc.). Koraput is the largest producer of vegetables in Odisha. Presently irrigation is mainly done through diesel pumps. Diesel pumps of 2-5 HP capacities are being used to draw using water from bore wells. Typical land holding size is around 2,000 square meters.


(i) Solar pumps for irrigation

(ii) Solar power based small cold rooms for storage of vegetables

(iii) Solar dryers for drying of spices, etc.

117

12. Puri, Odisha

Livelihood sector : Fisheries

Location : Nimapara (near Chandrabhaga) block in Puri district

Brief description of livelihood activity in the cluster: The coastal area near Chandrabhaga in the Puri district has been leased to a cooperative society. This society is working for developing livelihoods around fisheries and establishing market linkages with support from the Directorate of Fisheries, Govt. of Odisha. There is good demand of dried fish in the market and presently the fish are being dried in open Sun.


(i) Solar dryers for drying of fish.

13. Kalahandi, Odisha

Livelihood sector : Dairy

Location : Kokasara block in Kalahandi district

Brief description of livelihood activity in the cluster: This cluster has around 10 milk collection centres. Each collection centre is being managed by a society which has 30-50 small milk producer members located across 3-4 villages (within 2 km radius). Usually 50 -100 litres of milk is collected at a centre at a time. Electronic milk testing and weighing machines are being used at the collection centres. Milk collection is not done from several villages as milk collection is low and transportation of milk to the chilling plant is not economically viable. There are also few large milk producers having 50-100 cattle in their dairy farms.


(i) Solar power pack for lighting and powering equipment at milk collection centre.

(ii) Solar powered milk chillers for collection centre: It will reduce the frequency of transportation of milk to the chilling plant.

(iii) Biogas plant based on cow dung for power generation for captive use in dairy farms of 50-100 cattle.

14. Keonjhar, Odisha

Livelihood sector : Poultry

Location : Kokasara block in Kalahandi district

Brief description of livelihood activity in the cluster: There are about 200 families in the cluster involved in the poultry farming activity. Usually each family has a backyard poultry farm with around

118

600 birds in each farm. These families are associated in the form of a cooperative society. The cooperative owns and operates a centralised layer farm with hatchery and feed preparation units. Not all these backyard farms have electricity connection and these usually use LPG lamps for lighting of the farms. These farms use saw-dust/rice husk as bedding material which are replaced every rearing cycle.


(i) Solar lighting systems for back yard poultry farms.

(ii) Biomass briquetting machine for briquetting of waste saw-dust/rice husk which can bring in additional income to the cooperative from the selling of briquettes.

15. Khurda, Odisha


Location : Bolagarh (Arikama) block in Khurda district

Brief description of livelihood activity in the cluster: There are about 600 artisan families in this cluster who depends upon bamboo and cane processing activities for their livelihoods. These artisans are associated through 24 SHGs (self-help group). The main products manufactured at the cluster are furniture and decorative and utility items. The artisanal work is mainly done at individual houses. Khadi and Village Industry Commission of India (KVIC) is providing support to the artisans of this cluster in the form of technical training, access to finance and market linkages. KVIC has also provided grant for setting-up of a common facility centre (CFC) which provides the artisans a common work-shed equipped with some necessary equipment for bamboo splitting, cutting, etc. The electricity supply situation in the cluster is poor which affects the productivity of artisans due to inadequate lights duringmorning and evening hours and under-utilisation of the equipment at CFC.




119

ANNEXURE – G: SUMMARY REPORT ON STAKEHOLDERS CONSULTATIONS

Five stakeholder consultation workshops have been organised in two phases. The first phase of workshops was focused on consultations with stakeholders at state level and were organised at the state capitals of the three targeted states. In the second phase consultation workshop with potential partners and the LFA workshop were organised at New Delhi. The highlights of the workshops are provided in Table 41 below:

Table 41: Summary details of stakeholders' workshops

Phase – I (State level workshops) Participation

Bhubaneswar (January 17, 2014) Around 60 participants from NGOs, governments, academics, technical experts and private sector. Majority belonging to Odisha and a few from Jharkhand and West Bengal.

Bhopal (January 21, 2014) Around 30 participants from NGOs, governments, technical experts and private sector. Majority from Madhya Pradesh, a few technology suppliers from other states.

Guwahati (January 24, 2014) Around 40 participants from NGOs, governments, academics, technical experts and private sector. Majority from Assam, a few from Meghalaya

Phase – II

New Delhi (February 14, 2014) –Round table meeting of potential partners

Around 30 participants representing manufacturers/vendors of clean technology, CSR representatives from PSUs, banks, and NGOs

New Delhi (February 17 and 18, 2014) – LFA workshop

Around 10 participants including UNDP, MNRE and international and national consultant team

As the project team sought to evolve and detail the project through the initial listing of major livelihoods activities / productive uses and RETPRLs, the stakeholder consultations in the states were geared towards not just sharing initial thoughts of the project team but importantly to also harvest local knowledge and views, particularly of those working on rural livelihoods, renewable energy industry and implementation of government programmes. These discussions were seen as critical in shaping implementation aspects and institutional framework for the proposed project.

Broadly, the questions posed to stakeholders in the various state-level consultations were as follows:

What are the key livelihood activities (existing/potential) that can benefit from energy linkages?

In which districts such projects will have high potential of success and impact?

Who could be the potential partners (Govt agencies, NGOs, Community based organisations or CBOs, private and public sector institutions) for undertaking cluster level projects?

What specific ideas do potential partners have to offer in terms of cluster level projects to provide RE energy services for livelihood activities?

Similar in tenor were the questions posed to participants at the multi-stakeholder consultation in New Delhi where the project team sought to garner inputs and support from potential partners. At the LFA workshop, these project ideas took more clear shape in terms of implementation aspects and recognition of the need for more detailed information to be gathered from the proposed project sites and partners.

120

Major Conclusions of Stakeholders’ Workshops

The major conclusions of the state level and the multi-stakeholders national partner workshops are summarised below:

Electricity grid extension: The participants noted that steady progress is taking place in grid extension. In some states, particularly MP, the situation of grid electricity supply has improved significantly in last 2-3 years. In this context, the project design needed to factor in the possibility of grid extension to currently unserved areas and improvements in grid electricity supply to currently underserved areas, during the project period. While some participants see availability of cheaper grid electricity as a threat to off-grid renewable electricity as well as see technical and regulatory barriers to integration of decentralised renewable electricity systems to the electricity grid; some other participants felt that there is no significant threat from the grid once regulatory issues related with decentralised electricity generation are sorted out

Challenges to off-grid renewable based rural electrification: Regulatory challenges with regard to tariff-setting as well as financing of off-grid rural electrification projects based on renewable electricity were seen as important challenges. Operators pointed out to the problems in the collection of tariffs. In the past, a typical approach has been to build off-grid renewable energy based rural electrification projects in remote villages and then make some efforts to develop livelihoods activities around them; this approach requires interventions spread over long period of time as the villages selected are usually small and remote and are not connected with the markets. While sharing experiences, the participants pointed out to a number of dysfunctional off-grid small biomass gasifier power plants and the problems in continued functioning of off-grid Solar PV power plants once the battery replacement becomes due.

Need to focus on captive energy needs of livelihoods activities: Overall, it was felt that the project should focus on catering primarily to the captive energy needs in livelihood activities, where the renewable energy systems displace electricity generated from a costly fuel like diesel or is used for thermal applications such as drying or cooking.

All the states have mature livelihood initiatives and institutions: A large amount of work is taking place in all the states on livelihood promotion in rural areas. Several government departments are involved –notably rural development, panchayati raj, fisheries, animal husbandry, agriculture, tribal development, etc. In addition, all the three states have several credible NGO led initiatives to promote rural livelihoods, which are focussed on certain specific livelihood sectors and specific districts. In most of the programmes the end-users are organised in the form of self-help groups, producer companies or cooperatives. One of the major issues in the past has been providing market access to the products produced by the rural households. In this context, during last two decades, most of the states now have specialised marketing federations; also cooperatives and producer companies are involved which are helping in marketing of the products.

Rural livelihoods can benefit from access to reliable energy and some examples exist of renewable energy use in rural livelihoods activities: Several critical rural livelihoods activities – notably dairy and poultry farming, storage and processing of several types of agri-produce, farming /irrigation – were observed to potentially benefit from access to reliable energy. All of the states have considerable interest and some experience in employing renewable energy services in various livelihoods activities. Some specific examples were given in the workshops e.g. solar drying of fish in Odisha, solar lighting for poultry in MP, solar aerators for in-land fisheries in Assam, use of solar lights by weavers in Assam, use of solar dryers for spices in MP and Assam, etc.

Challenges to use of renewable energy in rural livelihood activities: High capital cost was often identified as an important barrier in scaling-up of renewable energy use for rural livelihoods. The importance of pooling up of MNRE subsidies with the subsidies/ grants available for rural livelihoods activities was highlighted. In general, technology suppliers and project developers find the rural market unattractive due its dispersed nature and generally lower ability and / or willingness to pay. There are also challenges in

121

servicing and maintenance of devices due to lack of skilled manpower. The devices and parts also suffer from poor quality and low reliability. Due to several of these reasons, decentralised renewable energy has not been seen as attractive by financing institutions. Community or joint ownership of RE-devices / technologies was seen as an approach, but accountability was seen as a challenge in this approach where ownership is vague or joint.

Seasonality of energy demand: The energy demand side of rural livelihoods must also be assessed thoroughly. Seasonality of sectors and specific energy end-use demands must be factored in. For instance, fruit and vegetable production, drying of certain spices or eco-tourism activities will have distinct seasonal patterns which must be factored into the business models. The project must also explore other uses of RE devices to improve utilization.

Need for systematic RE resource assessment: Some renewable energy resource-specific issues were highlighted as points to bear in mind that in several areas small hydro potential exists but streams are rain-fed and dry up for 2-3 months. Similarly, in high rainfall areas of the North East, biomass is available, but it is wet for most of the year. Also typical in the North East is the problem of watery dung with low calorific value though livestock population is promising in terms of numbers. These insights underscore the importance of systematic RE resource assessment to assess suitability and ensure sustainability of RETPRLs.

Need for careful selection of state/local level implementers: State-level interest, financial resources and capacity and interest of State Nodal Agencies (SNAs) vary from state to state. This must be assessed and borne in mind while developing state-level activities and identifying project partners. Also important to understand at the local-level is the manner in which various livelihoods activities are organised in various locations. This is well-understood by local community-based organisations, cooperatives and NGOs and they could become important partners in project conceptualisation and in some cases execution.

122

ANNEXURE – H: COUNTRY OFFICE SUPPORT SERVICE (COSS) AGREEMENT

STANDARD LETTER OF AGREEMENT BETWEEN UNDP AND THE GOVERNMENT FOR THE PROVISION OF SUPPORT SERVICES

HOW TO USE THIS LETTER OF AGREEMENT This agreement is used to provide appropriate legal coverage when the UNDP country office provides support

services under national execution. This agreement must be signed by a governmental body or official authorised to confer full legal coverage on UNDP.

(This is usually the Minister of Foreign Affairs, the Prime Minister /or Head of State.) The UNDP country office must verify that the government signatory has been properly authorised to confer immunities and privileges.

A copy of the signed standard letter will be attached to each PSD and project document requiring such support services. When doing this, the UNDP country office completes the attachment to the standard letter on the nature and scope of the services and the responsibilities of the parties involved for that specific PSD/project document.

The UNDP country office prepares the letter of agreement and consults with the regional bureau in case either of the parties wishes to modify the standard text. After signature by the authority authorised to confer immunities and privileges to UNDP, the government keeps one original and the UNDP country office the other original. A copy of the agreement should be provided to UNDP headquarters (BOM/OLPS) and the regional bureau.

Dear [name of government official],

1. Reference is made to consultations between officials of the Government of India (hereinafter referred to as “the Government”) and officials of UNDP with respect to the provision of support services by the UNDP country office for nationally managed programmes and projects. UNDP and the Government hereby agree that the UNDP country office may provide such support services at the request of the Government through its institution designated in the relevant programme support document or project document, as described below.

2. The UNDP country office may provide support services for assistance with reporting requirements and direct payment. In providing such support services, the UNDP country office shall ensure that the capacity of the Government-designated institution is strengthened to enable it to carry out such activities directly. The costs incurred by the UNDP country office in providing such support services shall be recovered from the administrative budget of the office.

3. The UNDP country office may provide, at the request of the designated institution, the following support services for the activities of the programme/project:(a) Identification and/or recruitment of project and programme personnel;(b) Identification and facilitation of training activities;(c) Procurement of goods and services;

4. The procurement of goods and services and the recruitment of project and programme personnel by the UNDP country office shall be in accordance with the UNDP regulations, rules, policies and procedures. Support services described in paragraph 3 above shall be detailed in an annex to the programme support document or project document, in the form provided in the Attachment hereto. If the requirements for support services by the country office change during the life of a programme or project, the annex to the programme support document or project document is revised with the mutual agreement of the UNDP resident representative and the designated institution.

5. The relevant provisions of the [Insert title and date of the UNDP standard basic assistance agreement with the Government] (the “SBAA”), including the provisions on liability and privileges and immunities, shall apply to the provision of such support services. The Government shall retain overall responsibility for the nationally managed programme or project through its designated institution. The responsibility of the UNDP country office for the provision of the support services described herein shall be limited to the provision of such support services detailed in the annex to the programme support document or project document.

123

6. Any claim or dispute arising under or in connection with the provision of support services by the UNDP country office in accordance with this letter shall be handled pursuant to the relevant provisions of the SBAA.

7. The manner and method of cost-recovery by the UNDP country office in providing the support services described in paragraph 3 above shall be specified in the annex to the programme support document or project document.

8. The UNDP country office shall submit progress reports on the support services provided and shall report on the costs reimbursed in providing such services, as may be required.

9. Any modification of the present arrangements shall be effected by mutual written agreement of the parties hereto.

10. If you are in agreement with the provisions set forth above, please sign and return to this office two signed copies of this letter. Upon your signature, this letter shall constitute an agreement between your Government and UNDP on the terms and conditions for the provision of support services by the UNDP country office for nationally managed programmes and projects.

Yours sincerely,

________________________Signed on behalf of UNDP

[Name][Title: Resident Representative]

_____________________For the Government[Name/title][Date]

124

Attachment

DESCRIPTION OF UNDP COUNTRY OFFICE SUPPORT SERVICES

1. Reference is made to consultations between [insert name of Designated institution], the institution designated by the Government of India and officials of UNDP with respect to the provision of support services by the UNDP country office for the nationally managed programme or project [insert programme or project number and title], “the Programme” [or “the Project”].

2. In accordance with the provisions of the letter of agreement signed on [insert date of agreement] and the programme support document [or project document], the UNDP country office shall provide support services for the Programme [or Project] as described below.

3. Support services to be provided:

Support services(insert description)

Schedule for the provision of the support services

Cost to UNDP of providing such support services (where appropriate)

Amount and method of reimbursement of UNDP (where appropriate)

1. Recruitment of Project Staff To be recruited as per AWP

5,500 ATLAS billing

2. Recruitment of Consultants (i.e. Climate Experts, GIS Specialist, Innovative Finance Specialist, M&E Activities, etc.)

To be recruited as per AWP

7,000 ATLAS billing

3. Contractual service -Companies (i.e. procurement of equipment, annual audit)

To be engaged as per AWP

4,000 ATLAS billing

4. Payments To be arranged as per AWP

2,500 ATLAS billing

5. Workshops and training events To be organized as per AWP

3,000 ATLAS billing

4. Description of functions and responsibilities of the parties involved:

125

ANNEXURE – I: PROJECT ANNUAL TARGETS

Table 42: Project Annual Targets

Strategy Objectively Verifiable Indicators TargetAnnual Targets


Project goal: Reduced GHG emissions achieved through renewable energy systems in rural livelihood sectors

Cumulative CO2 emissions reduced from start of project to End-Of-Project (EOP), (tCO2e)

69,115 0 631 2,209 18,147 48,128

Project Objective:Enhancing reliable and affordable clean energy access for rural livelihoods in un-served and underserved areas

Total energy savings achieved from implemented RETPRLs by EOP

MWheMWhth

112,7371,376,631

00

1,12713,766

37,203454,288

37,203454,288

37,203454,288



Number of household enterprises adopting RETPRLs through demonstrations and replications in the targeted states by the EOP

30,000 0 600 900 14,250 14,250

Output 1.1: At least ten (10) cost-effective RE technology packages developed for rural livelihoods (RETPRL) applications and established technical specifications

No. of RETPRLs developed by year 2 10 5 5 0 0 0


No. of demonstration project clustersby EoP

15 0 15 0 0

No. of household enterprises adopting RETPRLs in the demonstration clusters by year 3

1,500 0 600 900 0 0

Output 1.3: Completed training programmes and training of trainers activities for replication and scale up

No. of training programmes conducted by EoP

14 0 0 7 0 7

No. of training packages developed by year 2

7 0 7 0 0 0

126



of RE – rural livelihood application packages No. of persons trained by EoP 280 0 140 0 0 140

Output 1.4: Completed promotion of replicated and documented RE – rural livelihood application packages promoted to other districts / states and applied to 28,500 household enterprises

No. of household enterprises adopting RETPRLs through replications by EoP

28,500 0 0 0 14,250 14,250



No. of RE technology supply and service providers for rural livelihood applications by EoP

100 0 20 0 40 40

Output 2.1: Business development aspects supported for 100 RE technology supply and service providers for rural livelihoods applications

No. of RE technology supply and service providers for rural livelihoods applications by EoP

100 0 20 0 40 40

No. of business plans developed for RE technology supply and service providers by year 2

20 0 20 0 0 0

No. of financial mechanism to access finance for RE technology supply and service suppliers by Year 2

1 0 1 0 0 0



No. of states enforcing policies on the RE applications as part of their SRLM and in line with the same policies at the national level by year 3

4 0 0 4 0 0

127



Output 3.1.1: National and State level rural livelihood mission statements / documents emphasise the use of RE

No. of Ministries/Departments that officially adopt mission statements that support RE applications for rural livelihoods by year 3

4 0 0 4 0 0


No. of livelihood sectors where RE is promoted in 3 targeted states by year 3

20 0 10 10 0 0


No. of peer reviewed publications sharing experiences regarding RE and rural livelihoods by EoP

7 0 1 2 2 2


Output 3.2.1: Developed MNRE-supportedprogramme for enhanced RE utilisation in rural livelihoods

No. of MNRE programs that espouse RE applications for rural livelihoods programme by Year 3

No. of replication projects implemented by MNRE in new programme using RETPRLs by EoP

1

28,500

0

0

0

0

1

0

0

14,250

0

14,250

Outcome 3.3: Improved tariff and grid interconnection regulations for decentralised RE

No. of state regulatory commissions (SRCs) implement policy guidelines of improved tariff structure for decentralised RE by year 3

3 0 0 3 0 0


No. of state level workshops to implement the revised tariff structuresby year 3

3 0 0 3 0 0

128




No. of SRCs implement policy guidelines for captive/decentralised RE grid interconnection by year 3

3 0 0 3 0 0

Component 4: Financial support for decentralised RE - rural livelihood applications


No. of developed improved overall subsidy and support models by Year 2

1 0 1 0 0 0

Output 4.1.1: Assessed RE subsidy and support models for increased effectiveness of decentralised RE

No. of completed study on existing subsidies and supports by Year 1

1 1 0 0 0 0

Output 4.1.2: Improved RE subsidy and support models for increased effectiveness of decentralised RE for rural livelihoods funding

No. of RE subsidy and support models for rural livelihoods available by year 1

1 1 0 0 0 0

Outcome 4.2: Enhanced provision of financial support for decentralised RE in rural livelihood applications

Output 4.2.1: Implemented financial support packages for RE technology – rural livelihood applications

No. of financial institutions supporting RETPRL by Year 3

No. of household enterprises adopting RETPRLs that were funded by the established financial support packages by EOP

1

28,500

0

0

0

0

1

0

0

14,250

0

14,250

Output 4.2.2: Pooled available financial resources for supporting viable livelihood business models and enhanced market linkages

No. of completed studies on inter-institutional linkages for finance pooling to support viable livelihood business models and enhanced market linkages covering three states and centre by year 2

1 0 1 0 0 0

129



Outcome 4.3: Improved investment risk mitigation for decentralised RE in rural livelihoods applications

Number of states implement designed suitable risk guarantee/mitigation mechanisms by year 3

3 0 0 3 0 0


No. of completed studies on risk assessment and risk mitigation in applicable sectors by year 3

1 0 0 1 0 0

No. of designed suitable risk guarantee/mitigation mechanism by year 3

1 0 0 1 0 0

GEF5 CEO Endorsement Template-February 2013.doc

1

For more information about GEF, visit TheGEF.org

PART I: PROJECT INFORMATION

Project Title: Scale Up of Access to Clean Energy for Rural Productive Uses (India GEF ACE Project)

Country(ies): India GEF Project ID:1 4900

GEF Agency(ies): UNDP GEF Agency Project ID: 4605

Other Executing Partner(s): Ministry of New and

Renewable Energy (MNRE),

Government of India

Submission Date: 21 Oct 2014

GEF Focal Area (s): Climate Change Project Duration

(Months)

60

Name of Parent Program (if

applicable):

For SFM/REDD+

For SGP

For PPP

Project Agency Fee ($): 380,651

A. FOCAL AREA STRATEGY FRAMEWORK2

Focal

Area

Objectiv

es

Expected FA

Outcomes Expected FA Outputs

Trust

Fund

Grant

Amount ($) Co-

financing

($)

CCM-3 Outcome 3.1:

Favorable policy

and regulatory

environment

created for

renewable energy

investments3

Output 3.1: Renewable

energy policy and

regulation in place

GEF TF 844,870 196,114

CCM-3 Outcome 3.2:

Investment in

renewable energy

technologies

increased

Output 3.2: Renewable

energy capacity installed

Output 3.3: Electricity

and heat produced from

renewable sources

GEF TF 3,161,979 18,837,653

Total project costs 4,006,849 19,033,767

B. PROJECT FRAMEWORK

1 Project ID number will be assigned by GEFSEC. 2 Refer to the Focal Area Results Framework and LDCF/SCCF Framework when completing Table A. 3 Comprising Components 3 and 4 in the project

REQUEST FOR CEO ENDORSEMENT

PROJECT TYPE: Full-sized Project

TYPE OF TRUST FUND:GEF Trust Fund

http://www.thegef.org/gef/home

http://www.thegef.org/gef/sites/thegef.org/files/documents/document/GEF5-Template%20Reference%20Guide%209-14-10rev11-18-2010.doc

http://www.thegef.org/gef/node/3624


2

Project Objective: Enhancing reliable and affordable clean energy access for rural livelihoods in un-served

and underserved areas

Project

Component

Grant

Type

Expected

Outcomes Expected Outputs

Trust

Fund

Grant

Amount

($)

Confirme

d Co-

financing

($)

Component 1:

Development

and deployment

of key RE-rural

livelihood

application

packages

TA Outcome 1:

Deployment of

RE-rural

livelihood

application

packages

1.1. At least ten (10)

cost-effective RE

technology packages

developed for rural

livelihood (RETPRL)

applications and

established technical

specifications

1.2 Demonstrated and

documented RE – rural

livelihood application

packages in 15 clusters

and benefitting 1,500

household enterprises

1.3 Completed training

programmes and

training of trainers

activities for

replication and scale

up of RE – rural

livelihood application

packages

1.4 Completed

promotion of replicated

and documented RE –

rural livelihood

application packages to

other districts / states

and applied to 28,500


GEF TF 2,719,94

9

18,374,380

Component 2:

Supply chain for

RE technology

supply and

service providers

for enhancing

rural livelihoods

TA Outcome 2:

Increased supply

of RE technology

and service

providers for

rural livelihood

applications

Output 2.1: Business

development aspects

supported for 100 RE

technology supply and

service providers for

rural livelihoods

applications

GEF TF 301,000 416,387

Component 3:

Policy and

regulatory

support for RE -

rural livelihood

applications

TA Outcome 3.1:

Inclusion of RE

applications in

national and state

level rural

livelihoods

policies for key

livelihood sectors

in rural areas

3.1.1 National and

State level rural

livelihoods mission

statements / documents

emphasizing the use of

RE

3.1.2 National and

State level policies that

support the use of RE

GEF TF 196,700 53,900


3

for key rural

livelihoods sectors

3.1.3 Documented

experiences and

lessons on RE

applications for rural

livelihoods at suitable

regional and

international fora

TA Outcome 3.2:

Future MNRE

programs also

cater to actions

towards

enhanced RE

utilization in

rural livelihoods

Output 3.2.1:

Developed MNRE-

supported programme

for enhanced RE

utilization in rural

livelihoods

GEF TF 46,600 14,000

TA Outcome 3.3:

Improved tariff

and grid

interconnection

regulations for

decentralized RE

Output 3.3.1:

Completed roadmap

and workshops for

supporting improved

tariff structures for

small scale captive and

off-grid RE

Output 3.3.2:

Developed and

implemented

regulatory, technical

and tariff guidelines

for RE based

captive/decentralized

systems’ grid

interconnection

GEF TF 69,500 28,800

Component 4:

Financial

support for

decentralized RE

- rural livelihood

applications

TA Outcome 4.1:

Improved

decentralized RE

subsidies and

support for rural

livelihoods

Output 4.1.1: Assessed

RE subsidy and

support models for

increased effectiveness

of decentralized RE

Output 4.1.2: Improved

RE subsidy and

support models for

increased effectiveness

of decentralized RE for

rural livelihoods

funding

GEF TF 64,800 22,000

TA Outcome 4.2:

Enhanced

provision of

financial support

for decentralized

RE in rural

livelihood

applications

Output 4.2.1:

Implemented financial

support packages for

RE technology – rural

livelihood applications

Output 4.2.2: Pooled

available financial

resources for

GEF TF 119,900 32,000


4

supporting viable

livelihood business

models and enhanced

market linkages

TA Outcome 4.3:

Improved

investment risk

mitigation for

decentralized RE

in rural

livelihood

applications

Output 4.3.1:

Enhanced risk

mitigation mechanisms

designed and supported

for RE enterprises and

RE technology

adopters / end-users in

rural livelihoods

applications

GEF TF 298,900 29,300

Subtotal 3,817,34

9

18,970,767

Project management Cost (PMC)4 GEF TF 189,500 63,000

Total project costs 4,006,84

9

19,033,767

C. SOURCES OF CONFIRMED CO-FINANCING FOR THE PROJECT BY SOURCE AND BY NAME ($)

Sources of Co-financing Name of Co-financier (source) Type of Co-

financing

Co-financing

Amount ($)

National Government Ministry of New and Renewable

Energy (MNRE)

Cash 10,000,000

GEF Agency UNDP Cash 800,000

Others Cluster Level Implementing Agencies

(CLIAs) – 15 nos.

Cash 8,233,767

Total Co-financing 19,033,767

D. TRUST FUND RESOURCES REQUESTED BY AGENCY, FOCAL AREA AND COUNTRY1: N.A.

1In case of a single focal area, single country, single GEF Agency project, and single trust fund project, no need to provide

information for this table. PMC amount from Table B should be included proportionately to the focal area amount in this table. 2 Indicate fees related to this project.

E. CONSULTANTS WORKING FOR TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE COMPONENTS:

Component Grant Amount

($)

Co-financing

($)

Project Total

($)

International Consultants 68,000 0 68,000

National/Local Consultants 1,098,9

00

601,600 1,700,500

F. DOES THE PROJECT INCLUDE A “NON-GRANT” INSTRUMENT? No

(If non-grant instruments are used, provide in Annex D an indicative calendar of expected reflows to

your Agency and to the GEF/LDCF/SCCF/NPIF Trust Fund).

4 PMC should be charged proportionately to focal areas based on focal area project grant amount in Table D below.

http://gefweb.org/Documents/Council_Documents/GEF_C21/C.20.6.Rev.1.pdf


5

PART II: PROJECT JUSTIFICATION

A. DESCRIBE ANY CHANGES IN ALIGNMENT WITH THE PROJECT DESIGN OF THE

ORIGINAL PIF5

A.1 National strategies and plans or reports and assessments under relevant conventions, if

applicable, i.e. NAPAS, NAPs, NBSAPs, national communications, TNAs, NCSA, NIPs,

PRSPs, NPFE, Biennial Update Reports, etc.

The applicable national strategies and plans (or reports or assessments under relevant conventions)

build on those described at the project’s PIF stage.

Key Government of India (GoI) policies and schemes6 that have sought to support the expansion of

renewable energy are as follows:

Electricity Act 2003: Mandates that each State Electricity Regulatory Commission (SERC)

must establish minimum renewable power purchases; allows for the Central Electricity

Regulatory Commission (CERC) to set a preferential tariff for electricity generated from

renewable energy technologies; and provides open access of the electricity transmission and

distribution system to licensed renewable power generators.

National Electricity Policy 2005: Allows SERCs to establish preferential tariffs for

electricity generated from renewable sources.

National Tariff Policy 2006: Mandates that each SERC must specify a renewable purchase

obligation (RPO) with distribution companies in a time-bound manner with purchases to be

made through a competitive bidding process.

Rajiv Gandhi Grameen Vidyutikaran Yojana (RGGVY) 2005: Supports extension of

electricity to all rural and below poverty line (BPL) households through a 90% subsidy of

capital equipment costs for renewable and non-renewable energy systems.

Eleventh Plan 2007–2012: Established a target that 10% of power generating capacity

should be based on renewable sources by 2012 (a goal that has already been reached); it also

supported the phasing out of investment-related subsidies in favor of performance-oriented

incentives.

In June 2008, India’s first National Action Plan on Climate Change (NAPCC) was released. It

outlined existing and future policies and programs addressing climate mitigation and adaptation.

The plan identified eight core “National Missions” running through 2017. The eight missions under

India’s National Action Plan on Climate Change (NAPCC) are the: National Solar Mission;

National Mission for Enhanced Energy Efficiency; National Mission on Sustainable Habitat;

National Water Mission; National Mission for Sustaining Himalayan Ecosystems; National Mission

for a Green India; National Mission for Sustainable Agriculture; and National Mission on Strategic

Knowledge for Climate Change. The NAPCC’s relevance relating to this project includes:

Achieving national economic growth objectives through a qualitative change in direction

that enhances ecological sustainability, leading to mitigation of greenhouse gas emissions;

5 For questions A.1 –A.7 in Part II, if there are no changes since PIF and if not specifically requested in the

review sheet at PIF stage, then no need to respond, please enter “NA” after the respective question. 6 Indian Renewable Energy Status Report, background paper for DIREC 2010. NREL/TP-6A20-48948

October 2010


6

Devising efficient and cost-effective strategies for end-use demand-side management;

Developing new and innovative forms of market, regulatory and voluntary mechanisms to

promote sustainable development.

The Jawaharlal Nehru National Solar Mission (JNNSM) is also part of the NAPCC. JNNSM has a

target for the deployment of 20,000 MW of solar power, 20 million m2 of solar thermal collector

area and 20 million solar lighting systems by 2022. The objective of JNNSM is to create a policy

and regulatory environment that provides a predictable and effective incentive structure that enables

rapid and large-scale capital investment in solar energy applications and encourages strong technical

innovation and the lowering of costs. The Mission adopted a 3-phased approach, spanning the

remaining period of the 11th Plan and first year of the 12th Plan (up to 2012-13) as Phase 1, the

remaining 4 years of the 12th Plan (2013-17) as Phase 2 and the 13th Plan (2017-22) as Phase 3. At

the end of each plan, and mid-term during the 12th and 13th Plans, there will be an evaluation of

progress and a review of capacity and targets for subsequent phases – to be based on emerging cost

and technology trends, both domestic and global.

1. Many states have introduced state-level renewable energy policies with their own schemes and

tax incentives for renewable energy. Various states have implemented provisional measures

such as concessional open access charges for captive renewable energy projects and waivers on

cross-subsidy surcharges. These measures are meant to reduce the burden resulting from the

generally lower plant load factors of renewable energy projects.

2. SERCs also set state-specific targets for distribution companies to purchase a certain percentage

of their total power requirement from renewable energy sources through targets set in the form

of Renewable Purchase Obligations (RPOs). As part of its policy to promote renewable energy,

India launched the Renewable Energy Certificate (REC) Mechanism in 2010. Under this

scheme, generators of renewable energy are granted an REC per unit of green energy that they

contribute to the grid. RECs have begun to be traded on the power exchanges, with the RECs

being purchased by states / agencies that are otherwise unable to meet their RPOs.

The National Clean Energy Fund was created in 2011 as a funding mechanism for research and

development in the field of clean energy technologies. The fund is created by levying a nominal

cost on coal. Though the fund is large (expected to grow to INR 100 billion) the guidelines for

utilization of this Fund have been found to be very broad-based with the result that the Fund is

now being used for routine energy projects including those in the new and renewable energy

sector.

One notable national strategy change in the energy access area from the PIF is that the inter-

ministerial Global Energy Access Centre (GEAC) is now almost certainly not going ahead (see

A.4 as below for more details).

Key Government of India (GoI) policies and schemes7 that have sought to support the expansion of

rural livelihoods were not mentioned in detail at the PIF stage, and are therefore detailed as follows:

Agriculture was the predominant livelihood interventions in India until the 1960s, with

irrigation through large dams and canal systems, followed by the introduction of high

yielding crop varieties during the Green Revolution, impacting the livelihoods of over 40

million farmers and a similar number of landless laborers. India has added over 40 million

hectares of irrigation since independence in 1947; the largest increase in irrigated land in

human history. This has generated or stabilized the livelihoods of millions of people.

7 Indian Renewable Energy Status Report. Background paper for DIREC 2010. NREL/TP-6A20-48948 October 2010


7

Originally called the National Rural Employment Program (NREP), and later the

Sampoorna Gram Samriddhi Yojana (SGSY), wage-employment was generated in the lean

season through public works such as road building. In 2006, this approach was substantially

revised with the National Rural Employment Guarantee Act, which guaranteed 100 days of

employment to any citizen wanting to work. The resulting Mahatma Gandhi National Rural

Employment Guarantee Scheme has generated over 16 billion days of work and generated

rural incomes to the range of INR 2.48 trillion since its inception.

In the field of self-employment, the interventions from Government started with the

Integrated Rural Development Programme in 1980, later re-fashioned into the Swarna

Jayanti Grameen Swarozgar Yojana (SJGSY), to promote self-employment among the poor

through acquisition of an income-generating asset with the help of a bank loan and a

government subsidy. The National Rural Livelihood Mission (NRLM) was launched in

2012; taking the SGSY idea forward by creating institutions of the poor that would anchor

rural livelihoods development in a sustainable manner.

In addition, there are a number of programmes run by sectoral institutions such as the

National Dairy Development Board, the Central Silk Board, the Coir Board, the National

Horticultural Board, the National Fisheries Development Board, the Khadi and Village

Industries Commission and the Development Commissioners for Handloom and

Handicrafts, focusing on specific sectors of the economy that provide livelihoods.

A.2. GEF focal area and/or fund(s) strategies, eligibility criteria and priorities.

The project has an applicable GEF Strategic Objective of Climate Change Objective 3 of “Promote

investment in renewable energy technologies”. The applicable GEF Expected Outcomes are Outcome

3.1: favorable policy and regulatory environment created for renewable energy investments can be

gauged by monitoring the extent to which energy access policies and regulations are adopted and

enforced (assessed over a score of 1 to 5). The achievement of Outcome 3.2: Investment in renewable

energy technologies increased can be determined by tracking the volume of investments mobilized in

clean and modern energy technologies and services. The applicable GEF Outcome Indicators are:

a. Extent to which EE policies and regulations are adopted and enforced

b. Volume of investment mobilized

c. Tonnes of CO2 equivalent avoided

A.3 The GEF Agency’s comparative advantage:

UNDP has been successfully implementing climate change mitigation renewable energy and energy

efficiency projects in India for many years, including with MNRE. Notable UNDP-MNRE GEF

projects include the successfully completed Global Solar Water Heating Market Transformation and

Strengthening Initiative (India GSWH) project and the currently very successfully underway India:

Market Development and Promotion of Solar Concentrators based Process Heat Applications in India

(India CSH) project.

UNDP has leveraged its long and successful collaboration with MNRE to obtain early funding for this

GEF ACE project. The India GEF ACE project will accordingly make an early implementation start

(even before GEF project funding approval) with the India UNDP-MNRE ACE $2.4 million project,

where $0.8 million will be provided from UNDP core funding sources, and no GEF funds will be

utilized. The India MNRE-UNDP ACE project will establish: the PSC (Project Steering Committee);

the PEC (Project Executive Committee) and UNDP-MNRE implementation arrangements; the

project’s PMU (Project Management Unit); suitable CLIA’s (Cluster Level Implementing Agencies);

and will enable early development of some of the RE – Rural Livelihoods applications. The India

UNDP-MNRE ACE project will integrate with the India GEF ACE project at its time of inception, and


8

the UNDP-MNRE ACE project implementation arrangements will then transition into the GEF ACE

project (this project).

The India GEF ACE project is also closely aligned with the Sustainable Energy for All (SE4ALL)

global initiative led by the Secretary-General of the United Nations, Ban Ki-Moon to achieve universal

energy access, double the rate of improvement in energy efficiency, and double the share of renewable

energy in the global energy mix by 2030. This initiative was launched in September 2011 and United

Nations General Assembly unanimously declared the decade 2014‑2024 as the Decade of Sustainable

Energy for All.

A.4. The baseline project and the problem that it seeks to address:

Government of India initiatives to improve rural energy access as stated in original PIF, such as Rajiv

Gandhi Grameen Vidyutikaran Yojana (RGGVY), Decentralized Distributed Generation (DDG), and

Remote Village Electrification (RVE) are similar to the key initiatives that are currently in place in

India. The focus on electrifying all feasible villages with grid electricity connections has continued,

with limited supply of electricity for rural areas at 4 - 6 hours per day with generally poor voltage

regulation.

This narrowing of the project focus to just RE for rural livelihoods applications also serves to provide

the narrower project focus sought in the STAP Review and by GEF Council members with regards to

the original PIF. The other key reason to narrow the project focus to rural livelihoods is that these users

need reliable energy for their livelihoods activities to take place, and their alternative is generally high

cost captive diesel generators. In contrast, domestic users just generally do without an electricity

supply when electricity is not available from the grid. So unserved and underserved rural livelihoods

applications are much more likely to pay for RE solutions compared to domestic users who continue

to expect low cost reliable electricity supply, but will generally not spend any extra money to obtain

such reliable alternative energy supplies when a grid electricity supply is not available. A positive

baseline change is that the National Rural Livelihood Mission (NRLM) is now underway in India to

lead rural livelihoods support activities. The basic concept of NRLM is to organize the rural poor into

SHG (Self Help Groups) and make them capable of generating self-employment. NRLM is now

available to provide the necessary rural livelihoods coordination framework to complement the RE

coordination role that will be provided by MNRE. Table 1 as below provides an overview of changes

from the PIF stage to the ProDoc stage.

Table 1: Overview of Changes from PIF to ProDoc

Expected Outputs Rationale for Changes in PIF

Outputs/Activities in the ProDoc GEF-Approved PIF Project Document

Project title: Scale Up of

Access to Clean Energy

for Rural Productive and

Domestic Uses

Project title: Scale Up of Access

to Clean Energy for Rural

Productive Uses (India GEF ACE

Project)

The main baseline project change from the PIF

stage is that the assumed baseline MNRE

activity to set up an inter-ministerial Global

Energy Access Centre (GEAC) has not

eventuated, and seems highly unlikely to occur

in the foreseeable future. So, the inter-

Ministerial coordination role envisaged to be

undertaken by GEAC is not feasible in the

project.


9



As GEAC will not be realized, and the strong

feedback received from the stakeholder

meetings to focus the project more tightly, the

problem that the project seeks to address has

therefore been narrowed down from enhanced

energy access to both domestic and livelihoods

applications (as stated in the PIF) to just

focusing on promoting the enhanced use of RE

for rural livelihoods applications. The India GEF ACE project will not explicitly

deal with domestic uses of RE as there are

fundamental differences between the domestic

uses of energy and the productive uses of

energy in India as follows: (1) even when

villages in India are “electrified”8, many

productive uses will not be connected as they

are located away from the village electrified

area; (2) households in unconnected villages or

households that are not connected in an

“electrified” village just generally do without an

electricity supply rather than make use of

captive diesel generator sets as is the case for

many productive uses where an available and

reliable electricity supply is a prerequisite of the

livelihoods activity being viable at all; (3)

households have an expectation of low cost

(actually below full supply cost) electricity and

would rather do without an available or reliable

supply rather than pay the full cost of electricity

supply, whereas productive uses are often

prepared to pay the high cost of diesel generator

sets if the alternative is no electricity supply at

all.

So adding domestic uses of energy, as an

explicit focus of the project, would result in

a project that tried to address two

fundamentally different energy supply

markets. Finally, even just focusing on

productive uses in three large states in India

(having a combined population of about 148

million) in the project is already very

8 In India a village is considered to be “electrified” when the government buildings (school, health clinic etc.) are

electrified and 10% of the houses are connected. However electricity supply can be as little as four to six hours per day


10



ambitious with only a GEF $ 4,006,849

budget.

Component 1. Investment

financing for rural energy

technology enterprises,

and for end- users that

promote productive

applications (GEF grant

$1,600,000)

Component 1. Development and

deployment of key RE-rural

livelihood application packages

(GEF grant $2,719,949)

The ProDoc Component 1 scope and budget is

now the major project activity in the ProDoc.

The ProDoc Component 1 includes, in a

suitably modified fashion, the PIF Outcome 3.1

activities.

The PIF Component 1 activities have been

reduced in scope and budget and the remaining

activities, in a suitably modified fashion, are

now included in the ProDoc Component 4.

A strong feedback received from the

stakeholder meetings to focus the project more

tightly, the problem that the project seeks to

address has been narrowed down from enhanced

energy access to both domestic and livelihoods

applications to just focusing on promoting the

enhanced use of RE for specific rural

livelihoods applications as mentioned above.

Some of the RE-rural livelihoods packages have

been tested and are commercially available;

however, several of them are at a concept and

demonstration stage.

Further, in the ProDoc, the activities that will

bring about the deployment of RE-rural

livelihood application packages have been

placed in Component 1 - as these now make up

the core of the project. The key focus now is on

the development and deployment of selected RE

– rural livelihoods packages.

Outcome 1.1. Improved

enabling environment

that spur and enhance

interest among

technology developers,

investors and service

enterprises in investing

on energy access

initiatives

Expected Outputs:

1.1.1. Developed and

approved State Action

Plan for Access to Clean

Energy (SAPACE) in a

Outcome 1: Deployment of RE-

rural livelihood application

packages

Output 1.1. At least ten (10) cost-

effective RE technology packages

developed for rural livelihood

(RETPRL) applications and

established technical

specifications

Output 1.2 Demonstrated and

documented RE – rural livelihood

application packages in 15

The revised Component 1 now consist of

interventions focusing on first developing

suitable REPTRL packages, and then on

deploying the RETPRL packages, which can be

closely linked with PIF Output 3.1.3. None of

the other PIF level Outputs are directly

comparable to the ProDoc outputs under this

component. The Component 1 outputs are

therefore largely new outputs (compared to the

PIF stage) resulted from extensive consultations

during PPG phase that set project emphasis on

developing and deploying suitable RETPRL

packages.


11



maximum of five states

1.1.2. Approved and

implemented access to

clean and modern energy

plans in at least three

districts, and 4 villages

per state

1.1.3. Prepared business

proposals by appropriate

rural energy technology

suppliers and service

enterprises

1.1.4. Completed

financial viability

assessments of the

prepared proposals

1.1.5. Established

enterprises that produce

rural energy technologies

and provide energy

services as per the local

energy needs

Outcome 1.2. Availability

of financing options for

enterprises that provides

access to clean energy

and promote productive

applications

Outputs

1.2 1. Designed financial

schemes that are output

based for enterprises that

provide access to clean

energy and promote

productive applications

1.2.2. Established

agreements with

financing institutions

(lead banks, IREDA,

SIDBI, NABARD, etc.),

micro financing

institutions to invest in

access to clean and

modern energy


clusters and benefitting 1,500


Output 1.3 Completed training

programmes and training of

trainers activities for replication

and scale up of RE – rural


Output 1.4 Completed promotion

of replicated and documented RE

– rural livelihood application

packages to other districts / states

and applied to 28,500 household

enterprises


12



financial support for

community and

household productive use

projects

Outputs

1.3.1. Completed

financial viability

assessments of the

developed applicable

technology packages

1.3.2. Identified financing

institutions that can

provide financing for the

end-users such as (a)

loans, (b) micro-

finance/micro-credit etc.

1.3.3. Funded productive

use of energy initiatives

at community level and

household level through

financing such as (a)

retailer financing, and,

(b) smart subsidies

(production based

incentives)

Outcome 1.4. Increased

access to finance for rural

enterprise development

Outputs

1.4.1. Prepared business

proposals by selected

rural enterprises

1.4.2. Completed

financial viability

assessments of the

prepared rural enterprise

proposals for productive

applications of energy

1.4.3. Installed energy

systems in established

rural enterprises that

make use of the energy

services

Component 2. Policy and

institutional support for

the promotion of access

Component 2: Supply chain for

RE technology supply and service

The Policy and Institutional support focus of the

PIF Component 2 has now been transferred to

the ProDoc Component 3.


13



to modern and clean

energy services (GEF

grant $350,000)

providers for enhancing rural

livelihoods (GEF grant $301,000)


refocused and reduced in scope and budget in

the absence of GEAC and with the ProDoc now

no longer focusing on district-level committees

to achieve project results. The other PIF

Component 2 activities, in a modified fashion,

are now included in the ProDoc Component 3.

The ProDoc has placed the enhanced supply

chain for RE suppliers as the 2nd Component in

numerical order as it is a logical progression

that once RETPRLs are developed, then and

only then can RE technology supply and service

providers be supported in the deployment of the

RETPRL packages.

Outcome 2.1. Energy

access efforts are

coordinated at the

national/central level

Outputs

2.1.1. Established

collaboration with

Integrated Rural Energy

Programme (IREP)

training centers, other

institutions (IISc, IITs,

Technical Back Up units

(TBUs), ITIs), private

sector and NGOs through

GEAC which function as

one-stop-service

provider.

Outcome 2.2. Energy

access projects are

implemented in line with

the institutionalized Rural

Electrification Policy

Outputs

2.2.1. Institutionalized

and enforced

implementation of

Decentralized Distributed

Generation (DDG)

scheme and Remote

Outcome 2: Increased supply of

RE technology and service

providers for rural livelihood

applications

Output 2.1: Business development

aspects supported for 100 RE

technology supply and service

providers for rural livelihoods

applications

The ProDoc Outcome 2.1 and its Output 2.1.1

replaces the PIF Outcome 3.2 and the PIF

Outputs 1.4.1 and 1.4.2


14



Village Electrification

(RVE) programme

through GEAC

2.2.2. Developed plans by

the district-level

committees involving

local communities /

vulnerable groups at sub-

national / district level

Outcome 2.3. Wider

availability of quality

modern and clean energy

technologies and services

for rural communities

Outputs

2.3.1. Improved and

expanded standards for

the modern and clean

energy technologies

2.3.2. Established testing

facilities to test the

performance of modern

and clean energy

technologies in at least 5

locations;

2.3.3. Established

certification process and

certified enterprises that

provide quality modern

and clean energy


in rural communities.

Component 3. Scale up

and replicate access to

clean and modern energy

services in unserved and

underserved regions

(GEF grant $1,400,000)

Component 3: Policy and

regulatory support for RE - rural

livelihood applications (GEF

grant $312,800)

The ProDoc Component 3 covers some of the

activities of the PIF Component 2 Policy and

Institutional support focus.

The main change from the PIF is the baseline

MNRE activity to set up an inter-ministerial

Global Energy Access Centre (GEAC), which

will not happen. So, the inter-Ministerial

coordination role envisaged by GEAC need to

be taken out and adjusted. Therefore, The PIF

Component 3 activities have been refocused and

reduced in scope and budget as clean and

modern energy access plans are now no longer

being developed or implemented in the ProDoc


15



approach. The PIF Component 3 residual

activities, in a modified fashion, are now

included in the ProDoc Component 1.

The ProDoc has placed policy and regulatory

support as the 3rd Component in numerical order

and allocated a smaller GEF funding budget

than in the PIF stage. This change is again

mainly attributed to GEAC. As GEAC will not

be established in India, during PPG phase it was

decided that the project focus specifically on

NRLM and SRLM to influence their mission

statements and policies.


flow of investments in

energy access projects

through increased number

of rural energy

technology enterprises

and service providers

Outputs

3.1.1. Implemented clean

and modern energy

access plans involving

energy technology

enterprises serving un-

served and underserved

regions and individual

households

3.1.2. Clustered dispersed

markets for energy

service delivery by

energy technology

enterprises and service

providers

3.1.3. Implemented

technology packages in

30 un-served villages and

30 underserved villages

at the individual

household, and

community levels that

linked modern and clean

energy services with

productive applications


Outcome 3.1: Inclusion of RE

application in national and state

level rural livelihoods policies for

key livelihood sectors, such as,

poultry, horticulture, fisheries,

dairies, Khadi and village

industries

Output 3.1.1 National and State

level rural livelihoods mission

statements / documents

emphasizing the use of RE

Output 3.1.2 National and State

level policies that support the use

of RE for key rural livelihoods

sectors

Output 3.1.3 Shared experiences

and lessons at suitable regional

and international fora for RE and

rural livelihoods

Outcome 3.2: Future MNRE

programs also cater to actions

towards enhanced RE utilization

in rural livelihoods

Output 3.2.1: Developed MNRE-

supported programme for

enhanced RE utilization in rural

livelihoods

Outcome 3.3: Improved tariff

and grid interconnection

regulations for decentralized RE

At the PIF-stage, it was assumed that there will

be an emphasis on GEAC which will be able to

coordinate on the policy and institutional

support structure. Now it is clear that GEAC

will not be established in India. Therefore the

ProDoc now includes a more tightly focused set

of outputs and outcomes that can be more

assuredly delivered by the project than at the

PIF stage, that will work towards RE being

specifically mentioned in relevant central and

state rural livelihood mission statements and

policies, and that the development of a specific

new MNRE RE and rural livelihoods

programme is supported.


16



number of energy access

service providers

Outputs

3.2.1. 500 trained

entrepreneurs under

entrepreneurship

development programs

3.2.2 RESCOs (25 nos.)

and ESDEs (35 nos.) that

were assisted to provide

access to clean and

modern energy solutions

Output 3.3.1: Completed roadmap

and workshops for supporting

improved tariff structures for

small scale captive and off-grid

RE

Output 3.3.2: Developed and

implemented regulatory, technical

and tariff guidelines for RE based

captive/decentralized systems’

grid interconnection

Component 4. Awareness

and institutional capacity

development (GEF grant

$676,849)

Component 4: Financial support

for decentralized RE - rural

livelihood applications (GEF

grant $483,600)

The ProDoc Component 4 covers the

identification and improvement of available RE

and rural livelihoods subsidies and supports, the

development and support of the enhanced

pooling of available subsidies and supports, and

the development of improved risk mitigation

mechanisms.

The district level committee awareness and

institutional capacity focus of the PIF

Component 4, and its Outcome 4.1 has not been

carried over in the ProDoc as the district

committee focus is no longer viable due to the

absence of GEAC. This institutional structure

was anticipated under GEAC at subnational

level. Therefore, it was revised in the ProDoc

design to Cluster Level Implementation

Agencies (CLIAs) which are expected to work

at the district level in promoting rural

livelihoods and CLIA act as a main

implementation partner. The knowledge

products of the PIF Outcome 4.2 are now

captured by the documentation aspects of the

various Outputs in the ProDoc, as well as the

Output 3.1.3 Knowledge transfer supported at

suitable regional and international fora for RE

and rural livelihoods.


refocused and reduced in scope and budget in

the ProDoc.

The ProDoc has placed the financial support for

decentralized RE - rural livelihood applications

as the 4th Component in numerical order as it is

Outcome 4.1.

Strengthened institutional

capacities at various

levels on the

implementation of energy

access projects

Outputs

4.1.1. Established and

operational district-level

committees under local

administration for

implementing energy

access projects (gender

balanced as well as equal

role for vulnerable

groups) in pilot districts

of five states

4.1.2. Trained members

of district-level

committees capable of

involving local

communities in the

planning and designing


4.1.3. Trained member of

district-level committees

on the evaluation and

selection of appropriate

modern and clean energy


Outcome 4.1: Improved

decentralized RE subsidies and

supports for rural livelihoods

Output 4.1.1: Assessed RE

subsidy and support models

assessed for increased

effectiveness of decentralized RE

Output 4.1.2: Improved RE

subsidy and support models for

increased effectiveness of

decentralized RE for rural

livelihoods funding

Outcome 4.2: Enhanced provision

of financial support for

decentralized RE in rural

livelihoods applications

Output 4.2.1: Implemented

financial support packages for RE

technology – rural livelihoods

applications

Output 4.2.2: Pooled available

financial resources for supporting

viable livelihood business models

and enhanced market linkages


17




accessibility of

information and enhanced

understanding and

knowledge about clean

and modern energy

services and technologies

in the rural communities

Outputs

4.2.1. Developed and

published knowledge

products (guidance

manual, toolkit etc.) for

specific target groups to

design and implement


4.2.2. Disseminated

knowledge products

informing about local

availability of modern

energy services,

technologies and

available financing

options


investment risk mitigation for


livelihoods applications

Output 4.3.1: Enhanced risk

mitigation mechanisms designed

and supported for RE enterprises

and RE technology adopters /

end-users in rural livelihoods

applications

a logical progression from the ProDoc’s

Component 3: Policy and regulatory support for

RE - rural livelihood applications.

The GEF budget for financial support activities

in the ProDoc is greatly reduced from the PIF

investment financing’s Component 1 – as the

ProDoc stage found that considerable RE and

rural livelihoods subsidies and grants were

available and that a reduced budget for financial

support would be adequate to support the

renewed focus on mobilizing and pooling

existing subsides and supports, and facilitating

risk mitigation approaches such as partial risk

guarantees.

A. 5. Incremental /Additional cost reasoning: describe the incremental (GEF Trust Fund/NPIF) or

additional (LDCF/SCCF) activities requested for GEF/LDCF/SCCF/NPIF financing and the

associated global environmental benefits (GEF Trust Fund) or associated adaptation benefits

(LDCF/SCCF) to be delivered by the project:

The UNDP/MNRE India GEF ACE project has been designed as an integrated and suitably co-funded

series of components and activities to remove the multiple barriers facing the widespread adoption of

key RE for rural livelihoods application in three specific states (Assam, Madhya Pradesh and Odissa)

in India, with a possible extension into the neighboring states of Jharkhand and Meghalaya. A specific

new MNRE RE for rural livelihoods programme, and the enhanced utilization of applicable existing

central and state level RE programmes and interventions will support the project. The project will also

be supported by central and a state level rural livelihoods programmes, and will also be supported by

appropriate NGOs, financial institutions, industrial companies, and academic institutions.

In the absence of the project’s interventions: the market of RE for rural livelihoods will be subject to

continued ad-hoc and hence inefficient central and state government funding for RE for rural

livelihoods applications; and it will continue to be difficult for RE technology and service providers,

and also for household enterprises, to access and pool the myriad ad-hoc central and state government

RE and rural livelihoods capital grants and other supports that are available. Key RE technology and

rural livelihoods application packages will remain poorly specified in terms of their performance and



http://www.thegef.org/gef/sites/thegef.org/files/documents/CPE-Global_Environmental_Benefits_Assessment_Outline.pdf


18

there will continue to be a lack of quality compliance testing. There will continue to be an inadequate

number and limited capacity of RE technology and service providers. There will also continue to be

significant constraints for RE for rural livelihoods providers in setting suitable tariffs and in accessing

the electricity grid to export any surplus RE generated electricity.

The GEF contribution of USD 4,006,849 will result in direct GHG emission reductions of 69,115

tonnes CO2 from the 1,500 demonstrations and 28,500 replication RE – rural livelihoods projects

implemented during the 5-year lifetime of the project. Assuming an average economic lifetime of the

RE systems (used to support rural livelihoods) as 10 years, the cumulative direct emission reduction

will be 662,742 tonnes CO2. The indirect emission reductions that can be attributed to the India ACE

project are in the range of 1,262,366 – 1,325,485 tonnes of CO2 equivalent. If the GEF contribution

(USD 4,006,849) is divided by the direct emission reductions, this gives a corresponding GEF GHG

unit abatement cost (UAC) (i.e. GEF$ per tCO2) of USD 6.05 US$/tonne CO2.

The availability of ten (10) well developed and integrated RE – rural livelihoods application packages

in a range of key rural livelihoods sectors will form the basis for a further scaling up of RE for rural

livelihoods projects post project-end.

A.6 Risks, including climate change, potential social and environmental risks that might prevent

the project objectives from being achieved, and measures that address these risks: The main

risks and the mitigating actions of the proposed project are described in the table below:

Risk9 Level of

Risk Mitigating Actions

The multiple key central and state level

rural energy and rural livelihoods

capital subsidies do not remain fully

available during the project’s

implementation period.

M The use of multiple subsidies reduces the project

risks arising from changes to any single subsidy.

The use of beneficiary equity investments and bank

or microfinance loans also reduces the project risk

from any changes to individual subsidy levels or

eligibility rules.

The Demonstration, Replication and

Scale-Up RE - rural livelihoods projects

are not able to pool and/or access the

available capital subsidies in a timely

fashion without excessive transaction

costs and/or time delays.

M A high-level Project Steering Committee (PSC)

project oversight and governance focused meeting

will be held at least once a year in Delhi. A Project

Executive Committee (PEC) meeting comprising all

major project stakeholders will be held four times a

year on a rotational basis in the 3 applicable project

states and in Delhi. Site visits will be held back-to-

back with state level PEC meetings to highlight

project successes and challenges. The PSC and PEC

structures will together facilitate the necessary

ongoing high-level ownership of the project to

facilitate ongoing access to available capital

subsidies. In addition, strong project engagement

and ownership will already start in 2014 with the

initial UNDP-MNRE Core ACE project’s pilot

phase activities. To ensure that both RE and rural

livelihoods capital subsidies are fully considered

and mobilized, the PMU and CLIs/CSUs will

contain equal level staff from both the RE and

9 Applicable to 2019/20 end of GEF funded 5-year FSP (Full Scale Project)


19

Risk9 Level of


livelihood sides to ensure that both sources of

subsidies are equally considered in the project’s

implementation.

The duration, scope and/or funding of

key National or State Rural livelihoods

‘Missions’ like NRLM, horticulture, or

fisheries are significantly curtailed

during the project’s implementation

period.

L The project will work with basic livelihood focused

missions that are highly likely to have durable

mandates and funding into the future.

Decentralized Renewable Energy

(DRE) does not remain an important

item on the relevant central or state

political agendas.

L The scale of the electricity supply deficit, and the

inarguable paramount importance of the rural

livelihoods sector in India for rural employment, is

highly likely to ensure that there will be a suitable

ongoing central and local commitment to

decentralize rural RE.

Grid electricity supply is significantly

extended and/or the reliability of rural

grid electricity supply improves

significantly in the project period in the

applicable states and districts.

M While India has made strong progress with

extending grid electricity to an increasing number

of villages in rural India, the underpricing of this

rural grid electricity for populist political gain, the

size of the electricity supply sector’s accumulated

past financial debts, and the size of the electricity

sector’s ongoing supply and financial deficits are

such that reliable 24/7 local grid electricity is highly

unlikely to be available for rural livelihood

applications in all relevant districts of the 3

applicable states during the project’s duration.

The price of grid electricity in

applicable districts goes down

significantly.

L The price of grid electricity for rural livelihood uses

can hardly go down significantly, as in many cases

it is already sold at very low tariffs or the grid

electricity for rural likelihoods is not even metered

at all.

The world price of diesel goes down

significantly and/or subsidies on diesel

significantly increase in India

L As in the 2008 GFC, even a strong global financial

crisis is unlikely to lead to sustained lower world

crude oil prices as lower oil prices would lead

directly to a lower global new oil field development

rate and hence would be quickly self-correcting as

occurred in 2009. An increase in diesel subsidies in

India is unlikely as here is a strong political

consensus and momentum towards reducing the

remaining diesel subsidies in India.

The many relevant Central Government

Ministries do not cooperate and/or do

not remain engaged for the project

period through changes in Central

Government, Ministers and bureaucrats

(institutional risk).

H The project will: establish a strong Central-level

PSC and a strong Central/State-level PEC; hold

frequent (annual PSC and quarterly PEC) meetings

that involve key ministries; and engage and retain

the strong interest and ownership of suitable high

level champions in key central Ministries, in

particular MNRE, NRLM, and in Ministries

covering key rural livelihoods.


20

Risk9 Level of


The many relevant State, Local and

District level agencies do not co-operate

and do not remain engaged for the

project period through changes in State

Governments, Ministers and bureaucrats

(institutional risk).

H The quarterly PEC meetings will be rotated around

the applicable states to ensure that each state hosts

at least one PEC meeting a year for ongoing local

project engagement and ownership.

The project is not able to mobilize a

minimum level (20%) of equity

financing from beneficiaries to ensure

strong enough ownership and hence

ensure the sustained the use of the

project supported or influenced RE –

rural livelihoods applications.

M The project’s RE - rural livelihoods applications

will focus on livelihoods sectors with well-

established existing commercial sales channels to

maximize the chances of obtaining the necessary

beneficiary equity financing.

The project is not able to mobilize the

necessary 30-50% debt financing from

banks or microfinance institutions for

the replication and scale up projects in

the relevant RE – rural livelihoods

applications.

M The project’s RE – rural livelihoods applications

will be targeted at RE suppliers and rural

livelihoods users with strong existing commercial

business models that utilize established marketing

and commercial sales channels - to maximize the

chances of obtaining the necessary debt financing.

The project is not able to mobilize

grants from other (e.g. CSR) sources.

L The project will utilize where available, but not rely

on, CSR funding.

Major adverse economic conditions

force up interest rates and/or curtail

bank lending for a significant period

during the project’s implementation.

L The Indian economy has strong internal growth

drivers and has a low risk of significant

domestically led major adverse economic

conditions. The Indian economy is significantly

nationally self-contained and is only weakly linked

to potential international financial crises and events.

Development of RE – rural livelihood applications

is therefore not greatly at risk of major interest rate

rises or significant bank lending restrictions.

Prices of relevant rural livelihoods

sector10 outputs collapse and stay down

for a significant period during the

project’s implementation.

M The project’s rural livelihoods sectors cater to basic

needs of domestic food supply and nutrition and

hence demand and prices have a low risk of

sustained major reductions.

Market linkages of the relevant

livelihoods sector outputs are weaker

than anticipated.

M The project will focus on rural livelihoods sectors

that have well-established and strong existing

market linkages.

Relevant RE – rural livelihoods projects

are successfully demonstrated but then

do not get replicated by a scale of ten

and do not then get further increased by

a further factor of ten at the scale up

stage.

M The project will take a strongly pro-active approach

to publicizing demo project results and to actively

supporting subsequent replication projects with

suitable project information and support activities.

The scale up phase will be closely monitored will

be actively supported.

There is a significantly slow start to on-

the-ground project activities.

H In 2014 a RE-Rural Livelihoods PMU will be

established in MNRE and local CLIs will be

recruited under the already approved and already

10 E.g. fresh or dried fish, tomatoes, raw milk, eggs, chicken, khadi, etc.


21

Risk9 Level of


funded UNDP-MNRE ACE Core Project. This will

ensure that once all the necessary UNDP-MNRE

GEF project approvals are obtained that the project

can then be implemented with the least possible

delays.

Significant RE supply chain weaknesses

arise during the project’s

implementation phase.

L Most of the RE technology packages are either

proven plug-and-play RE technologies or are only

modest risk rural application extensions of

conventional RE technologies.

There is significant risk of RE

technology underperformance or failure

in project activities (technical risk).

L The project’s mix of RE – rural livelihood

technology packages is carefully balanced between

well proven RE- rural livelihoods applications and

the extension of proven RE technologies into new

rural livelihoods applications.

There is a lack of necessary leadership

and slow decision making in the

project’s implementation.

M A detailed Project Operations Manual has already

been developed to define key accountabilities,

management responsibilities, and operational

procedures for all levels of the project’s

implementation. A strong PSC and PEC structure

will be established and will be given strong support

to ensure the ongoing effectiveness and efficiency

in the project’s implementation.

Users lose interest in decentralized RE

solutions.

L The project will focus on using only well-

established RE technologies and to locations where

there are clear links to already well-established

rural livelihoods. Geographical locations have

already been chosen for project implementation that

have significant underserved or unserved areas for

grid electricity supply where diesel captive power

or LPG would be the only reliable energy

alternative for the applicable rural livelihoods

energy end uses.

A.7. Coordination with other relevant GEF financed initiatives The proposed project has already been sufficiently redesigned taking into account the results, experiences

and lessons learnt from the past projects and the features and elements of on-going projects. The proposed

GEF project aims to provide energy access to underserved and un-served villages through clean energy

sources which is one of the mandates of National Action Plan on Climate Change (NAPCC). The NAPCC

encourages planning and coordination at different levels, especially state (sub-national) level. All

states and Union Territories11 of India are preparing their State Level Action Plans on Climate Change

(SAPCCs), which define state-level objectives and strategies that are aligned with the objectives of the

NAPCC. UNDP with support from GEF is currently developing “Market Transformation and Removal

of Barriers for Effective Implementation of the State-Level Climate Change Action Plans” project that

will facilitate the implementation of climate change mitigation actions stated in the SAPCCs and

maximize the benefits through exploring inter-state cooperation; showcase the actual implementation

of SAPCCs; demonstrate institutional mechanisms for inter-state networking and cross-learning,

11 India has 28 States and 7 Union Territories.


22

including information sharing and technology dissemination; and develop and implement a common

monitoring system to assess progress on the SAPCCs in the select states.

Another relevant ongoing GEF project is “Removal of Barriers for Biomass Power” (also called biomass

power project) are relevant to this proposed project. The Biomass power project has identified the necessity

of establishing biomass supply linkages to ensure good PLF [Plant Load Factor] and supported such fuel

linkage mechanism. There are some interesting ongoing initiatives under this project to combine energy

systems with productive applications of energy, and mini-grid support for domestic applications through

biomass power.

The World Bank initiative on decentralized off-grid energy access, which was council approved in 2013

focuses of decentralized off-grid energy solutions in the states of Uttar Pradesh and Bihar. This project is

currently in the design phase, but a close coordination with the World Bank will be maintained to ensure

complementarity of interventions and avoid duplication of efforts.

Apart from GEF projects, UNDP TRAC funding is being used to develop rural market promotion of

renewable energy; and few energy interventions on gap funding mode. UNDP-MNRE Access to Clean

Energy (ACE) is a US$ 2.4 million project, where $0.8 million will be provided from UNDP core

funding sources. The UNDP-MNRE ACE project will establish: the PSC (Project Steering

Committee); the PEC (Project Executive Committee) and UNDP-MNRE implementation

arrangements; the project’s PMU (Project Management Unit); suitable CLIA’s (Cluster Level

Implementing Agencies); and will enable early development of some of the RE – Rural Livelihoods

applications. The India UNDP-MNRE ACE project will integrate with the India GEF ACE project at

its time of inception, and the UNDP-MNRE ACE project implementation arrangements will then

transition into the GEF ACE project.

B. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION NOT ADDRESSED AT PIF STAGE:

B.1 Describe how the stakeholders will be engaged in project implementation.

The strong participation of a large number of stakeholders from central government, state governments,

NGOs, financial institutions, industry, and academic institutions, international organizations and

financial institutions is required for the project’s interventions in the RE and rural livelihoods

application area in India to be successful. A brief description and proposed role of the project’s key

stakeholders is presented in the Table as below.

Stakeholder Role12

Government – Central Level

Ministry of New and

Renewable Energy

(MNRE)

MNRE is responsible for framing policy and implementing programmes for the

development and promotion of new and renewable energy technologies in India.

MNRE serves as the main client (Implementing Partner) in this project. MNRE

will provide the strategic steering for the project, oversee the accomplishment of

project objectives and tasks, lead co-funding requirements, initiate policy

actions on its own and through other departments, and facilitate coordination

with other key stakeholders including the Ministry of Rural Development (for

NRLM), Ministry of Agriculture (for relevant agricultural sector Missions),

Ministry of Power (for decentralized RE tariffs and grid interconnection), etc.

Ministry of

Environment and

Forests (MoEF)

MoEF is the GEF focal point for GEF projects in India and thus will liaise with

GEF and provide overall coordination of the project.

12 This column describes the role of the stakeholder in implementation of this proposed project.


23

Ministry of

Agriculture (MoA)

MoA is the administrative ministry for several govt. agencies/missions

including: Department of Agriculture and Cooperation; Department of Animal

Husbandry, Dairying and Fisheries; National Horticulture Mission; etc. which

cover a wide spectrum of agriculture, horticulture, dairy, fisheries and animal

husbandry livelihoods. These subordinate departments/missions have the

mandate for formulation and implementation of policies/schemes for their

corresponding livelihoods sectors. MoA will be a member of the Project

Steering Committee (PSC) and in particular will be responsible for facilitating

and maintaining coordination linkages with its relevant programmes and support

schemes.

Ministry of Rural

Development

(MoRD)

MoRD is involved in improving the socio-economic status of rural areas through

various development and welfare activities. It will be a member of the PSC and

will support the project through facilitating coordination with relevant rural

development schemes/agencies.

National Rural

Livelihood Mission

(NRLM)

NRLM, a mission launched by MoRD, aims at creating efficient and effective

institutional platforms of the rural poor enabling them to increase their

household incomes through sustainable livelihood enhancements and improved

access to financial services. NRLM will be a member of the Project Executive

Committee (PEC) and will provide crucial linkages with the relevant livelihoods

sectors and local communities.

Khadi and Village

Industry Commission

(KVIC)

KVIC is a statutory government body under the Ministry of Micro, Small and

Medium Enterprises. It has the mandate for planning and implementing

programmes for the development of khadi (homespun garments) and other

village industries in rural areas. KVIC will be a project co-financing partner and

will be a member of the PSC.

Rural Electrification

Corporation (REC)

Limited

REC has a mandate for the promotion and financing of the electrification of

rural areas. It is also a nodal agency designated by the Ministry of Power for the

implementation of the Rajiv Gandhi Grameen Vidyutikaran Yojana (RGGVY),

a scheme to electrify all un-electrified villages / habitations and to provide

access to electricity to all rural households in un-electrified and electrified

villages in India. REC will be consulted on project issues related to rural

electrification aspects.

Ministry of Power

(MoP)

MOP closely works with REC in meeting its targets under the RGGVY. MOP

will be a member of the PSC and will be responsible to facilitate close

coordination and to avoid duplication of efforts when it comes to rural

electrification.

Government – State Level

State Nodal Agencies

(SNAs) for renewable

energy

The SNA’s are the state level agencies for the promotion of renewable energy

and will have a role in the MNRE subsidy disbursement component for the

various renewable energy technologies.

State Departments for

Rural Development

The State Departments for Rural Development are the key state level rural

livelihoods agencies, which are also involved in the implementation of the

central government schemes/programmes related to rural development in their

state. They also formulate and implement state specific schemes on rural

development. They will be important stakeholders in the scaling-up of the

renewable energy interventions for rural livelihoods applications in the three

states.

State Rural

Livelihood Missions

The State Rural Livelihood Missions are the implementing arms of NRLM in

the respective states. They will be important stakeholders in the scaling-up of

the renewable energy interventions for productive applications in the three

states.

State Departments for

Agriculture/

These state level Departments have the mandate for the implementation of

central government schemes and programmes in the respective sectors of their


24

Horticulture/ Animal

Husbandry/ Dairy/

Fisheries

states. These Departments also formulate and implement independent state level

programmes. They will be approached for the integration of renewable energy

in their on-going programmes and in accessing additional subsidies/assistance

available under their programmes.

State Electricity

Regulatory

Commissions

(SERCs)

The SERCs have the responsibility for determining electricity tariffs and for

regulating power purchase and procurement processes within their state. SERCs

will be key project partners as it is expected that tariff structures for off-grid

electricity generation would ideally be updated through project activities. The

SERCs are responsible for the guidelines for off-grid as well as small-scale on-

grid solutions.

Financial Institutions

Indian Renewable

Energy Development

Agency (IREDA)

IREDA is a Government Public Limited Company established in 1987 that

operates under the administrative control of MNRE. IREDA’s role is to

promote, develop and extend financial assistance for renewable energy and

energy efficiency/conservation projects in India. IREDA will be a member of

the Project Steering Committee (PSC) and is expected to play an important role

in making finance available for the scaling-up of project interventions.

National Bank for

Agriculture and

Development

(NABARD)

NABARD is an apex development bank in India. The mission of NABARD is to

promote sustainable and equitable agriculture and rural prosperity through

effective credit support, related services, institutional development and other

innovative initiatives. NABARD is expected to play an important role in

providing credit support to the rural livelihood beneficiaries and to the

renewable energy enterprises.

YES Bank YES Bank is a private sector commercial bank in India, which is also involved

in providing credit for livelihood activities. YES Bank can play an important

role in providing credit support to the rural livelihood beneficiaries and to the

renewable energy enterprises.

Grameen/Regional

Rural Banks (RRBs)

and micro finance

institutions

Grameen/Regional Rural Banks (RRBs) and micro finance institutions are

expected to play an important role in providing credit support to the

beneficiaries and renewable energy enterprises.

Corporate Organizations for CSR (Corporate Social Responsibility)

National Thermal

Power Corporation

(NTPC)

NTPC is a public sector enterprise, which has significant operations in Madhya

Pradesh and Odisha. It will be approached to provide support in the

implementation of the pilot projects and for scaling-up activities, by contributing

CSR funds and technical expertise.

National Aluminium

Company Ltd.

(NALCO)

NALCO is a public sector enterprise, which has significant operations in

Odisha. NALCO will be approached to assist in the implementation of the pilot

projects and in the scaling-up phase by contributing CSR funds and technical

expertise.

Oil and Natural Gas

Corporation Ltd.

(ONGC)

ONGC is a public sector enterprise that has significant operations in Assam. It

can be involved in implementation of the pilot projects and scaling-up by

contributing CSR funds and technical expertise.

Private sector enterprises involved in developing / delivering specific renewable energy solutions

Bayer Material

Science

Bayer Material Science, under its Social Business Initiative is involved in the

promotion of cold rooms and solar dryers, which are key project rural livelihood

application areas. These technologies are proposed as part of the technology

packages to be implemented in the project.

Promethean Power

Systems

Promethean Power Systems designs and manufactures rural refrigeration

systems for commercial cold-storage applications in both non-electrified and in

partially electrified areas. The technology (based on a thermal battery concept)

is enabling milk producers to reliably store and preserve milk. This concept can


25

also be used for the cool storage of fruits and vegetables. The thermal battery

concept is part of the technology packages proposed in the project.

Science for Society

(S4S)

Science for Society (S4S) is a research and innovation based enterprise, which

has developed a low cost solar conduction dryer for individual use for the drying

of agro products. The S4S dryers could be part of the technology packages to be

implemented in the project.

Claro Energy Pvt Ltd Claro Energy is a small energy service provider company formed in 2011 that

offers solar powered water pumping solutions to meet the irrigation water needs

of rural farmers in power‐deficit regions in India. Claro’s solar water pumping

systems could be part of the technology packages to be implemented by the

project in rural regions of India.

Jain Irrigation

Systems Ltd

Jain Irrigation Systems Ltd (JISL) is a multinational organization based in

Jalgaon, Maharashtra, India with over 9,000 employees and 28 manufacturing

plants. JISL manufactures a number of products, including drip and sprinkler

irrigation systems and components, integrated irrigation automation systems,

PVC and PE piping systems, plastic sheets, greenhouses, bio-fertilizers, solar

water-heating systems, biogas plant on turnkey basis, wind hybrid energy and

photovoltaic system. JISL’s solar water pumping systems could be part of the

technology packages to be implemented by the project in rural regions of India.

Shakti Pumps Shakti Pumps is a leading pump manufacturer in India and is also a

manufacturer of Solar PV pumps. Solar PV pumps from Shakti Pumps could be

part of the technology package.

Perfect Gas

Generators Pvt Ltd

Perfect Gas Generators Pvt Ltd is a specialist manufacturer of biogas engines

and also undertakes turnkey installation of biogas power generation systems in

poultry farms and dairies. They could be one of the biogas systems technology

providers.

Jay Khodiyar

Machine Tools

Jay Khodiyar Machine Tools is one of the manufacturers of biomass briquetting

machines in India. They could be one of the technology providers for the

briquetting systems.

Infinite Energy Pvt

Ltd

Infinite Energy Pvt Ltd is one of the manufacturers of biomass briquetting

machines and biomass gasifiers in India. They could be one of the technology

providers for the biomass briquetting and biomass gasifier systems.

Radhe Engineering

Company & Radhe

Renewable Energy

Development Pvt Ltd

The two companies belonging to the same group are manufacturers of biomass

briquetting machines and biomass gasifiers in India. They could be one of the

technology providers for the biomass briquetting and biomass gasifier systems.

SELCO Solar Pvt.

Ltd

SELCO Solar Pvt. Ltd, a social enterprise that provides sustainable energy

solutions and services to under-served households and businesses. They could

be one of the technology providers for solar PV solutions in the project.

Cold Chain Solutions Cold Chain Solutions are involved in setting-up of cold rooms for post-harvest

management in Odisha. They could be one of the solution providers for the

Solar based cold room applications.

Planters Energy

Network (PEN)

Planters Energy Network (PEN) provides solar-based dryers for processing of

fruits, fish, vegetables, spices, etc. They could be one of the solution providers

for the Solar drying solutions.

NRG Technologies

Pvt Ltd

NRG provides solar drying and solar hot air generation systems for drying of

fruits & vegetables, fish, mushrooms, spirulena, etc. They could be one of the

solution providers for the Solar drying solutions.

Sustaintech India

Private Limited

Sustaintech India Private Limited is a social enterprise, which manufactures and

sells sustainable energy products, primarily fuel-efficient commercial cook

stoves. They could be one of the solution providers for the commercial biomass

cooking stove solutions.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jalgaon

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Drip_irrigation

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irrigation_sprinkler

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irrigation

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PVC


26

Ecozen Solutions Ecozen Solutions has developed an innovative micro-cold storage product that is

powered by solar energy. They could be one of the solution providers for the

Solar based cold room solutions.

Ankur Scientific

Energy Technologies

Pvt Ltd

Ankur Scientific Energy Technologies Pvt Ltd are one of the leading

manufacturers of biomass gasifier systems in India. They could be one of the

technology providers for biomass gasifier systems

Fosera Solar systems

GmbH & Co.

Fosera Solar systems GmbH & Co is a manufacturer of pico solar lighting

solutions. They could be one of the technology providers for solar lighting

solutions.

Supernova

Technologies Pvt Ltd

Supernova Technologies Pvt Ltd has developed mobile solar energy based

aeration system as well as wind-solar aeration system to be used for the aeration

of fisheries ponds. They could be one of the solution providers for the renewable

energy based aeration systems for fisheries.

Sun Edison They are a large manufacturing firm in solar solutions. They were the first

company to install the 1 MW canal top solar power plant in Mehsana, Gujarat.

They not only sell products, but are involved providing financing to dealers.

Hence, they may be useful partners in piloting innovative markets with solar

solutions.

Academic/Research Institutions:

IIT Guwahati, Assam The Department of Design and Rural Technology Action Group at IIT Guwahati

have been working on research and development of innovative technological

solutions and the improvement of existing technologies for rural livelihoods.

They are also providing training support to the rural enterprises. In the proposed

project, IIT Guwahati could assist in the performance assessment, development

of specifications, technological improvements and technical training for

RETPRLs.

Tezpur University,

Assam

The Department of Energy at Tezpur University is involved in research and

technology development and training work on various renewable energy

technologies. In the proposed project, Tezpur University could assist in the

performance assessment, development of specifications, technological

improvements and technical training for RETPRLs.

National Institute of

Science and

Technology (NIST),

Berhampur, Odisha

NIST is an academic institute and some of its faculty members are involved in

the development and implementation of innovative renewable energy solutions

and business models for rural enterprises. In the proposed project, NIST could

assist in the performance assessment, development of specifications,

technological improvements and technical training for RETPRLs.

The Energy and

Resources Institute

(TERI)

TERI is a not for profit research institute. The institute is involved in

development of renewable energy based technological solutions for

decentralized applications. In the proposed project, TERI could assist in the

performance assessment, development of specifications, technological

improvements and technical training for RETPRLs.

Entrepreneurship

Development

Institute of India

(EDI)

The Entrepreneurship Development Institute of India (EDI), an autonomous

body and not-for-profit institution. EDI runs regular academic programmes and

a variety of training programmes aimed at developing entrepreneurship. In the

proposed project, EDI could assist in Component 2 - i.e. in the development of

the supply chain for RE technology supply and service providers.

Mahatma Gandhi

Institute for Rural

Industrialization

(MGIRI)

MGIRI is an institute promoted by the Ministry of Micro Small and Medium

Enterprises (MSME). MGIRI is involved in developing new technologies for

rural entrepreneurs, enterprises and industries related to their products. In the

proposed project, MGIRI could assist in the performance assessment,

development of specifications, technological improvements and technical

training for RETPRLs

Civil Society Organizations/NGOs


27

Action for Food

Production (AFPRO)

AFPRO strives for the enhancement of livelihoods and the quality of life of the

rural poor and marginalized communities through the management of natural

resources (land, water and forests); with the main supported economic activities

revolving around agriculture, livestock, fishery and forestry. AFPRO is active in

Assam, Jharkhand, Madhya Pradesh and Odisha. AFPRO could be a potential

CLIA in the project

Rashtriya Gramin

Vikas Nidhi (RGVN)

RGVN is a national level multi-state development and support organization

working in the states of Assam, Jharkhand, Meghalaya and Odisha. RGVN aims

for the development of sustainable livelihoods of the rural poor with a priority

for women in the agri and allied sectors through financial, institution building

and capacity building support activities. RGVN could be a potential CLIA in the

project

Ajagar Social Circle Ajagar Social Circle is an initiative to bring about a change in the socio-

economic condition of the people of India’s north eastern region through

increasing livelihood opportunities and through providing social and economic

security. The organization, at present, is engaged in a number of farming, allied

and non-farming activities with communities living in the Assam-Meghalaya

belt. Ajagar Social Circle could be a potential CLIA in the project

Green Valley Forest

and Wildlife

Protection Society

(GVFWPS)

GVFWPS is primarily working with the communities in and around wildlife rich

areas of Assam. The majority of these communities are dependent on forest-

based livelihoods such as firewood and timber businesses. GVFWPS aims at

reducing human-animal conflict, saving flora and fauna and conserving natural

resources by providing alternative livelihoods and encouraging efficient use of

natural resources. GVFWPS could be a potential CLIA in the project

Bethany Society Bethany Society is a NGO based in the state of Meghalaya. The key areas of

their work include capacity building and livelihood enhancement, institution

building (development of SHGs) and improving access to finance with a special

focus on the disabled. Bethany Society could be a potential CLIA in the project

NB Institute for Rural

Technology (NBIRT)

NBIRT works for the development of rural communities through development,

promotion and implementation of innovative renewable energy technologies for

rural applications, training and development of human resources and creating

green jobs. NBIRT is based in Guwahati in Assam. NBIRT could be a potential

CLIA in the project

PRADAN PRADAN has significant and wide-ranging experience in promoting improved

livelihoods with the rural poor. The key areas of PRADAN’s work are forest-

based livelihoods, natural resource (land and water) management, livestock

development, promotion of SHGs and micro enterprises. PRADAN has an

active presence in Jharkhand, Madhya Pradesh and Odisha. PRADAN could be

a potential CLIA in the project. They could also be involved in training

activities.

Action for Social

Advancement (ASA)

ASA is working for the livelihood improvement of the rural poor mainly in the

agriculture and allied sector in the state of Madhya Pradesh. The main areas of

ASA’s work are land and water resource management, enhancement of

agriculture productivity, agribusiness promotion for small holders, and micro

credits for agriculture and research and training. ASA could be a potential CLIA

in the project.

Samaj Pragati

Sahayog (SPS)

SPS, a NGO based in Madhya Pradesh, is working towards the improvement of

the socio-economic conditions of the tribal and marginalized rural poor through

technical and financial support to the communities and policy advocacy. The

main sectors of their work are water resource management, agriculture, livestock

development and handicrafts. SPS could be a potential CLIA in the project.

Mahila Chetna

Manch (MCM)

MCM is an NGO with a focus towards the empowerment of women so as to

enable them to take a lead role in the social, economic and political spheres.


28

MCM is providing support to women and communities in establishing suitable

institutions (SHGs, cooperatives, producer companies, etc.), improved

institutional management, the development of livelihoods (in particular

agriculture, horticulture and dairy) and establishing forward and backward

linkages. MCM is based in Madhya Pradesh. MCM could be a potential CLIA

in the project

Centre for Advanced

Research and

Development

(CARD)

CARD has been established to promote action research and to apply its findings

for the protection and development of society and the environment. The focus

areas of their work are research studies, monitoring and evaluation of

development programmes, capacity building and policy advocacy. CARD could

be a potential CLIA in the project

ACCESS

Development

Services (ADS)

ADS is a national level livelihoods promotion organization with a focus on

incubating innovations and sustainable models for the livelihoods promotion of

the poor. It offers specialized technical assistance in the microfinance and

livelihoods areas. ADS have a significant presence in Madhya Pradesh and

Odisha. ADS could be a potential CLIA in the project

Rural Development

and Self Employment

Training Institute

(RUDSETI)

RUDSETI has been established to train, support and promote self-employment

entrepreneurial ventures in the field of rural development. RUDSETI offers

several entrepreneurship development programmes of 1-4 weeks duration in

agriculture, and in allied and non-farm based livelihood sectors. RUDSETI

could be a potential CLIA in the project

Agragamee Agragamee is working with the marginalized and underprivileged communities

in the tribal districts of Odisha. Agragamee are focusing on policy advocacy and

formulation of people centered development programmes, food security, water

resource management, and the development of women’s organization and

training programmes. Agragamee could be a potential CLIA in the project

Samvedna Samvedna, an NGO based in Odisha, is working for the fishing communities

and marginalized farmers. Samvedna are involved in the implementation of

various government programmes/schemes and in strengthening livelihoods

through providing technical support and access to finance. Samvedna could be a

potential CLIA in the project

Development

Alternatives

Development Alternatives (DA) is both a research and an action-oriented

organization, involved in designing and delivering eco-solutions for the poor

and the marginalized. Development Alternatives could be a potential CLIA in

the project. They could also be involved in training activities.

B.2 Describe the socioeconomic benefits to be delivered by the Project at the national and local

levels, including consideration of gender dimensions, and how these will support the achievement of

global environment benefits (GEF Trust Fund/NPIF) or adaptation benefits (LDCF/SCCF):

The project is explicitly focused on supporting rural livelihoods at the individual household enterprise level,

and therefore the project will make a direct positive socio-economic impact on rural livelihoods at the local

level. At the national level, the project will directly and tangibly support the emphasis on supporting rural

livelihoods through the NRLM self-help group approach that has been proven to be successful in the Andhra

Pradesh (Indira Kranti Patham) and Kerala (Kudumbashree) experiments of mass SHG programmes. The

project will directly support rural livelihoods, and there is a clear realization that supporting rural

livelihoods is a critical element of any poverty reduction efforts in India. Many self-help groups (SHG) are

domestic enterprise based such as leaf plate making, sewing, etc. and priority is given to women as they

lead livelihood enterprises. Such SHGs are even headed by women. Overall, the project will have a very

positive gender impact as well.

B.3. Explain how cost-effectiveness is reflected in the project design:


29

This UNDP/MNRE India GEF ACE project has been designed as an integrated and suitably co-funded

series of components and activities to remove the multiple barriers facing the widespread adoption of

key RE for rural livelihoods application in three specific states (Assam, Madhya Pradesh and Odisha)

in India, with a possible extension into the neighboring states of Jharkhand and Meghalaya. A specific

new MNRE RE for rural livelihoods programme, and the enhanced utilization of applicable existing

state level RE programmes and interventions will support the project. The project will also be supported

by central and a state level rural livelihood programmes, and will also be supported by appropriate

NGOs, financial institutions, industrial companies, and academic institutions.

In the absence of the project’s interventions: the market for RE for rural livelihoods will be subject to

continued ad-hoc and hence inefficient central and state government funding for RE for rural livelihoods

applications; and it will continue to be difficult for RE technology and service providers and household

enterprises to access and pool the myriad central and state government RE and rural livelihoods capital

grants and other supports that are available. Key RE technology and rural livelihoods application

packages will remain poorly specified in terms of their performance and there will continue to be a lack

of quality compliance testing. There will be an inadequate number and limited capacity of RE

technology and service providers. There will continue to be significant constraints for RE for rural

livelihoods providers in setting suitable tariffs and in accessing the electricity grid to export any surplus

RE generated electricity.

The project's design is highly cost effective as it maximizes the enhanced mobilization and the effective

pooling of existing but still underutilized RE and rural livelihoods funding and other support

mechanisms that are already available at the applicable central and state levels in India. In addition, the

India GEF ACE project (this project) will follow on from and utilize the operational knowledge,

management arrangements, and institutional structures established by the MNRE and UNDP Core

funded “Increasing access to Renewable Energy for micro-enterprises in Rural India” project (the Core

project) that is now being established and that will be fully operational in late 2014. The India GEF

ACE project will focus on the use of established RE technologies that will be systematically

demonstrated in established rural livelihoods sectors where the necessary transport, market intermediary

and market linkages are already well established. The project focus is on developing, demonstrating,

replicating and then scaling up 15 Renewable Energy Technology Packages for Rural Livelihoods

(RETPRLs) packages in 3 states (Assam, Madhya Pradesh and Odissa) in India.

The GEF contribution of USD 4,006,849 will result in direct GHG emission reductions of

69,115tonnes CO2 from the 1,500 demonstrations and 28,500 replication RE – rural livelihoods projects

implemented during the 5-year lifetime of the project. Assuming an average economic lifetime of the

RE systems (used to support rural livelihoods) as 10 years, the cumulative direct emission reduction

will be 662,742 tonnes CO2. If the GEF contribution (USD 4,006,849) is divided by the combined direct

and indirect post-project emission reductions, this gives a corresponding direct GHG unit abatement

cost (UAC) (i.e. GEF$ per tCO2) of 6.05 US$/tonne CO2.

C. DESCRIBE THE BUDGETED M &E PLAN:

The following main project monitoring and evaluation activities will be carried out: (1) Measurement of

means of verification for project progress and performance (baseline and impact analysis); (2) Annual

project reporting, including project implementation review (PIR); (3) Tripartite review meetings; (4)

Periodic status reporting; (5) Audits; (6) Mid-term external review; (7) Final (Terminal) external review;

and, (8) Visits to field sites. These activities have been included in the budget under project management.


30

Type of M&E

activity

Responsible Parties Budget US$

Excluding project

team staff time

Time frame

Inception

Workshop and

Report

Project Manager

UNDP CO, UNDP GEF

Indicative cost:

10,000

Within first two

months of project

start up

Measurement of

Means of

Verification of

project results.

UNDP GEF RTA/Project

Manager will oversee the

hiring of specific studies and

institutions, and delegate

responsibilities to relevant

team members.

Indicative cost:

60,000 Start, mid and end of

project (during

evaluation cycle) and

annually when

required.

Measurement of

Means of

Verification for

Project Progress

on output and

implementation

Oversight by Project

Manager

Project team


(To be determined as

part of the Annual

Work Plan's

preparation.)

Annually prior to

ARR/PIR and to the

definition of annual

work plans

ARR/PIR Project manager and team

UNDP CO

UNDP RTA

UNDP EEG

None Annually

Periodic status/

progress reports

Project manager and team None Quarterly

Mid-term

Evaluation

Project manager and team

UNDP CO

UNDP BRH

Independent External

Consultants (i.e. evaluation

team)

Indicative cost:

30,000

At the mid-point of

the project’s

implementation.

Terminal

Evaluation

Project manager and team,

UNDP CO

UNDP BRH

Independent External

Consultants (i.e. evaluation

team)

Indicative cost:

30,000

At least three months

before the end of the

project’s

implementation

Project Terminal

Report


UNDP CO

Local consultant

0 At least three months

before the end of the

project

Audit UNDP CO


Indicative cost per

year: 3,000

Yearly

Visits to field

sites

UNDP CO

UNDP BRH (as appropriate)

Government representatives

For GEF supported

projects, paid from

IA fees and

operational budget

Yearly

TOTAL indicative COST

Excluding project team staff time and UNDP staff

and travel expenses

US$ 150,000

(+/- 5% of total

budget)


31

PART III: APPROVAL/ENDORSEMENT BY GEF OPERATIONAL FOCAL POINT(S) AND

GEF AGENCY(IES)


32

A. RECORD OF ENDORSEMENT OF GEF OPERATIONAL FOCAL POINT(S) ON BEHALF OF THE GOVERNMENT(S): ):

(Please attach the Operational Focal Point endorsement letter(s) with this form. For SGP, use this OFP endorsement

letter).

NAME POSITION MINISTRY DATE

Mr. Shashi Shekhar GEF Operational Focal

Point

Ministry of Environment

and forests, Government

of India

09/05/2014

B. GEF AGENCY(IES) CERTIFICATION

This request has been prepared in accordance with GEF/LDCF/SCCF/NPIF policies and procedures and meets

the GEF/LDCF/SCCF/NPIF criteria for CEO endorsement/approval of project.

Agency

Coordinator,

Agency Name

Signature

Date

(Month, day,

year)

Project

Contact

Person

Telephone Email Address

Adriana Dinu,

Executive

Coordinator, GEF

10/21/2014 Butchaiah

Gadde,

Regional

Technical

Specialist

+66 2304

9100 ext

5048

butchaiah.gadde

@undp.org

http://www.thegef.org/gef/sites/thegef.org/files/documents/OFP%20Endorsement%20Letter%20Template%2011-1-11_0.doc

http://www.thegef.org/gef/sites/thegef.org/files/documents/OFP%20Endorsement%20Letter%20Template%20for%20SGP%2009-08-2010.doc

http://www.thegef.org/gef/sites/thegef.org/files/documents/OFP%20Endorsement%20Letter%20Template%20for%20SGP%2009-08-2010.doc

GEF5 CEO Endorsement Template-February 2013.doc 33

ANNEX A: PROJECT RESULTS FRAMEWORK (either copy and paste here the framework from the Agency document, or provide

reference to the page in the project document where the framework could be found).

This project will contribute to achieving the following Country Programme Outcome as defined in the UNDP Strategic Plan 2014-2017 and the UNDP India CPAP

2013-2017:

Project: Scale Up of Access to Clean Energy for Rural Productive13

Uses (India ACE Project)

Outcome: Expanded access to clean energy.

Output: Support for initiatives that increase access to clean energy for productive uses in off-grid, underserved rural regions.

Output indicators: number of REPTRL packages developed and trialed, number of RE for rural livelihoods applications fostered by project.

Country Programme Outcome Indicators:

Outcome: Progress towards meeting national commitments under multilateral environmental agreements

Output: Supporting national development objectives with co-benefits of mitigating climate change

Output indicators: (a) Annual reductions in greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions in India; (b) million USD flowing annually to India from GEF through UNDP for this programme;

(c) number of additional UNDP initiatives for achieving global and national targets under multilateral environmental agreements.

Primary applicable Key Environment and Sustainable Development Key Result Area): Strengthened national capacities to mainstream environment and energy concerns

into national development plans.

Expanding access to environmental and energy services for the poor.

Applicable GEF Strategic Objective and Program:

Strategic Objective: Climate Change Objective 3: Promote investment in renewable energy technologies

Applicable GEF Expected Outcomes: Increased market uptake of RE systems for rural livelihoods

Applicable GEF Outcome Indicators:

a. Extent to which EE policies and regulations are adopted and enforced

d. Volume of investment mobilized

e. Tonnes of CO2 equivalent avoided

Strategy Objectively Verifiable Indicators

Means of Verification Critical Assumptions

Description Baseline Target

Project goal: Reduced GHG

emissions achieved through

renewable energy systems in rural

livelihood sectors

Cumulative CO2 emission

reduced from start of project to

End-Of-Project (EOP), (tCO2e)

0 69,115 M&E reports of the

demonstration and

replication projects

Continued support and participation from

co-financing institutions, MNRE, CLIAs

and other stakeholders

13 The original PIF and documentation referred to “and Domestic (Uses)” but in the PPG phase the feedback and analysis firmly supported a narrowing of the

project scope to be limited to productive uses. In a country of over 1.2 billion people (India) even just focusing on productive uses in three states is very ambitious with only a GEF $4 million budget. Adding domestic uses would increase project implementation complexity and risks as domestic users expect low cost (subsidised) electricity supply and it would also make the project scope and ambition too great. This reduction in scope to just productive uses will also address GEF STAP and Council comments at the PIF stage of the project scope being too ambitious and that the original project was too unfocussed.





Project Objective: Enhancing

reliable and affordable clean energy

access for rural livelihoods in un-

served and underserved areas

Total energy savings achieved

from implemented RETPRLs by

EOP MWhe

MWhth

0

0

112,737

1,376,631

M&E reports of the

demonstration and


Selected end users for demos and

replications have sufficient finance and

favorable business environment


Outcome 1: Deployment of RE-

rural livelihood application

packages

No. of household enterprises

adopting RETPRLs through

demonstrations and replications

in the targeted states by the EOP

0 30,000 M&E reports of the

demonstration and


Sufficient finance is available for the

implementation of developed packages for

RE-rural livelihood

Output 1.1: At least ten (10) cost-

effective RE technology packages

developed for rural livelihood

(RETPRL) applications and

established technical specifications

No. of RETPRLs developed by

Year 2

0 10 Performance assessment

reports on RETPRLs

RE technology suppliers willing to provide

services as required for technology

packages in rural areas

Output 1.2: Demonstrated and

documented RE – rural livelihood

application packages in 15 clusters

and benefitting 1,500 household

enterprises

No. of demonstration project

clusters by EoP

0 15 Reports from CLIAs

M&E reports of the

demonstration

Household enterprises are convinced with

RE application benefits in livelihood

activities


adopting RETPRLs in the

demonstration clusters by Year

3

0 1,500 Reports from CLIAs

M&E reports of the

demonstration

End-users are interested and have the

sufficient finance

Output 1.3: Completed training

programmes and training of trainers

activities for replication and scale up

of RE – rural livelihood application

packages

No. of training programmes

conducted by EoP

0 14 Report of training

programmes




No. of training packages

developed by Year 2

0 7 Training package material Continued support and participation from



No. of persons trained by EoP 0 280 Report of training

programmes




Output 1.4: Completed promotion of

replicated and documented RE – rural


promoted to other districts / states and

applied to 28,500 household

enterprises


adopting RETPRLS through

replications by EoP

1,500

(at the end

of

demonstra

tion)

30,000 M&E reports of the


Implementing agencies and end-users are

interested, accept RETPRLs and are

equipped to implement the project






Outcome 2: Increased supply of RE

technology and service providers

for rural livelihood applications

No. of RE technology supply

and service providers for rural

livelihood applications by EoP

0 100 M&E of supply chain

development activity

There is sufficient demand for RETPRLs

amongst existing and new RE technology

and service providers

Enterprises have sufficient technical and

financial capacity

Output 2: Business development

aspects supported for 100 RE


providers for rural livelihoods

applications

No. of RE technology supply

and service providers for rural

livelihoods applications by EoP



No. of business plans developed

for RE technology supply and

service providers by Year 2


development activity/

business plan reports

No. of financial mechanism to

access finance for RE


suppliers by Year 2




Outcome 3.1: Inclusion of RE

applications in national and state level

rural livelihoods policies for key

livelihood sectors in rural areas

No. of states enforcing policies

on the RE applications as part of

their SRLM and in line with the

same policies at the national

level by year 3

0 4 NRLM (1) and SRLMs (3

states) policy documents

NRLM and SRLMs that support RE

applications for rural livelihoods is

sustained

Output 3.1.1: National and State level

rural livelihood mission statements /

documents emphasizing the use of RE

No. of Ministries/Departments

that officially adopt mission

statements that support RE

applications for rural livelihoods

by Year 3

0 4 Policy documents of

NRLM and SRLM,

meeting/ workshop reports

Output 3.1.2: National and State level

policies that support the use of RE for

key rural livelihood sectors

No. of livelihood sectors where

RE is promoted in 3 targeted

states by year 3

0 20 Central (e.g. KVIC) and

state livelihoods sectors

/departments policy

documents




Output 3.1.3: Documented

experiences and lessons on RE

applications for rural livelihoods at

suitable regional and international

fora

No. of peer reviewed

publications sharing experiences

regarding RE and rural

livelihoods by EoP

0 7 Published reports

Outcome 3.2: Future MNRE

programs also cater to actions

towards enhanced RE utilization in

rural livelihoods

No. of MNRE programs that

espouse RE applications for

rural livelihoods programme by

Year 3

0

1

MNRE policy document








Output 3.2.1: Developed MNRE-

supported programme for enhanced

RE utilization in rural livelihoods

No. of replication projects

implemented by MNRE in new

programme using RETPRLs by

EoP

0 28,500 Documentation of MNRE-

supported RET operated

rural livelihood projects

Outcome 3.3: Improved tariff and

grid interconnection regulations for

decentralized RE

No. of state regulatory

commissions (SRCs) implement

policy guidelines of improved

tariff structure for decentralized

RE by year 3

0 3 Continued support and participation of

SRCs

Output 3.3.1: Completed roadmap

and workshops for supporting

improved tariff structures for small

scale captive and off-grid RE

No. of state level workshops to

implement the revised tariff

structures by Year 3

0 3 Workshop reports Continued support and participation from


and other stakeholders especially SRCs

Output 3.3.2: Developed and

implemented regulatory, technical

and tariff guidelines for RE based

captive/decentralized systems’ grid

interconnection

No. of SRCs implement policy

guidelines for

captive/decentralized RE grid

interconnection by year 3

0 3 National level study report Continued support and participation from


and other stakeholders especially SRCs,

where SRCs see RE grid interconnection

as an important issue.

Component 4: Financial support for decentralized RE - rural livelihood applications


decentralized RE subsidies and

support for rural livelihoods

No. of developed improved

overall subsidy and support

models by Year 2

0 1 Review report

Output 4.1.1: Assessed RE subsidy

and support models for increased

effectiveness of decentralized RE

No. of completed study on

existing subsidies and supports

by Year 1

0 1 Review report Continued support and participation from


and other stakeholders in subsidizing and

supporting decentralized RE

Output 4.1.2: Improved RE subsidy

and support models for increased

effectiveness of decentralized RE for

rural livelihoods funding

No. of RE subsidy and support

models for rural livelihoods

available by year 1

0 3 Report on

recommendations

Outcome 4.2: Enhanced provision

of financial support for


livelihood applications

Output 4.2.1: Implemented financial

support packages for RE technology –

rural livelihood applications

No. of financial institutions

supporting RETPRL by Year 3


adopting RETPRLs that were

funded by the established

financial support packages by

EOP

0

0

3

28,500

Report on new financial

support packages

developed

Continued interest, and participation from


and other stakeholders such as IREDA





Output 4.2.2: Pooled available

financial resources for supporting

viable livelihood business models and

enhanced market linkages

No. of completed studies on

inter-institutional linkages for

finance pooling to support

viable livelihood business

models and enhanced market

linkages covering three states

and center by Year 2

0 1 Study report Institutions are willing to continuously

pool their financial resources and other

financing institutions continued to provide

support

Outcome 4.3: Improved investment

risk mitigation for decentralized

RE in rural livelihood applications

Number of states implement

designed suitable risk

guarantee/mitigation

mechanisms by Year 3

0 3 Communication by the

state governments /

Review report

Output 4.3.1: Enhanced risk

mitigation mechanisms designed and

supported for RE enterprises and RE

technology adopters / end-users in

rural livelihoods applications

No. of completed studies on risk

assessment and risk mitigation

in applicable sectors by Year 3

0 1 Study report Continued interest, and participation from


and other stakeholders such as IREDA

No. of designed suitable risk

guarantee/mitigation

mechanisms by Year 3

0 1 Study report


38

ANNEX B: RESPONSES TO PROJECT REVIEWS

(From GEF Secretariat and GEF Agencies, and Responses to Comments from Council at work program

inclusion and the Convention Secretariat and STAP at PIF).

GEF Sec comments at the clearance of the PIF

Comments and Responses Reference

Please address the following items at the CEO Endorsement stage if it is

included in a Work Program:

a) Articulate which technology packages are proposed to be implemented in

which villages with rationales.

b) Justify the cost-effectiveness of the project with more detailed

methodologies and assumptions;

c) Elaborate the originality of the project, including demonstration of

different aspects (e.g. geographic priorities) and different tools from the

World Bank's rural renewable energy project proposal;

d) Elaborate key stakeholders to implement the project in an efficient and

effective way. For example, it is inconsistent to include the Petroleum

Conservation Research Association as one of the key stakeholders while

the project will not consider any fossil fuel related activities. In addition,

identify private companies to join the project and explain their specific

role in sustaining the activities of the project;

e) Ensure the visibility of the GEF financing, including use the GEF logo on

all material, publications, leaflets, brochures and newsletters, websites

etc.

Response:

a) The relevant RE Technology Packages for Rural Livelihoods (RETPRLs)

for specific districts is detailed, with rationales, in the ProDoc’s “Annexure

– F: Summary information on identified clusters for demonstration

projects”. The project as detailed in the ProDoc does not deal with village

level interventions as was the case at the PIF stage, the project instead deals

with specific RETPRLs and the district level.

b) The cost effectiveness of the project has been recalculated taking into

account the threefold demonstration-replication-scale up methodology with

suitable documentation to be undertaken at all levels. Detailed assumptions

have been stated in the relevant ProDoc “Annexure – D: Emission

Reductions Calculation”.

c) The project is based on extensive consultations and research conducted

during PPG phase to identify a new specific approach (development and

deployment of multiple RETPRL packages) of combined suitable RE

technologies and a specific limited set of rural livelihoods with strong

connections to well-established existing markets. No new mechanisms or

policies are required for project success. The proposed project takes a very

different approach to that taken in the World Bank’s rural renewable energy

project proposal.

d) The project stakeholders have been elaborated in an efficient and effective

way in Section B.1.

ProDoc

Annexure F, p

113.

ProDoc

Annexure D, p

109.

ProDoc

Section 5, p

47.

CEO ER,

Section B.1, p

20.

ProDoc, para

194, p 89 &


39


e) The visibility of GEF financing has been specified in the ProDoc’s

Communications and visibility requirements 2nd para under section 14

Monitoring framework and evaluation.

para 207 and

208, p 90.

GEF COUNCIL COMMENTS

Comments from Germany (April 2013)


Germany requests that the following requirements are taken into account during

the design of the final project proposal:

The project objective seems very ambitious, e.g. the outputs 1.3.3 to 1.4.3. The

planned clustering of dispersed markets as well as the focus on productive

applications of energy is welcomed. However, the PIF completely lacks an

assessment of the target group’s ability to pay, although this stands at the core of

the proposal. For this reason, we recommend:

An assessment of the ability to pay of the rural population. Depending on

the result the priority areas may require modification, e.g. targeting first

areas where local industries/ production are most likely to flourish with

improved energy services. In this context, we ask for a definition of

“productive applications”, too (e.g. does it include cook stoves);

Regarding cooking stoves, collaboration with current and previous

programs (e.g. also by the German cooperation, GIZ) beyond the

mentioned DFID-TERI program is recommended as well as collaboration

with local manufacturers.

In the final document, a clearer definition of the indicators and the size of

the (direct) target group shall be provided.

Please clarify in the final document on the feasibility of the expected scale-

up potential in view of diversity of villages and surrounding conditions.

Please indicate the number of systems applied and the related emission

reductions. In case of cook stoves, it is unclear whether the emission

reduction potential per unit accounts for renewable biomass use in the

baseline.

Response:

The ability for RETPRL users to pay for their proposed RE systems is

ensured by targeting rural livelihoods that are unserved or underserved by

grid electricity or LPG for thermal uses and whose only real viable option

for their required reliable energy supply is expensive operating cost diesel

gen sets. Coupled with the multiple subsidies and supports available which

will be pooled by the project. This ensures that the relevant rural household

enterprises will have a generally suitable ability to pay for their part of their

RE systems. A detailed analysis on RETPRLs is presented in the ProDoc.

Regarding cook-stoves, the project will work through MNRE who are aware

of, and involved in, all relevant cook-stove programs in India. Biomass fuel

based small businesses around the tea gardens in Udalguri district of Assam

ProDoc

Section 2.3, p

25 and Section

5.1, p 47.


40


is identified as one of the interventions for improved cook-stoves and going

to work closely with MNRE

More detailed indicators and the size of the relevant direct target market are

provided in the ProDoc.

The feasibility of the expected scale up potential of relevant districts is

detailed in the ProDoc “Annexure – E: Renewable Energy Technology

Compendium” (attached as a separate document to ProDoc).

The number of systems applied and their related emission reductions are

detailed in the ProDoc Annex D. A conservative methodology is used for

cook stoves, but in any case cook stoves only account for a small fraction of

project emission reductions.

ProDoc

Annexure F, p

114.

ProDoc

Section 11, p

71.

ProDoc

Annexure E, p

112.

ProDoc

Annexure D, p

109.

STAP Screening of the PIF (29 March 2013)

STAP expresses its consent for this project focused mainly on energy access for all in India.

Several initiatives are already in place in India so it will be challenging to determine what specific

impact this GEF project would have on the rate of clean-energy technology deployment by

overcoming the barriers as identified. Targeting specific districts and rural village communities

that are currently under-served as demonstrations is the way to overcome this. However, the

selection of those should be based on a set of predefined criteria. One of the criteria could be

willingness by the residents to become involved in the project for example, possibly coupled with

having a strong leader to act as “champion”. Other could include feasibility of particular RE

resource, cost-effectiveness and others.


1. The PIF is not clear on how the renewable energy resources in a given

location will be assessed as a first step into planning which technologies to invest

in. For example, one site in a valley may have mean annual wind speeds less

than half of another site in the nearby hills, so wind turbines in the valley would

generate much lower levels of electricity per year and not be a viable option. For

biomass gasification, assessing the available biomass supply on an all-year-

round basis, and securing sufficient supplies is imperative. STAP recommends

conducting detailed renewable resource assessment which is now seems to be a

gap in this proposal.

2. The total costs of mitigation for 0.6 MtCO2-eq are relatively high (around

$50/t including all co-finance) but the co-benefits of energy access etc. should

also be considered and estimated as far as feasible to help assure sustainability of

project results.

3. STAP recommends undertaking risk assessment for this project. Its success

depends significantly on a number of factors such as practical feasibility of a

particular RE resource and supplies (in case of biomass residues), its societal


41


acceptance, cost-effectiveness, provision of regulatory and financial incentives

and other factors.

Response:

The project has been refocused to target specific RE for rural livelihoods

demonstration applications in specific targeted districts. The districts chosen for the

demonstrations have been based on a set of predefined criteria, as detailed in the

ProDoc. The project has also been refocused to cover a more realistic

demonstration, replication and scale up approach in only 3 states, with a replication

and scale up potential in two adjoining states. The issue of willingness to pay for

energy services has been addressed by tightly focusing on rural livelihood activities

where the baseline option for the applicable household enterprises to get their

necessary reliable energy services is primarily captive diesel generators, which is

now an expensive option in India as diesel subsidies have now been largely

removed and hence the price of diesel is substantially set by international oil

markets working through a generally freely floating Indian currency. The champion

for the particular rural livelihoods that RE will be provided for under the project

will come from the Cluster Level Implementing Agency/Cluster Support Units

(CLIAs/CSUs) that will be engaged by the project to undertake this role at the

necessary district level. The issue of adequate local RE resources availability has

been carefully reviewed in the case of non-solar RE applications, and where

thermal uses are involved the required bioenergy is available on site as a low value

waste product from the relevant livelihoods processes - e.g. poultry litter for poultry

applications and bamboo waste at bamboo processing Common Facility Centers.

1. The PPG stage has looked at the issue of RE resource availability. Most of

the RE that is to be used in the project is PV, where resource availability is

not much of an issue. Where biomass is to be used, the biomass in question

is an integral by product of the process that will use the biomass. The RE to

be used is now driven by the rural livelihoods applications concerned, not the

other way around as in the original PIF. The provision of RE is now a means

to an end (energy services for rural livelihoods) - rather than rural livelihoods

being secondary to project supported new RE energy supplies to be followed

(or not) by livelihoods that might or might not want to or be able to pay for

the RE energy service, as was the case in the original PIF.

2. The costs to GEF of mitigation have been substantially reduced in the

refocused project. With the redesigned project the costs of mitigation14 are

now 6.05 US$/tonne CO2.

3. A detailed risk assessment and means of risk mitigation has been undertaken

and is detailed in Section A.6

ProDoc

Section 2.3, p

25 and

Annexure E,

p 112.

(RETPRL

Compendium)

ProDoc

Section 2.3

and Annex E

- RETPRL

Compendium

CEO ER,

Section B.3, p

22 & ProDoc

Annex D, p

109

CEO ER,

Section A.6, p

16 & ProDoc,

Annex A, p

93.

14 Based on the $4 million GEF contribution and the combined direct and indirect post-project emission reductions


42

ANNEX C: STATUS OF IMPLEMENTATION OF PROJECT PREPARATION ACTIVITIES AND THE USE OF

FUNDS15

A. PROVIDE DETAILED FUNDING AMOUNT OF THE PPG ACTIVITIES FINANCING STATUS IN THE TABLE

BELOW:

PPG Grant Approved at PIF: US$ 102,740

Project Preparation Activities Implemented GEF/LDCF/SCCF/NPIF Amount ($)

Budgeted Amount Amount Spent To

date

Amount

Committed

1. Revalidate Barriers and Baseline Projects/Activities 20,000 15,794 4,206

2. Identification, evaluation and selection of

demonstrations

42,500 33,563 8,937

3. Conduct of Logical Framework Analysis (LFA) with the

project stakeholders

15,000 11,846 3,154

4. Detailed Design of Project Components & Activities 17,500 13,820 3,680

5. Establishment of institutional framework for project

partners/co-financiers in the project implementation and to

ensure close coordination with co-financed baseline

activities

7,740 6,112 1,628

Total 102,740 81,135 21,605

ANNEX D: CALENDAR OF EXPECTED REFLOWS (if non-grant instrument is used)

Provide a calendar of expected reflows to the GEF/LDCF/SCCF/NPIF Trust Fund or to your Agency

(and/or revolving fund that will be set up)

N/A

15 If at CEO Endorsement, the PPG activities have not been completed and there is a balance of unspent fund, Agencies can

continue undertake the activities up to one year of project start. No later than one year from start of project implementation,

Agencies should report this table to the GEF Secretariat on the completion of PPG activities and the amount spent for the

activities.

Tracking Tool for Climate Change Mitigation Projects

(For CEO Endorsement)

General Data Target Notes

at CEO Endorsement

Project Title Scale Up of Access to Clean Energy for Rural Productive Uses (India GEF ACE Project)

GEF ID 4900

Agency Project ID 4605

Country India

Region EAP

GEF Agency UNDP

Date of Council/CEO Approval Month DD, YYYY (e.g., May 12, 2010)

GEF Grant (US$) 4,006,849

Date of submission of the tracking tool Month DD, YYYY (e.g., May 12, 2010)

Is the project consistent with the priorities identified in National Communications,

Technology Needs Assessment, or other Enabling Activities under the UNFCCC?1

Yes = 1, No = 0

Is the project linked to carbon finance? 0 Yes = 1, No = 0 Cofinancing expected (US$) 19,033,767

Objective 1: Transfer of Innovative Technologies

Please specify the type of enabling environment created for technology transfer through this project

National innovation and technology transfer policy Yes = 1, No = 0

Innovation and technology centre and network Yes = 1, No = 0

Applied R&D support Yes = 1, No = 0

South-South technology cooperation Yes = 1, No = 0

North-South technology cooperation Yes = 1, No = 0

Intellectual property rights (IPR) Yes = 1, No = 0

Information dissemination Yes = 1, No = 0

Institutional and technical capacity building Yes = 1, No = 0

Other (please specify)

Number of innovative technologies demonstrated or deployed

Please specify three key technologies for demonstration or deployment

Area of technology 1

Type of technology 1 specify type of technology





Status of technology demonstration/deployment

0: no suitable technologies are in place

1: technologies have been identified and assessed

2: technologies have been demonstrated on a pilot basis

3: technologies have been deployed

4: technologies have been diffused widely with investments

5: technologies have reached market potential

Lifetime direct GHG emissions avoided tonnes CO2eq (see Special Notes above)

Lifetime direct post-project GHG emissions avoided tonnes CO2eq (see Special Notes above)

Lifetime indirect GHG emissions avoided (bottom-up) tonnes CO2eq (see Special Notes above)

Lifetime indirect GHG emissions avoided (top-down) tonnes CO2eq (see Special Notes above)

Special Notes: reporting on lifetime emissions avoided

Lifetime direct GHG emissions avoided: Lifetime direct GHG emissions avoided are the emissions reductions attributable to the investments made during the project's supervised

implementation period, totaled over the respective lifetime of the investments.

Lifetime direct post-project emissions avoided: Lifetime direct post-project emissions avoided are the emissions reductions attributable to the investments made outside the project's

supervised implementation period, but supported by financial facilities put in place by the GEF project, totaled over the respective lifetime of the investments. These financial facilities

will still be operational after the project ends, such as partial credit guarantee facilities, risk mitigation facilities, or revolving funds.

Lifetime indirect GHG emissions avoided (top-down and bottom-up): indirect emissions reductions are those attributable to the long-term outcomes of the GEF activities that remove

barriers, such as capacity building, innovation, catalytic action for replication.

Please refer to the Manual for Calculating GHG Benefits of GEF Projects.

Manual for Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy Projects

Manual for Transportation Projects

For LULUCF projects, the definitions of "lifetime direct and indirect" apply. Lifetime length is defined to be 20 years, unless a different number of years is deemed appropriate. For

emission or removal factors (tonnes of CO2eq per hectare per year), use IPCC defaults or country specific factors.

GEF Climate Change Mitigation Tracking Tool Version: 1.0 1


http://www.thegef.org/gef/GEF_C39_Inf.16_Manual_Greenhouse_Gas_Benefits

Objective 2: Energy Efficiency

Please specify if the project targets any of the following areas

Lighting Yes = 1, No = 0

Appliances (white goods) Yes = 1, No = 0

Equipment Yes = 1, No = 0

Cook stoves Yes = 1, No = 0

Existing building Yes = 1, No = 0

New building Yes = 1, No = 0

Industrial processes Yes = 1, No = 0

Synergy with phase-out of ozone depleting substances Yes = 1, No = 0


Policy and regulatory framework

0: not an objective/component

1: no policy/regulation/strategy in place

2: policy/regulation/strategy discussed and proposed

3: policy/regulation/strategy proposed but not adopted

4: policy/regulation/strategy adopted but not enforced

5: policy/regulation/strategy enforced

Establishment of financial facilities (e.g., credit lines, risk guarantees, revolving funds)


1: no facility in place

2: facilities discussed and proposed

3: facilities proposed but not operationalized/funded

4: facilities operationalized/funded but have no demand

5: facilities operationalized/funded and have sufficient demand

Capacity building


1: no capacity built

2: information disseminated/awareness raised

3: training delivered

4: institutional/human capacity strengthened

5: institutional/human capacity utilized and sustained

Lifetime energy saved

MJ (Million Joule, IEA unit converter:

http://www.iea.org/stats/unit.asp)

Fuel savings should be converted to energy savings by using the net

calorific value of the specific fuel. End-use electricity savings should

be converted to energy savings by using the conversion factor for

the specific supply and distribution system. These energy savings

are then totaled over the respective lifetime of the investments. Lifetime direct GHG emissions avoided tonnes CO2eq (see Special Notes above)





Objective 3: Renewable Energy

Please specify if the project includes any of the following areas

Heat/thermal energy production 1 Yes = 1, No = 0

On-grid electricity production 1 Yes = 1, No = 0

Off-grid electricity production 1 Yes = 1, No = 0

Policy and regulatory framework 4







Establishment of financial facilities (e.g., credit lines, risk guarantees, revolving funds) 3







Capacity building 5







Installed capacity per technology directly resulting from the project

Wind - MW

Biomass 1.80 MW el (for electricity production)

Biomass 91.34 MW th (for thermal energy production)

Geothermal - MW el (for electricity production)

Geothermal - MW th (for thermal energy production)

Hydro - MW

Photovoltaic (solar lighting included) 6.010 MW

Solar thermal heat (heating, water, cooling, process) 11.20 MW th (for thermal energy production, 1m² = 0.7kW)

Solar thermal power - MW el (for electricity production)

Marine power (wave, tidal, marine current, osmotic, ocean thermal) - MW

Lifetime energy production per technology directly resulting from the project (IEA unit converter: http://www.iea.org/stats/unit.asp)

Wind - MWh

Biomass 44,850.00 MWh el (for electricity production)

Biomass 1,296,630.73 MWh th (for thermal energy production)

Geothermal - MWh el (for electricity production)

Geothermal - MWh th (for thermal energy production)

Hydro - MWh

Photovoltaic (solar lighting included) 67,886.640 MWh

Solar thermal heat (heating, water, cooling, process) 80,000.00 MWh th (for thermal energy production)

Solar thermal power - MWh el (for electricity production)

Marine energy (wave, tidal, marine current, osmotic, ocean thermal) - MWh

Lifetime direct GHG emissions avoided 662,742 tonnes CO2eq (see Special Notes above)


Lifetime indirect GHG emissions avoided (bottom-up) 1,325,485 tonnes CO2eq (see Special Notes above)

Lifetime indirect GHG emissions avoided (top-down) 2,103,944 tonnes CO2eq (see Special Notes above)


Objective 4: Transport and Urban Systems


Bus rapid transit Yes = 1, No = 0

Other mass transit (e.g., light rail, heavy rail, water or other mass transit;

excluding regular bus or minibus) Yes = 1, No = 0

Logistics management Yes = 1, No = 0

Transport efficiency (e.g., vehicle, fuel, network efficiency) Yes = 1, No = 0

Non-motorized transport (NMT) Yes = 1, No = 0

Travel demand management Yes = 1, No = 0

Comprehensive transport initiatives (Involving the coordination of multiple strategies

from different transportation sub-sectors) Yes = 1, No = 0

Sustainable urban initiatives Yes = 1, No = 0















Capacity building







Length of public rapid transit (PRT) km

Length of non-motorized transport (NMT) km

Number of lower GHG emission vehicles

Number of people benefiting from the improved transport and urban systems





Objective 5: LULUCF

Area of activity directly resulting from the project

Conservation and enhancement of carbon in forests, including agroforestry ha

Conservation and enhancement of carbon in nonforest lands, including peat land ha

Avoided deforestation and forest degradation ha

Afforestation/reforestation ha

Good management practices developed and adopted


1: no action

2: developing prescriptions for sustainable management

3: development of national standards for certification

4: some of area in project certified

5: over 80% of area in project certified

Carbon stock monitoring system established


1: no action

2: mapping of forests and other land areas

3: compilation and analysis of carbon stock information

4: implementation of science based inventory/monitoring system

5: monitoring information database publicly available

Lifetime direct GHG emission avoided tonnes CO2eq (see Special Notes above)

Lifetime indirect GHG emission avoided tonnes CO2eq (see Special Notes above)

Lifetime direct carbon sequestration tonnes CO2eq (see Special Notes above)

Lifetime indirect carbon sequestration tonnes CO2eq (see Special Notes above)

Objective 6: Enabling Activities

Please specify the number of Enabling Activities for the project (for a multiple country project, please put the number of countries/assessments)

National Communication

Technology Needs Assessment

Nationally Appropriate Mitigation Actions

Other

Does the project include Measurement, Reporting and Verification (MRV) activities? Yes = 1, No = 0



(For Mid-term Evaluation)

General Data Results Notes

at Mid-term Evaluation

Project Title

GEF ID

Agency Project ID

Country

Region

GEF Agency


GEF Grant (US$)



Technology Needs Assessment, or other Enabling Activities under the UNFCCC? Yes = 1, No = 0

Is the project linked to carbon finance? Yes = 1, No = 0

Cumulative cofinancing realized (US$)

Cumulative additional resources mobilized (US$) additional resources means beyond the cofinancing committed at

CEO endorsement





























Lifetime direct GHG emissions avoided: Lifetime direct GHG emissions avoided are the emissions reductions attributable to the investments made until the mid-term evaluation,

totaled over the respective lifetime of the investments.



For LULUCF projects, the definition of "lifetime direct" applies. Lifetime length is defined to be 20 years, unless a different number of years is deemed appropriate. For emission or

removal factors (tonnes of CO2eq per hectare per year), use IPCC defaults or country specific factors.






























Capacity building


















Heat/thermal energy production Yes = 1, No = 0

On-grid electricity production Yes = 1, No = 0

Off-grid electricity production Yes = 1, No = 0















Capacity building








Wind MW

Biomass MW el (for electricity production)

Biomass MW th (for thermal energy production)

Geothermal MW el (for electricity production)

Geothermal MW th (for thermal energy production)

Hydro MW

Photovoltaic (solar lighting included) MW

Solar thermal heat (heating, water, cooling, process) MW th (for thermal energy production, 1m² = 0.7kW)

Solar thermal power MW el (for electricity production)

Marine power (wave, tidal, marine current, osmotic, ocean thermal) MW


Wind MWh

Biomass MWh el (for electricity production)

Biomass MWh th (for thermal energy production)

Geothermal MWh el (for electricity production)

Geothermal MWh th (for thermal energy production)

Hydro MWh

Photovoltaic (solar lighting included) MWh

Solar thermal heat (heating, water, cooling, process) MWh th (for thermal energy production)

Solar thermal power MWh el (for electricity production)

Marine energy (wave, tidal, marine current, osmotic, ocean thermal) MWh





























Capacity building












Objective 5: LULUCF








1: no action







1: no action





Lifetime direct GHG emission avoided tonnes CO2eqLifetime direct carbon sequestration tonnes CO2eq






Other




(For Terminal Evaluation)

General Data Results Notes

at Terminal Evaluation

Project Title

GEF ID

Agency Project ID

Country

Region

GEF Agency


GEF Grant (US$)



Technology Needs Assessment, or other Enabling Activities under the UNFCCC? Yes = 1, No = 0

Is the project linked to carbon finance? Yes = 1, No = 0

Cumulative cofinancing realized (US$)

Cumulative additional resources mobilized (US$) additional resources means beyond the cofinancing committed at

CEO endorsement































Lifetime direct GHG emissions avoided: Lifetime direct GHG emissions avoided are the emissions reductions attributable to the investments made during the project's supervised

implementation period, totaled over the respective lifetime of the investments.

Lifetime direct post-project emissions avoided: Lifetime direct post-project emissions avoided are the emissions reductions attributable to the investments made outside the project's

supervised implementation period, but supported by financial facilities put in place by the GEF project, totaled over the respective lifetime of the investments. These financial facilities

will still be operational after the project ends, such as partial credit guarantee facilities, risk mitigation facilities, or revolving funds.

Lifetime indirect GHG emissions avoided (top-down and bottom-up): indirect emissions reductions are those attributable to the long-term outcomes of the GEF activities that remove

barriers, such as capacity building, innovation, catalytic action for replication.




For LULUCF projects, the definitions of "lifetime direct and indirect" apply. Lifetime length is defined to be 20 years, unless a different number of years is deemed appropriate. For

emission or removal factors (tonnes of CO2eq per hectare per year), use IPCC defaults or country specific factors.






























Capacity building





















Heat/thermal energy production Yes = 1, No = 0

On-grid electricity production Yes = 1, No = 0

Off-grid electricity production Yes = 1, No = 0















Capacity building








Wind MW

Biomass MW el (for electricity production)

Biomass MW th (for thermal energy production)

Geothermal MW el (for electricity production)

Geothermal MW th (for thermal energy production)

Hydro MW

Photovoltaic (solar lighting included) MW

Solar thermal heat (heating, water, cooling, process) MW th (for thermal energy production, 1m² = 0.7kW)

Solar thermal power MW el (for electricity production)

Marine power (wave, tidal, marine current, osmotic, ocean thermal) MW


Wind MWh

Biomass MWh el (for electricity production)

Biomass MWh th (for thermal energy production)

Geothermal MWh el (for electricity production)

Geothermal MWh th (for thermal energy production)

Hydro MWh

Photovoltaic (solar lighting included) MWh

Solar thermal heat (heating, water, cooling, process) MWh th (for thermal energy production)

Solar thermal power MWh el (for electricity production)

Marine energy (wave, tidal, marine current, osmotic, ocean thermal) MWh
































Capacity building















Objective 5: LULUCF








1: no action







1: no action





Lifetime direct GHG emission avoided tonnes CO2eq (see Special Notes above)

Lifetime indirect GHG emission avoided tonnes CO2eq (see Special Notes above)

Lifetime direct carbon sequestration tonnes CO2eq (see Special Notes above)

Lifetime indirect carbon sequestration tonnes CO2eq (see Special Notes above)






Other



UNDP Environmental and Social Screening Template (December 2012) QUESTION 1:

Has a combined environmental and social assessment/review that covers the proposed project already been completed by implementing partners or donor(s)?

Select answer below and follow instructions:

NO: Continue to Question 2 (do not fill out Table 1.1)

YES: No further environmental and social review is required if the existing documentation meets UNDP’s quality assurance standards, and environmental and social management recommendations are integrated into the project. Therefore, you should undertake the following steps to complete the screening process:

1. Use Table 1.1 below to assess existing documentation. (It is recommended that this assessment be undertaken jointly by the Project Developer and other relevant Focal Points in the office or Bureau).

2. Ensure that the Project Document incorporates the recommendations made in the implementing partner’s environmental and social review.

3. Summarize the relevant information contained in the implementing partner’s environmental and social review in Annex A.2 of this Screening Template, selecting Category 1.

4. Submit Annex A to the PAC, along with other relevant documentation.

Note: Further guidance on the use of national systems for environmental and social assessment can be found in the UNDP ESSP Annex B.

TABLE 1.1: CHECKLIST FOR APPRAISING QUALITY ASSURANCE OF EXISTING ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL ASSESSMENT

Yes/No

1. Does the assessment/review meet its terms of reference, both procedurally and substantively?

2. Does the assessment/review provide a satisfactory assessment of the proposed project?

3. Does the assessment/review contain the information required for decision-making?

4. Does the assessment/review describe specific environmental and social management measures (e.g. mitigation, monitoring, advocacy, and capacity development measures)?

5. Does the assessment/review identify capacity needs of the institutions responsible for implementing environmental and social management issues?

6. Was the assessment/review developed through a consultative process with strong stakeholder engagement, including the view of men and women?

7. Does the assessment/review assess the adequacy of the cost of and financing arrangements for environmental and social management issues?

Table 1.1 (continued) For any “no” answers, describe below how the issue has been or will be resolved (e.g. amendments made or supplemental review conducted).

QUESTION 2:

Do all outputs and activities described in the Project Document fall within the following categories?

Procurement (in which case UNDP’s Procurement Ethics and Environmental Procurement Guide need to be complied with)

Report preparation

Training Event/workshop/meeting/conference (refer to Green Meeting Guide) Communication and dissemination of results

Select answer below and follow instructions:

NO Continue to Question 3

YES No further environmental and social review required. Complete Annex A.2, selecting Category 1, and submit the completed template (Annex A) to the PAC.

http://content.undp.org/go/userguide/cap/procurement/ethics/?lang=en#top

http://www.undp.org/procurement/documents/UNDP-SP-Practice-Guide-v2.pdf

http://www.greeningtheblue.org/resources/meetings

QUESTION 3:

Does the proposed project include activities and outputs that support upstream planning processes that potentially pose environmental and social impacts or are vulnerable to environmental and social change (refer to Table 3.1 for examples)? (Note that upstream planning processes can occur at global, regional, national, local and sectoral levels)

Select the appropriate answer and follow instructions:

NO Continue to Question 4.

YES Conduct the following steps to complete the screening process:

1. Adjust the project design as needed to incorporate UNDP support to the country(ies), to ensure that environmental and social issues are appropriately considered during the upstream planning process. Refer to Section 7 of this Guidance for elaboration of environmental and social mainstreaming services, tools, guidance and approaches that may be used.

2. Summarize environmental and social mainstreaming support in Annex A.2, Section C of the Screening Template and select ”Category 2”.

3. If the proposed project ONLY includes upstream planning processes then screening is complete, and you should submit the completed Environmental and Social Screening Template (Annex A) to the PAC. If downstream implementation activities are also included in the project then continue to Question 4.

TABLE 3. 1 EXAMPLES OF UPSTREAM PLANNING PROCESSES WITH POTENTIAL DOWNSTREAM ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL IMPACTS

Check appropriate box(es) below

1. Support for the elaboration or revision of global- level strategies, policies, plans, and programmes.

For example, capacity development and support related to international negotiations and agreements. Other examples might include a global water governance project or a global MDG project.

2. Support for the elaboration or revision of regional-level strategies, policies and plans, and programmes.

For example, capacity development and support related to transboundary programmes and planning (river basin management, migration, international waters, energy development and access, climate change adaptation etc.).

3. Support for the elaboration or revision of national-level strategies, policies, plans and programmes.

For example, capacity development and support related to national development policies, plans, strategies and budgets, MDG-based plans and strategies (e.g. PRS/PRSPs, NAMAs), sector plans.

4. Support for the elaboration or revision of sub-national/local-level strategies, polices, plans and programmes.

For example, capacity development and support for district and local level development plans and regulatory frameworks, urban plans, land use development plans, sector plans, provincial development plans, provision of services, investment funds, technical guidelines and methods, stakeholder engagement.

QUESTION 4:

Does the proposed project include the implementation of downstream activities that potentially pose environmental and social impacts or are vulnerable to environmental and social change?

To answer this question, you should first complete Table 4.1 by selecting appropriate answers. If you answer “No” or “Not Applicable” to all questions in Table 4.1 then the answer to Question 4 is “NO.” If you answer “Yes” to any questions in Table 4.1 (even one “Yes” can indicated a significant issue that needs to be addressed through further review and management) then the answer to Question 4 is “YES”:

NO No further environmental and social review and management required for downstream activities. Complete Annex A.2 by selecting “Category 1”, and submit the Environmental and Social Screening Template to the PAC.

YES Conduct the following steps to complete the screening process:

1. Consult Section 8 of this Guidance, to determine the extent of further environmental and social review and management that might be required for the project.

2. Revise the Project Document to incorporate environmental and social management measures. Where further environmental and social review and management activity cannot be undertaken prior to the PAC, a plan for undertaking such review and management activity within an acceptable period of time, post-PAC approval (e.g. as the first phase of the project) should be outlined in Annex A.2.

3. Select “Category 3” in Annex A.2, and submit the completed Environmental and Social Screening Template (Annex A) and relevant documentation to the PAC.

TABLE 4.1: ADDITIONAL SCREENING QUESTIONS TO DETERMINE THE NEED AND POSSIBLE EXTENT OF FURTHER ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL REVIEW AND MANAGEMENT

1. Biodiversity and Natural Resources Answer (Yes/No/ Not Applicable)

1.1 Would the proposed project result in the conversion or degradation of modified habitat, natural habitat or critical habitat?

No

1.2 Are any development activities proposed within a legally protected area (e.g. natural reserve, national park) for the protection or conservation of biodiversity?

No

1.3 Would the proposed project pose a risk of introducing invasive alien species? No

1.4 Does the project involve natural forest harvesting or plantation development without an independent forest certification system for sustainable forest management (e.g. PEFC, the Forest Stewardship Council certification systems, or processes established or accepted by the relevant National Environmental Authority)?

No

1.5 Does the project involve the production and harvesting of fish populations or other aquatic species without an accepted system of independent certification to ensure sustainability (e.g. the Marine Stewardship Council certification system, or certifications, standards, or processes established or accepted by the relevant National Environmental Authority)?

No

1.6 Does the project involve significant extraction, diversion or containment of surface or ground water?

No

http://www.pefc.org/

http://www.fsc.org/

http://www.msc.org/


For example, construction of dams, reservoirs, river basin developments, groundwater extraction.

1.7 Does the project pose a risk of degrading soils? No

2. Pollution Answer (Yes/No/ Not Applicable)

2.1 Would the proposed project result in the release of pollutants to the environment due to routine or non-routine circumstances with the potential for adverse local, regional, and transboundary impacts?

No

2.2 Would the proposed project result in the generation of waste that cannot be recovered, reused, or disposed of in an environmentally and socially sound manner?

No

2.3 Will the propose project involve the manufacture, trade, release, and/or use of chemicals and hazardous materials subject to international action bans or phase-outs?

For example, DDT, PCBs and other chemicals listed in international conventions such as the Stockholm Convention on Persistent Organic Pollutants, or the Montreal Protocol.

No

2.4 Is there a potential for the release, in the environment, of hazardous materials resulting from their production, transportation, handling, storage and use for project activities?

No

2.5 Will the proposed project involve the application of pesticides that have a known negative effect on the environment or human health?

No

3. Climate Change

3.1 Will the proposed project result in significant1 greenhouse gas emissions?

Annex E provides additional guidance for answering this question.

No

3.2 Is the proposed project likely to directly or indirectly increase environmental and social vulnerability to climate change now or in the future (also known as maladaptive practices)? You can refer to the additional guidance in Annex C to help you answer this question.

For example, a project that would involve indirectly removing mangroves from coastal zones or encouraging land use plans that would suggest building houses on floodplains could increase the surrounding population’s vulnerability to climate change, specifically flooding.

No

4. Social Equity and Equality Answer (Yes/No/ Not Applicable)

4.1 Would the proposed project have environmental and social impacts that could affect indigenous people or other vulnerable groups?

No

4.2 Is the project likely to significantly impact gender equality and women’s empowerment2? No

1 Significant corresponds to CO2 emissions greater than 100,000 tons per year (from both direct and indirect sources). Annex E

provides additional guidance on calculating potential amounts of CO2 emissions.

2 Women are often more vulnerable than men to environmental degradation and resource scarcity. They typically have weaker

and insecure rights to the resources they manage (especially land), and spend longer hours on collection of water, firewood, etc.

(OECD, 2006). Women are also more often excluded from other social, economic, and political development processes.

http://chm.pops.int/Convention/tabid/54/language/en-US/Default.aspx#convtext

http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/4/21/37353858.pdf


4.3 Is the proposed project likely to directly or indirectly increase social inequalities now or in the future?

No

4.4 Will the proposed project have variable impacts on women and men, different ethnic groups, social classes?

No

4.5 Have there been challenges in engaging women and other certain key groups of stakeholders in the project design process?

No

4.6 Will the project have specific human rights implications for vulnerable groups? No

5. Demographics

5.1 Is the project likely to result in a substantial influx of people into the affected community(ies)?

No

5.2 Would the proposed project result in substantial voluntary or involuntary resettlement of populations?

For example, projects with environmental and social benefits (e.g. protected areas, climate change adaptation) that impact human settlements, and certain disadvantaged groups within these settlements in particular.

No

5.3 Would the proposed project lead to significant population density increase which could affect the environmental and social sustainability of the project?

For example, a project aiming at financing tourism infrastructure in a specific area (e.g. coastal zone, mountain) could lead to significant population density increase which could have serious environmental and social impacts (e.g. destruction of the area’s ecology, noise pollution, waste management problems, greater work burden on women).

No

1. Culture

6.1 Is the project likely to significantly affect the cultural traditions of affected communities, including gender-based roles?

No

6.2 Will the proposed project result in physical interventions (during construction or implementation) that would affect areas that have known physical or cultural significance to indigenous groups and other communities with settled recognized cultural claims?

No

6.3 Would the proposed project produce a physical “splintering” of a community?

For example, through the construction of a road, powerline, or dam that divides a community.

No

2. Health and Safety

7.1 Would the proposed project be susceptible to or lead to increased vulnerability to earthquakes, subsidence, landslides, erosion, flooding or extreme climatic conditions?

For example, development projects located within a floodplain or landslide prone area.

No

7.2 Will the project result in increased health risks as a result of a change in living and working conditions? In particular, will it have the potential to lead to an increase in HIV/AIDS infection?

No

7.3 Will the proposed project require additional health services including testing? No

3. Socio-Economics

8.1 Is the proposed project likely to have impacts that could affect women’s and men’s ability to use, develop and protect natural resources and other natural capital assets?

No


For example, activities that could lead to natural resources degradation or depletion in communities who depend on these resources for their development, livelihoods, and well-being?

8.2 Is the proposed project likely to significantly affect land tenure arrangements and/or traditional cultural ownership patterns?

No

8.3 Is the proposed project likely to negatively affect the income levels or employment opportunities of vulnerable groups?

No

9. Cumulative and/or Secondary Impacts Answer (Yes/No/ Not Applicable)

9.1 Is the proposed project location subject to currently approved land use plans (e.g. roads, settlements) which could affect the environmental and social sustainability of the project?

For example, future plans for urban growth, industrial development, transportation infrastructure, etc.

No

9.2 Would the proposed project result in secondary or consequential development which could lead to environmental and social effects, or would it have potential to generate cumulative impacts with other known existing or planned activities in the area?

For example, a new road through forested land will generate direct environmental and social impacts through the cutting of forest and earthworks associated with construction and potential relocation of inhabitants. These are direct impacts. In addition, however, the new road would likely also bring new commercial and domestic development (houses, shops, businesses). In turn, these will generate indirect impacts. (Sometimes these are termed “secondary” or “consequential” impacts). Or if there are similar developments planned in the same forested area then cumulative impacts need to be considered.

No

ANNEX A.2: ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL SCREENING SUMMARY

(to be filled in after Annex A.1 has been completed)

Name of Proposed Project: India: Scale up of Access to Clean Energy for Rural Productive Uses (India ACE)

A. Environmental and Social Screening Outcome

Select from the following:

Category 1. No further action is needed

Category 2. Further review and management is needed. There are possible environmental and social benefits, impacts, and/or risks associated with the project (or specific project component), but these are predominantly indirect or very long-term and so extremely difficult or impossible to directly identify and assess.

Category 3. Further review and management is needed, and it is possible to identify these with a reasonable degree of certainty. If Category 3, select one or more of the following sub-categories:

Category 3a: Impacts and risks are limited in scale and can be identified with a reasonable degree of certainty and can often be handled through application of standard best practice, but require some minimal or targeted further review and assessment to identify and evaluate whether there is a need for a full environmental and social assessment (in which case the project would move to Category 3b).

Category 3b: Impacts and risks may well be significant, and so full environmental and social assessment is required. In these cases, a scoping exercise will need to be conducted to identify the level and approach of assessment that is most appropriate.

B. Environmental and Social Issues (for projects requiring further environmental and social review and management)

In this section, you should list the key potential environmental and social issues raised by this project. This might include both environmental and social opportunities that could be seized on to strengthen the project, as well as risks that need to be managed. You should use the answers you provided in Table 4.1 as the basis for this summary, as well as any further review and management that is conducted.

The project is explicitly focussed on supporting rural livelihoods at the individual household enterprise level, and therefore the project will make a direct positive socioeconomic impact on rural livelihoods at the local level. At the national level, the project will directly and tangibly support the emphasis on supporting rural livelihoods through the NRLM self-help group approach that has been proven to be sucessful in the Andhra Pradesh (Indira Kranti Patham) and Kerala (Kudumbashree) experiments of mass SHG programmes. The project will directly support rural livelihoods, and there is a clear realisation that supporting rural livelihoods is a critical element of any poverty reduction efforts in India. The project does not specifically focus on gender

issues, but women head many rural livelihoods enterprises, or work on or are employed by them, so the project will have a very positive overall gender impact as well.

C. Next Steps (for projects requiring further environmental and social review and management):

In this section, you should summarize actions that will be taken to deal with the above-listed issues. If your project has Category 2 or 3 components, then appropriate next steps will likely involve further environmental and social review and management, and the outcomes of this work should also be summarized here. Relevant guidance should be obtained from Section 7 for Category 2, and Section 8 for Category 3.

The project will be implemented to maximise poverty reduction and maximise its positive gender contributions.

D. Sign Off

Project Manager Date

PAC Date

Programme Manager Date

Compendium of Renewable Energy Technology Packages for Selected Rural Livelihood Sectors

JUNE 2014

Acknowledgements Ashden India Renewable Energy Collective and Greentech Knowledge Solutions Private Limited are extremely grateful to all the stakeholders who provided useful inputs during the course of the studies undertaken when compiling this compendium. We specially thank all the organizations and their personnel who facilitated our field visits. A list of the organisations, companies and people we would like to thank is provided as an annexure to this document.

Disclaimer The present document is an attempt to put together relevant information on the status and

potentials of some key renewable energy technologies in India that are suitable for

application to improve rural livelihoods. This document is neither exhaustive nor complete on

the topic. The information has been compiled from reliable references/resources, as cited in

the publication. Mention of any company, association or product in this document is for

informational purposes only and does not constitute a recommendation of any sort by UNDP/

MNRE/ Ashden India Renewable Energy Collective/ Greentech Knowledge Solutions Private

Limited.

Contents

1. Poultry .................................................................................................................................... 1

1.1 Introduction and Relevance to Rural Livelihoods ........................................................... 1

1.2 Potential Renewable Energy Technologies Applications ................................................ 1

1.2.1 Lighting and ventilation of backyard poultry sheds ................................................. 1

1.2.1.1 Solar lanterns and Micro solar lighting solutions ...................................................... 2

1.2.2 Biogas plant based on poultry litter for captive use in hatcheries and layer farms .. 5

1.2.3 Waste to energy generation from small poultry farms .............................................. 6

2. Dairy ...................................................................................................................................... 9

2.1 Introduction and Relevance to Rural Livelihoods ........................................................... 9

2.2 Potential Renewable Energy Technologies Applications ......................................... 10

2.2.1 Solar lights/ power packs for lighting and powering small equipment at milk

collection centres ............................................................................................................. 10

2.2.2 Solar PV powered milk chiller at milk collection centre ........................................ 11

2.2.3 Biogas plant for power generation for captive use in dairy farm ........................... 12

3. Horticulture .......................................................................................................................... 15

3.1 Introduction and Relevance to Rural Livelihoods ......................................................... 15


3.2.1 Micro Solar Pumps ................................................................................................. 15

3.2.2 Solar Pumps ............................................................................................................ 16

3.3.3 Solar PV based farm level small Cold Storage ....................................................... 18

3.3.4 Solar dryers for drying of spices, vegetables and fruits .......................................... 20

3.3.5 Other potential renewable energy applications ....................................................... 22

4. Fisheries ............................................................................................................................... 23



4.2.1 Solar Aerators ......................................................................................................... 23

4.2.2 Solar Fish Dryers .................................................................................................... 25

5. Khadi and Village Industries ............................................................................................... 27



5.2.1 Solar lighting for households .................................................................................. 29

5.2.2 Solar PV based power for lighting and powering equipment at common facility

centres .............................................................................................................................. 29

5.2.3 Solar powered charkha and loom ............................................................................ 30

5.2.4 Biomass gasifiers based on bamboo waste for power generation for lighting and

powering equipment at common facility centers of bamboo clusters .............................. 32

6. Biomass Energy Based Informal Industries/ Small Business .............................................. 33


6.2 Potential Renewable Energy Technologies Applications .............................................. 33

6.2.1 Improved biomass cook stoves ............................................................................... 33

Bibliography ............................................................................................................................ 36

Acknowledgements .................................................................................................................. 39

List of Figures

Figure 1: Back-Yard Poultry Farms ........................................................................................... 2

Figure 2: Solar lanterns .............................................................................................................. 4

Figure 3: Micro solar lighting system ........................................................................................ 4

Figure 4: Biogas Plant in a poultry farm in Haryana ................................................................. 6

Figure 5: Poultry Farm ............................................................................................................... 6

Figure 6: Biomass Briquetting ................................................................................................... 8

Figure 7: Milk collection at the village level collection centre ................................................. 9

Figure 8: Milk chilling plant ...................................................................................................... 9

Figure 9: Milk testing machine ................................................................................................ 11

Figure 10: Milk chilling plant .................................................................................................. 12

Figure 11: Biogas based Power Generation at Dairy Farm ..................................................... 13

Figure 12: Micro Solar Pump .................................................................................................. 16

Figure 13: Solar Pump System ................................................................................................ 18

Figure 14: Cold Storage implemented by Cold Chain Solutions ............................................. 20

Figure 15: Green house dryer .................................................................................................. 21

Figure 16: Solar collector based dryer ..................................................................................... 21

Figure 17: Natural convection based dryer .............................................................................. 21

Figure 18: Aerator IIT Guwahati Model ................................................................................. 24

Figure 19: Present Practice of Fish Drying (Open Sun) .......................................................... 25

Figure 20: Solar Dryers ............................................................................................................ 26

Figure 21: Pictures from a Weaving Cluster in Assam ............................................................ 27

Figure 22: Women making Bamboo Products in Barpeta, Assam .......................................... 28

Figure 23: Bamboo Products made at Barpeta Cane and Bamboo Cluster ............................. 28

Figure 24: Common work-sheds with looms at common facility centre in Nalbari, Assam ... 29

Figure 25: Sewing Machines at common facility centre in Nalbari, Assam ........................... 29

Figure 26: Solar charkha at Limbdi, Gujrat ............................................................................. 31

Figure 27: Improved biomass cook stove ................................................................................ 35

Figure 28: Biomass cook stoves using husks as fuel ............................................................... 35

List of Tables

Table 1: Specifications and costs of solar lanterns, ................................................................... 2

Table 2: Specifications and costs - Micro solar lighting systems .............................................. 3

Table 3: Specifications and costs of solar power packs ............................................................. 4

Table 4: Specifications and costs of biogas plant in a 10,000 bird poultry farm ....................... 5

Table 5: Ash content and calorific value of rice husk and saw dust .......................................... 7

Table 6: Specifications and costs for different models of biomass briquetting machines ......... 7

Table 7: Specifications and costs of solar PV system put up at the village level milk

collection centre ....................................................................................................................... 10

Table 8: Specifications and costs - Milk chilling plant ............................................................ 12

Table 9: Specifications and costs of biogas plant in a 100 cattle dairy farm ........................... 13

Table 10: Specifications and costs- Micro solar pumps .......................................................... 15

Table 11: Specifications and costs- Solar pumps of 3 hp capacity ......................................... 17

Table 12: Specifications and costs of cold storages of different capacity ............................... 19

Table 13: Specifications and costs of different types of dryers ............................................... 21

Table 14: Specifications and costs of IITG model aerator ..................................................... 24

Table 15: Specifications and costs of solar collector based dryers .......................................... 25

Table 16: Specifications and costs - solar power packs for common facility centre ............... 30

Table 17: Specification and cost of solar charkha ................................................................... 31

Table 18: Specification and cost of solar loom ........................................................................ 31

Table 19: Specifications and costs - Biomass gasifier ............................................................. 32

Table 20: Stipulated performance parameters for MNRE approval ........................................ 34

Table 21: Specifications and costs – Improved biomass cook stoves ..................................... 34

Acronyms & Abbreviations Ah Ampere-Hour

ASSIST Asia Society for Social Improvement and Sustainable

Transformation

CFL Compact fluorescent lamp

CO Carbon Monoxide

DC Direct Current

GDP Gross Domestic Product

hp Horse power

kcal/kg Kilocalories per Kilogram

kg/h Kilograms per hour

km Kilometer

kVA Kilo Volt-Ampere

kW Kilo Watt

kWh Kilo Watt Hour

LED Light Emitting Diode

m Meter

m2 Square meter

m3 Cubic meter

MNRE Ministry of New and Renewable Energy

(Government of India)

NGO Non-Governmental Organisation oC Degree Celsius

PEN Planters Energy Network

PM Particulate Matter

PV Photovoltaic

INR Indian Rupee (around 60 INR = 1 USD in 2014)

SHG Self Help Group

V Volt

Wp Watt peak

1

1. Poultry

1.1 Introduction and Relevance to Rural Livelihoods

Poultry is one of the fastest growing segments of the agricultural sector in India; increasing at

a rate of 8-12% annually. India is the 3rd largest global producer of eggs and the 4th largest

global producer of broiler. Poultry provides a source of livelihood to more than 3 million

families among which there is a high concentration of landless, marginal and small farmers.

The number of families engaged in poultry is expected to reach 5 million by 2025.1

One of the models of broiler (meat) poultry development is a market-oriented backyard or

small farm model. Under this model, poultry farmers (300-500 families spread over 20-50

villages in a radius of around 30 km) are organised in the form of a cooperative or producer

company. Each family has a small backyard poultry farm which can accommodate 200 -800

birds. Through the cooperative, a family gets 1 day old chicks. The chicks are reared for 35-

40 days & then sold in the market for meat. After one cycle, the shed is sanitized and made

ready for receiving the next batch of chicks. Usually 4 to 6 cycles are repeated in a year. The

cooperative/producer company provides chicks (from own hatchery or purchased from a

commercial hatchery), feed (usually from a self-owned feed production unit), medical and

technical support, and market linkage. In some cases there is a buy-back arrangement with

private companies. Market-oriented backyard poultry is being promoted by both NGOs as

well as by Government livelihoods programmes.

1.2 Potential Renewable Energy Technologies Applications

1.2.1 Lighting and ventilation of backyard poultry sheds

The birds are fed 24*7 and the poultry shed requires lighting during the night. In the areas

having an available and reliable grid electricity supply, usually one or two incandescent bulbs

are used for lighting of the poultry shed. In case of non-availability or unreliable grid

electricity supply, kerosene2 lamps are often used. For the wellbeing and good growth of the

birds, ventilation of the shed and temperature control (target temperatures between 20–35 oC)

is required. In the areas having available and reliable grid electricity supply, the poultry

1 Presentation, Mr: Anish Kumar, Poultry, Available online at: http://sapplpp.org/files-repository/information-hub/presentations/rural-backyard-poultry-development, Last accessed on 14th May 2014 2 Kerosene is still subsidised in India and hence is still used for lighting in rural areas

http://sapplpp.org/files-repository/information-hub/presentations/rural-backyard-poultry-development


2

sheds generally have electricity operated fan(s) for ventilation.

Figure 1: Back-Yard Poultry Farms

The most promising renewable energy options for back-yard poultry farms are:

1.2.1.1 Solar lanterns and Micro solar lighting solutions Portable solar lights (solar lanterns) and micro solar lighting solutions can be used for lighting

of the poultry shed. A large number and range of RE lighting products with various

specifications are available in the market. The specifications of the products are determined

by the end-user requirements.

Specifications And Costs

Table 1: Specifications and costs of solar lanterns3,4

CFL- based Solar Lantern White LED based Solar Lantern

Solar PV Module rating 10 Wp 5 Wp

Battery

Sealed Maintenance Free

(SMF) lead acid battery or

NiMH battery or Lithium

Ion Battery

Sealed Maintenance Free (SMF)

lead acid battery or NiMH battery

or Lithium Ion Battery

Light Source CFL luminaire of 7 Watt

power rating

White-LED luminaire of 160 lux

luminous flux (at vertical at a

distance of 1 feet)*

Autonomy 3 days or 12 operating

hours 3 days or 12 operating hours

Costs (Rs/ Wp) 270 450

Cost of the System 2700 2250

3 http://mnre.gov.in/file-manager/UserFiles/led_spls_2013_14.pdf Last accessed on 20th April 2014 4 http://mnre.gov.in/file-manager/UserFiles/cfl_spls_2013_14.pdf Last accessed on 20th April 2014

http://mnre.gov.in/file-manager/UserFiles/led_spls_2013_14.pdf

http://mnre.gov.in/file-manager/UserFiles/cfl_spls_2013_14.pdf

3

* LEDs often have their rating given in terms of light incident at the surface (luminous flux)

and not in terms of their power rating.

Table 2: Specifications and costs - Micro solar lighting systems5

Model I Model II Model III Solar PV module rating (Wp)

1.5 2.5 5

System capacity (Ah)

2.8 4.2 7

System voltage (V) 3.25 3.25 3.25

Lighting Load* (LED lamps)

Lamps of 0.8W and 0.4W

One lamp of 1.5 W and 2 lamps of 0.4W

2 lamps of 1.5W and 2 lamps of 0.4 W

Daily operation (in hours)

7 6 12

Approximate Cost of the system (Including the cost of lamps)

3,500 4,000 5,500

*Lamps of different rating can be used with the micro solar lighting systems.

Operation and maintenance costs: Solar systems have no operational costs; however there

are replacement costs involved. Batteries of lanterns, lighting systems or power packs have

to be replaced after about 4-6 years. LED lamps have a lifetime of about 50,000 hours (about

25 years for use of 5 hours daily). Solar panels have a lifetime of about 25 years. The

inverter, if used to provide AC power, also often needs to be replaced after say 3-5 years.

5 Personal communication with Mr Richard Sequeira, Fosera (www.fosera.com)

http://www.fosera.com/

4

Figure 2: Solar lanterns

Figure 3: Micro solar lighting system

1.2.1.2 Solar Power Packs Solar PV power packs can be employed for providing both lighting as well as ventilation in

the poultry farms.


The specification and the cost of some of the models of power packs specified by MNRE, and

that can be suitable for lighting and/or ventilation of backyard poultry farms, are provided in

the table below:

Table 3: Specifications and costs of solar power packs

Model I – 2 LED luminaires6

Model II - 2 LED luminaires and 1

DC Fan7

Model III – 4 LED luminaires8

Solar PV Module Rating (Wp)

12 24 24

Light Source 2 white LED luminaires

2 white LED luminaires

4 White LED Luminaires

Rating of DC fan (W) NIL 10 NIL

Battery rating 12V, 12Ah 12V, 20Ah 12V, 20Ah

MNRE Benchmark Costs (INR/ Wp)

450 450 450

Approximate Cost of the System as per MNRE benchmark Costs (INR)

5,400 10,800 10,800

6 http://mnre.gov.in/file-manager/UserFiles/cfl_spls_2013_14.pdf Last accessed on 3rd March 2014 7 http://mnre.gov.in/file-manager/UserFiles/led_spls_2013_14.pdf Last accessed on 3rd March 2014 8 http://mnre.gov.in/file-manager/UserFiles/amendmends-benchmarkcost-aa-jnnsm-2013-14.pdf Last accessed on 3rd March 2014



http://mnre.gov.in/file-manager/UserFiles/amendmends-benchmarkcost-aa-jnnsm-2013-14.pdf

5

Operation and maintenance costs: Please refer to section 1.2.1.1

Status: Solar lanterns and PV packs for meeting lighting and ventilation requirements are

now mature products.

Example: During the field visits in Madhya Pradesh, some of the families were found to be

using solar lanterns for the lighting of the poultry sheds. Pradan (an NGO involved in

promoting poultry) has experience of using both solar lanterns and centralised SPV power

plant for providing lighting of poultry sheds. Internationally, there are several examples of

providing solar PV based electricity in large poultry farms by using the roof space available

on the poultry sheds9.

1.2.2 Biogas plant based on poultry litter for captive use in hatcheries and layer

farms

In a hatchery unit or in a large layer farm (egg production), where the birds are kept in large

numbers, the poultry litter can be collected and utilised in a biogas plant. The biogas so

produced can either be burned to provide heat and/or used in an engine to produce

mechanical power or electricity for captive energy requirements. The biogas digestor residual

slurry can be used as an organic fertilizer.


The information collected from one of the biogas plant and engine suppliers indicates that

x Biogas engines working on 100% biogas are available in capacities ranging from 3

kVA to 125 kVA. Floating drum type biogas digesters are employed for biogas

generation. The construction cost of biogas plants is around Rs 17000/m3.

Table 4 shows the specifications and costs of a biogas plant for power generation in a 10,000

bird poultry farm.

Table 4: Specifications and costs of biogas plant in a 10,000 bird poultry farm10

Available Poultry Litter per day* (kg) 1,200

Biogas that can be generated per day (m3) 200

Electricity that can be generated (kWh)# 400

Required hours of electricity per day 16-17

kVA rating of biogas engine (kVA) 30

9 http://blogs.worldwatch.org/revolt/jamaican-poultry-producer-not-chicken-about-solar-investment/ Last accessed on 19th April 2014 10Personal communication with Perfect biogas generators, New Delhi

http://blogs.worldwatch.org/revolt/jamaican-poultry-producer-not-chicken-about-solar-investment/

6

Capacity of the biogas digester (m3) 200

Cost of 30 kVA Biogas Engine (in INR) 3,70,000

Cost of 200 m3 biogas digester plant (in INR) 34,00,000

Total cost of the system (including cost of biogas digester, biogas engine and accessories) (in INR) 40,00,000

*Droppings per bird per day are 100-150 g. #Assuming that 2 kWh of electricity can be produced from 1 m3 of biogas.

Operation and maintenance costs: Three to four people would be required to operate this

biogas plant. Other than the labour cost, there are also recurring expenses for biogas engine

oil and oil filter changes, and top and bottom end engine rebuilds. The lifetime of the plant is

typically around 15 years.

Figure 4: Biogas Plant in a poultry farm in Haryana

Figure 5: Poultry Farm

Status: There are several poultry based biogas plants that are operational.

Example: Several biogas plants based on poultry litter are functioning in India. A particular

example of this is the biogas power generation plant setup in a poultry farm with 6000 birds

located in Haryana (India). In this plant, a biogas power generator of 62.5 kVA/ 50kW

capacity is producing electricity from a 85 m3 biogas digester based on poultry litter / poultry

waste. The slurry coming out from the digester is being used as organic fertiliser in the

nearby agriculture fields. A video film showing the poultry biogas plant is available at

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l905W5Iz_es&feature=em-upload_owner

1.2.3 Waste to energy generation from small poultry farms

Saw dust or rice husk which is used as bedding material in poultry farms can be used for

production of pellets or briquettes which can be used as a fuel. The poultry litter is

periodically removed from the bedding material and is dispersed off; hence the bedding

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l905W5Iz_es&feature=em-upload_owner

7

material left at the end of rearing one batch has only a small percentage of poultry litter.

Briquetting is a way to convert loose biomass residues, such as sawdust, straw or rice husk,

into high density solid blocks that can be used as a fuel. Biomass briquettes (including pellets,

which are very small briquettes) replace fossil fuels or wood for cooking and industrial

processes. The best materials for high pressure briquetting are sawdust and other woody

residues, because these contain a high proportion of lignin11 that serves to bind the briquettes

together.

The ash content and calorific value of rice husk and saw dust is listed below.

Table 5: Ash content and calorific value of rice husk and saw dust

Ash Content (%) Calorific Value (kcal/kg)

Rice husk 17.65 3950

Saw Dust 8.20 3898

Specifications and Costs

The details collected from a poultry cluster shows that about 400kg of saw dust/ rice husk is

used per batch of poultry birds as bedding material. On average around 5 batches of birds are

reared per year in back-yard poultry farms. There are about 300-500 families in such a cluster

engaged in back yard poultry farming. The calculations show that there is the availability of

used saw dust or rice husk of about 800 metric tonnes year. A significant portion of this can

be collected and used to make biomass briquettes. To briquette this biomass a biomass

briquetting machine with production capacity of approx. 500 – 1000 kg/h would be required.

Below are listed some of the models available in the market which can be used for briquetting

the saw dust and rice husk used in poultry farms.

The selling price of briquettes is about INR 4,000- 6,000 per tonne (the price varies from

region to region).

Table 6: Specifications and costs for different models of biomass briquetting machines12

Model I Model II Model III

Production Capacity (kg/h) 550-880* 1000-1500 1200-1600#

Briquette Size (Diameter in mm) 60 90 90

Connected Load (hp) 34.5 93 88.5

Maximum energy consumption per 20-23 40-50 40-50

11 http://www.ashden.org/briquettes Last Last accessed on 10th May 2014 12 Personal communication with biomass briquetting machine manufacturers- Jay Khodiyar Group, Infinite energy and Radhe group of energy

http://www.ashden.org/briquettes

8

hour (kWh)

Capital cost of machinery (in INR) 11,25,000 19,50,000 16,50,000

* The output is 550-850 kg/h on saw dust and 450-650 kg/h on rice husk

# Production Capacity: Saw Dust : 1600 kg/h (Approx.)

Rice Husk : 1200 kg/h (Approx.)

x Optional items like biomass dryer and grinder will have to be used if the input has a

moisture level above 12% or feed size > 8 mm.

x The construction cost for briquetting press shed, raw material shed and finished

product shed is estimated to be about INR 5,00,000. Land required for construction

would be about 300 – 500 square meters.

Operation and Maintenance costs: 4 – 6 people would be required for the operation of a

briquetting machine (for loading and unloading, supervision, etc.). The lifetime of the plant is

expected to be about 15 years. The energy costs would also add to the operating costs based

on the electricity consumption (given in Table 6) and tariff in the region.

Figure 6: Biomass Briquetting

Status: Although the concept of briquetting of the bedding material of poultry farm is new,

biomass briquetting has been done for several years now. There are several suppliers in India

providing biomass briquetting machines. The quantity of poultry litter present in the bedding

material and the overall quality of the bedding material for briquetting will be important

considerations.

Example: A particular example of biomass briquetting of saw dust/ rice husk used in the

poultry sector could not be found, but there are many examples of biomass briquetting being

successfully used in other sectors.

9

2. Dairy


The dairy sector contributes about 5.3% of India’s agricultural GDP. India is the world's

largest milk producer with an annual output of 121.8 million tonnes in 2011-12, comprising

about 13% of world’s total milk production. India is also the world’s largest consumer of

dairy products. India ranks first in bovine population (cattle- 199.1 million and buffalo-

105.3 million; as in 2007) accounting for about 51% of Asia’s and about 19% of the world’s

bovine population.13

As per estimates in 2004, the dairy sector is the major source of income for an estimated

27.6 million people in India. Among these, 65 to 70 per cent are small, marginal farmers and

land-less laborers. The dairy sector also supports around 10 million members / farmers

through 100,000 cooperative societies in India.14

The milk produced by small producers is collected at the local milk collection centre, tested,

weighed and then transported to the milk chilling centres. Milk is transported to the chilling

centres twice a day – morning and evening. The milk is chilled in the chilling plant and is

then transported to the milk processing plant.

The milk collection centres are run and managed by small cooperatives and the milk

producers are members of the appropriate cooperative.

Figure 7: Milk collection at the village level collection centre

Figure 8: Milk chilling plant

13 http://www.dahd.nic.in/dahd/WriteReadData/Annual%20Report%202012-13%20EFG.pdf Last accessed on 5th April 2014 14 http://www.nird.org.in/nird_docs/ven_finrepo.pdf, Last accessed on 14th May 2014

http://www.dahd.nic.in/dahd/WriteReadData/Annual%20Report%202012-13%20EFG.pdf

http://www.nird.org.in/nird_docs/ven_finrepo.pdf

10


2.2.1 Solar lights/ power packs for lighting and powering small equipment at

milk collection centres

The energy requirement at a milk collection centre can be met by the use of solar powered

lighting and solar powered testing and weighing machines. The use of solar PV technology

can make the process of milk collection faster at the milk collection centre. Also a collection

centre, which has an unreliable grid electricity supply, requires an additional reliable power

supply - which solar PV can provide.

Specifications and Costs15

The specifications and cost of the system put up by SELCO Foundation at the milk

collection center are given below.

Table 7: Specifications and costs of solar PV system put up at the village level milk collection centre

Solar System

Solar PV Module (Wp) 100

Battery 12V, 110Ah

Total Costs (INR) 22,000 – 28,000

Load Details

Milk Analyzer (W) 85

Weighing Machine (W) 6

LED Light (W) 3.6

LED Light (W) 2.4

Hours of operation per day (hour) 3

Battery autonomy 3 days

Operation and maintenance costs: O&M costs of the solar PV system are given in section

1.2.1.1

15 Personal communication with Mr: Ananth Aravamudan, SELCO Foundation

11

Figure 9: Milk testing machine

Status: The technology of powering equipment and providing lighting using solar is mature

one and can be applied in the sector.

Example: SELCO Foundation has implemented a project for Karnataka Milk Federation

(KMF), the country’s second largest milk producer. Presently 522 milk cooperatives (milk

collection centres) in Karnataka are using solar power to run electronic weighing and testing

machines.16 The specifications of the solar systems are provided in the table given above.

2.2.2 Solar PV powered milk chiller at milk collection centre

Milk from all the collection centres has to be transported to the chilling centres twice daily.

A thermal battery concept based chiller has been developed by Promethean Power Systems

and these are now being used at a few milk collection centres. This thermal battery is

enabling them to cool and then store the milk for 1-2 days at the collection centres

themselves, and thus both reduce transportation costs and expand the reach of the milk

collection centres.

These milk chillers can also be used at milk chilling centres that require reliable power - as

milk has to be chilled immediately as soon as it arrives at the chilling plant.

The charging of the thermal batteries requires electricity which can be provided through

solar PV. More information can be found at the Promethean website

http://www.coolectrica.com/.

16 http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/bangalore/ Solar-power-comes-to-milk-coops-rescue/articleshow/31500722.cms Last Accessed on 19th May 2014

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/bangalore/

12

Specifications and costs17

Table 8: Specifications and costs - Milk chilling plant

Capacity (liters per day) 1000

Electricity consumption per day (kWh) 12

Cost in INR (without solar integration) 5,80,000

Operation and maintenance costs: O&M costs for the solar PV system are given in section

1.2.1.1. O&M cost for the thermal battery based milk chillers is around INR 0.07/liter.

Figure 10: Milk chilling plant18

Status: The integration of the chilling plant with solar system is in the implementation stage.

Example: There is no experience of powering these milk chillers with renewables; however,

it is being planned by Promethean Power to power milk chillers with solar PV, and most

likely by the end of 2014 there would be some real operational experience on this.

2.2.3 Biogas plant for power generation for captive use in dairy farm Power can be generated by the combustion of biogas in gas engines. The biogas required for

this type of generation is produced by anaerobic digestion of dung.

17 Personal communication with Promethean Power Systems, Mumbai 18 Photo courtesy: Promethean Power Systems.

13

Specifications And Costs19

The information collected from one of the biogas plant and engine suppliers indicates that

x Biogas engines working on 100% biogas are available in capacities ranging from 3

kVA to 125 kVA. Floating drum type biogas digesters are employed for biogas

generation. The construction cost of biogas plants is around INR 17,000/m3.

The table below shows the specifications and costs of a biogas plant for a dairy farm having

100 cattle heads.

Table 9: Specifications and costs of biogas plant in a 100 cattle dairy farm

Available cow dung per day (kg) 1500

Biogas that can be generated per day (m3) 75

Electricity that can be generated (kWh)* 150

Capacity of the biogas digester (m3) 85

Cost of 30 kVA Biogas Engine (in INR) 3,70,000

Cost of 85 m3 biogas digester plant (in INR) 14,50,000

Total Cost of the System (in INR)# 20,00,000

*Assuming 2kWh of electricity can be produced from 1m3 of biogas.

# including cost of biogas digester, biogas engine and accessories

Operation and maintenance costs: O & M costs of this plant would be similar to that of biogas

plants mentioned in section 1.2.2.

Figure 11: Biogas based Power Generation at Dairy Farm20

19 Personal communication with Perfect Biogas Generators, New Delhi 20 Picture Courtesy: Perfect Biogas Generators, New Delhi

14

Status: This technology is an established one with several private companies that have

successfully implemented biogas plants in dairy farms. The limitation of this technology is

that it is only viable for dairy farms with a certain minimum capacity.

Example: A number of projects have been implemented by several biogas companies in

several dairy farms. Perfect Biogas Generators has implemented a biogas plant for power

generation in Vrindavan dairy farm having 145 cattle in Varanasi, Uttar Pradesh. It has a

140m3 biogas digester and a 30 kVA generator. Daily electricity generation is about 240-280

kWh/day. The generator is operated for about 10-12 hours a day.21 A video film of this

biogas plant is available at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8fTrX3gCg8Q

21 Personal communication with Perfect Biogas Generators, New Delhi

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8fTrX3gCg8Q

15

3. Horticulture


Horticulture accounts for about 30% of India’s agricultural GDP - from 13.08% of cropped

area. Horticulture also provides about 37% of the total exports of agricultural commodities.

Presently, India is the 2nd largest producer of fruits and vegetables in the world. India

produces nearly 11% of all the world’s vegetables and 15% of all fruits. The annual average

growth rate of Indian Horticulture was about 5% in the 11th five year plan period (2007-

12).22

A large number of the farmers involved in horticulture have small land holdings. Diesel

pumps are the main source of irrigation water for horticulture in India.


3.2.1 Micro Solar Pumps Electricity generated using solar PV panels can be used by the solar pump to draw water that

can be used for irrigation of horticulture crops. In such a system, the electricity is not stored

and is used for lifting water directly. The micro solar pumps as the name suggests are

designed with much lower rating than the conventional solar PV pumps. This helps the solar

PV pump technology to be used by small and marginal farmers and reduces the initial

investment costs.23 The capacities of these pumps can range from 200 Wp to 500 Wp. The

specifications and cost of a 200 Wp system is given in the table below.


Table 10: Specifications and costs- Micro solar pumps

Solar PV module rating (Wp) 200

Pump rating 100W, 12V

Discharge (Liter/ day) 2500

Cost of the Solar PV pump system (INR) 20,000

22http://planningcommission.gov.in/aboutus/committee/wrkgrp12/agri/wg_horti1512.pdf Last accessed on 20th May 2014 23http://rwsnforum.files.wordpress.com/2011/11/8_andrea_vezzini-ennos_solar_water_pump_drive.pdf Last accessed on 20th May 2014 24 Personal communication with Dr. S.P.Gon Chaudhuri, Ashden (data provided from a project on micro solar pumps implemented in Sundarban, West Bengal)

http://planningcommission.gov.in/aboutus/committee/wrkgrp12/agri/wg_horti1512.pdf

http://rwsnforum.files.wordpress.com/2011/11/8_andrea_vezzini-ennos_solar_water_pump_drive.pdf

16

Total cost of installation in INR (including construction cost of a 5000 liter storage tank & distribution system)

50,000


1.2.1. MNRE has specified that the whole system including submersible/ surface pumps shall

be warrantied for 5 years 25

Figure 12: Micro Solar Pump26

Status: The solar PV pump technology has been there for many years now and downsizing of

the system has made it more affordable and appropriate for the needs of a smallholder family

and portable (so that it can be protected from theft).

Example: Six micro solar pumps have been installed in Sundarbans, West Bengal. The

pumps are being used to lift water from a small pond. The rating of the pumps installed is

provided in the table.27

3.2.2 Solar Pumps

Solar PV pumps of 3-5 hp capacities have been used in India for several years now. They are

used for drawing the water for irrigation and have no electrical storage as already explained

in the section for micro solar pumps. These systems are usually owned by a group of farmers

or by a single larger farmer.

25 http://mnre.gov.in/file-manager/UserFiles/technical-specification_spwps_2013_14.pdf. Last accessed on 3rd June 2014 26 http://www.bfh.ch/fileadmin/docs/newsmeldungen/2013/Brochure_SolarWaterPump_BFH_2013.pdf Last accessed on 19th May 2014 27 Personal communication with Dr. S.P.Gon Chaudhuri, Ashden

http://mnre.gov.in/file-manager/UserFiles/technical-specification_spwps_2013_14.pdf

http://www.bfh.ch/fileadmin/docs/newsmeldungen/2013/Brochure_SolarWaterPump_BFH_2013.pdf

17


The specification and cost of some of the solar PV selected models specified by MNRE are

provided in the table below.28,29

Table 11: Specifications and costs- Solar pumps of 3 hp capacity

Model I (Shallow well

pumping system) Model II (Deep well

pumping system )

Solar PV Module rating (Wp) 2700 3000

Motor Capacity (hp) 3 Not Specified

Motor Pump set type DC surface pumps DC submersible pumps

Max. Total Dynamic Head (m) 25 80

Required shadow free Area (m2) 120 120

Water Output 148,000 liters per

day from a total head of 20 meters

63,000 liters per day from a total head of 50

meters

MNRE Benchmark Cost (INR/Wp) 190 190

Approximate Cost of System as per MNRE benchmark costs (INR)

5,13,000 5,70,000

* The above specifications are for D.C. motor pumps; if A.C. induction motors are used the

water output would decrease by around 10%.


1.2.1.1. MNRE has specified that the whole system including submersible/ surface pumps

shall be warrantied for 5 years.30

28 http://mnre.gov.in/file-manager/UserFiles/amendmends-benchmarkcost-aa-jnnsm-2013-14.pdf Last accessed on 20th March 2014 29 http://mnre.gov.in/file-manager/UserFiles/technical-specification_spwps_2013_14.pdf Last accessed on 20th March 2014 30 http://mnre.gov.in/file-manager/UserFiles/technical-specification_spwps_2013_14.pdf Last accessed on 9th June 2014




18

Figure 13: Solar Pump System31

Status: Solar pumping is now a proven technology with numerous private solar pump supply

companies already operating, and with large-scale government schemes coming up in the

area.

Example: States like Punjab, Karnataka, Tamil Nadu, Chattisgarh, Andhra Pradesh lead the

way in installation of solar PV pumps. The number of pumps installed in each of these states

(statistics as of 2013) is as follows: Punjab – 1850, Karnataka – 700, Tamil Nadu – 285,

Chattisgarh -130, Andhra Pradesh – 70.32 MNRE has recently proposed to install 17,500

solar photovoltaic pumps with funding from the National Clean Energy Fund.33

3.3.3 Solar PV based farm level small Cold Storage Cold storage is a prime infrastructural component for storing perishable commodities. The

temperatures inside cold storages are kept low to prevent commodities from spoiling.

Traditionally, cold storage units have large capacities and run on grid electricity.

Farm based cold storage units have already been developed by companies like Cold Chain

Solutions, Bayer Material Science and Ecozen Solutions. The integration of solar energy to

the farm based cold storages is underway, and working prototypes have already been

implemented.

Cold Chain Solutions based at Bhubaneswar has developed small cold rooms with capacities

31 Picture Courtesy: Claro Energy 32 http://www.igen-re.in/files/giz__2013__report_solar_water_pumping_for_irrigation_in_bihar.pdf Last accessed on 14th May 2014 33 http://www.pv-tech.org/news/india_to_provide_thousands_of_solar_pv_water_pumps_with_rd_help_from_sunedi. Last accessed on 16th March 2014

http://www.igen-re.in/files/giz__2013__report_solar_water_pumping_for_irrigation_in_bihar.pdf

19

ranging from 2 to 10 metric tonnes. These cold rooms have split air-conditioning units

(vapour compression systems) for providing the necessary refrigeration.34

Specifications and Costs35,36,37

The specifications and costs (cold chain solutions) are listed below.

Table 12: Specifications and costs of cold storages of different capacity

Model I Model II Model III

Capacity (in metric tonnes of produce that can be stored)

2 5 10

Dimension (W x L x H) (in feet) 6x8x6 8x10x8 10x14x10 Air-conditioner Capacity (in Refrigeration Tonnes)

2 3 4

Rating of diesel generator (in kVA) 2.8 5 5 Electricity consumption (running: 15-16 h/day) (kWh/day)

16-17 50 80

Total costs (INR)* 2,50,000 7,90,000 11,70,000

*The cost also includes the cost of diesel generators which are provided for backup,

insurance and civil construction costs.


1.2.1.1. The warranty provided for cold storage is five years (including annual maintenance

contract). Manufacturers provide 10 year warranties for PV panels.38

Bayer Material Science has also developed small cold storages with capacity up to 10 metric

tonnes. The 8 metric tonne cold storage (10ft x12ft x 10ft) costs around Rs 3,00,000.39 Bayer

Material Science is in the process of testing these cold storage units running on solar PV.

Ecozen solutions has been working on solar cold storage units of capacities in the range of 5

to 15 metric tonnes using thermal back-up and has implemented two prototypes. More

information can be found on their website (http://ecozensolutions.com/innovation/micro-cold-

storage)

34 Personal communication with Cold Chain Solutions, Odisha 35 http://www.orissa.gov.in/dhc/Download/2MT-Cold-Room.pdf Last accessed on 26th March 2014 36 http://www.orissa.gov.in/dhc/Download/5MT-Cold-Room.pdf Last accessed on 26th March 2014 37 http://www.orissa.gov.in/dhc/Download/10MT-Cold-Room.pdf Last accessed on 26th March 2014 38 http://ecozensolutions.com/downloads/Brochure.pdf Last accessed on 6th June 2014 39 Personal communication with the Social Business Initiative team of Bayer Material Science

http://www.orissa.gov.in/dhc/Download/2MT-Cold-Room.pdf



http://ecozensolutions.com/downloads/Brochure.pdf

20

Figure 14: Cold Storage implemented by Cold Chain Solutions

Status: The technology has been tried out in different parts of India over the past year and

the results are quite positive. The uniqueness of this technology is the capacity it provides,

which is 2-10 metric tonnes, which is ideal for small rural farms. Although

commercialization of solar farm cold storage units has not been done, pilot efforts going on in

the field suggests that it is likely to happen in the near future.

Example: The Directorate of Horticulture, Government of Odisha has been promoting these

cold rooms with an additional subsidy (20% for non-tribal and 35% for tribal) and around

200 cold storages have already been installed in the state. The subsidy is in addition to the

central government subsidy of 40% available under the National Horticulture Mission. The

cold rooms are used for storage of fruits, vegetables, mushrooms, etc.

3.3.4 Solar dryers for drying of spices, vegetables and fruits

Drying is done to preserve spices, vegetables and fruits for a longer duration. The traditional

method of open sun drying can be replaced by solar drying in the drying of horticulture

produce. Solar drying has several advantages compared to open sun drying. Drying is 30-

40% faster in solar drying and drying is possible in all days, including cloudy and rainy days

with electrical backup. The advantage of using solar dryers for spices, vegetables and fruits

include retaining the aroma and flavour of the dried product.

Three types of solar dryers based on different drying technologies and suitable for different

capacities are listed below.

21

i) Green house dryer

ii) Solar air heaters with drying chambers

iii) Natural convection based solar dryer


The specifications and costs for the three types of dryers are given below.

Table 13: Specifications and costs of different types of dryers

Dryer Type Green house dryer Solar air heaters

with drying chambers

Natural convection based solar dryer

Technology Green house effect Solar collector based Natural convection

based

Capacity 300, 600 and 1000

kg 70 to 1000 kg 10 to 100 kg

Cost (in INR) 7,00,000 for 300 kg

dryer 1,80,000 for 70 kg

dryer 21,000 for 10 kg

dryer.

Operation and maintenance costs: The O&M costs associated with dryers are nominal.

The lifetime of the dryers is up to 15 years.41

Figure 15: Green house dryer

Figure 16: Solar collector based dryer

Figure 17: Natural convection based dryer

Status: The technology is mature, but useful innovations are still occurring at a fast pace with

several companies and persons actively involved in improving the technology. The

technology has the flexibility with scale which makes it a very good candidate for renewable

energy intervention in rural areas.

40 Personal communication with the Social Business Initiative team of Bayer Material Science 41 http://ceew.in/pdf/CEEW-WWF-RE+Renewables-Beyond-Electricity-Dec13.pdf Last accessed on 6th June 2014

http://ceew.in/pdf/CEEW-WWF-RE+Renewables-Beyond-Electricity-Dec13.pdf

22

Example: Solar dryers have been used in India for several years. M/s. Eastern Condiments

(P) Ltd. Theni, Tamil Nadu have been using solar dryers since 1994 for drying of spices.42

13 Solar collector based dryers are being used for apricot drying in Jammu and Kashmir.

Also, green house dryers (for drying chilies and bananas) have been used in Tamil Nadu, in

cooperation with ASSIST. 43

3.3.5 Other potential renewable energy applications

Renewable energy can be used for powering machines used in the post-harvesting stage of

horticulture produce. The use could be for processing the produce or for value addition.

Machines developed by Indian Institute of Horticulture Research for the purpose can be

found at http://www.iihr.res.in/section-of-agricultural-engineering.

The electricity requirement of these machines can be met by solar energy or by electricity

generated from other renewable energy sources. The technology of electricity generation

using renewable energy is mature,and hence a technology that can be used to power the

machines.

42 MNRE Handbook of Solar Air Heating for Drying and Space Heating 43 Personal communication with the Social Business Initiative team of Bayer material Science

http://www.iihr.res.in/section-of-agricultural-engineering

23

4. Fisheries


India is the third largest producer of fish in the world and second in inland fish production

(FAO 1998). India’s share in the world production of fish has increased from 3.2% in 1981 to

4.5% at present. Constituting about 4.4% of the global fish production, the sector contributes

to 4.7% of the agricultural GDP. The total fish production of 6.57 million metric tonnes now

has a nearly 55% contribution from the inland sector 44

Indian fisheries can be classified into

i) Inland/ freshwater fisheries

ii) Marine fisheries

iii) Brackish water fisheries

In India, aquaculture has emerged as an important farming activity transforming aquaculture

from a traditional livelihood-support rural activity to a profit oriented production system.

The fisheries sector has been recognised as a powerful income and employment generator as

it stimulates growth of a number of subsidiary industries and is a source of cheap and

nutritious food, at the same time it is an instrument of livelihood for a large section of the

economically backward population of India. More than 6 million people in India depend on

fisheries and aquaculture for their livelihood.45


4.2.1 Solar Aerators

Any procedure by which oxygen is added to water can be considered as a type of water

aeration. Aeration is required to maintain a minimum amount of Dissolved Oxygen (DO) in

the water. The minimum benchmark of DO for aquatic life is 4mg/lit. Aeration is required in

inland fisheries to keep the minimum benchmark of DO for fish to survive. Aeration is

usually provided by aerators powered by diesel generators.

IIT Guwahati had developed a paddle type aerator system for fish ponds. Trials are ongoing

to operate this aerator using solar energy. This is used to maintain DO level in fresh or

44 http://nfdb.ap.nic.in/html/aboutus.htm Last accessed on 29th March 2014 45 http://planningcommission.nic.in/aboutus/committee/wrkgrp/fishery.pdf Last accessed on 29th March 2014

http://nfdb.ap.nic.in/html/aboutus.htm

http://planningcommission.nic.in/aboutus/committee/wrkgrp/fishery.pdf

24

brackish water ponds. Aeration is more effective when done during morning hours in

sunshine. Paddle type aerators are more effective, less costly and require lower maintenance

as compared with other type of aerators.46


Table 14: Specifications and costs of IITG model aerator

Power rating of the motor used (hp)* 1

Hours of Operation (per day) 4-5

Costs (excluding the cost of solar panel) in INR 60,000 – 65,000

*Efforts are ongoing to reduce the power requirement to 0.75 hp.

Figure 18: Aerator IIT Guwahati Model

Another aerator system, Hybrid wind-solar aerator system has been developed by S N Jha,

Department of Physics, Sardar Patel University, Gujarat. The technology was

commercialized by Supernova Technologies, Gujarat. More information of this technology

can be found on the WWF report ‘Renewables beyond Electricity’ (Available at:

http://ceew.in/pdf/CEEW-WWF-RE+Renewables-Beyond-Electricity-Dec13.pdf) or in the

website of Supernova Technologies http://www.supernovawindsolar.com/

Status: The technology has potential for large scale dissemination. With the demand driven

research taking place in the field, it is likely to be commercially available soon.

Example: IIT Guwahati model aerator has been demonstrated at Agia in Goalpara district of

Assam where there are large number of fish ponds. Now it is being planned to run this aerator

using electricity from Solar PV. The main issue they foresee with solar is the high cost of the

46 Personal communication with Prof. A K Das, IIT Guwahati


http://www.supernovawindsolar.com/

25

system47.

4.2.2 Solar Fish Dryers

Fish drying is done to avoid spoilage of the fish to preserve the fish for a longer duration.

Drying is usually done for salt water fish where the catch is quite high. The traditional way of

fish drying is through open sun drying.

Fish is presently being dried in the open by laying the fish on sand beds. This practice is

unhygienic and cannot be considered as a good food manufacturing practice. Open sun drying

also has chances of contamination and delay in drying as drying is only possible in sunny

days.

Figure 19: Present Practice of Fish Drying (Open Sun)

Solar dryers basically make the two processes faster that happen during drying (mass transfer

of moisture from product to surrounding air and heat transfer to the product).

The dryers increase the temperature in the drying area and may also use convection methods

to move out the humidity.

The most common type of solar dryer being used in fish drying is solar air heaters with

drying chambers. This type of dryer is available in the market from several manufacturers.


Table 15: Specifications and costs of solar collector based dryers48

Dryer Type Solar Air Heaters with Drying Chambers

Technology Solar Collector Based

Manufacturers, PEN, ATR, NRG

Capacity 70 to 1000 kg

47 Personal communication with Prof A K Das, IIT Guwahati 48 Personal communication, Social Business Initiative team, Bayer Material Science

26

Cost (INR) 556,000 for 100 kg dryer (with installation cost, training and AMC)

Operation and maintenance costs: Lifetime of these types of dryers is up to 15 years.49

Figure 20: Solar Dryers

Status: Solar dryers have been tried for fish drying at several locations across the country.

However, different varieties of fish have different drying requirements viz. drying time,

drying rate, etc. and there is a varying mix of different fish species in the catch caught daily

by fishermen. Designing an appropriate solar dryer with this flexibility remains a challenge.

Example: In Odisha, under the Integrated Coastal Zone management project50, 115 SHGs

have been developed for solar fish drying, focusing in two coastal belts – Paradeep to

Dhamra and Gopalpur to Chilka. 50 Solar dryers have already been purchased and distributed

to SHGs. The project is providing 100% financial support as a grant. Solar dryers were

procured from ATR Solar, Madurai at a cost of INR 556,000 each.

49 http://ceew.in/pdf/CEEW-WWF-RE+Renewables-Beyond-Electricity-Dec13.pdf last accessed on 6th June 2014 50 Integrated Coastal Zone management is a World Bank assisted project, being implemented in India through MoEF, [five year pilot project (already completed 3 years)] implemented in 3 coastal states (Odisha, Gujarat and West Bengal), focused on strengthening livelihoods, being implemented by govt. agencies of corresponding sectors.


27

5. Khadi and Village Industries


The term Khadi is used for hand-spun and hand-woven fabric. A significant part of the rural

population in India is dependent on garment making (spinning, weaving, stitching) and other

small village industries like processing of minor forest produce, oil mills, spice processing,

etc. The hand-loom weaving sector was promoted in India as a gainful economic activity

because of the fact that it required little investment, provided individuals with gainful

employment and was seen as a means of ensuring self-sufficiency and the survival of

country’s traditional crafts and industry.

The handloom sector is the largest economic activity after agriculture, providing

employment to about 3.47 million weavers. Of this, 47.5% were full time weavers and others

part-time. The Joint Handloom and Power loom Census conducted in 1995-96 showed that a

large population of weaver households belong to the disadvantaged strata of society and

60.6% of total weavers being women weavers. The number of handlooms in India at the time

was estimated at 3.5 million.51

Figure 21: Pictures from a Weaving Cluster in Assam

The bamboo processing sector also offers enormous scope for improvement of rural and

tribal livelihoods. Bamboo is among the most important resources to be leveraged towards

the alleviation of rural poverty and empowerment of women. According to the Planning

Commission’s 10th plan document, an estimated 8.6 million Indians depend upon Bamboo

51 http://planningcommission.nic.in/plans/stateplan/upsdr/vol-2/Chap_b3.pdf Last accessed on 4th April 2014

http://planningcommission.nic.in/plans/stateplan/upsdr/vol-2/Chap_b3.pdf

28

for their livelihoods. The rural livelihood opportunities are for bamboo cultivation and

aggregation.

Figure 22: Women making Bamboo Products in Barpeta, Assam

Figure 23: Bamboo Products made at Barpeta Cane and Bamboo Cluster

Most of the activities in these sectors are carried out by artisans at household level with

labour contributed by the entire family. It is dispersed and spread across thousands of

villages.

Khadi and Village Industries Commission (KVIC) under the Scheme of Fund for

Regeneration of Traditional Industries (SFURTI) has selected several khadi and bamboo

processing clusters for implementation of the scheme. One of the components of the scheme

is to set-up a common facility centre to provide the artisans with a common work-shed with

equipment for mechanized and specialized work.52

Common facility centres of khadi clusters are provided with looms, stitching machines and

some other equipment.

52 http://www.kviconline.gov.in/sfurti/ Last accessed on 11th May 2014

http://www.kviconline.gov.in/sfurti/

29


5.2.1 Solar lighting for households Insufficient lighting due to poor access to, and reliability of, electricity during early morning

and evening hours is affecting the artisan’s work. Providing them with solar lanterns or solar

home lighting systems will help in increasing their productivity. The specifications and costs

of solar lanterns and home lighting systems are provided in table 1 and table 2 in chapter 1.

5.2.2 Solar PV based power for lighting and powering equipment at common

facility centres The electricity needs for lighting and powering small machines in common facility centre

can be met by the use of solar energy. In the khadi sector, activities like weaving and

stitching are usually done at common facility centres. There is also a requirement to power

lights and for a fan for providing comfortable working condition.

Figure 24: Common work-sheds with looms at common facility centre in Nalbari, Assam

Figure 25: Sewing Machines at common facility centre in Nalbari, Assam

Specifications and costs

Some of the silk and khadi common facility centres have the requirement of solar power

pack of 3-5 kWp to meet their electricity need. Solar PV systems without a battery also can

be used if the load is mostly during the day. If power is required during other times of the

day, then solar PV systems with a battery can be used.

30

Table 16: Specifications and costs - solar power packs for common facility centre

Solar PV systems (without battery)

Solar PV systems (with battery)

Capacity (kWp) 3 4 5 3 4 5

Cost of the system (in INR) as per MNRE benchmark cost

3,00,000 4,00,000 5,00,000 5,70,000 7,60,000 9,50,000

Status: Solar PV packs for generating electricity to meet various needs are now mature

products.

Example: The Energy and Resources Institute (TERI) has installed Solar PV packs in the

village level centres. The electricity generated is used to power machines like bamboo cross-

cutting and splitting machine, bamboo slivering machine, etc.53.

More details of the project can be found on the link:

http://www.teriin.org/index.php?option=com_ongoing&task=about_project&pcode=2008D

G07

5.2.3 Solar powered charkha54 and loom

Manually operated charkha and loom can be operated using solar power. Mahatma Gandhi

Institute for Rural Industrialisation (MGIRI), Wardha has developed several technologies

such as solar sewing machine, solar charkha, solar power loom which are now in the stage of

‘technology transfer’. Solar powered charkha and looms can help in reducing the hardship

involved in manual operation and increasing the production rate.

Specifications and costs55:

Solar charkha is developed by incorporating a specially designed 12 volt PMDC (permanent

magnet direct current) motor and pulleys which can be directly mounted on the charkha. The

specifications and costs of solar charkha is provided below:

53 http://www.teriin.org/index.php?option=com_ongoing&task=about_project&pcode=2008DG07 Last accessed on 12th may 2014 54 Charkha or spinning wheel is a device for spinning thread or yarn from natural or synthetic fibres 55 Business Plan for Decentralised Solar Technology Based Garment Manufacturing Units in Vidarbha Region of Maharashtra, August 2012, GIZ.

http://www.teriin.org/index.php?option=com_ongoing&task=about_project&pcode=2008DG07



31

Table 17: Specification and cost of solar charkha

Solar PV module

Motor Drive Battery Production capacity

Cost (INR)

8 Spindle charkha 60 Wp 12 V DC, 30 W 12 V, 26 A-h 1 kg/day 30,000

24 Spindle charkha 200 Wp NA NA 3 kg/day 60,000

The specification and cost of solar loom is provided below:

Table 18: Specification and cost of solar loom

Solar PV module Production capacity Cost (INR)

Solar powered loom 160 Wp 15 meter fabric/day 150,000

Figure 26: Solar charkha at Limbdi, Gujrat56

Status: The field trials of solar charkha have been conducted in different parts of the

country, the results of which are available at

http://www.ijmer.com/papers/Vol3_Issue4/AR3419651979.pdf .

Example: Governments of Uttarakhand and Gujarat have schemes for promoting solar

charkha in khadi industries. The details of the schemes can be found at

http://www.ureda.uk.gov.in/pages/display/125-solar-charkha (Uttarakhand) and

http://www.khadigujarat.in/solar-charkha-scheme.html (Gujarat).

56 http://www.ijmer.com/papers/Vol3_Issue4/AR3419651979.pdf Last accessed on 3rd June 2014

http://www.ijmer.com/papers/Vol3_Issue4/AR3419651979.pdf

http://www.ureda.uk.gov.in/pages/display/125-solar-charkha

http://www.khadigujarat.in/solar-charkha-scheme.html


32

5.2.4 Biomass gasifiers based on bamboo waste for power generation for lighting and powering equipment at common facility centers of bamboo clusters

The bamboo common facility centres are usually equipped with machines for bamboo

cutting, splitting, nailing, etc. Typical power requirement of these machines varies from 700

W to 1.5 kW.

Large amount of bamboo and cane waste are generated during the processing of bamboo for

manufacturing various products like furniture, decorative and utility items. These wastes can

be utilized in a suitable gasifier for power generation to power the equipment, lights and fans

at the common facility centres.


The specifications and costs of a biomass gasifier system which can meet the requirements at

a common facility centre are given below.

Table 19: Specifications and costs - Biomass gasifier57

Power rating of gasifier (kWe) 10

Raw material input (kg/h) * 16-18

Cost (INR) 10,00,000

*raw material in this case would be bamboo or cane waste

Status: Bamboo based biomass gasification has been promoted by the National Bamboo

Mission and the technology has been implemented in several places of India. More

information can be found on the website of the National Mission on Bamboo Applications

(http://www.bambootech.org/)

Example: Under the National Mission on Bamboo Applications, a 25 kWe bamboo based

gasifier was successfully commissioned and demonstrated at Bashistha, Assam. Daily

operation of the gasifier is being done by the Assam Forest Division. The gasifier has been

trial tested for over 50 hours and engine run at different loads for more than 25 hours.

Around 10 hours of testing has been done at a load in excess of 20 kWe. The biomass

consumption at 22 kWe load has found to be 1.05 kg/kWh.58 Several other examples can also

be found from the website National Mission on Bamboo Applications.

(http://www.bambootech.org/)

57 Personal communication with Infinite Energy, New Delhi 58http://www.bambootech.org/tslink.asp?subsubid=60&subid=6&sname=PROJECTS&subname=ACTIVITIES&lid=373 Last accessed on 14th May 2014

http://www.bambootech.org/

http://www.bambootech.org/tslink.asp?subsubid=60&subid=6&sname=PROJECTS&subname=ACTIVITIES&lid=373


33

6. Biomass Energy Based Informal Industries/ Small Business


Biomass energy sources account for 34 - 41 percent of total primary energy requirements in

India. Rural populations in India rely on biomass for most of their domestic and industrial

energy needs, using traditional low-efficiency wood-burning technologies. In the year 2000,

it was estimated that South India alone had about 8 million people directly or indirectly

employed in micro-, small and artisanal industries where fuel wood is the major energy

source.59


6.2.1 Improved biomass cook stoves

An improved biomass cook stove is a combustion device which burns biomass fuel more

efficiently with reduced emissions and offers cleaner cooking energy solutions. Biomass cook

stoves are of two types; fixed type and portable type. The portable cook stoves are also of two

types; natural draft and forced draft. Advanced cook stoves utilizing fans are more efficient

than natural draft ones.

Improved biomass cook stoves can be applied in several unorganized small

industries/businesses operating in rural areas like commercial cooking, arecanut (betel nut)

boiling and drying, jaggery and khova production, rubber-band vulcanizing, ayurvedic

medicine production, silk reeling, textile bleaching and drying, cashew processing and the

making of snacks.

Different types of improved biomass cook stoves are being developed and promoted by

various organizations, NGOs, entrepreneurs and industries in India. MNRE launched its

National Biomass Cook stoves Initiative (NBCI) in 2009 with the primary aim to enhance the

use of improved biomass cook stoves.

As part of NBCI, MNRE came up with the following performance parameters on compliance

of which the approval is given.

59 http://www.snap-undp.org/elibrary/Publications/Case15-TIDE_India.pdf. Last accessed on 19th May 2014

http://www.snap-undp.org/elibrary/Publications/Case15-TIDE_India.pdf

34

Table 20: Stipulated performance parameters for MNRE approval60

Sl. No.

Type of Biomass Cook stove

Standard performance parameters

Thermal efficiency (%) CO (g/MJd)* PM (mg/MJd)#

1 Natural draft type Not less than 25 ��

2. Forced draft type Not less than 35 ��

* g/MJd is grams per mega joule delivered to the pot

# mg/MJd is milligrams per mega joule delivered to the pot

A list of approved models of portable improved biomass cook stoves by various suppliers can

be found at the MNRE website (link: http://www.mnre.gov.in/schemes/decentralized-

systems/national-biomass-cookstoves-initiative/ )


The following table gives the key information on different types of biomass cook stoves and

using different fuels.

Table 21: Specifications and costs – Improved biomass cook stoves61

Type of stove

Other specifications

Fuel Fuel consumption (kg/h)

Cost of the stove (INR)

Tava (1 m length and 0.7 m diameter) Firewood 4 – 5 24,500

Multiuse Stove

Stove diameter of 0.3 m

Firewood 2.5 9,000

Briquette 1 – 1.5 11,000

Charcoal 0.7 10,250

Loose biofuel stove

Stove diameter of 0.7 m

Cashew shells, wood shavings, tamarind shells,

coconut shells, etc.

4 – 5 18,000

Operation and maintenance costs: The biomass cook stoves use locally available biomass

as fuel, so O&M costs are minimal. MNRE has specified that the cook stoves supplier should

give a warranty for a two year period, and should ensure that the life of the cook stoves is at

least five years.

60 http://www.mnre.gov.in/schemes/decentralized-systems/national-biomass-cookstoves-initiative/ Last accessed on 19th May 2014 61 Personal communication with Ms. Svati Bhogle, Sustaintech India Private limited, Karnataka

http://www.mnre.gov.in/schemes/decentralized-systems/national-biomass-cookstoves-initiative/



35

Figure 27: Improved biomass cook stove62

Figure 28: Biomass cook stoves using husks as fuel

Status: Improved biomass cook stoves have been developed and promoted by various

companies, organizations and MNRE has had national programmes on cook stoves and has

put in place suitable standards. The technology is being constantly being researched and

improved.

Example: Technology Informatics Design Endeavour (TIDE), an NGO based in Banglore,

has been working in improving biomass cook stoves. By the year 2009, TIDE had supplied

11,840 small business stoves and 7,000 domestic stoves, benefitting about 121,000 people.

TIDE has developed stoves specific to the relevant sector of use, based on a survey of need

and current usage. Stoves like silk-reeling stove, ayurvedic medicine stove, areca stove and

improved tava cook stove (for dosa, rotis, omelettes) were developed.62

62 http://www.ashden.org/files/TIDE%20full_0.pdf. Last accessed on 19th May 2014

http://www.ashden.org/files/TIDE%20full_0.pdf

36

Bibliography

Poultry

1) Kumar, A. (2014) Indian Poultry Sector - Integrating Poor & Small-holders: Opportunities &

Challenges South Asia Pro-poor Livestock Policy Programme. Available from:


[Accessed on 14th may 2014]

2) MNRE (2013) Technical specifications for white led (w-led) based solar photovoltaic lighting

systems. Available from: http://mnre.gov.in/file-manager/UserFiles/led_spls_2013_14.pdf [Accessed

on 20th April 2014]

3) MNRE (2013) Technical specifications for Compact fluorescent lamp (CFL) based solar photovoltaic

lighting systems. Available from: http://mnre.gov.in/file-manager/UserFiles/cfl_spls_2013_14.pdf

[Accessed on 20th April 2014]

4) MNRE (2013) Amendment in the bench mark cost for “Off-grid and Decentralized Solar Applications

Programme” being implemented under the Jawaharlal Nehru National Solar Mission (JNNSM)

during 2013-14.

Available from: http://mnre.gov.in/file-manager/UserFiles/amendmends-benchmarkcost-aa-jnnsm-

2013-14.pdf [Accessed on 3rd March 2014]

5) Makhijani, S. (2013) Jamaican poultry producer not chicken about solar investment Worldwatch

Institute. Available from: http://blogs.worldwatch.org/revolt/jamaican-poultry-producer-not-chicken-

about-solar-investment/ [Accessed on 19th April 2014]

6) Ashden (n.d.) Biomass briquettes and pellets. Available from: http://www.ashden.org/briquettes

[Accessed on 10th May 2014]

Dairy

1. Government of India. Department of Animal Husbandry, Dairying & Fisheries (2013) Annual report 2012-13. Available from: http://www.dahd.nic.in/dahd/WriteReadData/Annual%20Report%202012-13%20EFG.pdf [Accessed on 5th April 2014]

2. NIRD (n.d.) A study on improvement in rural livelihoods through dairy farming. Available from:

http://www.nird.org.in/nird_docs/ven_finrepo.pdf [Accessed on 14th May 2014]

3. Pavan, M.V. (2014) Solar power comes to milk coops' rescue. The Times of India, 6th Mar. retrieved

from: http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/

4. Promethean power systems (2014). Available from: http://www.coolectrica.com/ [Accessed on 14th

April 2014]








http://www.ashden.org/briquettes

http://www.dahd.nic.in/dahd/WriteReadData/Annual%20Report%202012-13%20EFG.pdf

http://www.nird.org.in/nird_docs/ven_finrepo.pdf

http://www.coolectrica.com/

37

Horticulture

1) Planning Commission (2011) Report of the working group on horticulture and plantation crops.

Available from:

http://planningcommission.gov.in/aboutus/committee/wrkgrp12/agri/wg_horti1512.pdf [Accessed on

20th May 2014]

2) RWSN (n.d.) Swiss solar water pump drive. Available from:



3) Bern University of Applied Sciences (n.d.) The low power solar water pump. Available from:



4) MNRE (2013) Amendment in the bench mark cost for “Off-grid and Decentralized Solar Applications

Programme” being implemented under the Jawaharlal Nehru National Solar Mission (JNNSM)

during 2013-14. Available from:http://mnre.gov.in/file-manager/UserFiles/amendmends-

benchmarkcost-aa-jnnsm-2013-14.pdf [Accessed on 20th March 2014]

5) MNRE (2013) Solar photovoltaic water pumping systems. Available from: http://mnre.gov.in/file-

manager/UserFiles/technical-specification_spwps_2013_14.pdf [Accessed on 20th March 2014]

6) GIZ (2013) Solar water pumping for irrigation. Available from: http://www.igen-

re.in/files/giz__2013__report_solar_water_pumping_for_irrigation_in_bihar.pdf [Accessed on 14th

May 2014]

7) PVTECH (2014) India launches US$163 million PV water pump programme . Available from:

http://www.pv-

tech.org/news/india_to_provide_thousands_of_solar_pv_water_pumps_with_rd_help_from_sunedi.

[Accessed on 16th March 2014]

8) Government of Odisha, Directorate of horticulture (2014) Project report on 2 MT cool chamber.

Available from: http://www.orissa.gov.in/dhc/Download/2MT-Cold-Room.pdf [Accessed on 26th

March 2014]

9) Government of Odisha, Directorate of horticulture (2014) ) Project report on 5 MT cool chamber.

Available from:http://www.orissa.gov.in/dhc/Download/5MT-Cold-Room.pdf [Accessed on 26th

March 2014]

10) Government of Odisha, Directorate of horticulture (2014) Project report on 10 MT cool chamber.

Available from:http://www.orissa.gov.in/dhc/Download/10MT-Cold-Room.pdf [accessed on 26th

March 2014]

11) MNRE (n.d.) MNRE Handbook of Solar Air Heating for Drying and Space Heating. Available from:

http://www.pen.net.in/website/Handbook%20on%20solar%20drying.pdf [ Accessed on: 25th April

2014]

http://planningcommission.gov.in/aboutus/committee/wrkgrp12/agri/wg_horti1512.pdf












http://www.pen.net.in/website/Handbook%20on%20solar%20drying.pdf

38

Fisheries

1) Government of India, National Fisheries Development Board (2014) About Indian fisheries. Available

from: http://nfdb.ap.nic.in/html/aboutus.htm [Accessed on 29th March 2014]

2) Planning Commission (2001) Report of the working group on Fisheries for the tenth five year plan

Available from: http://planningcommission.nic.in/aboutus/committee/wrkgrp/fishery.pdf [Accessed

on 29th March 2014]

3) Planning Commission (n.d.) Handloom. Available from:

http://planningcommission.nic.in/plans/stateplan/upsdr/vol-2/Chap_b3.pdf [Accessed on 4th April

2014]

Khadi and Village Industries

1) KVIC (2014) About SFURTI. Available from: http://www.kviconline.gov.in/sfurti/ [Accessed on 11th

May 2014]

2) TERI (2012) Solar Multi Utility for Assam. Available from:


[Accessed on 12th may 2014]

3) National Mission on Bamboo Applications (2014) Available from:

http://www.bambootech.org/tslink.asp?subsubid=60&subid=6&sname=PROJECTS&subname=ACTI

VITIES&lid=373 [Accessed on 14th May 2014]

4) International Journal of Modern Engineering Research (2013) Report on Technology Transfer of

Solar Charkha in Khadi Sector. Available from:

http://www.ijmer.com/papers/Vol3_Issue4/AR3419651979.pdf. [Accessed on 3rd June 2014]

Biomass Energy Based Informal Industries

1) UNDP (2012) Entrepreneurship at grassroots: Diffusion of biomass devices in informal industries in

India. Available from: http://www.snap-undp.org/elibrary/Publications/Case15-TIDE_India.pdf


2) MNRE (2011) National Biomass Cook stoves Programme Available from:



3) Ashden (2009) Case study summary Technology, Infomatics, Design, Endeavour (TIDE), India.

Available from: http://www.ashden.org/files/TIDE%20full_0.pdf. [Accessed on 19th May 2014]

http://nfdb.ap.nic.in/html/aboutus.htm

http://planningcommission.nic.in/aboutus/committee/wrkgrp/fishery.pdf

http://planningcommission.nic.in/plans/stateplan/upsdr/vol-2/Chap_b3.pdf

http://www.kviconline.gov.in/sfurti/





http://www.snap-undp.org/elibrary/Publications/Case15-TIDE_India.pdf


http://www.ashden.org/files/TIDE%20full_0.pdf

39

Acknowledgements

1) Mr. Anish Kumar, PRADAN (NGO), Delhi

2) Mr Arvindra Singh, Perfect Biogas Generators, Delhi

3) Kirloskar Integrated Technologies Ltd, Maharashtra

4) Jay Khodiyar Machine Tools, Gujarat

5) Radhe Engineering Co., Gujarat

6) Mr. Ananth Aravamudan, SELCO Foundation, Karnataka

7) Promethean Power systems, Maharashtra

8) Bayer Material Science, Delhi

9) Dr. S.P. Gon Chaudhuri, Ashden India Renewable Energy Collective

10) Ecozen Solutions, Maharashtra

11) Prof. A K Das, IIT Guwahati, Assam

12) Ms. Svati Bhogle, Sustaintech India private limited, Karnataka

13) Supernova Technologies, Gujarat

14) Ms Rashmi Saraswat, Mahila Chetna Manch, Madhya Pradesh

15) Mr Somnath Roy, Action for Social Advancement (ASA), Madhya Pradesh

16) Mr. P.C. Das, Director, KVIC

17) Mr. A. Malik, Anchalik Gram Unnayan Parishad, Barpeta, Assam

18) Mr. Mukul Chandra Medhi, Barkhetri Unnayan Samity, Mukalmua, Nalbari, Assam

19) Mr. Pankaj Bezbaruah, AFPRO, Assam

20) Mr. Loknath Mohanty ,AFPRO, Odisha

21) Mr. Swayam Bikash Das, Dy. Director (Horticulture), Odisha

22) Mr. Bishnupada Sethi, Commissioner & Secretary, Fisheries & Animal Resource

Development Department, Odisha

23) Mr. Suvendu Roy, Sambedna, Odisha

24) Mr. P.R. Raut, Deputy Director (marine), Odisha

25) Mr. J K Biswal, Addl. Fisheries Officer (marine), Odisha

26) Mr. Kirti Bhushna Pani, PRADAN, Odisha

27) Mr. P.G. Dora, OSD, OMFED, Odisha

28) Dr. R.N. Pradhan, Poultry Consultant

29) Mr. Ramakanta Panda, Freedom(NGO), Odisha

30) Mr. Deb Kumar Patra, Cold Chain Solutions, Odisha

31) Dr. N.C. Biswal, Fishery Expert, Odisha

40

32) Mr. Smruti Ranjan Das, Rural Development Expert, Integrated Coastal Zone Management

Project, Odisha

33) Mr. Hemant Lamba, Ashden India Renewable Energy Collective

34) Mr. Naresh Joshi, Ashden India Renewable Energy Collective

35) Mr Amiya Sharma, Rashtriya Gramin Vikas Nidhi (RGVN), Assam

36) Mr Richard Sequeira, Fosera, Delhi.