This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 649724. This document reflects only the author's view. The Agency is not responsible for any information it contains.

Projektzyklus in H2020 von Antragstellung bis Projektabschluss – Erfahrungen aus dem Projekt COMBI

Johannes Thema 10. Oktober 2018 Erfolgreich forschen in Europa – Netzwerkveranstaltung Energie Zenit, Mühlheim a.d.R.

[Use your partner] [ logo here ]

www.combi-project.eu

Agenda Erfahrungen aus dem Projektzyklus des COMBI-Projekts

2

§  Projekthintergrund, Ziele, Aufbau §  Überblick Projektphasen und Schlüsseltermine §  Rückblick: Erfolgsfaktoren für Antrag §  Rückblick: Schwierigkeiten im Projekt

COMBI webinar / IEPPEC Energy Evaluation Academy

Project background & objectives Quantification of multiple impacts of EE

§  Quantification & monetization of multiple impacts §  By EU member state & 21 EEI actions §  Common framework scenarios: based on 21 energy efficiency improvement (EEI) actions §  Extended Cost-Benefit analysis

-  Funded by EU Horizon 2020 EE12 (GA 649724, approx 1M€)

§  March 2015 – May 2018

3

Air pollution air pollutants health eco-system

Resources material footprint abiotic/biotic energy/non-energy unused extraction

Social welfare disposable income health productivity

Macro economy employment/ GDP public budget Fossil fuel/ETS prices Terms of Trade

Energy system/security energy system costs energy security

Coordinated by

COMBI webinar / IEPPEC Energy Evaluation Academy

COMBI structure

4

Impacts modelling Dedicated models

Input data COMBI stock models à BAS & EE scenario

•  2030 additional energy savings (1647 TWh)

•  additional energy cost savings (225 bn €)

•  total investment costs

8000

9000

10000

11000

12000

13000

14000

15000

16000

17000

2015 2030

TWh/a

PRIMES 2007 BAS

PRIMES 2016 BAS

EUCO27

EUCO30

EUCO+33

EUCO+35

EUCO+40

COMBI REF

COMBI EE

additional data: stocks, scenario levels etc.

COMBI online tool

•  Physical impacts •  Monetary impacts •  Cost-Benefit

calculations

user settings

D2.2 EEI action description (+ Annex on scenarios) D#.1 Literature reviews

D#.4 Quantification reports

D2.1 Synthesis lit. review

D2.4 Synthesis methodology

D2.7 Quantification report

D8.1 Tool manual & document.

D8.2 Policy report

D8.3 Summary brochure

Impact category models

air pollution (health, eco-systems)

GAINS

resources MIPS/Lifecycle assessment

health (indoor air quality) productivity

Socio-economic COMBI-model

economy (short/long-term)

Input-Output CGE (CECEM)

energy system energy security

COMBI energy balance model

COMBI webinar / IEPPEC Energy Evaluation Academy

Projektphasen & Schlüsseltermine Überblick aus dem COMBI-Projekt (nicht linear!)

AntragsphaseProjektlaufzeit

Projektabschluss03/2015 05/2018 Ende201802/2014

Projektphasen & Schlüsseltermine Überblick aus dem COMBI-Projekt

AntragsphaseProjektlaufzeit

Projektabschluss03/2015 05/2018 Ende201802/2014

ErsteIdeen

Ansprachemgl.Partner

KonsorDumfix,BeginnAntrag

Budget,Antragsbearbeitung

Einreichung

06/2014

Zuschlag

11/2014

ÄnderungswünscheEASMEAnpassungDOW

ÜberführungAntraginECASàGAprep

Unterschri3GA

02

ProjektstartKick-Off

+ExchangeMeeDng

2.ExchangeMeeDng

InterimReport

Reviewplanned

Reviewactual

Finalconference

09/2017

Projekt-ende

Submissionfinalreports

Q&A1

Q&A2

09/2018

Erfolgsfaktoren Auszug aus proposal evaluation form

Criterion 1 – excellence §  Clarity and pertinence of the objectives §  Credibility of the proposed approach §  Soundness of the concept, including trans-disciplinary considerations, where relevant §  Ambition, innovation potential, and is beyond the state of the art (e.g. ground-breaking objectives, novel concepts and approaches) Criterion 2 - Impact §  Call relevance §  Innovation §  Strengthening the competitiveness & innovations (poss.: delivering to the markets) §  Any other environmental and socially important impacts §  Convincing communication & dissemination concept

Criterion 3 - Quality and efficiency of the implementation §  Coherence and effectiveness of the work plan, incl. task & € distribution §  Complementarity of the participants within the consortium (when relevant) §  Convincing management structures and procedures, including risk and innovation management

Rückblick: Erfolgsfaktoren Aus project proposal evaluation

Laut proposal evaluation: 13/15 Punkte (threshold: 10) §  Excellence 4,5/5: -  „objectives of the proposal are very clear and the pertinence to the call for proposals is very

good“ -  „credible to carry out the idea and very well described“ -  „concept is feasable and sound because clearly defined, concrete and measurable“

§  Impact 4/5: -  „approaches well documented... good explanations... well referenced“ -  „work plan coherent with anticipated impacts“ -  „... but limited in reach and effectiveness as it ignores important institutional, social, personal

and cultural barriers to energy efficiency“ -  „more participation in conferences and/or more peer-reviewed articles in journals would add

some positive value“ §  Quality and efficiency of implementation: 4,5/5: -  „structure solid, coherent with objectives... WP and D descriptions clear and adequate“ -  „resources appropriate to the goals“ -  „complementarity of partners very good... cover needed skills“ -  „more interaction between partners recommended“

Erfolgsfaktoren Ziel: Überzeugung des Proposal Evaluators §  Einstieg: schnelles Verständnis der Idee und Struktur §  Abhaken der Erfolgskriterien für Evaluator ermöglichen Inhaltlich §  Klare Idee §  Gute Begründung der Forschungsfragen §  Klares Vorgehen, Schritte, Arbeitsteilung §  Relevanz für Call, ggf. sinnvoll: Fokus auf einzelne Aspekte

Formal §  einfache, klare Sprache (gutes Englisch vorausgesetzt) §  Fachbegriffe, Konzepte, Theorien allgemeinverständlich formulieren §  Gute grafische Aufbereitung (z.B. WP-Struktur, Workflows, D-Zusammenhänge)

Rückblick: Schwierigkeiten Antragstellung und Projektabwicklung

§  Konsortium: geeignete, kompetente Partner, wenn mgl. bekannt §  Zeitrahmen (Projekt und Antrag) -  ausreichend früher Beginn (Konsortiumsbildung, Antrag, Arbeitsverteilung) -  klarer Zeitplan für Antragsprozess -  frühzeitige Aufgabenverteilung -  Zeitliche Puffer einplanen

§  Arbeitsaufteilung (Antrag, später Projekt) -  Lead WP description je Partner (Gliederungen vorgeben/abstimmen) -  Koordinator lead: Management-WP, übergreifende Teile (Excellence, Impact) -  Partner: z.B. Universitäten (Doktoranden? Ressourcen?)

•  Vorarbeiten (Methoden, Modelle, Daten) •  Personelle Kapazitäten (MA, Teams) für Ausfallsicherheit

-  Interaktion zw. WPs sicherstellen §  Projektbearbeitung -  Hoher Koordinationsaufwand: Interaktionen, Verzögerungen, Critical Risks -  Review meetings (interim, mglw. final) -  Exchange meetings

Zum mitnehmen

Klar

einfach

grafisch/tabellarisch

ehrlich

KriterienundTemplate-Inhaltebeantworten

Passende,kompetente,bekanntePartner

This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 649724. This document reflects only the author's view. The Agency is not responsible for any information it contains.

Vielen Dank Johannes Thema johannes.thema@wupperinst.org Wuppertal Institut für Klima, Umwelt, Energie Abteilung: Energie-, Verkehrs- und Klimapolitik

FOLLOW US! Websites http://combi-project.eu www.wupperinst.org On Twitter @COMBI_project @wupperinst

COMBI Input data 1 21 EEI actions

Difference to PRIMES/EED-IA: •  disaggregated stock analysis model à bottom-up development of scenarios •  not complete energy system (excl. agric., only selected EEI actions, excl. supply sector) •  Multiple data sources: mostly EU stats & projects (ENTRANZE, PRIMES, FHG ISI, ECOFYS)

Buildings (residential & tertiary) Transport Industry

Actions 1 (residential) and 5 (non-residential): refurbishment of building shell + replacement of building systems (space heating, cooling and ventilation)

Actions 2 (residential) and 6 (non-residential): energy efficiency improvements of new dwellings or buildings, focusing on Passive House standards;

Actions 3 (residential) and 7 (non-residential): energy efficiency improvements for lighting systems;

Actions 4 (residential) and 8 (non-residential): energy efficiency improvements of cold appliances (residential) or product cooling (non-residential).

Actions 9 and 12: modal shifts for both passenger and freight transport;

Action 10: energy efficiency improvements of motorized two-wheelers;

Action 11: energy efficiency improvements of passenger cars;

Action 13: energy efficiency improvements of public road transport, i.e. bus or coach;

Action 14: efficiency improvements of light duty trucks (LDTs);

Action 15: efficiency improvements of heavy duty trucks (HDTs).

Action 16: energy efficiency improvements of high temperature process heating (furnaces, ovens, kilns, dryers, …)

Action 17: energy efficiency improvements of low and medium temperature process heating (boilers and steam systems in general);

Action 18: energy efficiency improvements of industrial process cooling and refrigeration;

Action 19: energy efficiency improvements of process specific use of electricity, mainly electrochemical processes in non ferrous metals and chemicals;

Action 20: energy efficiency improvements of motor drive systems, including pumps, compressed air for utilities, compressed gas/air systems for processes; fans and blowers, and other motor applications;

Action 21: energy efficiency improvements of heating, ventilation and air-conditioning (HVAC) systems in industrial buildings.

à Outputs by EEI action and country: •  2030 energy savings (EU total: 1647 TWh) •  energy cost savings (EU total: 131 bn €) •  total investment costs (EU total: 95 bn€ annualised) •  additional data: stocks, scenario levels etc.

8000

9000

10000

11000

12000

13000

14000

15000

16000

17000

2015 2030

TWh/a

PRIMES 2007 BAS

PRIMES 2016 BAS

EUCO27

EUCO30

EUCO+33

EUCO+35

EUCO+40

8000

9000

10000

11000

12000

13000

14000

15000

16000

17000

2015 2030

TWh/a

PRIMES 2007 BAS

PRIMES 2016 BAS

EUCO27

EUCO30

EUCO+33

EUCO+35

EUCO+40

COMBI input data 2 Comparison of COMBI and EED IA (PRIMES 2016) scenarios

-27% à EUCO27

8000

9000

10000

11000

12000

13000

14000

15000

16000

17000

2015 2030

TWh/a

PRIMES 2007 BAS

PRIMES 2016 BAS

EUCO27

EUCO30

EUCO+33

EUCO+35

EUCO+40

8000

9000

10000

11000

12000

13000

14000

15000

16000

17000

2015 2030

TWh/a

PRIMES 2007 BAS

PRIMES 2016 BAS

EUCO27

EUCO30

EUCO+33

EUCO+35

EUCO+40

COMBI REF

COMBI EE

COMBI input data 2 Comparison of COMBI and EED IA (PRIMES 2016) scenarios

more recent statistics COMBI: conservative (ambitious baseline)

excl. agric, industry raw ambition level ≈EUCO+33

-27% à EUCO27

8000

9000

10000

11000

12000

13000

14000

15000

16000

17000

2015 2030

TWh/a

PRIMES 2007 BAS

PRIMES 2016 BAS

EUCO27

EUCO30

EUCO+33

EUCO+35

EUCO+40

8000

9000

10000

11000

12000

13000

14000

15000

16000

17000

2015 2030

TWh/a

PRIMES 2007 BAS

PRIMES 2016 BAS

EUCO27

EUCO30

EUCO+33

EUCO+35

EUCO+40

COMBI REF

COMBI EE

COMBI quantifications Additional savings and impacts

Energy savings Investments Multiple impacts

Multiple impact modelling Overview

Impact category Modelling approach Impacts covered (additional savings)

Air pollution GAINS model (IIASA) Air pollutants (NOx, PM10, PM2.5, SO2, VOC)

Affected ecosystem area (acidification, eutrophication)

Human health (through air pollution)

Resources Life-Cycle modelling (Material Input per service unit/MIPS)

Ecological footprint

(Biotic materials, fossil fuels, metal ores, minerals, unused extraction)

Social welfare Socio-economic modelling

Health from indoor pollution

Health from building conditions (asthma, excess winter deaths)

Labour productivity (residential/tertiary buildings, transport)

Economy Short-term: Input-Output modelling

Employment

GDP

Public budget

Economy Long-term: CGE modelling

Fossil fuel prices

EUA prices

Structural effects

Energy system LEAP modelling Avoided combustion/investment in combustion plants

De-rated capacity margin

Energy security LEAP modelling Energy intensity

Fossil fuel imports

Energy security index

COMBI online tool

Input data

•  energy savings

additional data: stocks, scenario levels etc.

•  investment costs

Impacts modelling

18

COMBI key results Key results (annual values for 2030)

Air pollution Resources Social welfare Economy Energy system

>10,000 avoided pre-

mature deaths due to

PM2.5 (460 mn €) and

442 due to O3 (46 mn

€)

230,000 YOLLs of

avoided life expectancy

loss (26 bn €)

300Mt avoided direct

CO2eq emissions (17

bn €)

850 Mt savings of ma-

terial resources

3,000-24,000 avoided

premature deaths due

to indoor cold

(323 mn €-2.5 bn €)

2,700-22,300 avoided

DALYs due to indoor

dampness related

asthma (338 mn €-2.9

bn €)

39mn additional work-

days (4.7 bn €)

1% rise in GDP

(+161 bn € in GDP)

2.3 mn job-years

+86 bn € for public

budgets

Decrease in fossil fuel

prices (1.3% oil,

-2% coal, -2.9% gas)

Avoided generation of

power from combust-

ibles 257 TWh

(11 bn € of avoided in-

vestment)

Improved energy se-

curity up to 5% lower

fossil fuel import costs

(48 bn €)

WP3 report WP4 report WP5 / WP5a report WP6 report WP7 report

Key policy recommendations

• A more complete picture of (positive and negative) impacts of energy efficiency is a precondition for a hol-

istic assessment of policy impacts on various policy targets and for selecting those instruments and tar-

gets that maximize social welfare.

• An omission of one or more multiple impacts in cost-benefit analysis reduces the cost-effectiveness of EEI

actions below their actual value and leads to an underinvestment (sub-optimal level) in energy efficiency.

If multiple impacts are included into the assessment of policy scenarios, higher ambitions on energy effi-

ciency targets are more cost-effective.

• Energy efficiency is a case not only for cost savings and GHG Mitigation but also for improvements in hu-

man health, environment, agriculture, and can have positive stimulating effects on the economy. Making

more explicit the multiple impacts that concern policy targets of non-energy departments (e.g. health, so -

cial welfare, economy) may lead to a convergence of interest and may encourage inter-departmental and

cross-sectoral cooperation in policy making to pursue common goals.

• Quantified values of multiple impacts are beneficial to gain support for the implementation of respective

energy efficiency policies (from decision-makers, stakeholders and the general public) and to increase the

attractiveness of investments in energy efficiency for potential investors.

• Not the least, energy efficiency policy is a good investment for the finance ministries: a budget surplus of

annually up to € 85bn is more than the necessary energy efficiency policy is likely to cost. The EU should

ensure that all Member States are able to take this prudent investment in energy efficiency policy.

COMBI webinar / IEPPEC Energy Evaluation Academy

COMBI key results Investments, energy cost savings and multiple impacts (bn€ annual in 2030)

a)allEEIacDonsexceptmodalshi^swhichcannotbeincludedtoCBAduetonoavailabilityofinfrastructureinvestmentcostsandtrucksduetounreliabilityofout-datedinvestmentcosts

COMBI key policy recommendations

EE is a case not only for GHG Mitigation but also for human health, environment, agriculture, economy, public budgets

§  Key for policy makers to consider the various (positive and negative) MIs §  Cost-effectiveness of EEI actions: improves substantially from a societal

perspective when including MIs (à omission of MIs leads to an underinvestment in energy efficiency from a societal perspective)

à  Reliable quantifications: can support policy makers in selecting those instruments and targets that maximize social welfare

à  Quantified MI values: beneficial for their communication and promotion to decision-makers, stakeholders and the general public

à  Key to involve respective policy departments: convergence of interest, inter-departmental and cross-sectoral cooperation in policy making to pursue common goals

Further research needs Caveats & interpretation §  COMBI caveats -  sectoral & EEI action coverage -  many impacts could not/not comprehensively be estimated -  quantification techniques: model improvements & Integrated Assessment

(for feedback loops, overlaps & interactions) -  impact values level-dependent (non-linear) à applicable only for COMBI

scenarios §  Knowledge base issues -  more data & research needed -  Evolving: BAS/EE/BAT technologies à Continuous model improvements

necessary §  Impact aggregation issues: inclusion to CBA -  double counting -  non-monetary impacts

àcombi-project.eu/tool/

Access to project results COMBI online tool

23

sensitivity: energy prices, discount rates, impact selection

COMBI webinar / IEPPEC Energy Evaluation Academy

Results: avoided mortality Tool standard mode (pre-aggregated)

24

buildings

transport

industry

à Total EU: 17k avoided deaths/year

COMBI webinar / IEPPEC Energy Evaluation Academy

Cost-Benefit Analysis Marginal energy savings cost curve (excl./incl.* MIs)

COMBI webinar / IEPPEC Energy Evaluation Academy 25

hightemperatureprocess

refurbishment

automobiles

heavydutytrucks

lightdutytrucks

lighDng

*MIsincludedforthisdisplay:avoidedcostsofcombusDblesgeneraDon,health&mortalityfromairpolluDon&buildingcondiDons,producDvity,directGHGemissions.Publicbudgeteffectexcluded.

Cost-Benefit Analysis Marginal energy savings cost curve (excl./incl.* MIs)

COMBI webinar / IEPPEC Energy Evaluation Academy 26

hightemperatureprocess

refurbishment

automobiles

heavydutytrucks

lightdutytrucks

lighDng

*MIsincludedforthisdisplay:avoidedcostsofcombusDblesgeneraDon,health&mortalityfromairpolluDon&buildingcondiDons,producDvity,directGHGemissions.Publicbudgeteffectexcluded.

Traditional cost-benefit analysis Example: CBA of total values

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

M€

yr

Investment

Energy cost savings

Traditional cost-benefit analysis Example: CBA of total values

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

M€

yr

Investment

Energy cost savings

Cumulated energy cost savings

discounDngoflifeDme-savings

Totalcost/benefitcomparison

Expanded Cost-benefit analysis CBA including Multiple Impacts of Energy Efficiency

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

M€

yr

Investment

Energy cost savings

Cumulated energy cost savings

Multiple Impacts

Cumulated MIs

discounDng

Totalcost/benefitcomparison