1 / 9

Cost-benefit analysis of energy efficient interventions in low-cost housing

HARALD WINKLER Lwazikazi Tyani, Randall Spalding-Fecher, Khorommbi Matibe. Cost-benefit analysis of energy efficient interventions in low-cost housing. ENERGY & DEVELOPMENT RESEARCH CENTRE University of Cape Town May 2001. INTRODUCTION.

dakota
Download Presentation

Cost-benefit analysis of energy efficient interventions in low-cost housing

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. HARALD WINKLER Lwazikazi Tyani, Randall Spalding-Fecher, Khorommbi Matibe Cost-benefit analysis of energy efficient interventions in low-cost housing ENERGY & DEVELOPMENT RESEARCH CENTREUniversity of Cape Town May 2001

  2. INTRODUCTION • Objective- to analyse the cost-effectiveness of energy efficiency interventions in low-cost housing from national and consumer perspectives • Types of low-cost houses considered were • 30m2 RDP house, • row house and • informal house • Types of interventions analysed included: • ceilings, roof and wall insulation • window size, partition • efficient lighting and solar water heating

  3. Large benefits for society

  4. Benefit per household

  5. Not always affordable for poor households 1,000 500 - Rands Row RDP house house CFLs -500 Water Shacks Solar Heaters -1,000 -1,500

  6. Less than R1000 subsidy is needed

  7. Potential financing opportunities • Potential financing from climate change mechanisms • Carbon revenue could be similar size as subsidy requirement • At $10 per ton of carbon, R500 - R1,000 per household over 20 years • Requires costs to develop project • feasibility • monitoring • NOT the only financing option • bilateral funding • multi-lateral development banks • Further study on local financing options (EEU)

  8. Conclusion and Recommendations • Analyses presented here indicates that investments in energy efficiency are economical and environmentally attractive at a social level • Capital subsidy required • Interventions with negative costs are “no regret” options • Several other EE interventions have potential as CDM projects • Opportunity for co-funding initial capital cost • Explore funding options

More Related