131
1 Project Completion Report Philippines Chiller Energy Efficiency Project GLOBAL ENVIRONMENT FACILITY TF095991 OZONE TRUST FUND TF096093 December 2016
1
Project Completion Report
Philippines Chiller Energy Efficiency Project GLOBAL ENVIRONMENT FACILITY TF095991
OZONE TRUST FUND TF096093
December 2016
2
CURRENCY EQUIVALENTS
Currency Unit Peso (PhP)
At Appraisal At Project Completion
(April 2010 Exchange Rate) (December 2016 Exchange Rate)
USD 1.00 = PhP 45.00 USD1.00 = PhP 49.00
ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS
CDM Clean Development Mechanism
CoA Commission on Audit
CFC Chlorofluorocarbon
CMIS
DENR
Chiller Monitoring Information System
Department of Environment and Natural Resources
EEID
EMB
ERPA
Environmental Education and Information Division
Environmental Management Bureau
Emissions Reduction Purchase Agreement
FASPS Foreign Assisted and Special Projects Service
FGD
FM
Focus Group Discussion
Financial Management
GEF Global Environment Facility
GWh Gigawatt hour
IAS Internal Audit Service
IFR Interim Financial Report
KfW Kreditanstalt fur Wiederaufbau
MIS Management Information Systems
MMV Measurement, Monitoring and Verification
MWh Megawatt-hour
ODP Ozone Development Potential
ODS
OTF
Ozone Depleting Substance
Ozone Trust Fund
PCEEP Philippines-Chiller Energy Efficiency Project
PDO Project Development Objective
PMC Project Management Contractor
PMU Project Management Unit
PPPDD
PSMD
RAC
RF
Policy, Planning and Program Development Division
Property and Supply Management Division
Refrigeration and Airconditioning
Results Framework
SISMS
SGA
Statistical and Information System Management Section
Sub-grant Agreement
TTL Task Team Leader
TOR Terms of Reference
WB World Bank
3
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Title Page
No.
BASIC DATA 4
LOCATION MAPS 8
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 11
MAIN REPORT
I PROJECT DESCRIPTION 14
II IMPLEMENTATION ACHIEVEMENT 16
III IMPLEMENTATION PERFORMANCE 19
a. Design 19
b. Organization and Management 20
c. Cost and Financing 21
d. Performance of Consultants, Contractors, Chiller Owners and Suppliers 21
e. Engagement of Consultants and Procurement of Goods and Services 22
f. Compliance with Grant Covenants 22
g. Disbursement 24
h. Operation and Maintenance 25
i. Performance of Funding, Executing and Implementing Agencies 25
j. Contracting, Construction and Commissioning 26
IV PROJECT RESULTS 26
a. Economic Re-Evaluation 26
b. Socio-economic and Socio-Cultural Results 27
c. Gender and Development 28
d. Environmental Impacts and Control 28
e. Sustainability 29
V. KEY ISSUES 30
VI. LESSONS LEARNED 31
VII. CONCLUSION 33
a. Overall Assessment 33
b. Evaluation of Performance 34
c. Follow Up Actions Needed 35
APPENDICES
Appendix 1. Notes on the PCEEP Institutional Aspect
Appendix 2. Notes on the PCEEP Technical Aspect
Appendix 3. PCEEP Chiller Pipeline
Appendix 4. PCEEP Financial Matrices
Appendix 5. Summary of PCEEP Satisfaction Survey Focus Group Discussion
Appendix 6. Guidelines on PCEEP Awards and Recognition
Appendix 7. PCEEP Awardees
Appendix 8. Summary of PCEEP Satisfaction Survey
Appendix 9. PCEEP Consultants’ Schedules
Appendix 10. PCEEP Proposed Sustainability Plan
Appendix 11. Photo Documentation
Appendices in File:
1. PCEEP Project Appraisal Document
2. PCEEP Restructuring Paper
3. PCEEP Satisfaction Survey (FGD and Survey Proper) Reports
38
46
75
79
86
89
103
106
110
112
121
4
BASIC DATA
A. Brief Project Profile
Project Title Philippines-Chiller Energy Efficiency Project (PCEEP)
Implementing Agency/Office Department of Environment and Natural Resources
(DENR) – Environmental Management Bureau (EMB)
as the Project Management Unit (PMU)
Fund Source Global Environment Facility (GEF) and Multilateral Fund
(MLF) for the Implementation of the Montreal Protocol
Grant Number GEF Grant No. TF095991
OTF/MLF Grant No. TF096093
Signing of Grant Agreement June 28, 2010
Effectivity Date January 5, 2011
Physical Completion January 1, 2017
Project Cost GEF USD 2.6 Million
OTF USD 1.0 Million
GOP USD 0.325 Million
USD 3.925 Million (Total Project Cost)
Project Overall Objective To phase out ozone depleting substances (ODS)-based and
energy inefficient chillers that would result in energy efficiency
and overall reduction of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions in the
sector
Project General Description The PCEEP is a World Bank (WB)-assisted project which
aims to replace ODS-based inefficient chillers with new
and more energy-efficient new technology chillers through
provision of financial incentive and technical assistance to
a significant number of enterprises both in the private and
public sectors which are identified in the pipeline for the 5-
year plan (CY 2012-2016). PCEEP’s objective is to
accelerate the conversion of existing inefficient ODS-based
chillers to more efficient ones for the country to benefit
from potentially significant energy savings and to
eventually initiate a permanent market transformation of
the chiller sector in the Philippines.
Among the major expected benefits of the project are: a)
increased energy efficiency; b) reduced greenhouse gas
emissions and c) contribution in the phase-out of ODS and
reduction of ODP.
5
B. Project Data
1. Project Cost (USD’ 000)
Cost
Appraisal
Estimate
(PAD)
Restructured
Phase Actual
Total Project 47,900.00 18,000.00 14,471.00
2. Financing Plan (USD ‘000)
Cost
Appraisal
Estimate
(PAD)
Restructured
Phase Actual
Implementation Cost
Private Commercial Sources
GEF Grant
MLF Grant
Germany: Kreditanstalt fur
Wiederaufbau (KfW)
Borrower/Recipient
36,620.00
2,600.00
1,000.00
7,310.00
320.00
14,400.00
2,600.00
1,000.00
325.00
11,679.00
2,018.00
738.00
36.00
TOTAL 47,900.00 18,000.00 14,471.00
3. Cost Breakdown by Project Component (USD’000)
Components/Activities
Appraisal
Estimate
(PAD)
Restructured
Phase Actual
1, Investments to Chiller Replacement
2. Measurement, Monitoring and Verification
3. Performance Standards and Technical
Assistance
4. Project Management
5. Contingency
Total Project Cost
43,845.00
1,821.00
204.00
1,816.00
214.00
47,900.00
17,000.00
205.00
432.00
738.00
18,375.00
13,697.00
35.00
179.00
524.00
14,435.00
4. Project Schedule
Item Appraisal Estimate
(PAD) Actual
Date of Contract with Consultants
Project Management Contract
Individual Consultant
Equipment and Supplies
First Procurement
Last Procurement
Start of Project Operations
Beginning of Startup
Project Completion
July 2010
August 2012
December 2016
05 January 2011
01 January 2017
July 2010
October 2012, October
2013 and October 15
August 2012
December 2016
05 January 2011
01 January 2017
6
5. Project Performance Report Ratings1 of World Bank for PCEEP
Implementation Rating
Reporting Period
Implementation Ratings
Development Objectives Implementation Progress
21 June 2011
12 July 2011
28 December 2011
01 July 2012
13 November 2012
02 June 2013
24 October 2013
27 May 2014
29 December 2014
21 June 2015
30 September 2015
21 April 2016
06 September 2016
18 December 2016
Satisfactory
Moderately Satisfactory
Moderately Satisfactory
Moderately Unsatisfactory
Moderately Unsatisfactory
Moderately Unsatisfactory
Moderately Satisfactory
Moderately Satisfactory
Moderately Unsatisfactory
Moderately Satisfactory
Moderately Satisfactory
Moderately Satisfactory
Satisfactory
Satisfactory
Satisfactory
Moderately Satisfactory
Moderately Unsatisfactory
Moderately Unsatisfactory
Moderately Unsatisfactory
Moderately Unsatisfactory
Moderately Satisfactory
Moderately Satisfactory
Moderately Unsatisfactory
Moderately Satisfactory
Moderately Satisfactory
Moderately Satisfactory
Moderately Satisfactory
Satisfactory
1 http://projects.worldbank.org/P114119/ph-chiller-energy-efficiency-project?lang=en&tab=ratings
7
PROJECT LOCATION MAPS
8
Nationwide Location
9
Greater Manila Area
10
Visayas and Mindanao
11
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The Philippines-Chiller Energy Efficiency Project (PCEEP) was in line with the
country’s strategies to achieving the objectives of the Montreal Protocol, Kyoto Protocol and
Paris Agreement and consistent with the goals of the Medium Term Philippine Development
Plan (MTPDP CY2005-2010) which contributed to the achievement of a more inclusive growth
by supporting the country among others, to reduce the vulnerabilities by expanding the
country’s social safety net, improving disaster risk management, and piloting and expanding
climate change adaptation measures. It contributed to the phase-out of chlorofluorocarbons
(CFCs) and abatement of carbon dioxide (CO2) emission through the accelerated replacement
of energy inefficient and ozone-depleting substances (ODS)-based chillers through the
provision of financial and technical assistance to various chiller applications. In a way, the
Project synergized the phasing-out of ODS, reduction of GHG emissions to the atmosphere
and promotion of energy efficiency throughout the country.
The Project Development Objective (PDO) and Global Environment Objective (GEO)
were to reduce GHG emissions by replacing inefficient old ODS-based chillers. The Project
was to monitor quantifiable indicators which included (i) number of inefficient chillers
replaced by the Project; (ii) phase-out amount of ODS in the RAC servicing sector and (iii)
CO2 emission reductions as direct and indirect Project benefits and (iv) Megawatt-hour (MWh)
saved and MW demand reduced through chiller replacement.
PCEEP was comprised of key components, namely: (i) Component 1 – Investments to
Chiller Replacement which provided financial incentives (or about 15% of new chiller cost) to
accelerate replacement of inefficient chillers to non-ODS energy efficient ones; (ii) Component
2- Measurement, Monitoring and Verification which involved the measurement and data
monitoring related to the power-output function of inefficient chiller to be replaced, electrical
consumption of the new chiller, and cooling output; (iii) Component 3- Performance Standards
and Technical Assistance which aimed to enhance the knowledge and build capacity of Project
participants (i.e. government regulators, chiller manufacturers/suppliers and contractors) on
significant rate-of-return on investment of chiller replacement, different MMV requirements
and technical assistance from the Project, replacement and maintenance of new chillers,
adoption of environment friendly and energy-efficient technologies and ensure sustainability
through building the capacity of relevant stakeholders in energy conservation measures and
refrigerant management, and (iv) Component 4- Project Management which was involved on
the daily supervision of Project management activities.
Project financing was from Global Environment Facility (GEF) with an allocation of
USD 2,600,000.00 and the Multilateral Fund (MLF) for the Implementation of the Montreal
Protocol with an allocation of USD 1,000,000.00. With the restructured phase of the Project,
the closing date for the GEF Trust Fund (TF) was extended from January 1, 2015 to January 1,
2017 to coincide with the closing date of the MLF/OTF Trust Fund (TF) and of Project
termination date.
The PCEEP was a 6-year Project which effectively started on January 05, 2011 with a
physical completion on 01 January 2017.
12
Overall Performance
PDO Level Achievement. At end of 2016, the Project exceeded its end-of- project
targets. Under the PDO Level Results, the PCEEP reflected the following performance: (i)
149% for addressing 45,687 tons of refrigeration (TR) of its target cooling capacity of 30,649
TR; (ii) 121% or 6.9 tons of ozone depleting potential (ODP) of the 5.7 tons ODP consumption
target; (iii) 243% for achieving a cumulative carbon emission reduction as direct Project
benefit of 151.4 kilotons of carbon dioxide equivalent (ktCO2e) from 62.4 ktCO2e end-of-
project target and (iv) 118% or 35.0 Gigawatt-hour (GWh) savings from the 29.7 GWh target
and 189% which means an actual reduction of 18.95 MW from the target of 10 MW.
Under the Intermediate Results Level, the Project achieved for Component 1: (i) a
200% or an actual number of 40 Sub-grant Agreements (SGAs) signed from the end-of-project
target of 20 SGAs and (ii) 134% being able to install 71 new energy efficient chillers from its
53 chiller unit’s end-of-project target. Under Component 2, the Project was able to have 41
chillers connected to the Chiller Management Information System (CMIS) or 58% of 71
chillers expected to generate energy savings. This is 23% higher than the 35% targeted to be
connected to the CMIS. Under Component 3, (i) 193% or having an actual number of recipients
participating in recognition program of 29 from target of 15 recipients and (ii) 216% for
conducting 26 training and workshops out of the 12 end-of-project target. Under Component
4, the Project (i) engaged of six (6) project consultants and five (5) project support staff
throughout the project life, (ii) submitted at least 23 interim financial reports and 5 COA
management reports since its inception in 2011 and (iii) WB was able to conduct 15 review
missions to assess progress in project implementation.
Financial Accomplishment. For the total SARO of PhP162,000,000.00 issued to the
Project, 88% or PhP 142,270,527.00 was actually obligated as of December 31, 2016. About
52% or PhP 73,572,423.00 of the obligated amount was disbursed and this was approximately
45% of the total allotment to the Project. Of the total Project cost (exclusive of GOP) of USD
3,600,000.00, the Project was able to disburse 45% equivalent USD 1,618,319.00 or PhP
73,572,423.00 as of 31 December 2016. GEF actual total disbursement as of 31 December
2016 was USD 1,005,886.00 or PhP 45,711,808.00 which was 39% of total GEF financing
allocation of USD 2,600,000.00. The MLF/OTF reflected a 62% disbursement rate equivalent
to USD 612,434.00 or PhP 27,860,616.00 from USD 1,000,000.00 allocation.
Compliance with grant covenants
The DENR as the implementer was able to comply with the Grant Effectiveness
conditions and legal covenants. The following were called for under the GEF and MLF/OTF
Grant Agreements.
Project Relevance
PCEEP was relevant as it was consistent with the Medium Term Philippine
Development Plan (MTPDP) in terms of provision of climate change mitigations that would
address emission of GHG and replacement of old ODS-based chillers. The Project was in
accordance with the country’s commitment to the Montreal Protocol (MP) on Substances that
Deplete the Ozone Layer where MP mandated a complete phase-out of production and
consumption of new ODS and countries are requested to develop measures for the effective
use of the ODS recovered from the chillers to meet servicing needs in the RAC sector. At end
13
of Project life, an ODP abatement of 121.9% or 6.9 ODP ton from the 5.7 ODP ton
consumption target was realized and about 239.5% was achieved for a cumulative carbon
emission reduction (i.e. as direct Project benefit) of 147.3 ktCO2e from 62.4 ktCO2e end-of-
project target
Project Efficiency
Project was quite efficient in achieving its revised PDO Level and Intermediate Results
targets at 100% level or more without completely consuming its GEF and MLF/OTF financing
allocations. This was also attributed to the lower value for the ex-works for chillers with more
than 1000 TR from the originally estimated normative price of USD 400.00/TR to an actual
price average USD 299.00/TR which led to lower subsidy payments for the actual 45,687 tons
of refrigerants achieved by the Project. Moreover, in terms of Project schedule, PCEEP was
still implemented within the intended 6-year Project implementation period even if there was
restructuring in CY 2013 to improve GEF disbursements and extend the GEF financing to
coincide with the termination of MLF/OTF in January 2017. The implementation of the Project
also contributed to the Philippine commitment to Montreal Protocol relative to DENR
Administrative Order 2013-25 which was within Project timeframe.
Project Effectiveness
Project was effective in pursuing a good partnership with chiller owners, suppliers and
manufacturers for the replacement of old and inefficient ODS-based chillers. Said partnership
contributed to the achievement of Project PDO Level and Intermediate Results Based on the
PCEEP Satisfaction Survey, the Project facilitated the cholorofluorocarbon (CFC) phase-out
obligation with lesser cost to the chiller owners, in the same manner that the project facilitated
the compliance to DENR Administrative Order (DAO) 2013-25 or the Revised Regulation on
the Chemical Control of ODS, and that the Project accelated the replacement of inefficient
ODS- based chillers. Likewise, the Project resulted to a significant reduction of energy
consumption and electricity cost, as well as the promotion of the use of energy efficient chillers.
Moreover, the Project also contributed to market transformation in the chiller industry,
particularly on ESCOs market development and expansion.
Preliminary Assessment of Sustainability
The fielded World Bank Mission in July 2016 reiterated the allocation of sufficient
funds by the DENR to close the Project in January 2017 and be able to mainstream the post-
PCEEP activities into the regular programs of the DENR and/or EMB. The DENR
Memorandum Circular No. 36 dated September 30, 1994, prescribed for the development of
that sustainability plan that would provide for the smooth integration of the Project’s activities
into the regular activities of the agency. A workshop for the development of the PCEEP
Sustainability Plan was conducted on October 17-18, 2016. The workshop was participated in
by personnel from the DENR and EMB Central Offices and selected EMB regional offices,
namely, EMB IV-A, EMB VI, EMB-VII, EMB-XI, EMB-Negros Island Region and EMB-
National Capital Region. Said Plan provided the blueprint of various activities that may be
adopted and undertaken by the DENR and EMB during the post-PCEEP implementation. The
development of sustainability strategies would ensure continuity of the various economic and
environmental benefits created by the PCEEP furthering the market transformation in the
chiller sector. These benefits include abatement of ODS consumption and reduction of CO2
emission. Further consultation with EMB divisions and other DENR offices/services/units
concerned need to be conducted with the assistance of DENR-FASPS.
14
PHILIPPINES CHILLER ENERGY EFFICIENCY PROJECT
I. PROJECT DESCRIPTION
1. The Project was in line with the country’s strategies to achieving the objectives of the
Montreal Protocol, Kyoto Protocol and Paris Agreement and consistent with the goals of the
Medium Term Philippine Development Plan (MTPDP CY2005-2010) which contributed to the
achievement of a more inclusive growth by supporting the country among others, to reduce the
vulnerabilities by expanding the country’s social safety net, improving disaster risk
management, and piloting and expanding climate change adaptation measures. It contributed
to the phase-out of chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs) and abatement of carbon dioxide (CO2)
emission through the accelerated replacement of energy inefficient and ozone-depleting
substances (ODS)-based chillers through the provision of financial and technical assistance to
various chiller applications. In a way, the Project synergized the phasing-out of ODS, reduction
of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions to the atmosphere and promotion of energy efficiency
throughout the country.
2. The Project Development Objective (PDO) and Global Environment Objective (GEO)
were to reduce GHG emissions by replacing inefficient old ODS-based chillers and by phasing
out of ODS. The Project was to monitor quantifiable indicators which included (i) number of
inefficient chillers replaced by the Project; (ii) phase-out amount of ODS in the Refrigeration
and Airconditioning (RAC) servicing sector and (iii) CO2 emission reductions as direct and
indirect Project benefits and (iv) Megawatt-hour (MWh) saved and Megawatt (MW) demand
reduced through chiller replacement.
3. The Project was financed by grant from the Global Environment Facility (GEF) USD
2.6 million and the Multilateral Fund (MLF) for the Implementation of the Montreal Protocol
USD 1.0 million.
4. On June 28, 2010, the Global Environment Facility (GEF) and Ozone Trust Fund (OTF)
agreements for the Project were signed with the Program of Activity (PoA) comprised of many
Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) Program Activities (PAs) under the CDM scheme of
the Kyoto Protocol with a fixed CDM crediting period of 10 ten years. The GEF grant was to
provide subsidy for the replacement of at most 255 chiller units by January 1, 2015 based on
the Projected Cash Flow of the Project. The Department of Environment and Natural
Resources (DENR) signed an Emission Reduction Purchase Agreement (ERPA) with
Kreditanstalt fur Wiederaufbau (KfW) on December 11, 2009, with the KfW as the carbon
buyer to scale up the investment in chiller replacement through the carbon credits earned from
the newly replaced chillers after the closing date of the GEF grant. In this manner, the Project
targeted the replacement of 375 chiller units until 2020.
5. The DENR was expected to deliver a total of 560,000 tons of Certified Emission
Reductions (CERs) to KfW until 2020 under the ERPA. In order to realize the CERs through
the Project, chiller owners were provided with two options: (i) GEF grant subsidy of 15% of
the cost of the new energy-efficient chillers after they were installed and commissioned; and
(ii) annual subsidy of 80% of CDM revenues to be generated from the actual energy savings
achieved by the new chillers. Chiller owners that would receive the initial grant funds i.e., 15%
subsidy, were required to surrender potential carbon credits to the overall program. The
15
enrollment to the Project was on a voluntary basis and availment of the 15% subsidy from the
GEF was on a “first-come, first served” basis.
6. However, the delay in the registration of the PCEEP as a CDM PoA under the CDM
scheme reduced the number of Certified Emission Reduction (CERs) to be delivered by the
DENR under the ERPA. The collapse of the carbon market in 2012 also triggered the DENR
and KfW to mutually terminate the ERPA. The DENR, likewise, terminated the contract with
Project Management Contractor (PMC) because of the latter’s inability to perform its tasks (i.e.
lack of competent and frequent changes of consultants) and the other external factors such as
reluctance of the chiller owners to participate in the Project. Please refer to Appendix 1 Notes
on the Institutional Aspect of PCEEP for details.
7. Immediately after the termination of the ERPA and PMC, DENR requested the Bank
to restructure the Project, basically removing the carbon finance component which
consequently downscaled the original results indicators for the Project and the following were
also changed: (i) conversion of PMC from a firm to Individual Consultants, (ii) change in the
project cost, procurement plan, financing plan and disbursement estimates, (iii) revision of the
eligibility criteria and sub-grant agreement (SGA) templates, (iv) elimination of the mid-term
review; and (f) retroactive elimination of the semestral internal audit review for the project as
a requirement under the Grant Agreement. However, there were no changes in the project
development objectives and safeguards category for the project. The restructured Project was
approved in July 2013.
8. The Project was comprised of components, namely: (i) Component 1 – Investments to
Chiller Replacement which provided financial incentives (or about 15% of new chiller cost) to
accelerate replacement of inefficient chillers to non-ODS energy efficient ones; (ii) Component
2- Measurement, Monitoring and Verification (MMV) which involved the measurement and
data monitoring related to the power-output function of inefficient chiller to be replaced,
electrical consumption of the new chiller, and cooling output; (iii) Component 3- Performance
Standards and Technical Assistance which aimed to enhance the knowledge and build capacity
of Project participants (i.e. government regulators, chiller manufacturers/suppliers and
contractors) on significant rate-of-return on investment of chiller replacement, different MMV
requirements and technical assistance from the Project, replacement and maintenance of new
chillers, adoption of environment friendly and energy-efficient technologies and ensure
sustainability through building the capacity of relevant stakeholders in energy conservation
measures and refrigerant management, and (iv) Component 4- Project Management which was
involved on the daily supervision of Project management activities.
9. Implementation Arrangement. Under the restructured phase, the DENR-Foreign
Assisted and Special Project Service (FASPS) served as the oversight entity. The Environment
Management Bureau (EMB) created the Project Management Unit (PMU), with the EMB
Director serving as Project Director, to manage the day-to-day implementation of the Project
activities. Said PMU function was originally performed by the PMC but with its termination,
individual consultants were hired to assist the PMU in project implementation. These
consultants included the following: (i) Carbon Specialist cum Team Leader, (ii) Financial
Management Specialist, (iii) Chiller Specialist/MMV Consultant, and (iv) Management
Information System (MIS) Consultant. The consultants were assisted by support staff (e.g.,
Technical Assistant and Administrative Assistant). On the other hand, the DENR Financial
Management Service (FMS) was responsible for the overall project financial management and
reporting. Processing of payments was handled by the DENR-FMS. Moreover, the Project
16
Steering Committee (PSC) was created by virtue of DENR Special Order 2010-446, dated 04
June 2010, to provide operational guidance and oversight to the Project. The PSC was chaired
by the Assistant Secretary for FASPS of the DENR and co-chaired by a designated Assistant
Secretary of the Department of Energy (DOE). The members of the PSC were the
representatives from the DENR and other relevant agencies. The PSC, however, was not
convened since its creation. Please refer to Appendix 1 Notes on the Institutional Aspect of
PCEEP for details.
10. Moreover, the closing date of the GEF grant was extended from January 1, 2015 to
January 1, 2017 to coincide with the closing date of the MLF/OTF Trust Fund (TF) and of
Project termination date. The extension of the closing date of the GEF grant was triggered by
the renewed interest of chiller owners in the Project.
II. IMPLEMENTATION ACHIEVEMENT
11. PDO Level Achievement. At end of 2016, the Project exceeded its end-of- project
targets. Under the PDO Level Results, PCEEP reflected the following performance: (i) 149%
for addressing 45,687 tons of refrigeration (TR) of its target cooling capacity of 30,649 TR;
(ii) 121% or 6.9 tons of ozone depleting potential (ODP) of the 5.7 tons ODP consumption
target; (iii) 243% for achieving a cumulative carbon emission reduction as direct Project benefit
of 151.4 kilotons of carbon dioxide equivalent (ktCO2e) from 62.4 ktCO2e end-of-project target
and (iv) 118% or 35.0 Gigawatt-hour (GWh) savings from the 29.7 target and 189% which
means an actual reduction of 18.95 Megawatt (MW) from the target of 10 MW.
12. Under the Intermediate Results Level, the Project achieved for Component 1: (i) a
200% or an actual number of 40 SGAs signed from the end-of-project target of 20 and (ii)
134% being able to install 71 new energy efficient chillers from its 53 end-of-project target.
Under Component 2, the Project was able to have 41 chillers connected to the Chiller
Management Information System (CMIS) or 58% of 71 chillers expected to generate energy
savings. This is 23% higher than the 35% target. Under Component 3, (i) 193% or having an
actual number of recipients participating in recognition program of 29 from target of 15
recipients and (ii) 217% for conducting 26 training and workshops out of the 12 end-of-project
target (refer to Appendix 2 on Notes on Technical Aspect of PCEEP) .
13. Component 1. At the end of Project life, a total of 77 old chillers with total TRs of
45,687 were replaced by 71 new chillers of total TRs of 45,345 as presented in the table below:
17
Table 1. PCEEP Chiller Pipeline (refer to Appendix 3) and Completed Chiller Replacements
Chiller Owners
No. of
Old
Chillers
Enrolled
Total Cooling
Capacity of Old
Chillers (TR)
No. of New
Chillers
Installed
Total Cooling
Capacity of
New Chillers
(TR)
Chiller Replacement Completed in 2013
The Peninsula Manila 1 577 1 550
Chiller Replacements Completed in 2014
BPI-Buendia 1 550 1 500
Marco Polo Davao 1 400 1 400
Waterfront Cebu Hotel & Casino 4 1,205 3 1,200
New World Makati Hotel 1 700 1 700
BA Lepanto Building 1 335 1 335
TriNoma Malls 3 3,450 3 3,600
Manila Pavilion 2 1,200 2 1,000
SM City Iloilo 2 2,000 2 2,000
SM City Iloilo (Batch 2) 1 1,000 1 1,000
International School Manila 3 1,600 3 1,600
6750 Ayala Ave. Joint Venture 2 960 2 1,000
CY2014 Pipeline but Replacement Completed in 2015
Tower One & Exchange Plaza 2 1,000 2 1,000
Cultural Center of the Philippines 1 500 1 500
Ayala Life FGU Center 1 700 1 700
Chiller Replacements in CY2015 (Completed)
Radisson Blu Cebu Hotel 2 1,000 2 1,000
SM City Fairview (Batch 1) 1 1,000 1 1,000
Robinsons Place Manila 5 2,450 5 2,500
Insular Life Alabang 2 750 2 800
CY2015 Chiller Pipeline but Replacements to be completed in CY2016
Philippine National Bank 2 1,800 2 1,800
Robinsons Place Iloilo 3 1,350 2 1,400
Robinsons Place Bacolod 4 1,520 2 1,400
Robinsons Galleria 10 4,250 8 4,000
SM City Southmall (Batch 1) 2 2,000 2 2,000
CY2016 Chiller Pipeline
Radisson Blu Cebu Hotel (Batch 2) 1 500 1 500
Insular Life Alabang (Batch 2) 2 900 2 810
SM City Southmall (Batch 2) 2 2,000 2 2,000
SM City Fairview (Batch 2) 2 2,000 2 2,000
SM City Bicutan 1 1,000 1 1,000
SM City Sucat 2 800 2 800
SM City Sucat (Batch 2) 2 800 2 800
SM City Bacoor 2 2,000 2 2,000
SM City Manila 2 1,600 2 1,600
SM City Manila (Batch 2) 1 800 1 800
Robinsons Summit Center 3 990 3 1,050
TOTAL 77 45,687 71 45,345 Data Source: PCEEP PMU
18
14. Component 2. The major activities and key result indicators for this component
included the: (i) collection of monitoring reports from Project beneficiaries; (ii) conduct of
annual monitoring visits to Project beneficiaries; (iii) maintenance of the CMIS and (iv)
reporting of project results. Annual monitoring visits were regularly conducted to ensure the
good transmission of complete monitoring logs from the chiller owner partners to the PCEEP
MIS. There were about 41 chillers connected to the PCEEP CMIS at end of 2016. Moreover,
CMIS training activities were conducted to all chiller monitoring personnel of the connected
71 chillers units to the PCEEP CMIS database.
15. Component 3 Chiller partners were being assisted by the PMU consultants and
technical staff, together with the technical personnel from the Philippine Ozone Desk (POD),
to ensure that the respective chiller units enrolled were properly inspected and commissioned.
Likewise, technical assistance extended to the chiller partners expedited the submission of the
suspensive condition documents required for payment of subsidy. Also included in this
component were the conduct of (i) capability building workshop on Sustainability of Project to
DENR, EMB Central and Regional Offices, (ii) annual PCEEP awards, (iii) attendance to
national/international conferences, (iv) printing of Information, Education and
Communication (IEC) materials and (v) development of the PCEEP documentary video.
16. Component 4. The Project was able to engage six (6) project consultants and five (5)
project support staff throughout the project life. The project consultants were composed of the
following: (a) Team Leader cum Carbon Specialist, (b) Chiller Specialist / Measurement,
Monitoring and Verification (MMV) Consultant, (c) Management Information System (MIS)
Consultant, (d) Financial Management Specialist, and (e) Information, Education and
Communication (IEC) Specialist. Hiring of these consultants were funded through the OTF
grant fund. The project also engaged Satisfaction Survey Facilitator to conduct the PCEEP
survey and focus group discussion sessions. The project support staff included the following:
(a) Technical Assistant, (b) Financial Analyst, (c) Database Management Assistant, (d)
Administrative Assistant, and (e) Project Development Officer. The Administrative Assistant
and the Project Development Officer were funded using the GOP counterpart funds for the
PCEEP. The project submitted at least 23 interim financial reports and 5 COA management
reports since its inception in 2011. Moreover, the World Bank conducted a total of 15 review
missions to assess progress in project implementation.
17. Financial Accomplishment. For the total Special Allotment Release Order (SARO) of
PhP 162,000,000.00 issued to the Project, 88% or PhP 142,270,527.00 was actually obligated
as of December 31, 2016. About 52% or PhP 73,572,423.00 of the obligated amount was
disbursed and this was approximately 45% of the total allotment to the Project (Refer to
Appendix 4 for the PCEEP Financial Matrices).
18. The total GEF allotment issued by the Department of Budget and Management (DBM)
as of December 31 2016 was 72% or PhP 117,000,000.00 from the total Project allotment.
From said allotment about 88% or PhP 103,405,268.00 was obligated and 44% or PhP
45,711,808.00 was the amount actually disbursed. The said disbursed amount was 39% of the
total GEF allotment.
19. The total MLF/OTF allotment issued to the Project was 28% or PhP 45,000,000.00 of
the total SARO issued to the Project. Of the total MLF/OTF allotment, the obligated amount
was 86% or PhP 38,865,258.00 and about 72% or PhP 27,860,616.00 was actually disbursed.
The disbursed amount was 62% of the total amount allotted for the MLF/OTF.
19
III. IMPLEMENTATION PERFORMANCE
a. Design
20. At appraisal, restructured and completion phase, the Project was relevant to the
achievement of the goals of the MTPDP 2005-2010 particularly on the piloting of climate
change adaptation measures and expanding climate change mitigation programs that would
contribute to the reduction of GHG emissions from the energy or power sector through the
replacement of old inefficient ODS-based chillers. The Project was also in line with the
country’s ODS phase-out program.
21. The removal of the carbon finance in the restructured phase and the retention of the
option to subsidize only 15% of the ex-works cost of the chillers enrolled for replacement
facilitated the speedy implementation of the Project in the said Project phase. The 15% subsidy
for the chiller replacement was an incentive to the chiller owners even if the CDM-related
element of the Project adopted during the appraisal and early implementation phase was not
anymore applied in the restructured phase. As per project design the said subsidy was meant
to attract chiller owners to replace their inefficient ODS-based chillers and partner with the
Project in the achievement of MTPDP of eliminating emissions from the power or energy
sector. As 60% opined by the Project partners involved in the PCEEP Satisfaction Survey
conducted in early 2016, “the subsidy was a good attraction to support the government
environmental advocacy to address climate change” (refer to Appendices 5 and 8 on Summary
of PCEEP Satisfaction Survey Results).
22. In the original project design, the Project targeted the replacement of 375 chillers.
However, based on the verification of the chiller pipeline compiled in 2004 and served as the
basis of the 375 chillers, the PMU found out that some of the chillers were no longer eligible
in the Project given the stringent CDM criteria, to wit: (a) some chillers were no longer
operational as of 2012, (b) some of the chillers are more than 15 years old, (c) some of the
chiller owners had no immediate plans to replace their chillers, among others. Hence, the PMU
developed a new pipeline after conducting series of validation with potential project
participants. It is worth mentioning also that during the restructuring phase of the Project, the
TR was introduced as a performance indicator and became the primary indicator to assess the
performance of the project. The TR was directly linked to the cost of the chiller as well as the
subsidy level for each chiller replacement. This was in contrast to the number of chiller units
which could not directly translate to the corresponding subsidy level given that chillers have
different TR capacities. In the restructuring Project, the number of TR to be addressed was
computed at 30,649 TR based on the available subsidy level i.e., US$2.6 million using 500 TR
as the average TR capacity of the replacement chillers. This was approximately 53 chillers. To
support the 53 chillers, the PMU developed a chiller pipeline of potential project participants
(Appendix 3 for the chiller pipeline). The PMU adopted more proactive strategies that enabled
the active participation of chiller suppliers and energy services company (ESCOs). The
involvement of chiller suppliers and ESCOs in actual Project implementation beneficially
contributed to the development of the Chiller Pipeline and increased project disbursement for
subsidy payments to chiller owners. Moreover, the DENR, through the PMU, entered several
Memoranda of Understanding (MOU). A total of nine (9) MOU were signed throughout the
implementation of the Project. The primary role of the chiller suppliers was to help the PMU
market the project to chiller owners and assist them comply with the requirements of the Project
particularly in the completion and submission of suspensive conditions documents prescribed
in the SGAs.
20
23. The absence of a well-planned marketing plan of the PMC contributed an adverse
impact to the Project due to difficulty of enticing chiller owners, particularly at early
implementation phase, to partner with PCEEP even with the 15% subsidy incentive and
expected significant energy efficiency and savings from the replaced chillers. The Project,
however, managed to improve its marketing performance by: (i) developing marketing
strategies in close coordination with ESCOs i.e., identification of potential chiller replacements
in the RAC sector; and (ii) giving awards of recognition to Project partners.
24. Moreover, it was a project design requirement that the new chillers procured would
meet energy efficiency specifications. In addition, they would be equipped with basic data
loggers which would monitor their performance. Relative to this, the 10-year monitoring
period stipulated in the SGA between the Project chiller owner partners and the DENR-EMB
urged the latter to establish and to sustain a good monitoring framework and support even after
Project life. As of December 2016, 26 chillers were submitting the required monitoring logs.
b. Organization and Management
25. At the early implementation phase, the DENR had the primary responsibility for project
implementation with the DENR Secretary as the CDM-Designated National Authority (CDM
DNA), with the EMB as Secretariat. The DENR - FASPS acted as the Coordinating Entity
(CE) to oversee the implementation of the Project with the main responsibility of
communicating with the CDM Executive Board (CDM EB). CE engaged a private consulting
firm or the PMC responsible for the day-to-day operations of the Project. Meanwhile, the
DENR-FMS was responsible for the overall Project financial management including the
preparation of financial reports to financing institutions. Moreover, FASPS established and
maintained, for the duration of the Project, a PSC chaired by the DENR and co-chaired by the
DOE. The members of the PSC were the representatives from the DENR and any other
relevant agencies. However, the PSC was not convened during the entire Project life due to
some problems encountered by the Project (i.e. removal of the CDM and termination of the
ERPA). Instead, the fielded Implementation Review Missions of the Bank and the DENR-
FASPS guided the PCEEP-PMU in executing its Project activities.
26. During the restructured phase, the DENR remained as the primary implementer with
the FASPS still the oversight office. The EMB established the PMU to oversee the day to day
activities of the project which was previously the responsibility the contracted firm, i.e. the
PMC. The contract did not proceed as planned and DENR and the PMC mutually agreed to
terminate the contract. Under the restructured phase, following the termination of the PMC,
individual consultants were hired and were directly reporting to the EMB-PMU. Moreover,
the DENR-FMS still was responsible for the overall Project financial management.
27. Even with the changes in the implementation structure the processing of subsidy
payments under the GEF was still slow due to the delayed submission of suspensive condition
documents by partner chiller owners of which the PMU extended facilitative measures to
improve the submission. Activities under components 2, 3 and 4 which were financed under
the MLF/OTF were still subjected to centralized approval and processing which created
payment delays or cancelled Project activities, even if these were consistent with approved
Project Work and Financial Plan, due to factors like: (i) too many layers of approving authority
which took a relatively long time for all signatories to sign official documents and (ii)
restriction for the downloading of the MLF funds to EMB for Project operations.
21
c. Cost and Financing
28. Of the total Project cost (exclusive of GOP) of USD 3,600,000.00 or
PhP162,000,000.00, the Project was able to disburse 45% equivalent to USD 1,618,319.00 or
PhP 73,572,423.00 of as of 31 December 2016. Moreover, the Project is expected to disburse
a total of USD 2,835,949.00 or P79% of the total Project cost after all payments will be made
after the 6-month wind-up stage of the Project (refer to Appendix 4 on Financial Matrices).
29. GEF actual total disbursement as of 31 December 2016 was USD 1,005,886.00 or PhP
45,711,808.00 which was 39% of total GEF financing allocation of USD 2,600,000.00 or Php
117,000,000.00. The MLF/OTF reflected a 62% disbursement rate equivalent to USD
612,434.00 or PhP 27,860,616.00 from USD 1,000,000.00 or PhP 45,000,000.00 allocation.
Expected total disbursements after the 6-month wind-up stage of the Project are 80% (i.e. USD
2,067,666.00 or PhP 93,600,000.00) and 77% (i.e. USD 768,283.00 or PhP 34,572,721.00) for
GEF and MLF/OTF, respectively.
Table 2. PCEEP Fund Disbursement by Fund Source, as of 31 December 2016.
Fund
Source
Allocation
(a)
Utilized Allocation
(b)
Performance
=(b)/(a)
(in %)
Projected Utilization End of
Project
USD’000 PhP’000 USD’000 PhP’000 USD’000 PhP’000 %
GEF 2,600.00 117,000 1,005.89 45,711.81 39 2,067.67 93,614.72 80
OTF 1,000.00 45,000 612.43 27,860.62 62 751.62 33,868.86 77
GOP 325.00 14,625 35.97 1,626.96 11 46.64 2,150.00 14
Total 3,925.00 176,625 1,654.29 75,199.39 45 2,865.93 127,633.58 73
Data Source: PCEEP-PMU, DENR-FASPS
d. Performance of Consultants, Contractors, Chiller Owners and Suppliers
30. In the original project design, the PMC was tasked to manage the day-to-day activities
of the project. However, the DENR noted the inability of the PMC to deliver the required CERs
due to internal and external factors. Internal factors included frequent changes in the Task Team
Leader, CDM Specialist and Chiller Specialist and weak marketing plan. External factors, on
the other hand, included lack of willingness/high hesitance level of chiller owners to participate
in the project, declining carbon market, slow CDM registration, among others. Because of
these, the DENR terminated the PMC on April 23, 2012.
31. During the project restructuring, the DENR proposed to the Bank the hiring of
Individual consultants to replace the PMC. The hiring of individual consultants who were
reporting directly to the EMB to assist the PMU in the day-to-day activities of the PCEEP
proved to be efficient and effective. It facilitated the smooth implementation of project
activities particularly after the project restructuring i.e., development of the chiller pipeline,
conduct of validation visits, among others. This team of consultants possessed expertise needed
by the Project to catch up with its implementation delay for almost three years (i.e. CY 2010-
2012) and relatively end the Project at a satisfactory level of performance, as rated by the 15th
Implementation Review Mission of the World Bank. Additional 5 project support staff were
also hired to assist the consultants in meeting the end-of-project targets in January 2017. Three
(3) of them were hired by the DENR and 2 of the staff were hired by the EMB charged to the
downloaded funds from DENR-FASPS.
22
32. The partnership of chiller owners and chiller suppliers with PCEEP was significantly
expedited in the restructured phase which led to the (i) finalization of the Chiller Pipeline; (ii)
replacement of old chillers eligible for Project intervention; (iii) improvement in the
submission of suspensive conditions documents; (iv) increased in subsidy payments likewise
increasing GEF disbursements and (v) transmission of monitoring logs to the PCEEP CMIS
database. At end of Project life, about 28 chiller owners and 9 chiller suppliers/manufacturers
actively partnered with PCEEP.
e. Engagement of consultants and Procurement of Goods and Services
33. The engagement of individual consultants was effective as their expertise served well
in the achievement of the Project’s purpose, particularly on the achievement of the end-of-
Project targets. These consultants were: (i) Carbon Specialist cum Task Team Leader (TTL);
(ii) Chiller Specialist and Measurement, Monitoring and Verification (MMV) Specialist, and
(iii) Management Information System (MIS) Consultant, (iv) Financial Management Specialist
and (v) Information, Education and Communication (IEC) Specialist. The Project also hired
project support staff i.e., Technical Assistant, Financial Analyst, Administrative Assistant,
Project Development Officer and Database Management Assistant, who assisted the PMU in
the Project implementation. The Consultants were hired in accordance to the WB guidelines
on the Selection of Consultants. At the end of Project life, the hired consultants were able to
render 183 person-months of service to the Project (refer to Appendix 9 on the Consultants’
Schedules).
34. Procurement of contracts went through the procurement process consistent with the
Republic Act 9184 or the Philippine Government Procurement Reform Act and World Bank
Guidelines on Procurement. There were no major issues raised by Commission on Audit
(COA) and by WB with regard to the procurement process of the Project.
f. Compliance with Grant Covenants
35. The DENR as the implementer was able to comply with the Grant Effectiveness
conditions which were as follows: (a) Signed contract of PMC which was actually terminated
in Project restructured phase due to the removal of the CDM revenue; (b) Adoption of a Project
Implementation Plan and of an Operations Manual which included a section on the project
financial management policies and procedures adopted for the project; (c) Establishment of the
Project Management Unit and the Project Steering Committee, and (d) Execution and delivery
of the GEF Grant Agreement and the MLF/OTF Grant Agreement, and all conditions precedent
to its effectiveness or to the right of the Recipient to make withdrawals there under (other than
the effectiveness of this Agreement) were fulfilled.
36. In terms of the legal covenants, the following were called for under the GEF and
MLF/OTF Grant Agreements:
23
Table 3. Legal Covenants under the GEF and MLF/OTF Agreements
Appraisal/Early Implementation Phase Restructured
Phase
Status of
Compliance
(a) Compliance with the Environmental
Management Framework (EMF) and
collection and compilation of reports on status
of compliance with the EMF for submission of
six monthly reports to the World Bank.
Still applied in
the Restructured
Phase.
Complied.
(b) Maintenance of an adequate financial
management system with appropriate books of
accounts in accordance with generally
accepted accounting principles.
Still applied in
the Restructured
Phase.
Complied.
(c) Submission of Unaudited Interim Financial
Reports (IFRs) within 45 days after the end of
each calendar quarter.
Still applied in
the Restructured
Phase.
Complied. There
were noted delays
in the submission
but Project
generally was able
to submit on time as
the Project nears
completion.
(d) Submission of an Annual audited project
financial statements, which consisted of the
statement of financial position, statement of
financial performance, statement of changes in
net assets/equity, and cash flow statement
together with the notes on the financial
statements and a copy of the management
letter reflecting the auditor’s findings and
recommendations, shall be submitted to the
Bank no later than 6 months after the end of
each fiscal year.
Still applied in
the Restructured
Phase.
Complied. The
project was
submitting the COA
reports on time i.e.,
every June 30th.
(e) Copy of the internal audit report to be
submitted by DENR-Internal Audit Service
(IAS) to the Bank ninety (90) working days
after the end of each semester.
Eliminated in
the Project
Restructured
Phase.
(f) An independent performance review by a
consulting firm, with terms of reference
acceptable to the Bank, shall be conducted at
Mid-term and the report submitted to the Bank
sixty (60) days after mid-term.
Eliminated in
the Project
Restructured
Phase.
(g) Within 6 months from grant signing, DENR to
adopt a grievance monitoring system
Still applied in
the Restructured
Phase.
Complied.
(h) Within twelve (12) months from issuance of
each external audit report for the project,
implement the recommendations arising from
such external audits, all in a manner
satisfactory to the World Bank.
Eliminated in
the Project
Restructured
Phase.
24
37. Safeguards. The project triggered Operational Policy 4.01 on Environmental
Assessment (EA) of which the key safeguard issues were related to proper installation of new
chillers and refrigerant management. No changes in the safeguards instrument in Project
Restructured Phase. Moreover, the Project was guided with the Environmental Management
Framework (EMF) to address the potential environmental risks associated with the replacement
of old ODS-based chiller systems. Regular due diligence was conducted by the PMU
particularly on the (i) installation of non-ODS chillers; (ii) disposal of baseline equipment; (iii)
recovery and inventory of refrigerant from the decommissioned units; (iv) recording of CFCs
and HCFCs recovered. The Bank also required the submission of the Due Diligence Report
from Project PMU.
g. Disbursement
38. Disbursement of PCEEP at early project phase i.e., prior to project restructuring in
2013, was low and this could be attributed to: (i) absence of an effective marketing plan by the
PMC that would attract possible Project partners from the RAC, chiller
suppliers/manufacturers, and the (ii) difficulty of the PMC to register the Project into the CDM
due primarily to delays in the validation process. The delay in the validation process was
overtaken by the depression of the carbon market. These led to the eventual termination of the
PMC contract between the DENR and the PMC and the ERPA between DENR and the KfW.
39. In addition to the project restructuring in July 2013, the World Bank extended the
closing date of the GEF grant from January 1, 2015 to January 1, 2017 and coincided it with
the closing date of the project. This allowed more chiller replacement projects to be subsidized
by the project and increase disbursement of the GEF grant.
40. There were other factors notably contributing to the low Project disbursement. The low
disbursement of the GEF grant could be attributed to the following: (i) Reduction of the ex-
works cost of the chiller units. As the subsidy was based on the lower cost between the ex-
works cost of the chiller and normative cost of the chiller defined by the project i.e.,
US$400/TR, most chillers were procured at a lower ex-works cost. (ii) Chiller replacement
cycle generally takes at least 6 months to 1 year from the submission of the expression of
interests. There were two critical activities that generally took time to be completed. One was
the approval of the SGAs. While the SGA was a pro-forma document, it had to be reviewed by
the legal departments of the chiller owners which usually took time. Another time-consuming
activity of the chiller replacement was the procurement process. Chillers were procured abroad
and would require delivery lead time which ranged from 2 months to 4 months. The problem
was exacerbated if there was port congestion and delivery of the equipment from the port to
the site became a major implementation issue. This was the case of the chiller replacements in
2014. Because of the port congestion problem, the Bank agreed to extend the completion of
the chiller replacement until 2015.
41. On the other hand, the low disbursement of the OTF grant could be attributed to the
following: (i) Delays in the approval of the Work and Financial Plan and the subsequent
issuance of the SARO by the DBM. On the average, the SAROs were released between the end
of the first quarter and end of the second quarter. The delay in the issuance of the SARO also
delayed the implementation of project activities. (ii) Utilization of allotments for project
activities was not maximized. For example, the project allotted travel expenses for monitoring
activities that would cover certain number of participants. The allotments for travels were
25
oftentimes not maximized as DENR and EMB personnel were unable to join due to other
equally important commitments. There were also several programmed out-of-town activities
but were conducted within Metro Manila due to the non-availability of the participants. (iii)
Delays in the procurement of the IEC materials. (iv) Foreign exchange made impact on
disbursements. The higher foreign exchange rate in favor of the US dollars significantly
lowered the overall projected disbursements. At project appraisal the exchange rate of US$
1.00 is PhP 45.00. By the end of the Project, the exchange rate of US$ 1.00 is PhP 50.00. The
11% dollar appreciation against the Philippine pesos reduced the disbursement of the project
proportionately.
42. As of 31 December 2016, the Project was able to disburse 45% equivalent USD
1,618,319.00 or PhP 73,572,423.00. The GEF had a disbursement rating of 39% (USD
1,005,885.00 or PhP 45,711,808.00) and MLF/OTF of 62% (USD 612,434.00 or PhP
27,860,616.00) from their respective fund allocations. Refer to Appendix 4 for the details on
PCEEP Financial Matrices.
43. Moreover, as the Project prioritized the replacement of old chillers with large capacity,
the financial value of the chillers replaced under the Project were lower than the originally
expected value of USD 400.00/TR to the actual value of USD 299.00/TR. The 25% difference
contributed to a lower disbursement of the GEF financing. On the other hand, the situation
implied that the Project was cost efficient in the sense that it was able to address more than
49% of its target cooling capacity of 30,649 TR without completely consuming the USD 2.6
Million allocation from GEF.
44. The Project disbursement, in terms of the GEF fund, started to increase after the
handover of the first payment of subsidy to Manila Peninsula in 2013. More chiller owners
decided to enroll/ participate in the Project.
h. Operation and Maintenance
45. Following the termination of the PMC, the EMB-PMU satisfactorily managed the daily
activities of the Project. However, most of the Project activities reflected in the respective
approved Annual Work and Financial Plans were affected by the delay in the release of funds
and delayed approval of the Special Orders pertaining to the Project activities like capability
building training activities for Project stakeholders, attendance to local and international
conferences.
i. Performance of Funding, Executing and Implementing Agencies
46. The World Bank (WB) was able to field a total of 15 Implementation Review Missions.
All of the missions served their respective purpose of surfacing implementation issues and
concerns as well as the forging of agreements on how to address the issues and concerns. The
recommendations of the missions were generally accepted by the DENR as implementing
agency. No major disagreements between the Bank and the DENR relative to the provisions
of in the GEF and MLF/OTF Grant Agreements, procurement and implementation schedules
and other matters which pertained to Project Implementation.
47. The Philippine Government through the DENR satisfactorily worked to ensure
compliance to the GEF and MLF/OTF Grant covenants, delivery of Project commitments to
the MTPDP and to the attainment of Project goals. PCEEP was able to partner with the chiller
26
owners, chiller manufacturers and suppliers to satisfy its commitment to replace the old ODS-
based chillers with new non-ODS-based energy efficient ones and would eventually led to ODP
abatement and realization on projected savings. The DENR-EMB POD Regional Offices at
the NCR, IVA, VI, VII, NIR and XI were also involved in the implementation of PCEEP
activities. Moreover, the DENR ensured that its fiduciary commitments particularly on the
aspects of financial management and procurement were executed satisfactorily during
implementation of the PCEEP.
j. Contracting, Construction and Commissioning
48. The DENR was responsible for the procurement of goods and services related to the
PCEEP requirements. With the presence of the Procurement Unit of the DENR-FASPS and
the DENR-PSMD comprised of sufficient number of trained and qualified staff capable of
handling the procurement under the Project following Bank procedures. However, bulk of the
procurement with respect to chillers replacement was undertaken by the chiller owners, who
obtained the best value of their respective chiller investments.
IV. PROJECT RESULTS
a. Economic Re-evaluation
49. The Project reflected a beneficial or positive impact on the local and global environment
through the reduction of the emission of greenhouse gases and release of ODS.
50. The economic analysis, at end of Project life, was still limited due to the lack of reliable
quantifiable data on the valuation of human health and impact of climate changes to the
livelihood of the Philippine population. It was understood that the Project’s replacement of old
ODS-based chillers contributed to the reduction of emission of greenhouse gases and release
of ODS through energy efficiency interventions. Relative to this, the data monitoring logs from
71 chillers to be monitored by the Project which would be sustained by the EMB-PPPDD-
SISMS would also support the impact of projected cumulative emission reduction of
greenhouse gases for the next ten years on the reduction of cases of respiratory sickness or
death nationwide. Moreover, the partnership of ESCOs with PCEEP provided them
opportunities to expand their market nationwide and global-wide which also increased
employment opportunities in the RAC sector.
51. In terms of computing the financial viability indicators for the Project, three sources of
funds (i.e. GEF, MLF and GOP) were taken into account. These fund sources were utilized for
technical and administrative expenses as well as the payment of subsidies for the early
replacement of chillers. At the appraisal stage, the cost of the new chiller unity was estimated
at USD 400.00/TR. During the project implementation, the average ex-works cost of the chiller
unit was US$ 299.00/TR2. Based on these financial assumptions, the average financial viability
indicators were: (i) an internal rate of return (IRR) higher than the computed weighted average
2 The price was based on the average prices of conventional or more commonly used chiller units installed the
Philippines i.e., oil-based centrifugal chillers and screw chillers (approximately 90% of cooling capacity in the
PCEEP pipeline). There are new chiller technologies however being introduced to the Philippine market i.e.,
magnetic chillers. The prices of these types of chillers however are higher than the more conventional chiller
types.
27
cost of capital (WACC) at an average of 26%,(ii) a positive net present value (NPV) at a
discount rate based on the computed WACC and (iii) a payback period of 4 years and below.
52. By the end of its project life, the Project intended to replace a combined cooling
capacity of 30,649 TR for approximately 53 chillers with a within its life. With an estimate of
improving energy efficiency by 0.63 kW/TR from the new chillers, the total energy
consumption of the chiller owners would be reduced by 29.7 GWh. Thus, 10 MW coal-fired
power plant of future power generating capacity requirements could be avoided – an investment
saving of USD 25 million for the country. The total GHG emission reduction from the Project
was 62.4 ktCO2 which could be attributed to direct and indirect contributions.
53. The energy savings resulting from the installation of energy efficient chillers, estimated
at PhP350 million3, improves the overall financial standing of the project beneficiaries. For
example, Waterfront Cebu City Hotel and Casino saved approximately PhP5 million4 per
month in their electricity cost. The savings in electricity cost provided chiller owners more
leverage to expand their business operations and improve their human resources i.e., more
employment opportunities with the business expansion.
54. While the carbon finance was not pursued, the emissions reductions generated by the
project in the past four (4) years could be estimated at USD 0.450 million5.
55. Moreover, the Project was able to create an environment friendly business market i.e.,
Participation of Energy Savings Company and shared with the result of the computed financial
viability indicators developed by the Project for investment analysis and Regression Analysis
for the Calculation of Chiller Efficiency for decision making of chiller owners.
b. Socioeconomic and Sociocultural Results
56. The Project was not involved with land acquisition and the displacement and relocation
of people. It neither affected the ancestral domains or communities of indigenous peoples,
women and children. None of the World Bank social safeguard policies was triggered as a
result. Also, the project did not cause any associated social impacts such as the loss of
employment of chiller operators and maintenance personnel. Instead, the project upgraded the
skills of existing chiller operators and maintenance personnel and the emergent energy service
industry through capacity building.
57. With the Project, various awareness activities through the Project IEC materials,
website, recognition and awarding ceremonies, signing of SGA, conventions and forum were
conducted. The results of these activities were on:
a. Information dissemination to Project Beneficiaries and their principals and
subsidiaries on (i) the GHG emissions and ODS Phase out period, and (ii) Enhanced
3 Estimated PhP 10/kWh. The total GWh saved by the end of project life was 35.0 GWh.
4 Before the PCEEP, the hotel used to pay around PhP 13 million to the local power utility. With the installation
of the energy efficient chillers, the hotel has been paying around PhP 7-8 million per month.
5 Average global market price for carbon credits is estimated at US$ 3/tCO2e. The project was able to reduce
around 150,000 tCO2e.
28
knowledge on ODS management and climate change mitigation and adaptation
initiatives and technologies;
b. Awareness of DENR on carbon finance and emission reduction, energy efficiency,
refrigeration technology;
c. Partnership with ESCOs and Chiller Suppliers to disseminate government policies
on ODS and GHG emission reduction;
d. Government recognition i.e., PCEEP Award of Excellence, given to chiller owners.
This boosted the corporate image of COs. Refer to Appendix 6 for the Guidelines
on PCEEP Awards and Recognition, to Appendix 7 for the PCEEP awardees and to
Appendices 5 and 8 for the summary results of the PCEEP Satisfaction Survey (i.e.
both focus group discussion and survey proper) conducted.
e. Contribution of the project to the Country Program Report of the Philippine Ozone
Desk (e.g. ODP abated by the project) and National Communication prepared by
the Climate Change Division (GHG emission reduction of the Project), and
f. Introduction of the Concept on District Cooling System (DCS) to DENR
Management for possible investment.
c. Gender and development
58. The Project was male dominated and only a handful of chiller executives and
technicians were female. About 10 female executives/ managers were appreciated on their
positive impacts to the Project. Moreover, provision of gender equal work
opportunities/participation to chiller and machinery sector was observed by chiller partners.
d. Environmental Impacts and Control
59. Direct contribution of the Project was to global environmental benefits by reducing and
or avoiding carbon emissions and ozone depleting substances to atmosphere. The
Environmental Management Plan (EMP) of PCEEP contained mitigating measures to address
the potential worker and building occupant safety risks and the potential environmental risks
during installation, and major building renovations/retrofitting and disposal of old ODS-based
chillers and refrigerants as well as health and safety issues in handling non-ODS chemicals for
the new chillers. An EMF which consisted of EMP, among others, was developed to address
these risks and its attendant mitigating measures to minimize, if not prevent, any impact that
may be brought about by the replacement of the old chillers. Other attendant documents
supporting the EMF are the project’s Operational Monitoring Plan, Manual of Protocols and
the Operations Manual.
60. The Project further highlighted the following relative to monitoring and disseminating
impact of chiller replacement on the environment: (i) CMIS monitoring and reporting,
standards (kW/TR and chiller criteria) and procedures (Manual for COs on refrigerant recovery
and compressor destruction), were established i.e., eligibility criteria for chillers, CMIS,; (ii)
Partnership with ESCOs and Chiller Suppliers to disseminate government policies on ODS and
GHG emission reduction, and (iii) Contribution of the project to the Country Program Report
29
of the Philippine Ozone Desk (e.g. ODP abated by the project) and National Communication
prepared by the Climate Change Division (GHG emission reduction of the Project).
e. Sustainability
61. The DENR Memorandum Circular No. 36 dated September 30, 1994, prescribed for
the development of a sustainability plan that would provide for the smooth integration of the
Project’s activities into the regular activities of the agency. The PMU of the PCEEP conducted
a workshop to develop the Sustainability Plan for the Project with the aim of sustaining chiller
replacements and explore enabling policies beyond the project life, mainstream the various
PCEEP activities into the regular programs of the DENR and EMB, and manage the PCEEP
Chiller Management Information System. Included in the Sustainability Plan, as agreed, is the
matrix/timeline of each activity as well the responsible office to easily monitor is the
recommended task were adopted or mainstreamed.
62. In the absence of financial incentives, several strategies including different approaches
were explored with the aim to influence chiller owners to replace their old and inefficient
chillers even without the subsidy provided by the Project. These approaches would include use
of market-based instruments and enforcement of regulatory directives. The DENR could work
with the Department of Energy and the Bureau of Product Standards of the Department of
Trade and Industry to develop efficiency standards for energy efficient chillers for various
establishments. This approach would influence the consumer behavior with regard to
employing more energy efficient chillers in buildings. The experiences of the DENR in the
PCEEP would be able to provide baseline information on the current practices of various
establishments that utilize chillers. In order to effect this strategy, the DENR may share with
the DOE the Project Completion Report (PCR) of the PCEEP that highlighted this
recommendation. Moreover, the EMB, as the lead agency in the enforcement of DAO 2013-
25, should strictly enforce the administrative order. Based on the experience of the PCEEP,
there are companies that still operate CFCs-based chillers. The EMB should intensify activities
leading to the development of the inventory of the ODS chillers in the country. In this manner,
the EMB could easily identify companies that contravene the administrative order and
influence these companies to shift to non-ODS based chillers even without the provision of
subsidies.
63. The PCEEP developed a number of tool kits that were used to assess the eligibility of
baseline chiller units in the Project. These include: (a) the Power-Output Function (POF)
Regression Analysis and (b) Investment Analysis worksheets. The POF Regression Analysis
was used by the PMU to assess the efficiency of the baseline chiller units while the Investment
analysis was used to assess the financial viability of the chiller replacement. Making these
toolkits available onsite may capacitate chiller owners arrive at the well-informed decision with
regard to replacing the old and inefficient chillers.
64. The Project was able to partner with ESCOs and successfully linked them to Project
Beneficiaries. To sustain this linkage and to recognize them as project partners, the EMB may
provide list of ESCOs in the PCEEP website in order to link interested chiller owners to these
companies who were actively engaged in chiller replacement programs as well as preventive
and maintenance activities.
65. In the proposed revised SMR template, companies are required to report the ODS and
GHG ER in the Self-Monitoring Report (SMR). In order to build the capacities of the Project
30
Beneficiaries, the EMB could hold capacity building activities to train the Pollution Control
Officers of Project Beneficiaries monitor the ODS and GHG emissions as well as GHG
reduction. The EMB POD and the CCD may provide guidance on the sources of GHG and
ODS and the calculation of the GHG emissions and reductions.
66. One of the strategies to ensure continuous engagement of Project Beneficiaries
particularly in the submission of the monthly monitoring logs would be the engagement of the
Regional Ozone Desk Officers (RODO) and/or Environmental Monitoring and Enforcement
Officers (EMEO) of the EMB regional offices with chiller units enrolled in the PCEEP.
67. The EMB and DENR may continue to promote the success stories of the Project
through various fora and conferences organized by both institutions.
68. The EMB have considered the designation of a CMIS Focal Person in the EMB MIS
Office who is capable of maintaining the PCEEP CMIS server and website. See Appendix 10
for the Detailed PCEEP Sustainability Plan.
V. KEY ISSUES
69. The key issues observed during Project Implementation phase were on:
a. Despite the launching of the project with key players in the RAC sector, most of
the chiller owners were hesitant to participate in the project due to the very
stringent CDM eligibility criteria, establishment of a very reliable monitoring and
calibration regime, and voluminous documentary requirements. It was evident in
the very minimal number of letters of interest received by the PMU.
b. The chiller inventory used as basis for the baseline information i.e., 375 chiller
units, was developed before the initial adoption of CDM Methodology AM006
Version 1.1 “Power saving through replacement by energy efficient chillers” in
2007 by the CDM Executive Board and the finalization of the eligibility criteria
for the Project in May 20106. Perhaps, many of the eligibility criteria were not yet
considered in the development of the chiller inventory such as the age of the chiller
and remaining lifetime i.e., Chiller units should not be older than 15 years; limit of
+ 5% of the chiller capacity of new chillers compare to the capacity of the old
chillers, at least one (1) year worth of maintenance logs, among others.
c. The participation in the Project is voluntary. While there is a phase-out plan for
HCFCs, chiller owners still have the option to utilize HCFC-based chillers and not
avail of the incentives offered by the Project. Moreover, the nature of the Project
which is on a “first come, first serve” and the no penalty clause for failure to qualify
as Project Beneficiary (Section XVII Pre Termination of the SGA), rendered other
SGAs void as in the case of Marco Polo Davao (Batch 2), Robinsons Place Imus,
Robinsons Place Metro East and Robinsons Starmills Pampanga.
d. The provision of an adequate manpower requirement, particularly on the need to
hire a Procurement Officer that would take charge on the procurement of goods
and services which affected the conduct of intended Project activities;
6 Approval of the Project Appraisal Document by the Bank.
31
e. The IEC Specialist should have been hired at Project start to ensure the preparation
of a good marketing plan that would have expedited the participation of chiller
owners with eligible chillers in the Project. The IEC Specialist was only hired but
during the latter part of Project life i.e., October 2015;
f. The close coordination of the PMU and the chiller owners on the chiller
replacement activities could have been expedited if there was downloading of
portion of the operational funds to the EMB POD regional counterparts. The
Regional EMB POD could have helped in marketing in their respective regions;
g. The provision of technical assistance to chiller owners in the replacement of their
chillers and submission of suspensive condition documents was aimed at
expediting the processing and release of subsidy payments. However, most chiller
owners need concurrence of the board/management as confidential information
about the business operation would be shared to the DENR and EMB.
h. At the start of the project, there is a need to establish a clear Sustainability Agenda
for the Project interventions initiated by the Project and intended to be continued
after Project life. Nevertheless, the Project conducted a Sustainability Planning
Workshop to ensure that the continuity of interventions that would contribute to
the ODP abatement and GHG emission reduction and energy savings.
VI. LESSONS LEARNED
70. Within the six-year of Project implementation, major lessons learned were documented
and these were:
a. Project Design’s Consistency with the DENR Mandate. The Project was still
consistent with the Kyoto and Montreal Protocols and the Paris Agreement of
reducing the GHG and ODS emissions even if there was the removal of the CDM
component in the restructured phase of the PCEEP. It may have created a little
confusion because the Project as its name suggested was on energy efficiency and
not directly as a climate change mitigation measure. On this premise, the DENR
had difficulty streamlining or sustaining the interventions of PCEEP particularly on
monitoring the energy consumption performance of chillers connected to the
PCEEP CMIS database that became a responsibility of the EMB for the next 10
years and in a way outside of their expertise. On this premise, the need for the
DENR and the DOE to converge on this effort on monitoring the chillers connected
to the CMIS was relevant because the direct benefit may be on energy consumption
but the socio-economic and environmental benefits were on the reduction of GHG
and ODS emissions.
b. Baseline Data used in Project Design Stage. The chiller inventory used as basis
for the baseline information i.e., 375 chiller units, was developed before the initial
adoption of CDM Methodology AM006 Version 1.1 “Power saving through
replacement by energy efficient chillers” in 2007 by the CDM Executive Board and
32
the finalization of the eligibility criteria for the Project in May 20107. Perhaps, many
of the eligibility criteria were not yet considered in the development of the chiller
inventory such as the age of the chiller and remaining lifetime i.e., Chiller units
should not be older than 15 years; limit of + 5% of the chiller capacity of new
chillers compare to the capacity of the old chillers, at least one (1) year worth of
maintenance logs, among others. In the future, designing a similar Project should
consider the “time gap” or applicability of the data in the next period of years to
arrive at realistic targets. The inventory on 375 chillers to be covered by the Project
for chiller replacement was subsequently reduced to 53 chillers because the PMU
conducted another survey based on recent eligibility criteria (please refer to
Appendix 2 on the Notes on the Technical Aspect – see Eligibility Criteria);
c. Facilitative function of the PMU to ensure the compliance of the Project partners,
i.e., ready templates prepared by the PMU and constant coordination with chiller
owners regarding the submission of suspensive condition documents. Likewise, the
PMU ensured the specifications of chillers, layout of piping and other technical
concerns to avoid the delay in the replacement of chillers; The PMU intensified its
facilitative function which was critical to the release of subsidy payments and to
subsequent increase of Project disbursement.
d. Management Support for Better Implementation of Project activities. The intended
implementation of major activities (e.g., trainings and conferences, midyear and
annual assessments, etc) would be more efficient if the:
i. Operational fund, i.e. MLF/OTF, of the Project was downloaded to and was
managed by the EMB as the PMU which oversaw the day-to-day operations
of the Project. However, the disbursements would still be subjected to
regular audit;
ii. Streamlining of bureaucracy and of layers of approving authority were
observed so as not to affect the approval and implementation of Project
activities relevant to the achievement of end-of-Project targets;
iii. Involvement of the EMB regional offices (ROs) should have been
considered as they were facilitative in the chiller replacement activities of
PCEEP, as well as the continuation of the required chiller monitoring
activities for the next years after the Project life. Likewise, downloading of
funds to the involved ROs would have made the execution of chiller
replacement-related activities more efficient;
iv. Objectivity in the processing of documents for payments was observed.
Avoid “piecemeal” requirements. Strict adherence to the procedural
manual; and
v. Provision of orientation and or training activities on the DENR financial
guidelines and on the Project Operations Manual was conducted before
subjecting the new staff assigned to the Project. Although there was
coordination between PMU and DENR-FMS during the earlier restructured
7 Approval of the Project Appraisal Document by the Bank.
33
phase of PCEEP which facilitated the speedy release of subsidy payments,
the latter part of the Project seemed to experience delay in the releases of
payments. This could be attributed to the non-familiarity of the new
assigned FMS staff on procedural financial guidelines.
vi. Inclusion of an IEC Specialist in the list of consultants required by the Project
or the engagement of an IEC Specialist during the first year of the Project;
e. Inclusion of IEC in the SGAs as a commitment of the chiller partners in promoting
the PCEEP as a catalyst in the reduction of GHG and ODS emissions through
replacement of old ODS-based chillers was considered, and
f. The Existence of a Project Steering Committee was not maximized. As earlier
mentioned in this Report the PSC was not able to meet within the life of the Project
although the Project was able to notably end at a satisfactory performance level.
For future projects, including a PSC in the organizational/implementation chart be
thoroughly rationalized or a good option other than the PSC be considered to ensure
good Project implementation direction.
VII. CONCLUSION
a. Overall Assessment
71. An assessment of the completed activities indicated that PCEEP significantly achieved
its PDO Level and Intermediate Results Indicators where all of the revised end-of-Project
targets were accomplished at 100% level or more.
a. PDO Level Achievement. At end of 2016, the Project exceeded its end-of-
project targets. Under the PDO Level Results, PCEEP reflected the following
performance: (i) 149% for addressing 45,687 of its target cooling capacity of
30,649 tons of refrigeration (TR); (ii) 121% or 6.9 ODP ton of the 5.7 ODP ton
consumption target; (iii) 243% for achieving a cumulative carbon emission
reduction as direct Project benefit of 151.4 ktCO2e from 62.4 ktCO2e end-of-
project target and (iv) 118% or 35.0 GWh savings from the 29.7 target and
189% which means an actual reduction of 18.95 MW from the target of 10 MW,
and
b. Under the Intermediate Results Level, the Project achieved for Component 1:
(i) a 200% or an actual number of 40 SGAs signed from the end-of-project
target of 20 SGAs and (ii) 134% being able to install 71 new energy efficient
chillers from its 53 chillers end-of-project target. Under Component 2, the
Project was able to have 41 chillers connected to the CMIS or 58% of 71
chillers expected to generate energy savings. This is 23% higher than the 35%
target. Under Component 3, (i) 193% or having an actual number of recipients
participating in recognition program of 29 from target of 15 and (ii) 216% for
conducting 26 training and workshops out of the 12 end-of-project target.
72. Financial Accomplishment. For the total SARO of PhP162,000,000.00 issued to the
Project, 88% or PhP142,270,527.00 was actually obligated as of December 31, 2016. About
34
52% or PhP73,572,423.00 of the obligated amount was disbursed and this was approximately
45% of the total allotment to the Project (Refer to Appendix 4 for the PCEEP Financial
Matrices).
73. Of the total Project cost (exclusive of GOP) of USD 3,600,000.00, the Project was able
to disburse 45% equivalent USD1,618,319.00 or PhP73,572,423.00 as of 31 December 2016.
GEF actual total disbursement as of 31 December 2016 was USD1,005,886.00 or
PhP45,711,808.00 which was 39% of total GEF financing allocation of USD2,600,000.00. The
MLF/OTF reflected a 62% disbursement rate equivalent to USD612,434.00 or
PhP27,860,616.00 from USD1,000,000.00 allocation.
b. Evaluation of Project Performance
74. The discussion on the performance was based on relevance, efficiency, effectiveness
and preliminary sustainability assessment.
i. Project Relevance. PCEEP was relevant as it was consistent with the MTPDP
in terms of provision of climate change mitigations that would address emission of GHG
and replacement of old ODS-based chillers. The Project was in accordance with the
country’s commitment to the Montreal Protocol on Substances that Deplete the Ozone
Layer where MP mandated a complete phase-out of production and consumption of new
ODS and countries are requested to develop measures for the effective use of the ODS
recovered from the chillers to meet servicing needs in the RAC sector. At end of Project
life, an ODP abatement of 121% or 6.9 ODP ton from the 5.7 ODP ton consumption
target was realized and about 243% was achieved for a cumulative carbon emission
reduction (i.e. as direct Project benefit) of 151.4 ktCO2e from 62.4 ktCO2e end-of-
project target.
ii. Project Efficiency. Relative to Section II of this PCR, the Project was quite
efficient in achieving its revised PDO Level and Intermediate Results targets at 100%
level or more without completely consuming its GEF and MLF/OTF financing
allocations. This was also attributed to the lower value of ex-works with more than 1000
TR from the originally estimated normative price of USD 400.00/TR to an actual price
average USD 299.00/TR which led to lower subsidy payments for the actual 45,687 tons
of refrigerants achieved by the Project. Moreover, in terms of Project schedule, PCEEP
was still implemented within the intended 6-year Project implementation period even if
there was restructuring in CY 2013 to improve GEF disbursements and extend the GEF
financing to coincide with the termination of MLF/OTF in January 2017. The
implementation of the Project also contributed to the Philippine commitment to
Montreal Protocol relative to DAO 2013-25 which was within Project timeframe.
iii. Project Effectiveness. Project was effective in pursuing a good partnership with
chiller owners, suppliers and manufacturers for the replacement of old and inefficient
ODS-based chillers. Said partnership contributed to the achievement of Project PDO
Level and Intermediate Results Based on the PCEEP Satisfaction Survey, the Project
facilitated the CFC phase-out obligation with lesser cost to the chiller owners, in the
same manner that the project facilitated the compliance to DAO 2013-25 or the revised
regulation on the chemical control of ODS, and that the Project accelated the
replacement of inefficient ODS-based chillers. Likewise, the Project resulted to a
35
significant reduction of energy consumption and electricity cost, as well as the
promotion of the use of energy efficient chillers. Moreover, the Project also contributed
to market transformation in the chiller industry, particularly on ESCOs market
development and expansion.
iv. Preliminary Assessment of Sustainability. The fielded World Bank Mission in
July 2016 reiterated the allocation of sufficient funds by the DENR to close the Project
in January 2017 and be able to mainstream the post-PCEEP activities into the regular
programs of the DENR and/or EMB. The DENR Memorandum Circular No. 36 dated
September 30, 1994, prescribed for the development of that sustainability plan that
would provide for the smooth integration of the Project’s activities into the regular
activities of the agency. A workshop for the development of the PCEEP Sustainability
Plan was conducted on October 17-18, 2016. The workshop was participated in by
personnel from the DENR and EMB Central Offices and selected EMB regional offices,
namely, EMB IV-A, EMB VI, EMB-VII, EMB-XI, EMB-Negros Island Region and
EMB-National Capital Region. Said Plan provided the blueprint of various activities
that may be adopted and undertaken by the DENR and EMB during the post-PCEEP
implementation. The development of sustainability strategies would ensure continuity
of the various economic and environmental benefits created by the PCEEP furthering
the market transformation in the chiller sector. These benefits include abatement of
ODS consumption and reduction of CO2 emission. Further consultation with EMB
divisions and other DENR offices/services/units concerned need to be conducted for
the PCEEP with the assistance of DENR-FASPS.
c. Follow-up Actions Needed
75. Approval and Adoption of the Sustainability Plan. This Sustainability Plan aims to
provide the blueprint of various activities that may be adopted and undertaken by the DENR
and EMB during the post-PCEEP implementation. The development of sustainability strategies
would ensure continuity of the various economic and environmental benefits created by the
PCEEP furthering the market transformation in the chiller sector. These benefits included
abatement of ODS consumption and reduction of CO2 emission. There were strategies per
project component adopted by the DENR and EMB in order to sustain the interests of chiller
owners and continue the market transformation in the chiller sector in the country.
76. Completion of Project Closure Activities. This component of the Project involved
management aspect of activities to be conducted during the post-PCEEP implementation. This
includes assigning EMB staff and specific tasks to be carried out. This would also include
provision of budget to sustain the activities during the post-PCEEP implementation.
77. The following strategies were adopted by the DENR/EMB in order to effectively and
efficiently ensure project closure including the monitoring of chillers enrolled under the
PCEEP CMIS: (a) designation of a CMIS focal person in the EMB MIS Office; (b) turnover
of PCEEP equipment to the EMB. The DENR and EMB should ensure proper transfer of
accountability of the equipment in accordance to existing rules and regulations. The equipment
includes the following: (a) desktops, (b) laptops, (c) servers, (d) telecommunication equipment,
(e) hanging cabinets, (f) camera, (g) Smart TV, among others.
36
APPENDICES
37
APPENDIX 1
Notes on Institutional Aspect of PCEEP
38
APPENDIX 1
NOTES ON THE INSTITUTIONAL ASPECT OF THE PROJECT
Implementation Arrangement
A. Appraisal/ Early Implementation Phase (Prior to Project Restructuring)
The Department of Environment and Natural Resources (DENR) was primarily responsible for
project implementation on behalf of the government of the Philippines. The principal
organizational units and entity for implementation were:
.
The DENR as the Clean Development Mechanism-Designated National Authority
(CDM DNA) that approves CDM projects through the issuance of Letters of Approval
(LoA). The Environmental Management Bureau (EMB) acts as the CDM Secretariat.
The DENR entered into an Emission Reduction Purchase Agreement (ERPA) with the
KfW, the carbon buyer.
The DENR - Foreign-Assisted and Special Projects Service (FASPS) acted as the
Coordinating Entity (CE) with the main task of overseeing the implementation of the
Project as a CDM Program of Activity (CDM-PoA). The CE was also tasked to
communicate with the CDM Executive Board (CDM EB) with regard to the registration
of the PoA in the CDM. The CE was also tasked to perform the following functions:
o Engaged a private consulting firm to be the Project Management Contractor
(PMC) for the duration of the Project.
o Established a Project Steering Committee (PSC) chaired by the DENR and co-
chaired by the Department of Energy (DOE). The members of the PSC were
composed of representatives from (i) the DENR and any other relevant agencies
elected by the co-chairs of such Committee; (ii) the Project Director; and (iii)
members of civil society and the private sector. The function of the PSC was to
provide operational guidance and oversight to the Project.
o Entered into procurement contracts with goods suppliers (except for new chiller
suppliers) and consultant services contractors.
o Adopted a Project Implementation Plan and Operations Manual acceptable to
the World Bank, giving details of guidelines and procedures agreed with the
World Bank for the implementation, supervision, and monitoring and
evaluation of the Project, including: (i) institutional and staffing arrangements;
(ii) reporting requirements; (iii) performance indicators; (iv) financial
management procedures and audit procedures; (v) procurement procedures; (vi)
details of the Environmental Management Framework; (vii) procedures for the
identification and selection of Beneficiaries, and terms and conditions
governing approval and award of Financial Incentives; (viii) procedures for the
reallocation and utilization of CDM revenues foregone; and (ix) details of the
Governance and Accountability Action Plan. The Plan helped monitor and
39
assess the Project’s compliance with the grant conditions, contracts and other
similar legal instruments;
The Financial Management Service (FMS) of the DENR has overall responsibility for
the financial management of the Project. The DENR-FMS maintained two separate
Designated Accounts for the MLF and GEF funds. The DENR FMS has the authority
to process disbursements of these accounts. The FMS certified the availability of funds
for contracts, Purchase Orders (POs), and all other claims. The FMS also prepared
regulatory financial reports and other reports required by the international financing
institutions (i.e., WB, GEF, and KfW).
The EMB, which is a line bureau of the DENR, established a Project Management Unit
(PMU) that ensured the effective and timely implementation of the project. The PMC
reported to the PMU on a regular basis. The EMB-PMU oversaw the day-to-day
activities of the PMC. It maintained supervision and coordination of the Project’s
implementation, including financial and procurement management. The PMU was also
responsible for the review, acceptance and endorsement of payments. It also entered
into agreements (i.e., Sub-grant Agreement) with the Chiller Owners.
The PMC was contracted by DENR, with terms of reference acceptable to the World
Bank. The PMC was be headed by a full- time Project Manager/Team Leader with skills
and assisted by full-time staff. The PMC was responsible for the day-to-day operations
of the Project. The MLF fund was used to finance the PMC to cover its administrative
and management costs.
Measurement, Monitoring and Verification (MMV) Consultant. The consultant was
contracted by the DENR to carry out Component 2 and validate the information in the
Chiller Management Information System (CMIS) of the PMU that contained data
generated by the data loggers of chillers. The CMIS monitored the energy savings,
measuring energy consumption of baseline equipment and of new equipment,
monitoring performance of new chillers by collecting performance parameters and
analyzing the data in accordance with the Measurement, Monitoring and Verification
(MM &V) protocols.
The KfW (the German Reconstruction Bank) has committed to be the Carbon buyer of
the project and has assisted in the preparation of the project’s PoA Design Document
(PoA-DD) for submission to the CDM Executive Board.
The DENR-EMB entered sub-grant agreements with 20 Chillers Owners (Project
Beneficiaries) namely: Manila Peninsula Inc., Bank of the Philippine Islands, Halifax
Hotel Davao Inc., Waterfront Cebu Hotels and Casino Inc./Cofely Philippines, New
World International Development Inc., BA Lepanto Condominium Corporation,
Acesite (Phils) Hotel Corporation, International School Manila Inc., Cultural Center of
the Philippines, SM Prime Holdings Inc., Robinsons Land Corporation, Philippine
National Bank, Ayala Land Inc / Minot Holdings Inc., North Triangle Depot
Commercial Corp / Philippines Integrated Energy Solutions Inc., Tower One and
Exchange Condominium Corporation Inc., The Philippine Assurance Company Ltd.,
and Ayala Life FGU Center Makati Condominium Corporation.
40
The DENR-EMB entered Memoranda of Understanding with the Chiller Suppliers to
assist the PMU promote the Project to the chiller sector. MOUs were signed between
the DENR and the following chiller suppliers: Aircode Corporation, Concepcion-
Carrier Air Conditioning Company, Delsa Chemicals Inc., Dunham-bush international
Sales and services Inc., Engineered Airconditioning Systems Inc., Filairco Inc. (Trane
Philippines), Global Power Corporation, Stellar Equipment and Machinery Inc. and
Thermal Solutions. Several Energy Services Companies (ESCOs) were also very
supportive to the Project. They are: Cofely Philippines, Meralco Energy Inc. (MSERV)
and Philippine Integrated Energy Solutions Inc. (PhilENERGY).
The table below shows the Chiller Suppliers of the chiller replacements of the Chiller
Project Beneficiaries (Chiller Owners).
Chiller
Suppliers
Project Beneficiaries
(Chiller Owners) Establishments
No. of
Chiller
Units
Supplied
Total
TR
Stellar
Equipment and
Machinery Inc.
(York
Philippines)
Bank of the Philippine
Islands
Bank of the Philippine
Islands – Buendia Center
1 500
Waterfront Cebu City
Casino Hotel Inc. / Cofely-
Philippines
Waterfront Cebu City
Hotel and Casino
3 1,200
International School
Manila Inc.
International School
Manila
3 1,600
Robinsons Land
Corporation
Robinsons Place Manila 5 2,500
Robinsons Galleria 8 4,000
Robinsons Summit Center 3 1,050
SM Prime Holdings Inc.
Radisson Blu Hotel Cebu 3 1,500
SM City Southmall 4 4,000
SM City Sucat 4 1,600 Sub-Total 34 17,950
Filairco Inc.
(Trane
Philippines)
Halifax Davao Hotel, Inc Marco Polo Hotel- Davao 1 400
SM Prime Holdings Inc. SM City Iloilo 3 3,000
Acesite (Phils) Hotel
Corp. / Cofely Philippines
Waterfront Manila
Pavilion Hotel
2 1,000
New World International
Development Philippines
Inc.
New World Hotel-Makati
1 700
North Triangle Depot
Commercial Corp. /
Philippine Integrated
Energy Solutions, Inc.
Trinoma Malls 3 3,600
Tower One and Exchange
Plaza Condominium Corp.
/ Philippine Integrated
Energy Solutions, Inc.
Tower One and Exchange
Plaza
2 1,000
Ayala Land Inc. 6750 Ayala Avenue Office 2 1,000
Ayala Life FGU Center
Makati Condominium
Corp.
Ayala FGU Center Makati
1 700
Sub-Total 15 11,400
41
LG Electronics
Inc.
SM Prime Holdings Inc. SM City Fairview 3 3,000
SM Prime Holdings Inc. SM City Bicutan 1 1,000
SM Prime Holdings Inc. SM City Bacoor 2 2,000
SM Prime Holdings Inc. SM City Manila 3 2,400 Sub-Total 9 8,400
SMARDT Inc.
(MSERV)
The Insular Life
Assurance Company
Insular Life Alabang 4 1,610
Robinsons Land Corp. Robinsons Place Bacolod 2 1,400
Robinsons Land Corp. Robinsons Place Iloilo 2 1,400 Sub-Total 8 4,410
Concepcion-
Carrier
Industries
Manila Peninsula Hotel
Inc.
The Peninsula Manila 1 550
Philippine National Bank PNB-Head Office 2 1,800 Sub-Total 3 2,350
D.B.
International
Sales Services,
Inc
Cultural Center of the
Philippines Cultural Center of the
Philippines 1 500
Sub-Total 1 500
Mcquay
Philippines
Sales and
Service
BA Lepanto
Condominium Corp.
BA Lepanto
Condominium
1 335
Sub-Total 1 335
Grant Total 71 45,345
B. Restructured Phase
In the restructured Project, the DENR-FASPS served as the oversight entity. The PMU
created under the EMB, implements the day-to-day activities of the Project. This was originally
performed by the PMC. With the termination of the PMC, the DENR hired individual
consultants who assisted the PMU in project implementation. These consultants included the
following: (a) Carbon Specialist cum Team Leader, (b) Financial Management Specialist, (c)
Chiller/MMV Consultant, and (d) Management Information System (MIS) Consultant. The
consultants were assisted by support staff e.g., Technical Assistant, Database Management
Assistant, Financial Analyst and Administrative Assistant. On the other hand, the DENR-FMS
was responsible for the overall project financial management and reporting. Processing of
payments was handled by the DENR-FMS.
The PSC was retained in the restructured project. In addition, Special Orders 265-2016,
303-2016 and 305-2016 were issued to create the Technical Working Groups (TWGs) for the
PCEEP Awards and Recognition and procurement of goods and services, respectively. The
composition of the TWG for the PCEEP awards and recognition are as follows: Head of the
PMU (Chairperson), Representative of the DENR-FASPS (Co-Chairperson), and
Representatives from the EMB Management Information System, EMB Climate Change
Division, EMB Philippine Ozone Desk, DENR Financial Management Service, DENR
Programs, Policy and Planning Service, and DENR Strategic Communications and Initiative
Service. The TWG for the procurement of goods and hiring of consultants is composed of
Deputy Project Director/Project Coordinator, representative from the EMB Philippine
42
Environmental Partnership Program, EMB Pollution Adjudication Board and DENR FASPS
as members.
Below is the organizational chart of the restructured Project.
C. Project Officials and Staff
The PCEEP was implemented through the collective efforts of DENR and EMB
officials, Project Staff and Consultants. At project appraisal, the PCEEP was headed by
Undersecretary Analiza R. Teh. After the creation of the Project Management Unit, several
Project Directors headed the implementation of the project. The Project Directors were assisted
by Project Coordinators/Deputy Project Director.
Project Directors
Atty. Jonas R. Leones
DENR Secretary for International Affairs and Foreign – Assisted and Special Project Service
(IAFAPS) and PCEEP Project Director (2014 – 2015)
Atty. Juan Miguel T. Cuna
DENR Assistant Secretary and PCEEP Project Director (July 2010 – 2014 and 2015 – 2016)
Engr. Gilbert C. Gonzales
Director, Environmental Management Bureau and Project Director (June – November 2016)
Ms. Jacqueline A. Caancan
In-Charge, Office of Director and Concurrent Assistant Director, Environmental
Management Bureau and Project Director (November 2016 – January 2017)
Secretary WB
Chiller Supplier
DENR FMS
VER Buyer EMB Director
Undersecretary
FASPO
PMU including ICs
Support Staffs Chiller Owner/ESCOs
PSC
TWG
43
Deputy Project Director and Project Coordinators
Ms. Michico Venus A. Navaluna, Deputy Project Director (November 2015 – January 2017)
Ms. Consolacion P. Crisostomo, Project Coordinator (June 2012 – October 2015)
Engr. Vizminda A. Osorio, Project Coordinator (July 2010 – June 2012)
DENR Foreign-Assisted and Special Projects Service
The DENR-FASPS, as the oversight agency for the project, was headed by the following
officials and staff:
Assistant Secretary Rommel R. Abesamis
DENR Assistant Secretary for Foreign-Assisted and Special Projects
Dir. Edwin G. Domingo
Overall Director, DENR Foreign-Assisted and Special Projects Service (FASPS)
Mr. Eddie B. Abugan Jr.
Chief, PPD, DENR-FASPS (September 2015 - January 2017)
Ms. Cristina M. Regunay
OIC-Chief, PPD, DENR-FASPS (January 2011- September 2015)
Ms. Marilou T. Calado
PCEEP Focal Person, DENR-FASPS (May 2013 – January 2017)
Ms. Belen Panganiban
PCEEP Focal Person, DENR-FASPS (January 2011 – April 2013)
The PMU was assisted by the following Project Consultants and Project Staff:
Project Consultants
Mr. Jo-Rex E. Camba, Team Leader and Carbon Specialist
Engr. Jose M. Grajeda, Chiller Specialist and Measurement, Monitoring and Verification
(MMV) Consultant
Engr. Herbert T. Narisma, Management Information System (MIS) Consultant
Ms. Susan Solano-Cruz, Financial and Management Specialist
Mr. Ferdinand S. Esguerra, Information, Education and Communication (IEC) Specialist
44
Project Staff
Ms. Maybel M. Nonato, Technical Assistant (August 2012 – September 2013)
Ms. Diana S.Virtusio, Technical Assistant (September 2013 – September 2016)
Engr. Jeffrey F. Bancifra, Technical Assistant (September 2016 – December 2016) and
Database Management Assistant (January 2016 – September 2016)
Ms. Izel D. Ibardolaza, Financial Analyst (2012 – September 2015)
Ms. Myrna A. Caguioa, Financial Analyst (October 2016 – December 2016)
Ms. Alexis Sarah Malaca, Project Development Officer (February 2013 – December 2016)
Mr. Mark Louie C. Esclamado, Administrative Assistant (February 2014 – December 2016)
Mr. Ariel A. Bonita, Administrative Assistant (January 2013 – February 2014)
Mr. Daniel Clarin, Administrative Assistant (May – December 2012)
Mr. Jaime D. Savella, Database Management Assistant (September 2016 – December 2016)
Engr. Jasmine C. Redulla, Database Management Assistant (August 2015 – December 2015)
45
APPENDIX 2
Notes on Technical Aspect of PCEEP
46
APPENDIX 2
Project Performance
As of December 31, 2016, the Project was able to accomplish the following as per the revised
(restructured) Project Targets:
Indicators Units of
Measurement
End of Project
Target
As of December 31,
2016
GEF Grant
PDO Level Results Indicator
Cooling capacity addressed by the
Project
No. of TR 30,649 45,687
ODP consumption phase-out due to
replacement of chillers
ODP ton 5.7 6.9
Cumulative carbon emission
reduction as direct benefits from the
project
ktCO2e 62.4 151.4
GWh savings and MW demand
reduction
GWh
MW
29.7
10
34.95
18.95
Intermediate Results Indicators
Component 1
No. of Sub-Grant Agreements
signed
No. 20 40
No. of New Energy Efficient
Chillers Installed
No. 53 71
OTF Grant
Component 2
Data MIS for VER claims % of unit
providing data
35%
(19 chillers)
58%
(41 chillers)
Component 3
No. of recipients participating in
the recognition program
No. 15 29
No. of Trainings and Workshop
conducted
No. 12 26
47
Changes in the Project Eligibility Criteria
The changes in the eligibility criteria after the Project restructuring particularly in the age and
installation date of the old chiller units, created a wider range of potential applicants to the
Project as more chillers i.e., those installed earlier than 1995, were considered in the Project,
provided that the operating hours did not exceed 131,400 operating hours. The 15-year limit in
the eligibility criteria was based on the recorded operating hours of the chiller i.e., maximum
operating hours of 131,400 hours.
Also, the allowable increase or decrease in the capacity of old and new chillers was increased
10 +10% from the original +5%.
The payback period of 4 years or less was also introduced as one of the eligibility criteria in
the restructured PCEEP to assure chiller owners of the viability of their investment. The Project
provided financial calculations on return on investment (ROI) to chiller owners to encourage
them to pursue chiller replacement. The baseline 300 TR chiller capacity and the 0.3kW/TR
difference in efficiency between new and old chillers guarantee a 4-year payback period.
In line with the objectives of the Montreal Protocol, the use of non-ODS (non-ozone depleting
substance) refrigerant for the new chillers was also included in the new eligibility criteria under
the restructuring. This resulted in the disqualification of new chillers with HCFC refrigerant
e.g., HCFC-123 and HCFC-22. The implementation of this criterion in 2015 affected the
Project’s chiller pipeline, effectively excluding Chiller Owners which had a standing contract
with a supplier of chillers with HCFC-123 refrigerant.
48
Eligibility of the Old Chillers:
Criteria Eligibility (Prior to
Restructuring) Eligibility (Restructuring)
Age and
Date of Installation
At the time of application, the
chiller identified for replacement
must have at least five (5) years of
technical life left, based on the
assumption of a 20-year business-
as-usual equipment life.
The old chiller must be operating
no more than 15 years. The age of
the chiller will be based on the
operating hours.
Chiller Type All chillers are eligible except
Absorption type of chillers.
All chillers that conform to CDM
methodology are eligible.
Power Source and
Compression
The chiller should be essentially
electrically powered and of the
compression type.
The same prior to restructuring
Efficiency None Old chillers shall have a specific
energy consumption ratio of least
0.8 kW/TR.
Cooling Capacity In size or in terms of cooling
capacity, the old chiller proposed
for replacement must be 100 tons
refrigeration (TR) or above.
In size or in terms of cooling
capacity, the old chiller proposed
for replacement must be at least
300 tons of refrigeration (TR) or
above.
Operating Hours None The old chiller must be operating
on a regular basis.
Refrigerant Type Chiller may be using any type of
refrigerant
The same prior to restructuring
Use and Location The chillers must be currently in
use and located in the Philippines.
The same prior to restructuring
Proof of
Ownership or
Legal Rights to
Possess and
Operate
The chiller operator is the owner,
or has the legal rights to possess
and operate, the existing chiller.
The chiller operator shows proof
of ownership or legal rights to
possess and operate.
The same prior to restructuring
49
Table of the Eligibility of the Old Chillers:
Establishments of Project Beneficiaries Install
Date
Age of Chiller
(Hours)
Cooling
Capacity (TR)
Efficiency
(KW/TR) Refrigerant
Type of
Chiller
Qty. of Old
Chillers
The Peninsula Manila 1996 62,050 577 0.997 R-22 Screw 1
Bank of Philippine Islands Buendia Center 1995 46,930 550 0.859 R-123 Centrifugal 1
SM City Iloilo (Batch 1) 1999 43,200 2,000 0.925 R-22 Centrifugal 2
Marco Polo Hotel Davao 1998 63,648 400 0.882 R-123 Centrifugal 1
Waterfront Cebu City Hotel and Casino 1997 67,392 1,205 1.330 R-22 Screw 4
International School Manila 2002 27,040 1,600 0.975 R-134a Centrifugal 3
BA Lepanto Condominium 1996 51,680 335 0.922 R-134a Centrifugal 1
New World Makati Hotel 1994 104,832 700 1.283 R-123 Centrifugal 1
Trinoma Malls 2007 49,920 3,450 1.083 R-22 Screw 3
SM City Iloilo (Batch 2) 1999 43,200 1,000 0.860 R-22 Centrifugal 1
Waterfront Manila Pavilion 1993 82,368 1,200 0.952
0.975
R-12
R-22
Screw
2
6750 Ayala Avenue Office
1991 74,880 960 0.985
1.406
R-22
R-22
Screw
2
Ayala FGU Center Makati 1997 46,800 700 1.030 R-123 Centrifugal 1
Tower One and Exchange Plaza 1995 46,800 1,000 1.290
1.740
R-22 Screw 2
Cultural Center of the Philippines 1997 50,046 500 1.090 R-22 Screw 1
SM City Fairview (Batch 1) 1997 44,460 1,000 1.148 R-123 Centrifugal 1
Radisson Blu Hotel Cebu (Batch 1) 1997 71,136 1,000 0.932
0.924
R-123 Centrifugal 2
Insular Life Alabang (Batch 1) 2001 35,100 750 1.350
1.080
R-134a Centrifugal 2
Robinsons Manila 1996 72,800 2,450 0.950 R-123 Centrifugal 5
Robinsons Galleria
1989
75,816
4,250
1.056
R-12
R-22
R-22a
Centrifugal
Centrifugal
Screw
10
Philippine National Bank 1994 53,820 1,800 0.970 R-12 Centrifugal 2
50
Establishments of Project Beneficiaries Install
Date
Age of Chiller
(Hours)
Cooling
Capacity (TR)
Efficiency
(KW/TR) Refrigerant
Type of
Chiller
Qty. of Old
Chillers
Robinsons Bacolod 1996 49,140 1,520 1.232 R-22 Screw 4
Robinsons Iloilo 2001 44,928 1,350 1.070 R-22 Screw 3
Radisson Blu Hotel-Cebu (Batch 2) 1997 74,880 500 1.006 R-123 Centrifugal 1
Insular Life Alabang (Batch 2) 2001 37,440 900 0.930 R-123 Centrifugal 2
SM City Fairview (Batch 2) 1997 46,800 2,000 0.900 R-123 Centrifugal 2
SM City Southmall (Batch 1) 1995 51,480 2,000 0.868 R-22 Centrifugal 2
SM City Southmall (Batch 2) 1995 51,480 2,000 0.908 R-22 Centrifugal 2
SM City Bicutan 2001 37,440 1,000 0.890 R-123 Centrifugal 1
SM City Sucat (Batch 1) 2001 37,440 800 0.876 R-123 Centrifugal 2
SM City Sucat (Batch 2) 2001 37,440 800 0.912 R-123 Centrifugal 2
SM City Bacoor 1996 49,140 2,000 0.950 R-22 Centrifugal 2
SM City Manila (Batch 1) 2000 39,780 1,600 0.908 R-22 Centrifugal 2
SM City Manila (Batch 2) 2000 39,780 800 0.893 R-22 Centrifugal 1
Robinsons Summit Center 2001 37,440 990 0.977 R-22 Screw 3
Total (TRs) 45,687 Total Units of Old Chiller 77
51
Eligibility of the New Chillers:
Criteria Eligibility (Prior to Restructuring) Eligibility (Restructuring)
Starting Date
To be eligible, the new, replacement chillers should have
been installed on or after January 15, 2010.
To be eligible, the new replacement chillers should have
been installed on or after January 1, 2012 but before 31
December 2016.
Chiller Process
The new chiller process is such that it generates chilled water
or a water/antifreeze mixture (e.g. water and glycol) for
process cooling or air conditioning
The same prior to restructuring
Power Source and
Compression
The replacement chiller should be essentially electrically
powered and of the compression type.
The same prior to restructuring
Efficiency
Energy consumption of the new chiller should be equal to or
lower than 0.63 kW/TR.
Specific energy consumption ratio of the new chiller
should be equal to or lower than 0.63 kW/TR and a
difference of at least 0.3 kW/TR between the efficiency of
old and new chiller
Cooling Capacity
The rated output capacity of the new chiller must be equal or
not significantly larger or smaller (maximum + 5%) than the
rated output capacity of the old chiller.
The rated output capacity of the new chiller must not be
significantly smaller (max. -10%) than the baseline or
significantly larger (maximum +10%) than the baseline.
Operating Hours None New chiller must operate to ensure investment payback
period of less than four (4) years
Refrigerant Type The new chiller must use non-CFC based refrigerant The new chiller must use non-ODS based refrigerant
Data Measuring Device
Use and Location
The new chiller is fitted with data logging equipment. The new chiller is fitted with data measuring device that
would measure compression motor kWh (energy
efficiency), temperature of in and out chilled water,
chilled water flow rate based on flow meter or pressure
drop.
Installation
The new chiller is installed in the applicant’s facility where
the old chiller was located. New chiller location need not be
in the exact same place of the old chiller, as long as it is
serving the same facility/building.
The same prior to restructuring
52
Table of the Eligibility of the Replacement (New) Chillers:
Establishments of Project Beneficiaries Install
Date
Type of
Chiller
Cooling
Capacity
±10% (TR)
Efficiency
(KW/TR) Refrigerant
Payback
Period
(Years)
Qty. of
New
Chillers
The Peninsula Manila 2012 Screw 550 0.564 R-134a 4 1
Bank of the Philippine Islands – Buendia 2013 Centrifugal 500 0.548 R-134a 4 1
SM City-Iloilo (Batch 1) 2014 Centrifugal 2,000 0.519 R-123 2 2
Marco Polo Hotel-Davao 2014 Centrifugal 400 0.525 R-123 2 1
Waterfront Cebu City Hotel and Casino 2014 Centrifugal 1,200 0.540 R-134a 2 3
International School Manila 2014 Centrifugal 1,600 0.565 R-134a 4 3
BA Lepanto Condominium 2014 Centrifugal 335 0.615 R-134a 2 1
New World Makati Hotel 2014 Centrifugal 700 0.500 R-123 2 1
Trinoma Malls 2014 Centrifugal 3,600 0.534 R-123 4 3
SM City Iloilo (Batch 2) 2014 Centrifugal 1,000 0.519 R-123 3 1
Waterfront Manila Pavilion 2014 Centrifugal 1,000 0.525 R-123 3 2
6750 Ayala Avenue Office 2014 Centrifugal 1,000 0.551 R-123 3 2
Ayala FGU Center Makati 2014 Centrifugal 700 0.514 R-123 3 1
Tower One and Exchange Plaza 2014 Centrifugal 1,000 0.558 R-123 3 2
Cultural Center of the Philippines 2015 Screw 500 0.550 R-134a 4 1
SM City Fairview (Batch 1) 2015 Centrifugal 1,000 0.510 R-134a 3 1
Radisson Blu Hotel-Cebu (Batch 1) 2015 Centrifugal 1,000 0.560 R-134a 3 2
Insular Life Alabang (Batch 1) 2015 Centrifugal 800 0.598 R-134a 3 2
Robinsons Manila 2015 Centrifugal 2,500 0.550 R-134a 3 5
Robinsons Galleria 2015 Centrifugal 4,000 0.550 R-134a 3 8
Philippine National Bank 2016 Centrifugal 1,800 0.560 R-134a 4 2
Robinsons Bacolod 2016 Centrifugal 1,400 0.531 R-134a 4 2
Robinsons Iloilo 2016 Centrifugal 1,400 0.531 R-134a 4 2
Radisson Blu Hotel Cebu (Batch 2) 2016 Centrifugal 500 0.560 R-134a 3 1
Insular Life Alabang (Batch 2) 2016 Centrifugal 800 0.598 R-134a 3 2
SM City Fairview (Batch 2) 2016 Centrifugal 2,000 0.510 R-134a 3 2
SM City Southmall (Batch 1) 2016 Centrifugal 2,000 0.519 R-134a 3 2
53
Establishments Install
Date
Type of
Chiller
Cooling
Capacity
±10% (TR)
Efficiency
(KW/TR) Refrigerant
Payback
Period
(Years)
Qty. of
New
Chillers
SM City Southmall (Batch 2) 2016 Centrifugal 2,000 0.519 R-134a 3 2
SM City Bicutan 2016 Centrifugal 1,000 0.510 R-134a 3 1
SM City Sucat (Batch 1) 2016 Centrifugal 800 0.527 R-134a 3 2
SM City Sucat (Batch 2) 2016 Centrifugal 800 0.548 R-134a 3 2
SM City Bacoor 2016 Centrifugal 2,000 0.510 R-134a 2 2
SM City Manila (Batch 1) 2016 Centrifugal 1,600 0.510 R-134a 4 2
SM City Manila (Batch 2) 2016 Centrifugal 800 0.510 R-134a 4 1
Robinsons Summit Center 2016 Screw 1,050 0.560 R-134a 3 3
Total (TRs) 45,345 Total Units of New Chiller 71
54
Calculation of Ozone Depleting Potential (ODP):
The ODP reduction is the amount of ODS (expressed in ODP tons) reduced from the
replacement of old chillers with high ozone depleting potentials. The amount of refrigerant in
the chiller is approximately equal to its cooling capacity.
To calculate the ODP reduction, the ODS value of the refrigerant of the old chiller is multiplied
by the amount of recovered refrigerant in kilograms. For this Project, the 20% leakage factor
was used as conservative estimate for ODS emissions during the annual maintenance of old
and inefficient chillers as evident in the amount of refrigerant recovered vis-à-vis the estimated
amount of the refrigerant originally charged in the chiller units. This assumption is conservative
since the actual average recovery rate of refrigerant in the Project is approximately 69% of the
cooling capacity of the old chillers or an average leakage of 31%. The project also assumed an
annual 1% leakage factor during recharging of the new refrigerant despite the absence of
reported recharging of refrigerant from the installation date of the new chiller units.
The table below shows the ODS value of the different refrigerants.
Refrigerant Type ODS Value
CFC-11 or R-11 1.000
CFC-11 or R-12 1.000
HCFC-22 or R-22 0.055
HCFC-123 or R-123 0.020
HCFC-134a or R-134a 0.000
The formula for the calculation was shown below:
a. ODP Abated due to early replacement of old chiller
ODP = (Amount Recovered) x ODS + (20% Leakage x ODS) – (1% x ODS new x TRs )
b. ODP Abated from leakage and maintenance of the old chiller under the BAU scenario
ODP = (TRs x 20% Leakage x ODS) - (1% x ODS new x TRs )
Note: BAU means business as usual scenario where chiller owners will continue to
utilize inefficient chillers.
55
Calculated Ozone Depleting Potential (ODP) of Chiller Pipeline
Establishments of
Project Beneficiaries
No. of
Old
Chiller
Cooling
Capacity of
Old Chiller
(TRs)
Ref.
of Old
Chiller
ODS
of Old
Ref.
Ref.
of New
Chiller
ODS
of New
Ref.
Ref.
Recovered
(Kg)
ODP of
Recovered
with 20%
Leakage
(Kg)
ODP of
Recharge
and
Maintenance
(Kg)
Date
of Ref.
Recovery
(mm/yyyy)
The Peninsula Manila 1 577 R-22 0.055 R-134a 0.000 585 38.61 6.35 09/2012
Bank of the Philippine Islands -Buendia 1 550 R-123 0.020 R-134a 0.000 300 7.20 2.20 08/2013
SM City Iloilo (Batch 1) 2 2,000 R-22 0.055 R-123 0.020 1,800 82.44 21.60 04/2014
Marco Polo Davao Hotel 1 400 R-123 0.020 R-123 0.020 99 0.00 1.52 09/2013
Waterfront Cebu City Hotel and Casino 4 1,205 R-22 0.055 R-134a 0.000 938 61.91 13.26 06/2014
International School Manila 3 1,600 R-134a 0.000 R-134a 0.000 1,390 0.00 0.00 07/2014
BA Lepanto Condominium 1 335 R-134a 0.000 R-134a 0.000 300 0.00 0.00 07/2014
New World Hotel-Makati 1 700 R-123 0.020 R-123 0.020 520 0.00 2.66 01/2014
Trinoma Malls 3 3,450 R-22 0.055 R-123 0.020 2,080 95.68 37.26 08/2014
SM City Iloilo (Batch 2) 1 1,000 R-22 0.055 R-123 0.020 800 36.64 10.80 11/2014
Waterfront Manila Pavilion Hotel 1
1
660
540
R-12
R-22
1.000
0.055
R-123
R-123
0.020
0.020
250
318
299.87
14.56
131.87
5.83
05/2014
10/2014
6750 Ayala Avenue Office 2 960 R-22 0.055 R-123 0.020 510 23.36 10.37 11/2014
Ayala FGU Center Makati 1 700 R-123 0.020 R-123 0.020 490 0.00 2.66 07/2015
Tower One and Exchange Plaza 2 1,000 R-22 0.055 R-123 0.020 405 18.55 10.80 11/2014
Cultural Center of the Philippines 1 500 R-22 0.055 R-134a 0.000 400 26.40 5.50 04/2015
SM City-Fairview (Batch 1) 1 1,000 R-123 0.020 R-134a 0.000 680 16.32 4.00 05/2015
Radisson Blu Hotel-Cebu (Batch 1) 2 1,000 R-123 0.020 R-134a 0.000 554 13.30 4.00 06/2015
Insular Life Alabang (Batch 1) 2 750 R-134a 0.000 R-134a 0.000 615 0.00 0.00 09/2015
Robinsons Place Manila 5 2,450 R-123 0.020 R-134a 0.000 1,670 40.08 9.80 11/2015
Robinsons Galleria
4 2,000 R-12 1.000 R-134a 0.000 1,603.6 1,924.32 400.00
11/2015 1 295 R-22 0.055 R-134a 0.000 209.5 13.83 3.24
2 1,100 R-134a 0.000 R-134a 0.000 533.5 0.00 0.00
3 855 R-22a 0.000 R-134a 0.000 178.0 0.00 0.00
Philippine National Bank 2 1,800 R-12 1.000 R-134a 0.000 2,164.3 2,597.16 n/a* 02/2016
Robinsons Place Bacolod 4 1,520 R-22 0.055 R-134a 0.000 1,238 81.71 n/a 04/2016
Robinsons Place Iloilo 3 1,350 R-22 0.055 R-134a 0.000 1,100 72.60 n/a 04/2016
56
Chiller Owners
No. of
Old
Chiller
Cooling
Capacity of
Old Chiller
(TRs)
Ref.
of Old
Chiller
ODS
of Old
Ref.
Ref.
of New
Chiller
ODS
of New
Ref.
Ref.
Recovered
(Kg)
ODP of
Recovered
with 20%
Leakage
(Kg)
ODP of
Recharge
and
Maintenance
(Kg)
Date
of Ref.
Recovery
(mm/yyyy)
Radisson Blu Hotel Cebu (Batch 2) 1 500 R-123 0.020 R-134a 0.000 268 6.43 n/a 08/2016
Insular Life Alabang (Batch 2) 2 900 R-134a 0.000 R-134a 0.000 630 0.00 n/a 09/2016
SM City Fairview (Batch 2) 2 2,000 R-123 0.020 R-134a 0.000 1,078 25.87 n/a 11/2016
SM City Southmall (Batch 1) 2 2,000 R-22 0.055 R-134a 0.000 1,400 92.40 n/a 11/2016
SM City Southmall (Batch 2) 2 2,000 R-22 0.055 R-134a 0.000 1,400 92.40 n/a 12/2016
SM City Bicutan 1 1,000 R-123 0.020 R-134a 0.000 540 12.96 n/a 08/2016
SM City Sucat (Batch 1) 2 800 R-123 0.020 R-134a 0.000 545 13.08 n/a 12/2016
SM City Sucat (Batch 2) 2 800 R-123 0.020 R-134a 0.000 595 14.28 n/a 12/2016
SM City Bacoor 2 2,000 R-22 0.055 R-134a 0.000 1,385 91.41 n/a 11/2016
SM City Manila (Batch 1) 2 1,600 R-22 0.055 R-134a 0.000 821.2 54.20 n/a 12/2016
SM City Manila (Batch 2) 1 800 R-22 0.055 R-134a 0.000 408.6 26.97 n/a 12/2016
Robinsons Summit Center 3 990 R-22 0.055 R-134a 0.000 643 42.44 n/a 09/2016
Total 77 45,687 31,444.70 5,936.98 683.72
57
Tabulation of ODP of Chillers from Year 2012 to 2016 (Expected Leakage of refrigerant under BAU Scenario)
Establishments
No. of
Old
Chiller
Cooling
Capacity
of Old
Chiller
(TRs)
ODS
of Old
Chiller
ODS
of New
Chiller
Amount of
ODS
Recovered
(kg)
ODP of
Recovered
with 20%
Leakage
(kg)
ODP of
Recharge
and
Maint.
(kg)
ODP
for
2012
(kg)
ODP
for
2013
(kg)
ODP
for
2014
(kg)
ODP
for
2015
(kg)
ODP
for
2016
(kg)
The Peninsula Manila 1 577 R-22 R-134a 585 38.61 6.35 38.61 6.35 6.35 6.35 6.35
Bank of the Philippine Islands - Buendia 1 550 R-123 R-134a 300 7.20 2.20 n/a 7.20 2.20 2.20 2.20
SM City Iloilo (Batch 1) 2 2,000 R-22 R-123 1,800 82.44 21.60 n/a n/a 82.44 21.60 21.60
Marco Polo Davao Hotel 1 400 R-123 R-123 99 0.00 1.52 n/a n/a 0.00 1.52 1.52
Waterfront Cebu City Hotel and Casino 4 1,205 R-22 R-134a 938 61.91 13.26 n/a n/a 61.91 13.26 13.26
International School Manila 3 1,600 R-134a R-134a 1,390 0.00 0.00 n/a n/a 0.00 0.00 0.00
BA Lepanto Condominium 1 335 R-134a R-134a 300 0.00 0.00 n/a n/a 0.00 0.00 0.00
New World Hotel-Makati 1 700 R-123 R-123 520 0.00 2.66 n/a n/a 0.00 2.66 2.66
Trinoma Malls 3 3,450 R-22 R-123 2,080 95.68 37.26 n/a n/a 95.68 37.26 37.26
SM City Iloilo (Batch 2) 1 1,000 R-22 R-123 800 36.64 10.80 n/a n/a 36.64 10.80 10.80
Waterfront Manila Pavilion Hotel 1
1
660
540
R-12
R-22
R-123
R-123
250
318
299.87
14.56
131.87
5.83
n/a n/a 299.87
14.56
131.87
5.83
131.87
5.83
6750 Ayala Avenue Office 2 960 R-22 R-123 510 23.36 10.37 n/a n/a 23.36 10.37 10.37
Ayala FGU Center Makati 1 700 R-123 R-123 490 0.00 2.66 n/a n/a 0.00 2.66 2.66
Tower One and Exchange Plaza 2 1,000 R-22 R-123 405 18.55 10.80 n/a n/a 18.55 10.80 10.80
Cultural Center of the Philippines 1 500 R-22 R-134a 400 26.40 5.50 n/a n/a n/a 26.40 5.50
SM City-Fairview (Batch 1) 1 1,000 R-123 R-134a 680 16.32 4.00 n/a n/a n/a 16.32 4.00
Radisson Blu Hotel-Cebu (Batch 1) 2 1,000 R-123 R-134a 554 13.30 4.00 n/a n/a n/a 13.30 4.00
Insular Life Alabang (Batch 1) 2 750 R-134a R-134a 615 0.00 0.00 n/a n/a n/a 0.00 0.00
Robinsons Place Manila 5 2,450 R-123 R-134a 1,670 40.08 9.80 n/a n/a n/a 40.08 9.80
Robinsons Galleria
4 2,000 R-12 R-134a 1,603.6 1,924.32 400.00 n/a n/a n/a 1,924.3 400.00
1 295 R-22 R-134a 209.5 13.83 3.24 n/a n/a n/a 13.83 3.24
2 1,100 R-134a R-134a 533.5 0.00 0.00 n/a n/a n/a 0.00 0.00
3 855 R-22a R-134a 178.0 0.00 0.00 n/a n/a n/a 0.00 0.00
Philippine National Bank 2 1,800 R-12 R-134a 2,164.3 2,597.16 n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a 2,597.16
Robinsons Place Bacolod 4 1,520 R-22 R-134a 1,238 81.71 n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a 81.71
58
Establishments
No. of
Old
Chiller
Cooling
Capacity
of Old
Chiller
(TRs)
ODS
of Old
Chiller
ODS
of New
Chiller
Amount of
ODS
Recovered
(kg)
ODP of
Recovered
with 20%
Leakage
(kg)
ODP of
Recharge
and
Maint.
(kg)
ODP
for
2012
(kg)
ODP
for
2013
(kg)
ODP
for
2014
(kg)
ODP
for
2015
(kg)
ODP
for
2016
(kg)
Robinsons P lace Iloilo 3 1,350 R-22 R-134a 1,100 72.60 n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a 72.60
Radisson Blu Hotel-Cebu (Batch 2) 1 500 R-123 R-134a 268 6.43 n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a 6.43
Insular Life Alabang (Batch 2) 2 900 R-134a R-134a 630 0.00 n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a 0.00
SM City Fairview (Batch 2) 2 2,000 R-123 R-134a 1,078 25.87 n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a 25.87
SM City Southmall (Batch 1) 2 2,000 R-22 R-134a 1,400 92.40 n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a 92.40
SM City Southmall (Batch 2) 2 2,000 R-22 R-134a 1,400 92.40 n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a 92.40
SM City Bicutan 1 1,000 R-123 R-134a 540 12.96 n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a 12.96
SM City Sucat (Batch 1) 2 800 R-123 R-134a 545 13.08 n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a 13.08
SM City Sucat (Batch 2) 2 800 R-123 R-134a 595 14.28 n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a 14.28
SM City Bacoor 2 2,000 R-22 R-134a 1,385 91.41 n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a 91.41
SM City Manila (Batch 1) 2 1,600 R-22 R-134a 821.2 54.20 n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a 54.20
SM City Manila (Batch 2) 1 800 R-22 R-134a 408.6 26.97 n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a 26.97
Robinsons Summit Center 3 990 R-22 R-134a 643 42.44 n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a 42.44
Total 77 45,687 31,444.70 38.61 13.55 641.56 2,291.4 3,907.63
Total ODP from Yr 2012 to Yr 2016 = 6,892.78 Kg or 6.9 tons ODP 38.61 13.55 641.56 2,291.4 3,907.63
Refrigerant Recovery Rate = 31,444.70 / 45,687 or 69%
Note: n/a means the old chillers were not replaced yet. Hence, refrigerant recovery was not performed.
59
Calculation of ktCO2e:
There were two sources of emission reductions for this Project: (a) emission reduction from
the recovered refrigerant and estimated BAU leakage and (b) emission reduction from the
displacement of electricity from the fossil fuel-based grid.
The emission reduction from the refrigerant was calculated using the Global Warming Potential
(GWP) value of the refrigerant. The chiller was assumed to be charged with refrigerant
approximately equal to the cooling capacity of the chiller.
To calculate the emission reduction from the recovered refrigerant, the GWP value of the
refrigerant of the old chiller was multiplied to the cooling capacity plus the projected annual
leakage under BAU condition and less the projected leakage of the new refrigerant during
annual recharging. The leakage factor during recharging of the new refrigerant was assumed
to be at 1%. The table below was the GWP of the different refrigerants.
If recovery is not yet conducted an assumption of 20% leakage is used in the calculation. This
is conservative since the average actual recovery rate of the Project is approximately 69% of
the cooling capacity of the old chillers or an average leakage of 31%.
The GWP value of the different refrigerants:
Refrigerant Type GWP Value
CFC-11 or R-11 8,500
CFC-11 or R-12 8,500
HCFC-22 or R-22 1,700
HCFC-123 or R-123 120
HCFC-134a or R-134a 1,300
The formula for the calculation was shown below:
a. tCO2e abated due to early replacement of old chiller
tCO2e = [ (TRs x GWP)old + (Leakage x GWP)old – (1% x GWP x TRs)new ] /1000
b. tCO2e abated from leakage and maintenance of the old chiller
tCO2e = [(Leakage x GWP ) old - ( 1% x GWP x TRs) new ]/1000
60
Calculated (tCO2e) of Chiller Pipeline
Establishments of
Project Beneficiaries
No. of
Old
Chiller
Cooling
Capacity
of Old
Chiller
(TRs)
ODS
of Old
Chiller
Cooling
Capacity of
New Chiller
(TRs)
ODS
of New
Chiller
Amount of
ODS
Recovered
(kg)
Amount
of ODS
Leakage
(kg)
tCO2e of
Recovered
with Leakage
(kg)
tCO2e of
Recharge
and
Maintenance
(kg)
Date
of ODS
Recovery
(mm/yyyy)
The Peninsula Manila 1 577 R-22 550 R-134a 585 0 973.75 0.00 09/2012
Bank of the Philippine Islands –
Buendia
1 550 R-123 500 R-134a 300 250 89.50 23.50 08/2013
SM City Iloilo (Batch 1) 2 2,000 R-22 2,000 R-123 1,800 200 3,737.60 337.60 04/2014
Marco Polo Davao Hotel 1 400 R-123 400 R-123 99 301 83.64 35.64 09/2013
Waterfront Cebu City Hotel & Casino 4 1,205 R-22 1,200 R-134a 938 267 2,486.40 438.30 06/2014
International School Manila 3 1,600 R-134a 1,600 R-134a 1,390 210 2,332.20 252.20 07/2014
BA Lepanto Condominium 1 335 R-134a 335 R-134a 300 35 476.75 41.15 07/2014
New World Hotel-Makati 1 700 R-123 700 R-123 520 180 104.76 20.76 01/2014
Trinoma Malls 3 3,450 R-22 3,600 R-123 2,080 1,370 8,189.68 2,324.68 08/2014
SM City Iloilo (Batch 2) 1 1,000 R-22 1,000 R-123 800 200 2,038.80 338.80 11/2014
Waterfront Manila Pavilion Hotel 1
1
660
540
R-12
R-22
500
500
R-123
R-123
250
318
410
222
9,094.40
1,294.80
3,484.40
376.80
05/2014
10/2014
6750 Ayala Avenue Office 2 960 R-22 1,000 R-123 510 450 2,395.80 763.80 11/2014
Ayala FGU Center Makati 1 700 R-123 700 R-123 490 210 108.36 24.36 07/2015
Tower One and Exchange Plaza 2 1,000 R-22 1,000 R-123 405 595 2,710.30 1,010.30 11/2014
Cultural Center of the Philippines 1 500 R-22 500 R-134a 400 100 1,013.50 163.50 04/2015
SM City-Fairview (Batch 1) 1 1,000 R-123 1,000 R-134a 680 320 145.40 25.40 05/2015
Radisson Blu Hotel Cebu (Batch 1) 2 1,000 R-123 1,000 R-134a 554 446 160.52 40.52 06/2015
Insular Life Alabang (Batch 1) 2 750 R-134a 800 R-134a 615 135 1,140.10 165.10 09/2015
Robinsons Place Manila 5 2,450 R-123 2,500 R-134a 1,670 780 355.10 61.10 11/2015
Robinsons Galleria
4 2,000 R-12 2,000 R-134a 1,603.6 396.4 20,343.40 3,343.40
11/2015 1 295 R-22 500 R-134a 209.5 85.5 640.35 138.85
2 1,100 R-134a 1,000 R-134a 533.5 566.5 2,153.45 723.45
3 855 R-22a 500 R-134a 178.0 - 0.00 0.00
Philippine National Bank 2 1,800 R-12 1,800 R-134a 2,164.3 360 18,336.60 n/a 02/2016
Robinsons Place Bacolod 4 1,520 R-22 1,400 R-134a 1,238 282 3,045.20 n/a 04/2016
Robinsons Place Iloilo 3 1,350 R-22 1,400 R-134a 1,100 250 2,701.80 n/a 04/2016
61
Establishments of
Project Beneficiaries
No. of
Old
Chiller
Cooling
Capacity
of Old
Chiller
(TRs)
ODS
of Old
Chiller
Cooling
Capacity of
New Chiller
(TRs)
ODS
of New
Chiller
Amount of
ODS
Recovered
(kg)
Amount
of ODS
Leakage
(kg)
tCO2e of
Recovered
with Leakage
(kg)
tCO2e of
Recharge
and
Maintenance
(kg)
Date
of ODS
Recovery
(mm/yyyy)
Radisson Blu Hotel-Cebu (Batch 2) 1 500 R-123 500 R-134a 268 232 81.34 n/a 08/2016
Insular Life Alabang (Batch 2) 2 900 R-134a 810 R-134a 630 270 1,393.47 n/a 09/2016
SM City Fairview (Batch 2) 2 2,000 R-123 2,000 R-134a 1,078 400 262.00 n/a 11/2016
SM City Southmall (Batch 1) 2 2,000 R-22 2,000 R-134a 1,400 400 4,054.00 n/a 11/2016
SM City Southmall (Batch 2) 2 2,000 R-22 2,000 R-134a 1,400 400 4,054.00 n/a 12/2016
SM City Bicutan 1 1,000 R-123 1,000 R-134a 540 200 131.00 n/a 08/2016
SM City Sucat (Batch 1) 2 800 R-123 800 R-134a 545 160 1,621.60 n/a 12/2016
SM City Sucat (Batch 2) 2 800 R-123 800 R-134a 595 160 1,621.60 n/a 12/2016
SM City Bacoor 2 2,000 R-22 2,000 R-134a 1,385 400 4,054.00 n/a 11/2016
SM City-Manila (Batch 1) 2 1,600 R-22 1,600 R-134a 821.2 320 3,243.20 n/a 12/2016
SM City-Manila (Batch 2) 1 800 R-22 800 R-134a 408.6 160 1,621.60 n/a 12/2016
Robinsons Summit Center 3 990 R-22 1,050 R-134a 643 198 2,005.95 n/a 09/2016
Total 77 45,687 45,343 31,444.7 11,921.4 110,295.92
62
Tabulation of (tCO2e) of Chillers from Year 2012 to 2016 (Emission from Leakage under BAU Scenario)
Establishments of
Project Beneficiaries
No. of
Old
Chiller
Cooling
Capacity
of Old
Chiller
(TRs)
ODS
of Old
Chiller
ODS
of New
Chiller
Amount of
ODS
Recovered
(kg)
tCO2e
for
2012
(kg)
tCO2e
for
2013
(kg)
tCO2e
for
2014
(kg)
tCO2e
for
2015
(kg)
tCO2e
for
2016
(kg)
The Peninsula Manila 1 577 R-22 R-134a 585 973.75 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Bank of the Philippine Islands Buendia 1 550 R-123 R-134a 300 n/a 89.50 23.50 23.50 23.50
SM City Iloilo (Batch 1) 2 2,000 R-22 R-123 1,800 n/a n/a 3,737.60 337.60 337.60
Marco Polo Davao Hotel 1 400 R-123 R-123 99 n/a n/a 83.64 35.64 35.64
Waterfront Cebu City Hotel & Casino 4 1,205 R-22 R-134a 938 n/a n/a 2,486.40 438.30 438.30
International School Manila 3 1,600 R-134a R-134a 1,390 n/a n/a 2,332.20 252.20 252.20
BA Lepanto Condominium 1 335 R-134a R-134a 300 n/a n/a 476.75 41.15 41.15
New World Hotel-Makati 1 700 R-123 R-123 520 n/a n/a 104.76 20.76 20.76
Trinoma Malls 3 3,450 R-22 R-123 2,080 n/a n/a 8,189.68 2,324.68 2,324.68
SM City Iloilo (Batch 2) 1 1,000 R-22 R-123 800 n/a n/a 2,038.80 338.80 338.80
Waterfront Manila Pavilion Hotel 1
1
660
540
R-12
R-22
R-123
R-123
250
318
n/a n/a 9,094.40
1,294.80
3,484.40
376.80
3,484.40
376.80
6750 Ayala Avenue Office 2 960 R-22 R-123 510 n/a n/a 2,395.80 763.80 763.80
Ayala FGU Center Makati 1 700 R-123 R-123 490 n/a n/a 108.36 24.36 24.36
Tower One and Exchange Plaza 2 1,000 R-22 R-123 405 n/a n/a 2,710.30 1,010.30 1,010.30
Cultural Center of the Philippines 1 500 R-22 R-134a 400 n/a n/a n/a 1,013.50 163.50
SM City Fairview (Batch 1) 1 1,000 R-123 R-134a 680 n/a n/a n/a 145.40 25.40
Radisson Blu Hotel Cebu (Batch 1) 2 1,000 R-123 R-134a 554 n/a n/a n/a 160.52 40.52
Insular Life Alabang (Batch 1) 2 750 R-134a R-134a 615 n/a n/a n/a 1,140.10 165.10
Robinsons Place Manila 5 2,450 R-123 R-134a 1,670 n/a n/a n/a 355.10 61.10
Robinsons Place Galleria
4 2,000 R-12 R-134a 1,603.6 n/a n/a n/a 20,343.40 3,343.40
1 295 R-22 R-134a 209.5 n/a n/a n/a 640.35 138.85
2 1,100 R-134a R-134a 533.5 n/a n/a n/a 2,153.45 723.45
3 855 R-22a R-134a 178.0 n/a n/a n/a 0.00 0.00
Philippine National Bank 2 1,800 R-12 R-134a 2,164.3 n/a n/a n/a n/a 18,336.60
Robinsons Place Bacolod 4 1,520 R-22 R-134a 1,238 n/a n/a n/a n/a 3,045.20
Robinsons Place Iloilo 3 1,350 R-22 R-134a 1,100 n/a n/a n/a n/a 2,701.80
Radisson Blu Hotel-Cebu (Batch 2) 1 500 R-123 R-134a 268 n/a n/a n/a n/a 81.34
63
Establishments of
Project Beneficiaries
No. of
Old
Chiller
Cooling
Capacity
of Old
Chiller
(TRs)
ODS
of Old
Chiller
ODS
of New
Chiller
Amount of
ODS
Recovered
(kg)
tCO2e
for
2012
(kg)
tCO2e
for
2013
(kg)
tCO2e
for
2014
(kg)
tCO2e
for
2015
(kg)
tCO2e
for
2016
(kg)
Insular Life Alabang (Batch 2) 2 900 R-134a R-134a 630 n/a n/a n/a n/a 1,393.47
SM City Fairview (Batch 2) 2 2,000 R-123 R-134a 1,078 n/a n/a n/a n/a 262.00
SM City Southmall (Batch 1) 2 2,000 R-22 R-134a 1,400 n/a n/a n/a n/a 4,054.00
SM City Southmall (Batch 2) 2 2,000 R-22 R-134a 1,400 n/a n/a n/a n/a 4,054.00
SM City Bicutan 1 1,000 R-123 R-134a 540 n/a n/a n/a n/a 131.00
SM City Sucat (Batch 1) 2 800 R-123 R-134a 545 n/a n/a n/a n/a 1,621.60
SM City Sucat (Batch 2) 2 800 R-123 R-134a 595 n/a n/a n/a n/a 1,621.60
SM City Bacoor 2 2,000 R-22 R-134a 1,385 n/a n/a n/a n/a 4,054.00
SM City Manila (Batch 1) 2 1,600 R-22 R-134a 821.2 n/a n/a n/a n/a 3,243.20
SM City Manila (Batch 2) 1 800 R-22 R-134a 408.6 n/a n/a n/a n/a 1,621.60
Robinsons Summit Center 3 990 R-22 R-134a 643 n/a n/a n/a n/a 2,005.95
Total 77 45,687 973.75 89.50 35,077 35,424.11 62,360.97
Total tCO2e = 133,925.32 or 133.93 ktCO2e 973.75 89.50 35,077 35,424.11 62,360.97
64
Energy Savings (GWh) :
The Giga-Watt hour (GWh) savings is the energy saved from using more energy efficient chillers
because of the early replacement of the old inefficient chillers.
The Project started with very low cumulative energy savings of 2.45 GWh in CY2014 because
only four (4) chillers are uploading to the PCEEP CMIS. By the end of December 2015, the energy
savings reached to 18.45 GWh. The increase was seven (7) times more than the 2.45 GWh because
there were already 22 new chillers uploading monitoring logs to the PCEEP CMIS. As of
December 15, 2016, 41 chillers were connected to the CMIS and so far 24 new chillers were
contributing to the energy savings and about 34.95 GWh savings or 117% of target was already
achieved by the Project. This cumulative value was conservative since there was some chiller not
yet updated in the monthly monitoring logs.
At the end of the Project, 35.63 GWh savings or 120% of the 29.7 GWh target will be achieved.
This GWh savings is conservative since the actual average efficiency and operating hours of each
chiller is varying.
Table: Direct Reading of GWh from CMIS as of December 2017
No. Establishments of
Project Beneficiaries Chiller ID Efficiency
GWHr
Savings ktCO2e
01 The Peninsula Manila Hotel PCEEP-001 0.5724 2.00 1.00
02 Bank of the Philippine Island PCEEP-002 0.5556 0.78 0.39
03 SM Iloilo PCEEP-003 0.6065 1.70 0.85
04 SM Iloilo PCEEP-004 0.6170 1.38 0.69
05 Marco Polo Davao PCEEP-005 0.7090 0.40 0.20
06 Waterfront Cebu City Hotel & Casino PCEEP-006 0.5215 2.99 1.50
07 Waterfront Cebu City Hotel & Casino PCEEP-007 0.5145 3.77 1.89
08 Waterfront Cebu City Hotel & Casino PCEEP-008 0.7029 2.91 1.46
09 International School Manila PCEEP-009 0.5542 0.18 0.09
10 International School Manila PCEEP-010 0.6538 0.06 0.03
11 International School Manila PCEEP-011 0.6493 0.06 0.03
12 New World Makati PCEEP-012 0.3624 2.24 1.12
13 Trinoma(NTDCC) PCEEP-014 0.5627 1.86 0.93
14 Trinoma(NTDCC) PCEEP-015 0.5601 2.36 1.18
15 Trinoma(NTDCC) PCEEP-016 0.5744 3.25 1.63
16 SM Iloilo PCEEP-017 0.5874 0.93 0.47
17 Manila Pavillion PCEEP-018 0.5571 1.27 0.63
18 Manila Pavillion PCEEP-019 0.5594 1.71 0.86
19 6750 Ayala Ave. Joint Venture PCEEP-020 0.5803 0.07 0.04
20 6750 Ayala Ave. Joint Venture PCEEP-021 0.6250 0.01 0.01
21 Tower One and Exchange Plaza PCEEP-022 0.5423 1.43 0.72
22 Tower One and Exchange Plaza PCEEP-023 0.5697 0.89 0.45
23 Cultural Center of the Philippines PCEEP-024 0.5307 0.13 0.07
24 SM City Fairview PCEEP-027 0.2479 2.54 1.27
Total 34.95 17.47
65
Megawatt (MW) Demand Reduction:
The Megawatt demand reduction was the power allotment saved by the Government because of
the reduction in the supply of energy due to the operation of efficient chillers. The power saved
could be used for other services like public and private hospitals, transport system and schools.
The power demand reduction by each chiller was calculated by multiplying the rated cooling
capacity of the new chiller by the difference in POF of the old chiller and the average efficiency
of the new chiller.
Formula:
MW demand = (POF – New Ave. Efficiency) x (New Rated Cooling Capacity) / 1000
At end of Project, the MW demand reduction was estimated at 18.95 MW or 189% of the 10
MW demand target.
The power demand reduction was not cumulative. After the new chiller was commissioned, the
power demand reduction was already realized. The power demand reduction was dependent on the
actual efficiency of the new chiller. Efficient chiller achieved better power demand reduction.
66
Tabulation of the MW Demand Reduction
No. ESTABLISHMENTS OF
PROJECT BENEFICIARIES
BASELINE CHILLER NEW CHILLER
QTY
COOLING
CAPACITY
(TR)
POF
(kW/TR) QTY
COOLING
CAPACITY
(TR)
AVE. POF
(kW/TR) ∆ POF
MW
Demand
2013 Chiller Replacements
01 The Peninsula Manila (Chiller 1) 1 577 0.9970 1 550 0.600 0.3970 0.2184
02 BPI-Buendia (Chiller 2) 1 550 0.8590 1 500 0.600 0.2590 0.1295
03 SM City Iloilo Batch 1 (Chiller 1) 1 1,000 0.9240 1 1,000 0.600 0.3240 0.3240
04 SM City Iloilo Batch 1 (Chiller 3) 1 1,000 0.9260 1 1,000 0.600 0.3260 0.3260
05 Marco Polo Davao (Chiller 1) 1 400 0.8820 1 400 0.620 0.2620 0.1048
06 Waterfront Cebu City Hotel Casino 4 1,205 1.3216 3 1,200 0.550 0.7716 0.9259
07 International School Manila (Chiller 1A) 1 650 1.0810 1 650 0.560 0.5210 0.3387
08 International School Manila (Chiller 2A) 1 650 0.9170 1 650 0.630 0.2870 0.1866
09 International School Manila (Chiller 1B) 1 300 0.8690 1 300 0.630 0.2390 0.0717
10 New World Hotel Makati (Chiller 1) 1 700 1.2800 1 700 0.550 0.7300 0.5110
11 BA Lepanto Condominium (Chiller 2) 1 335 0.8510 1 335 0.610 0.2410 0.0807
12 Trinoma (Chiller 1) 1 1,150 1.0200 1 1,200 0.600 0.4200 0.5040
13 Trinoma (Chiller 2) 1 1,150 1.1100 1 1,200 0.600 0.5100 0.6120
14 Trinoma (Chiller 3) 1 1,150 1.1200 1 1,200 0.600 0.5200 0.6240
15 SM City Iloilo Batch 2 (Chiller 4) 1 1,000 0.8600 1 1,000 0.600 0.2600 0.2600
16 Manila Pavilion (Chiller 1) 1 660 0.8710 1 500 0.550 0.3210 0.1605
17 Manila Pavilion (Chiller 2) 1 540 0.8500 1 500 0.550 0.3000 0.1500
18 6750 Ayala Ave. Joint Venture (Chiller 1) 1 480 0.9850 1 500 0.600 0.3850 0.1925
19 6750 Ayala Ave. Joint Venture (Chiller 3) 1 480 1.4060 1 500 0.600 0.8060 0.4030
20 Tower One & Exchange Plaza (Chiller 1) 1 600 1.2900 1 600 0.600 0.6900 0.4140
21 Tower One & Exchange Plaza (Chiller 2) 1 400 1.7400 1 400 0.600 1.1400 0.4560
22 Cultural Center of the Philippines 1 500 1.0900 1 500 0.630 0.4600 0.2300
23 FGU Ayala (Chiller 1) 1 700 1.0300 1 700 0.600 0.4300 0.3010
24 SM City Fairview Batch 1 (Chiller 1) 1 1,000 1.1480 1 1,000 0.600 0.5480 0.5480
67
No. ESTABLISHMENTS OF
PROJECT BENEFICIARIES
BASELINE CHILLER
NEW CHILLER
QTY
COOLING
CAPACITY
(TR)
POF
(kW/TR) QTY
COOLING
CAPACITY
(TR)
AVE. POF
(kW/TR) ∆ POF
MW
Demand
25 Radisson Blu Cebu Batch 1 (Chiller 1) 1 500 0.9320 1 500 0.600 0.3320 0.1660
26 Radisson Blu Cebu Batch 1 (Chiller 3) 1 500 0.9240 1 500 0.600 0.3240 0.1620
27 Insular Life Alabang Batch 1 (Chiller 1) 1 350 1.3500 1 400 0.600 0.7500 0.3000
28 Insular Life Alabang Batch 1 (Chiller 2) 1 400 1.0800 1 400 0.600 0.4800 0.1920
29 Robinsons Galleria (Chiller 1) 1 500 0.9800 1 500 0.600 0.3800 0.1900
30 Robinsons Galleria (Chiller 2) 1 500 0.9300 1 500 0.600 0.3300 0.1650
31 Robinsons Galleria (Chiller 3) 1 550 0.9100 1 500 0.600 0.3100 0.1550
32 Robinsons Galleria (Chiller 4) 1 500 0.9100 1 500 0.600 0.3100 0.1550
33 Robinsons Galleria (Chiller 5) 1 550 1.1500 1 500 0.600 0.5500 0.2750
34 Robinsons Galleria (Chiller 6) 1 500 1.1800 1 500 0.600 0.5800 0.2900
35 Robinsons Galleria (Chillers 7 and 8) 2 580 1.2140 1 500 0.630 0.5840 0.2920
36 Robinsons Galleria (Chillers 9 and 10) 2 570 1.1450 1 500 0.630 0.5150 0.2575
37 Robinsons Place Manila (Chiller 1) 1 500 0.8000 1 500 0.600 0.2000 0.1000
38 Robinsons Place Manila (Chiller 3) 1 500 1.0600 1 500 0.600 0.4600 0.2300
39 Robinsons Place Manila (Chiller 4) 1 500 0.9875 1 500 0.600 0.3875 0.1938
40 Robinsons Place Manila (Chiller 5) 1 500 0.9000 1 500 0.600 0.3000 0.1500
41 Robinsons Place Manila (Chiller 6) 1 450 1.0090 1 500 0.600 0.4090 0.2045
42 Philippine National Bank (Chiller 1) 1 900 1.0390 1 900 0.600 0.4390 0.3951
43 Philippine National Bank (Chiller 2) 1 900 0.9000 1 900 0.600 0.3000 0.2700
44 Robinsons Place Iloilo (Chillers 1 and 2) 3 1,350 1.0700 2 1,400 0.600 0.4700 0.6580
45 Robinsons Place Bacolod (Chillers 1&2) 4 1,520 1.2325 2 1,400 0.600 0.6325 0.8855
46 Radisson Blu Cebu Batch 2 (Chiller 4) 1 500 1.0060 1 500 0.620 0.3860 0.1930
47 Insular Life Alabang Batch 2 (Chiller 2) 1 450 1.0000 1 405 0.550 0.4500 0.1823
48 Insular Life Alabang Batch 2 (Chiller 3) 1 450 0.8600 1 405 0.550 0.3100 0.1256
49 SM City Fairview Batch 2 (Chiller 2) 1 1,000 0.9470 1 1,000 0.550 0.3970 0.3970
68
No. ESTABLISHMENTS OF
PROJECT BENEFICIARIES
BASELINE CHILLER
NEW CHILLER
QTY
COOLING
CAPACITY
(TR)
POF
(kW/TR) QTY
COOLING
CAPACITY
(TR)
AVE. POF
(kW/TR) ∆ POF
MW
Demand
50 SM City Fairview Batch 2 (Chiller 3) 1 1,000 0.8540 1 1,000 0.550 0.3040 0.3040
51 SM City Southmall Batch 1 (Chiller 1) 1 1,000 0.8810 1 1,000 0.600 0.2810 0.2810
52 SM City Southmall Batch 1 (Chiller 2) 1 1,000 0.9070 1 1,000 0.600 0.3070 0.3070
53 SM City Southmall Batch 2 (Chiller 3) 1 1,000 0.9100 1 1,000 0.600 0.3100 0.3100
54 SM City Southmall Batch 2 (Chiller 4) 1 1,000 0.8590 1 1,000 0.600 0.2590 0.2590
55 SM City Bicutan 1 1,000 0.8900 1 1,000 0.550 0.3400 0.3400
56 SM City Sucat Batch 1 (Chiller 3) 1 400 0.8470 1 400 0.600 0.2470 0.0988
57 SM City Sucat Batch 1 (Chiller 4) 1 400 0.9050 1 400 0.600 0.3050 0.1220
58 SM City Sucat Batch 2 (Chiller 5) 1 400 0.9010 1 400 0.600 0.3010 0.1204
59 SM City Sucat Batch 2 (Chiller 6) 1 400 0.9230 1 400 0.600 0.3230 0.1292
60 SM City Bacoor (Chiller 1) 1 1,000 0.995 1 1,000 0.550 0.4450 0.4450
61 SM City Bacoor (Chiller 2) 1 1,000 0.905 1 1,000 0.550 0.3550 0.3550
62 SM City Manila Batch 1 (Chiller 1) 1 800 0.942 1 800 0.550 0.3920 0.3136
63 SM City Manila Batch 1 (Chiller 2) 1 800 0.875 1 800 0.550 0.3250 0.2600
64 SM City Manila Batch 2 (Chiller 3) 1 800 0.893 1 800 0.550 0.3430 0.2744
65 Robinsons Summit Center (Chiller 2) 1 330 0.86 1 350 0.600 0.2600 0.0858
66 Robinsons Summit Center (Chiller 3) 1 330 1.02 1 350 0.600 0.4200 0.1386
67 Robinsons Summit Center (Chiller 4) 1 330 1.05 1 350 0.600 0.4500 0.1485
Note: Number indicates number of units 31 20,060 28 19,960 7.40
Total 77 45,687 71 45,345 18.95
69
Determination of the Average Price of Chiller
The 15% subsidy of the Project is based on the normative cost of USD400.00/TR or the ex-works
price of the chiller whichever is lower. This condition is incorporated in the sub grant agreement
(SGA). The ceiling of USD400.00/TR is used to protect the chiller owners and the Project from
the over-pricing of the chillers.
In 2013, Manila Peninsula bought the new chiller at USD572.16/TR. The price is above the
normative cost because the chiller is the state-of-the- art of Carrier USA, the tri-rotor screw type
driven by a variable speed drive (VSD) motor.
In 2014, New World Hotel-Makati bought the new chiller at USD452.00/TR. The price is also
higher than USD400.00/TR because the chiller is very efficient centrifugal type manufactured by
Trane USA and driven by VSD motor.
In 2015, Insular Life-Alabang and Robinsons Malls acquired the state of the art magnetic chillers.
The price is definitely higher since these new chillers were not conventional.
Also in 2015, SM City-Fairview bought a new centrifugal type and VSD chiller manufactured by
LG Korea at USD220.00/TR. The LG supplier also offered longer warranty period and guaranteed
efficiency.
In 2016, SM City Malls acquired LG chillers at USD225.00/TR but with five (5) years warranty
period and guaranteed efficiency.
From this experience, the Project was able to determine the average cost of the chiller at
USD299.35/TR.
In effect, more than 53 chillers of 800 TRs each can be subsidized by the USD2.6 Million GEF
fund. This explains also that even the Project can subsidize 45,285 TRs the disbursement of the
GEF fund is below 80%.
However, the Project was able to affect the chiller market by making the price lower but the
demand of chillers replacement increased. Moreover, chiller owners take advantage of the latest
technology on chillers (i.e. magnetic bearing type and VSD) to lower demand charge on electricity,
to increase energy savings and to lower operation and maintenance cost.
70
No.
Establishments Number of New Chillers
Installed
TRs of New
Chiller
PO (USD) USD/TR Type of Chiller Brand
01 The Peninsula Manila 1 550 314,685.31 572.16 Screw-Tri Rotor Carrier
02 BPI Buendia Center 1 500 272,018.82 544.04 Centrifugal York
03 SM City Iloilo (Batch 1) 2 2,000 464,000.00 232.00 Centrifugal Trane
04 Waterfront Cebu City Hotel 3 1,200 547,820.13 456.52 Centrifugal York
05 New World Makati Hotel 1 700 316,403.42 452.00 Centrifugal Trane
06 BA Lepanto Condominium 1 335 127,732.95 381.29 Centrifugal McQuay
07 Trinoma Malls 3 3,600 884,782.68 245.77 Centrifugal Trane
08 Marco Polo Davao Hotel 1 400 160,000.00 400.00 Centrifugal Trane
09 International School Manila 3 1,600 548,000.00 342.50 Centrifugal York
10 SM City Iloilo (Batch 2) 1 1,000 232,000.00 232.00 Centrifugal Trane
11 Waterfront Manila Pavilion 2 1,000 403,549.40 403.55 Centrifugal Trane
12 Tower One and Exchange Plaza 2 1,000 404,960.61 404.96 Centrifugal Trane
13 6750 Ayala Avenue Office 2 1,000 412,033.92 412.03 Centrifugal Trane
14 Cultural Center of the Philippines 1 500 192,362.40 384.72 Screw Dunham Bush
15 Radisson Blu Cebu Hotel (Batch 1) 2 1,000 276,000.00 276.00 Centrifugal York
16 SM City Fairview (Batch 1) 1 1,000 220,000.00 220.00 Centrifugal LG
17 Ayala Life FGU Center Makati 1 700 279,942.67 399.92 Centrifugal Trane
18 Insular Life Alabang
Turbocor-Multi Smardt
19 Robinson Place Manila 5 2,500 624,544.47 249.82 Centrifugal York
20 Robinson Galleria 8 4,000 1,203,539.82 300.88 Centrifugal York
21 Philippine National Bank 2 1,800 437,298.44 242.94 Centrifugal Carrier
22 SM City South Mall (Batch 1) 2 2,000 610,000.00 305.00 Centrifugal York
23 SM City South Mall (Batch 2) 2 2,000 610,000.00 305.00 Centrifugal York
24 SM City Bacoor 2 2,000 450,000.00 225.00 Centrifugal LG
25 SM City Manila (Batch 1) 2 1,600 370,000.00 231.25 Centrifugal LG
26 SM City Manila (Batch 2) 1 800 185,000.00 231.25 Centrifugal LG
27 SM City Fairview (Batch 2) 2 2,000 450,000.00 225.00 Centrifugal LG
28 SM City Sucat (Batch 1) 2 800 290,000.00 362.50 Centrifugal York
29 SM City Sucat (Batch 2) 2 800 290,000.00 362.50 Centrifugal York
30 SM City Bicutan 1 1,000 225,000.00 225.00 Centrifugal LG
31 Radisson Blu Cebu Hotel (Batch 2) 1 500 138,000.00 276.00 Centrifugal York Total 60 39,885 11,939,675.04 299.35
71
FINANCIAL VIABILITY INDICATORS - CHILLER INVESTMENTS ENROLLED
AT PCEEP
Weighted Average Cost
of Capital (WACC)
WACC = E/V * Re + D/V*Rd* (1-Tc)
Where: Re = Cost of Equity Rd = Cost of Debt E = Market Value of the Firm's Equity D= Market Value of the Firm's Debt D/V = percentage of financing that is
debt E/V= percentage of financing that is
equity Tc= Tax on Products V= E+D
Internal Rate of Return
(IRR)
IRR is the interest rate, also called the discount rate, that is required
to bring the net present value (NPV) to zero. That is, the interest rate
that would result in the present value of the capital investment, or
cash outflow, being equal to the value of the total returns over time,
or cash inflow
Net Present Value (NPV)
Net Present Value (NPV) is the difference between the present
value of cash inflows and the present value of cash outflows. NPV
is used in capital budgeting to analyze the profitability of a projected
investment or project.
NPV = ∑ {Net Period Cash Flow/(1+R)^T} - Initial Investment
- where R is the rate of return, and T is the number of time periods.
Return on Investment
(ROI)
is the ratio of a profit or loss made in a fiscal year expressed in terms
of an investment and shown as a percentage of increase or decrease
in the value of the investment during the year in question. The basic
formula for ROI is: ROI = Net Profit / Total Investment * 100
Payback Period
The payback period is the time required for the amount invested in
an asset to be repaid by the net cash outflow generated by the asset.
It is a simple way to evaluate the risk associated with a proposed
project.
The payback period is expressed in years and fractions of years. For
example, if a company invests $300,000 in a new production line,
and the production line then produces cash flow of $100,000 per
year, then the payback period is 3.0 years ($300,000 initial
investment / $100,000 annual payback).
72
Computed Financial Viability Indicators of Chillers
Establishments of
Project Beneficiaries
Computed
Weighted
Average
Cost of
Capital
Internal
Rate of
Return (IRR)
Net Present
Value (NPV)
in PhP
Return of
Investment
(ROI)
Payback
Period
6750 Ayala Avenue Office (Chiller 1 and 3) 26% 47% 13,668,332.89 142% 3rd year
Ayala Life LGU Makati (Chiller 1) 26% 29% 1,228,216.89 115% 4th year
BA Lepanto Condominium (1 Chiller) 26% 47% 6,693,928.45 140% 3rd year
BPI Buendia Center 22% 26% 1,385,258.76 105% 4th year
Cultural Center of the Philippines (Chiller
1) 26% 27% 262,751.14 110% 4th year
Insular Life Alabang Batch 1 (2 Chillers) 26% 35% 4,760,749.02 106% 3rd year
Insular Life Alabang Batch 2 (2 Chillers) 26% 35% 4,760,749.02 106% 3rd year
International School (Chiller 1A) 26% 40% 5,814,559 121% 3rd year
International School (Chiller 1B) 26% 31% 962,577 121% 3rd year
International School (Chiller 2A) 26% 31% 1,033,895 125% 4th year
The Peninsula Manila 14% 24% 6.683.928,45 101% 4th year
Marco Polo Davao Hotel (Chiller 1) 26% 44% 13,997,817.00 132% 3rd year
New World Makati Hotel (1 Chiller) 26% 56% 14,018,666.15 111% 2nd year
Philippine National Bank (Chiller 1) 26% 28% 1,027,696.66 114% 4th year
Philippine National Bank (Chiller 3) 26% 27% 615,544.08 111% 4th year
Radisson Blu Cebu Batch 1 (Chiller 1) 26% 34% 2,595,611.38 103% 3rd year
Radisson Blu Cebu Batch 1 (Chiller 4) 26% 40% 4,627,774.93 120% 3rd year
Radisson Blu Cebu Batch 2 (Chiller 3) 26% 33% 2,280,869.81 100% 3rd year
SM City Bacoor (Chiller 2) 26% 55% 11,540,086.42 109% 2nd year
SM City Bacoor (Chiller 3) 26% 43% 6,622,249,61 128% 2nd year
SM City Bicutan (Chiller 3) 26% 35% 4,097,105.00 104% 3rd year
SM City Fairview (Chiller 4) 26% 72% 17,409,468.00 144% 2nd year
SM City Fairview (Chiller 1) 26% 52% 9,857,856.22 105% 2nd year
SM City Fairview (Chiller 2) 26% 36% 4,516,487.22 107% 3rd year
SM City Iloilo (Chillers 1 and 3) 26% 56% 22,288,557.85 113% 2nd year
SM City Iloilo (Chiller 4) 26% 56% 22,288,557.85 113% 2nd year
SM City Manila Batch 1 (Chiller 5) 26% 47% 6,783,164.21 104% 2nd year
SM City Manila Batch 1 (Chiller 4) 26% 37% 5,252,300.00 110% 3rd year
SM City Manila Batch 2 (Chiller 1) 26% 36% 5,042,472.00 109% 3rd year
SM City Southmall (Chiller 2) 26% 34% 3,648,121.51 103% 3rd year
SM City Southmall (Chiller 3) 26% 37% 5,068,830.01 113% 3rd year
SM City Southmall (Chillers 1 and 4) 26% 39% 15,014,632.66 118% 3rd year
SM City Sucat (Chiller 6) 26% 30% 932,505.03 110% 3rd year
SM City Sucat (Chiller 5) 26% 28% 368,494.26 103% 3rd year
SM City Sucat (Chillers 3 and 4) 26% 33% 3,410,943.07 100% 3rd year
Robinsons Galleria (Chiller 1) 26% 41% 3,499,782.00 123% 3rd year
Robinsons Galleria (Chiller 2) 26% 35% 2,038,092.00 105% 3rd year
Robinsons Galleria (Chiller 3) 26% 43% 4,113,692.25 131% 3rd year
Robinsons Galleria (Chiller 4) 26% 37% 2,505,832.73 111% 3rd year
Robinsons Galleria (Chiller 5) 26% 75% 11,831,417.94 150% 2nd year
Robinsons Galleria (Chiller 6) 26% 65% 9,346,544.14 130% 2nd year
Robinsons Galleria (Chiller 7) 26% 73% 14,120,388.27 146% 2nd year
73
Establishments of
Project Beneficiaries
Computed
Weighted
Average
Cost of
Capital
Internal
Rate of
Return (IRR)
Net Present
Value (NPV)
in PhP
Return of
Investment
(ROI)
Payback
Period
Robinsons Galleria (Chiller 8) 26% 63% 11,109,306.20 126% 2nd year
Robinsons Place Bacolod (2 Chillers) 26% 44% 18,291,196.00 132% 3rd year
Robinsons Place Iloilo (2 Chillers) 26% 30% 3,665,733.00 122% 4th year
Robinsons Place Manila (5 Chillers) 26% 35% 1,408,271.12 105% 3rd year
Robinsons Summit Center (Chiller 4) 26% 45% 4,314,046.80 136% 3rd year
Robinsons Summit Center (Chiller 3) 26% 42% 3,535,061.41 126% 3rd year
Robinsons Summit Center (Chiller 2) 26% 27% 124,971.91 109% 4th year
Trinoma Malls (3 Chillers) 26% 43% 40,112,084.83 130% 3rd year
Tower One and Exchange Plaza (1) 26% 28% 966,575.91 114% 4th year
Tower One and Exchange Plaza (2) 26% 28% 966,575.91 114% 4th year
Waterfront Manila Pavilion (Chiller 1) 26% 38% 3,862,345.61 115% 3rd year
Waterfront Manila Pavilion (Chiller 2) 26% 44% 7,050,304.00 133% 3rd year
Waterfront Cebu City Hotel (3 Chillers) 26% 54% 35,860,363.73 108% 2nd year
74
APPENDIX 3
PCEEP CHILLER PIPELINE
75
APPENDIX 3
PCEEP Pipeline as of December 31, 2016
Establishments of Project
Beneficiaries
Project Beneficiaries
(Chiller Owners)
No. of
Old
Chillers
Enrolled
(with
SGA)
Cooling
Capacity
of Old
Chiller
(TRs)
Refrigerant
of Old
Chiller
Refrigerant
Recovered
(Kg)
No. of
new
chillers
installed
Cooling
Capacity of
New Chiller
(TRs)
Refrigeran
t of New
Chiller
Subsidy
(USD)
2013 Chiller Replacements
The Manila Peninsula The Peninsula Manila 1 577 R-22 585 1 550 R-134a 33,363.55
2014 Chiller Replacements
Bank of the Philippine Islands –
Buendia Center
Bank of the Philippine
Islands
1 550 R-123 300 1 500 R-134a 22,499.29
SM City Iloilo (Batch 1) SM Prime Holdings Inc. 2 2,000 R-22 1,800 2 2,000 R-123 69,946.58
Marco Polo Davao Hotel Halifax Davao Hotel Inc 1 400 R-123 99 1 400 R-123 21,109.02
Waterfront Cebu City Hotel &
Casino
Cofely Philippines /
Waterfront Cebu City
Casino Hotels Inc.
4 1,205 R-22 938 3 1,200 R-134a 62,976.45
International School Manila International School
Manila Inc.
3 1,600 R-134a 1,390 3 1,600 R-134a 79,630.87
BA Lepanto Condominium BA Lepanto
Condominium Corp.
1 335 R-134a 300 1 335 R-134a 18,733.11
New World Hotel Makati
New World International
Development
Philippines Inc.
1 700 R-123 520 1 700 R-123 39,143.81
Trinoma Malls Philippine Integrated
Energy Solutions, Inc. /
NTDCC
3 3,450 R-22 2,080 3 3,600 R-123 132,783.56
SM City Iloilo (Batch 2) SM Prime Holdings Inc. 1 1,000 R-22 800 1 1,000 R-123 36,739.16
Waterfront Manila Pavilion Hotel Acesite (Phils.) Hotel
Corp./Cofely Philippines
2 1,200 R-12
R-22
250
318
2 1,000 R-123 45,896.16
76
6750 Ayala Avenue Joint Venture Ayala Land Inc. / Minot
Holdings Inc.
2 960 R-22 510 2 1,000 R-123 56,717.92
Ayala FGU Center Makati Ayala Life FGU Center
Makati Condominium
Corporation
1 700 R-123 490 1 700 R-123 33,356.26
Tower One and Exchange Plaza Philippine Integrated
Energy Solutions, Inc. /
TOEPCC
2 1,000 R-22 405 2 1,000 R-123 54,644.33
Cultural Center of the Philippines Cultural Center of the
Philippines
1 500 R-22 400 1 500 R-134a 28,802.32
2015 Chiller Replacements
SM City Fairview (Batch 1) SM Prime Holdings Inc. 1 1,000 R-123 680 1 1,000 R-134a 31,427.17
Radisson Blu Cebu (Batch 1) SM Prime Holdings Inc. 2 1,000 R-123 554 2 1,000 R-134a 40,127.32
Insular Life Alabang (Batch 1) The Insular Life
Assurance Company Ltd
2 750 R-134a 615 2 800 R-134a 41,453.38
Robinsons Place Manila Robinsons Land Corp. 5 2,450 R-123 1,670 5 2,500 R-134a 93,681.67
Robinsons Galleria
Robinsons Land
Corporation
10
4,250
R-12 1,603.6
10
4,000
R-134a
180,531.00 R-22 209.5
R-134a 533.5
R-22a 178
2016 Chiller Replacements
Philippine National Bank Philippine National
Bank
2 1,800 R-12 2,164.3 2 1,800 R-134a 61,659.08
Robinsons Place Bacolod Robinsons Land Corp. 4 1,520 R-22 1,238 2 1,400 R-134a 84,000.00*
Robinsons Place Iloilo Robinsons Land Corp. 3 1,350 R-22 1,100 2 1,400 R-134a 84,000.00*
Radisson Blu Hotel-Cebu (Batch 2) SM Prime Holdings Inc. 1 500 R-123 268 1 500 R-134a 30,000.00*
77
Insular Life Alabang (Batch 2) Insular Life Assurance Company 2 900 R-134a 630 2 810 R-134a 48,600.00*
SM City Fairview (Batch 2) SM Prime Holdings Inc. 2 2,000 R-123 1,078 2 2,000 R-134a 67,500.00*
SM City Southmall (Batch 1) SM Prime Holdings Inc. 2 2,000 R-22 1,400 2 2,000 R-134a 105,750.00*
SM City Southmall (Batch 2) SM Prime Holdings Inc. 2 2,000 R-22 1,400 2 2,000 R-134a 105,750.00*
SM City Bicutan SM Prime Holdings Inc. 1 1,000 R-123 540 1 1,000 R-134a 33,750.00*
SM City Sucat (Batch 1) SM Prime Holdings Inc. 2 800 R-123 545 2 800 R-134a 45,750.00*
SM City Sucat (Batch 2) SM Prime Holdings Inc. 2 800 R-123 595 2 800 R-134a 45,750.00*
SM City Bacoor SM Prime Holdings Inc. 2 2,000 R-22 1,385 2 2,000 R-134a 67,500.00*
SM City Manila (Batch 1) SM Prime Holdings Inc. 2 1,600 R-22 821.2 2 1,600 R-134a 69,000.00*
SM City Manila (Batch 2) SM Prime Holdings Inc. 1 800 R-22 408.6 1 800 R-134a 34,500.00*
Robinsons Summit Center Robinsons Land Corporation 3 990 R-22 643 3 1,050 R-134a 63,000.00*
Total 77 45,687 71 45,345 2,070,072 Note: * Estimated
78
APPENDIX 4
PCEEP FINANCIAL MATRICES
79
Philippines-Chiller Energy Efficiency Project
Financial Status BY SARO as of December 31, 2016
Fund Source Year
TOTAL 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016
GEF
Allotment (a) - - 44,982,000.
00
42,673,500.
00
38,280,000.0
0
41,769,036.
00
167,704,536.0
0 Obligation (b) - - 20,672,710.
80
17,580,470.
52
36,977,782.9
2
28,174,304.
25
103,405,268.4
9 Disbursement (c) -
16,649,746.
62
16,275,511.
09
12,786,549.9
1
- 45,711,807.62
Obligation Rate (b/a)
-
- 46% 41% 97% 67% 62%
Disbursement Rate on
Allotment (c/a)
-
- 37% 38% ppe33% 0% 27%
Disbursement Rate on
obligation (c/b)
81% 93% 35% 0% 44%
MLF
Allotment (a) 3,470,000.00 7,770,000.
00
15,478,900.
00
13,533,000.
00
12,785,750.0
0
16,135,418.
00
69,173,068.00
Obligation (b) 3,470,000.00 7,646,955.
55
9,047,055.3
4
3,012,580.9
3
5,687,989.73 10,000,676.
92
38,865,258.47
Disbursement (c) 1,506,750.00 7,549,714.
53
8,146,060.6
0
2,566,363.4
9
5,057,061.90 3,034,665.1
9
27,860,615.71
Obligation Rate (b/a) 100% 98% 58% 22% 44% 62% 56%
Disbursement Rate on
Allotment (c/a) 43% 97% 53% 19% 40% 19% 40%
Disbursement Rate on
obligation (c/b) 43% 99% 90% 85% 89% 30% 72%
TOTAL
Allotment (a) 3,470,000.00 7,770,000.
00
60,460,900.
00
56,206,500.
00
51,065,750.0
0
57,904,454.
00
236,877,604.0
0 Obligation (b) 3,470,000.00 7,646,955.
55
29,719,766.
14
20,593,051.
45
42,665,772.6
5
38,174,981.
17
142,270,526.9
6 Disbursement (c) 1,506,750.00 7,549,714.
53
24,795,807.
22
18,841,874.
58
17,843,611.8
1
3,034,665.1
9
73,572,423.33
Obligation Rate (b/a) 100% 98% 49% 37% 84% 66% 60%
Disbursement Rate on
Allotment (c/a) 43% 97% 41% 34% 35% 5% 31%
Disbursement Rate on
obligation (c/b) 43% 99% 83% 91% 42% 8% 52%
a
[Grab your reader’s attention with a great quote from the
document or use this space to emphasize a key point. To place this
text box anywhere on the page, just drag it.]
APPENDIX 4
80
Philippine Chiller Energy Efficiency Project
Report of Checks Issued and Cancelled (RCIC)
As of December 31, 2016
Names of Payee No. of
Units Obligation
Actual Disbursements in PhP
Gross Amount Tax New Amount Paid Paid On
Charged to: CY 2013 Appropriation – PhP 44,982,000.00 (USD 1.00 = PhP 41.608)
1 Manila Peninsula Hotel Inc. 1 1,362,438.00 1,362,438.00 72,987.74 1,289,450.26 05/01/2013
2 Bank of the Philippine Islands 1 1,248,240.00 998,592.00 53,496.00 945,096.00 03/01/2014
3 Halifax Davao Hotel, Inc. (Marco Polo Davao) Hotel) 1 998,592.00 916,270.57 49,085.80 867,184.77 08/01/2014
4 Cofely Philippines (Waterfront Cebu City Hotel) 3 2,995,776.00 2,808,540.00 150,457.50 2,658,082.50 10/03/2014
5 New World International Development Philippines
Inc.(New World Makati Hotel)
1 1,747,536.00 1,747,536.00 93,618.00 1,653,918.00 10/16/2014
6 BA Lepanto Condominium Corporation 1 836,320.80 836,320.80 44,802.90 791,517.90 10/17/2014
7 Philippine Integrated Energy Solutions, Inc. (Trinoma)
Mall)
3 8,987,328.00 5,902,848.95 316,224.05 5,586,624.90 10/30/2014
8 Acesite (Phils.) Hotel Corporation (Manila Pavilion) 2 2,496,480.00 2,077,200.30 111,278.58 1,965,921.72 03/16/2015 TOTAL 13 20,672,710.80 16,649,746.62 891,950.57 15,757,796.05
Charged to: CY 2014 Appropriation – PhP 42,673,500.00 (USD 1.00 = PhP 44.815)
1 SM Prime Holdings Inc. (SM City Iloilo Batch 1) 2 3,045,705.60 3,045,705.60 163,162.80 2,882,542.80 06/01/2014
2 International School Manila Inc. 3 3,562,792.50 3,562,792.50 190,863.89 3,371,928.61 11/06/2014
3 Ayala Land Inc. (Makati Stock Exchange)
860,448.00 Note: Deobligated. New chiller did not meet the efficiency criteria.
4 Cultural Center of the Philippines 1 1,344,450.00 1,344,450.00 72,024.09 1,272,425.91 09/08/2015/
05/2016 5 Ayala Land Inc. (6750 Ayala Avenue Office) 2 2,581,344.00 2,581,344.00 141,283.75 2,440,060.25 09/14/2015
6 Ayala Life FGU Center Makati Condominium Corp. 1 1,882,230.00 1,585,511.50 84,938.11 1,500,573.39 06/27/2016
7 SM Prime Holdings Inc. (SM City Iloilo Batch 2) 1 1,614,600.19 1,614,600.19 86,496.43 1,528,103.76 02/06/2015
8 Philippine Integrated Energy Solutions, Inc (TOEPCC)
)
2 2,688,900.00 2,541,107.30 136,130.74 2,404,976.56 08/26/2015
9 International School Manila Inc.(refund of tax withheld
deducted from subsidy)
(190,863.89) 190,863.89 09/02/2015
TOTAL 12 17,580,470.29 16,275,511.09 684,035.92 15,591,475.17
Charged to: CY 2015 Appropriation - PhP 38,280,000.00 (USD 1.00 = PhP 44.611)
1 SM Prime Holdings Inc. (Radisson Blu Cebu Batch 1) 2 1,846,895.40 1,846,895.40 98,940.81 1,747,954.59 09/18/2015
2 SM Prime Holdings Inc. (SM City Fairview Batch 1) 1 1,472,163.00 1,472,163.60 78,865.87 1,393,297.73 12/08/2015
81
3 Philippine National Bank 2 4,817,988.00 2,887,179.31 154,670.32 2,732,508.99 07/28/2016
4 Halifax Davao Hotel, Inc. (Marco Polo Davao Hotel)
1,070,664.00 Note: Deobligated. Chiller replacement was not conducted.
5 Ayala Land Inc.(6750 Ayala Avenue Office)
55,952.87 55,952.85
55,952.85 09/14/2015
6 Robinsons Land Corporation (Robinsons Manila) 5 4,804,989.39 4,383,030.75 234,805.22 4,148,225.53 05/03/2016
7 Robinsons Land Corporation (Robinsons Galleria) 8 8,053,667.26
8 Robinsons Land Corporation (Robinsons Iloilo) 2 3,747,324.00
9 Robinsons Land Corporation (Robinsons Bacolod) 2 3,747,324.00
10 The Insular Life Assurance Company Batch 1 2 2,007,495.00 2,141,328.00 114,714.00 2,026,614.00 11/11/2016
11 SM Prime Holdings Inc (SM City Southmall Batch 1) 2 5,353,320.00
TOTAL 26 36,977,782.92 12,786,549.91 681,996.22 12,104,553.69
Charged to: CY 2016 Appropriation - PhP 41,769,036 (@47.205)
1 SM Prime Holdings (Radisson Blu Cebu Batch 2) 1 1,416,150.00
2 SM Prime Holdings (SM City Bacoor) 2 3,186,337.50
3 SM Prime Holdings (SM City Manila Batch 1) 2 2,619,877.50
4 SM Prime Holdings (SM City Bicutan) 1 1,593,168.75
5 SM Prime Holdings (SM City Fairview Batch 2) 2 3,186,337.50
6 SM Prime Holdings (SM City Sucat Batch 1) 2 2,053,417.50
7 The Insular Life Assurance Company Batch 2 2 2,294,163.00
8 SM Prime Holdings (SM City Southmall) Batch 2 2 4,319,257.50
9 Robinsons Land Corp. (Robinsons Summit Center) 3 2,973,915.00
10 SM Prime Holdings (SM City Manila Batch 2) 1 2,265,840.00
11 SM Prime Holdings (SM City Sucat Batch 2) 2 2,265,840.00
TOTAL 20 28,174,304.25 - - -
GRAND TOTAL 71 103,405,268.26 45,711,807.62 2,257,982.71 43,453,824.91 -
82
Names of Payee No. of
Units Total TR
Obligation
(PhP) Actual Disbursement in USD
Charged to: CY 2013 Appropriation - PhP 44,982,000.00 (USD 1 = PhP 41.608) Gross Amount W/Holding Tax Net Amount Paid
1 Manila Peninsula Hotel Inc. (The Peninsula Manila) 1 550 1,362,438.00 33,363.55 1,680.55 31,683.00
2 Bank of the Philippine Islands (BPI Buendia Center) 1 500 1,248,240.00 22,499.29 1,210.46 21,288.83
3 Halifax Davao Hotel, Inc. (Marco Polo Davao Hotel) 1 400 998,592.00 21,109.02 1,125.96 19,983.06
4 Cofely Philippines (Waterfront Cebu City Hotel) 3 1200 2,995,776.00 62,976.45 3,370.16 59,606.29
5 New World International Development Philippines Inc. 1 700 1,747,536.00 39,143.81 2,096.99 37,046.82
6 BA Lepanto Condominium Corporation 1 335 836,320.80 18,733.11 1,003.56 17,729.55
7 Philippine Integrated Energy Solutions, Inc. (Trinoma) 3 3600 8,987,328.00 132,783.56 7,083.24 125,700.32
8 Acesite (Phils.) Hotel Corporation (Manila Pavilion)
Pavilion)/COFELY
2 1000 2,496,480.00 45,896.16 1,211.04 44,685.12
Charged to: CY 2014 Appropriation - PhP 42,673,500.00 (USD 1 = PhP 44.815)
1 SM Prime Holdings Inc. (SM City Iloilo Batch 1) 2 2000 3,045,705.60 69,946.58 3,751.22 66,195.36
2 International School Manila Inc. 3 1600 3,562,792.50 79,630.87 4,304.07 75,326.80
3 Ayala Land Inc. (Makati Stock Exchange)
860,448.00 Note: Deobligated. Failure to meet the eligibility criteria.
4 Cultural Center of the Philippines 1 500 1,344,450.00 28,802.32 1,550.84 27,251.48
5 Ayala Land Inc. (6750 Ayala Avenue Office) 2 1000 2,581,344.00 55,515.72 3,088.65 52,427.07
6 Ayala Life FGU Center Makati Condominium Corp. 1 700 1,882,230.00 33,356.26 1,824.98 31,531.28
7 SM Prime Holdings Inc. (SM City Iloilo Batch 2) 1 1000 1,614,600.19 36,739.16 1,966.06 34,773.10
8 Philippine Integrated Energy Solutions, Inc. (TOEP) 2 1000 2,688,900.00 54,644.33 2,915.50 51,728.83
9 International School Manila Inc.(refund tax withheld)
deducted from subsidy)
4,109.73 4,109.73
Charged to: CY 2015 Appropriation - PhP 38,280,000.00 (USD 1 = PhP 44.611)
1 SM Prime Holdings Inc. (Radisson Blu Cebu Hotel) 2 1000 1,846,895.40 40,127.32 2,162.97 37,964.35
2 SM Prime Holdings Inc. (SM City Fairview Batch 1) 1 1000 1,472,163.00 31,427.17 1,681.90 29,745.27
3 Philippine National Bank 2 1800 4,817,988.00 61,659.08 3,323.24 58,335.84
4 Halifax Davao Hotel, Inc. (Marco Polo Davao Hotel)
1,070,664.00 Note: Deobligated. Did not proceed with chiller replacement
5 Ayala Land Inc.(6750 Ayala Avenue Office)
1000 55,952.87 1,202.20 - 1,202.20
6 Robinsons Land Corporation (Robinsons Manila) 5 2500 4,804,989.39 93,681.67 5,121.95 88,559.72
7 Robinsons Land Corporation (Robinsons Galleria) 8 4000 8,053,667.26 -
8 Robinsons Land Corporation (Robinsons Iloilo) 2 1400 3,747,324.00 -
9 Robinsons Land Corporation (Robinsons Bacolod) 2 1400 3,747,324.00 -
83
10 The Insular Life Assurance Company (Batch 20 2 800 2,007,495.00 43,773.75 2,320.37 41,453.38
11 SM Prime Holdings Inc (SM City Southmall Batch 2) 2 2000 5,353,320.00 -
Charged to: CY 2016 Appropriation - PhP 41,769,036 (USD 1 = PhP 47.205)
1 SM Prime Holdings (Radisson Blu Cebu Batch 2) 1 500 1,416,150.00
2 SM Prime Holdings (SM City Bacoor) 2 2000 3,186,337.50
3 SM Prime Holdings (SM City Manila Batch 1) 2 1600 2,619,877.50
4 SM Prime Holdings (SM City Bicutan) 1 1000 1,593,168.75
5 SM Prime Holdings (SM City Fairview Batch 2) 2 2000 3,186,337.50
6 SM Prime Holdings (SM City Sucat Batch 1) 2 800 2,053,417.50
7 The Insular Life Assurance Company (Batch 2) 2 810 2,294,163.00
8 SM Prime Holdings (SM City Southmall Batch 2) 2 2000 4,319,257.50
9 Robinsons Land Corporation (Robinsons Summit) 3 1050 2,973,915.00
10 SM Prime Holdings (SM City Manila Batch 2) 1 600 2,265,840.00
11 SM Prime Holdings (SM City Sucat Batch 2) 2 800 2,265,840.00
GRAND TOTAL 71 0 103,405,268.26 1,011,121.11 56,903.44 954,217.67
84
Projected Disbursement as of December 31, 2016
Grant Project Cost Disbursement as of
December 31, 2016 WA for Submission to WB Total Disbursement
USD USD USD USD PhP
GEF 2,600,000.00 964,431.86 41,453.38 1,005,885.24 42,708,721.49
OTF 1,000,000.00 574,573.12 37,860.79 612,433.91 26,232,271.78
3,600,000.00 1,539,004.98 79,314.17 1,618,319.15 68,940,993.27
GOP 325,000.00 35,970.00
35,970.00
Total Project 3,925,000.00
Grant Project Cost
Projected Disbursement
Q1 & Q2 2017
Total Disbursement -End of Project
%
Disbursement
USD USD PhP USD PhP
GEF 2,600,000.00 1,061,781.00 48,906,002.69 2,067,666.24 91,614,724.18 80%
OTF 1,000,000.00 155,848.79 7,636,590.58 768,282.70 33,868,862.36 77%
3,600,000.00 1,217,629.79 56,542,593.27 2,835,948.94 125,483,586.54 79%
GOP 325,000.00
46,640.00 2,150,000.00 14%
Total
Project
Cost
3,925,000.00
2,882,588.94 127,633,586.54 73%
85
APPENDIX 5
SUMMARY OF PCEEP SATISFACTION SURVEY
(FOCUS GROUP DISCUSSION)
86
APPENDIX 5
Focus Group Discussion
Venues Madison 101, Quezon City
Elizabeth Hotel, Cebu City
Iloilo City
Date June 13, 2016
Participants Technical – 12
IT Personnel - 8
Managerial – 5
Site Engineers – 6
Observations during FGD
General mood during the focus group discussion was very positive;
Some questions that were actively answered by the participants related to operations and
participants who are in the managerial level offered answers to all of the questions, and
Mix of participants was good in such a way that it offered a different set of perspective to
both job levels, allowing a more fruitful discussion.
Integration and Summary
Source of Information • Majority of the information came from chiller
suppliers/energy saving company;
• Information from people they know who are working
with chillers;
• Old employees who are presently associated with chiller
companies, and
• PCEEP Management Unit either because they know
some employees personally they came across while
researching.
First Impression and
Motivation
Project appeared to be “too good to be true” since participation
promises efficiency to the company and in the same time
minimizes damage to the environment. These first impressions
also served as their motivation in participation.
87
Project
Implementation and
Indicators
Majority found the implementation of PCEEP as easy to follow. Working
with people from PCEEP is easy, and problems encountered were more on
to the side of their clients and or on the latter part of the project;
Looking on the side of the project objectives, the participants see PCEEP
is more appropriate for big buildings like hotels, mall, office buildings,
hospitals, passenger terminals, manufacturing industries, and the like.
Moreover, they see that with the implementation of the project, the
performance of the chillers become efficient and cost-effective and in the
same friendly to the environment,and
The decrease in electiricty cost is highly observable and became a good
start for company initiated projects towards cost efficiency and
enviromental preservation.
SGA Signing: Issues
and Recovery
Challenges
Main issue that they have encountered in SGA signing was on the
management protocol on review and approval, and
No delays were encountered during the signing since the concern has been
addressed on the initial phase of project implementation
Recovery and
Destruction
In this phase, the protocols set were clearly laid down to the companies and
can be seen as easy to follow. The main problem encountered was on the
scheduling of representatives and accredited contractors. However, the
solution of documenting this phase as to whether the company followed all
protocols became a problem to others. This may be brought about by their
doubts if they have interpreted the instructions correctly and have followed
all expected actions.
Processing and
Subsidy
From the beginning of the implementation, the companies saw that the
subsidy is very atractive. There were some concerns for some companies on
how they will manage the incentives with their respective clients. However,
they all agreed that the timeframe set was reasonable but based from actual
experienc, other companies received the subsidies later than what they have
expected.
Satisfaction on Project Implementation
Overall the companies reported satisfaction on the implementation of the project. They
have expressed their satisfaction primarily because of decrease in their electrIcity expense
and in the same time it allowed them to participate in advocacies involving environmental
welfare.
Recommendations
Everyone agreed to recommend this project to other companies and hopefully to be extended. They
also specified recommendations in order to improve the project such as in terms of incentives
(increase of subsidy), eligibility compliance (longer time frame, lowered technical requirements),
support and assistance (more proactive assistance to companies, monitoring and after sales offer),
and information dissemination (more channels for dissemination, target the higher management).
Overall, the companies see the project very beneficial and as a good avenue for both the
government and private companies to work together for a higher goal which is for environment
protection.
88
APPENDIX 6
GUIDELINES ON PCEEP AWARDS AND RECOGNITION
89
APPENDIX 6
Guidelines on the Conduct of the Annual PCEEP Awards and Recognition
I. Rationale
The Philippine Chiller Energy Efficiency Project (PCEEP) is a World Bank-assisted project which aims to
replace CFC and non-CFC-based inefficient chillers with new and energy efficient chillers through
provision of financial and technical assistance to a number of enterprises in the private and public sectors.
Since it started in 2011, a number of establishments applied in the Project and later became successful
Project Beneficiaries. To date, the DENR subsidized the chiller replacements of 26 old and inefficient ODS-
based chillers from 13 establishments.
The Project has four components, namely: (a) investment to chiller replacements, (b) measurement,
monitoring and verification, (c) performance standards and technical assistance and (d) project
management.
One of the important sub-activities of Component 3 is the annual recognition where Project Beneficiaries
would be recognized for their best practices in sustaining excellent energy efficiency of their newly installed
chillers.
The PCEEP recognition ceremony is proposed to be conducted every December during the observance of
the Philippine Energy Efficiency Week. The event would serve as platform for information sharing among
chiller owners in the HVAC industry. The DENR may institutionalize the PCEEP awards in other
recognition ceremonies of the Department.
The PCEEP Awards and Recognition Ceremony was also highlighted during the recent World Bank Project
Implementation Review Mission as one of the major public awareness strategies to further influence the
public on energy efficiency and climate benefits.
II. Creation of Steering Committee and Technical Working Group
The DENR Secretary shall create the steering committee and technical working group through a
Special Order.
The Secretary shall confer the PCEEP Awards to the Project Beneficiaries.
Steering Committee
The PCEEP Awards Steering Committee shall be composed of the following:
(i) Undersecretary for Policy, Planning and FAPs – Chair
(ii) Undersecretary for Environment and International Environmental Affairs
– Co-Chair
Members
(iii) Assistant Secretary for FASPs
(iv) DENR EMB Director
(v) DENR FASPO Director
(vi) DENR FMS Director
(vii) DENR Strategic Communication and Initiative
(viii) Service Director
The Steering Committee shall recommend the list of PCEEP Awardees to the DENR Secretary.
90
Technical Working Group
The composition of the TWG shall include the following:
(i) Deputy Project Director - Chair
(ii) Representative from DENR Foreign Assisted and Special Project Service–
Co-Chair
Members
(iii) Representative from EMB Climate Change Office
(iv) Representative from EMB Philippine Ozone Desk
(v) Representative from EMB Statistical and Information System
Management Section
(vi) Representative from DENR Financial Management Service
(vii) Representative from DENR Policy and Planning Service
(viii) Representative from the Strategic Communication and Initiative Service
The Technical Working Group shall conduct validation to evaluate the qualifications of the
candidates for the PCEEP Awards based on the Awards Criteria. Results of the evaluation shall
be endorsed to the Steering Committee.
Project Management Unit of the PCEEP
The PMU of the PCEEP, headed by the Deputy Project Director, shall screen the qualification of
the Project Beneficiaries for the PCEEP Award. The PMU shall act as the Secretariat to the
Steering Committee, Technical Working Group and for the PCEEP Awarding Ceremony.
III. Awards and Recognition Categories
The following PCEEP Awards and Recognition categories are proposed:
(a) PCEEP Excellence Award
(b) Plaque of Recognition
(c) Special Awards
i. Special Citation for Most Number of PCEEP Applications
qualified as Project Beneficiaries (Chiller Owner Category)
ii. Special Citation for Most Number of PCEEP Applications
qualified as Project Beneficiaries (Chiller Supplier Category)
iii. Best in Chiller Management of the Year
iv. Highest GHG emissions reduction (Corporate)
PCEEP Excellence Award and Plaque of Recognition
The award is given to Project Beneficiaries that demonstrated excellent performance in the
overall operation and maintenance of their chiller systems during the coverage period of the current
year. To qualify for the PCEEP Excellence Award, a Project Beneficiary must be able to
demonstrate, satisfy and comply the following aspects:
91
(a) Efficiency of Newly Installed Chillers is within the Technical Specification
(b) Actual Electricity Saving is within the Projected Electricity Savings predicted in the
Investment Analysis
(c) Effective Operational Plan and Housekeeping In Place
(d) Regular and On-Time Submission of accurate/valid monthly logs to the Chiller
Monitoring Information System (CMIS)
The overall assessment/evaluation score/rating to qualify for the PCEEP Excellence Award must
be “Excellent”.
The Plaque of Recognition is given to Project Beneficiaries that demonstrated “satisfactory”
performance relative to the overall operation and maintenance of their chiller systems. To qualify
for this award, the overall assessment/evaluation score/rating must be “Satisfactory”.
The criteria for these aspects and the corresponding scores are detailed in the succeeding Section.
Special Awards
This award is given to Chiller Owners and Chiller Suppliers who have demonstrated active
participation in the implementation of the PCEEP.
The Special Citation for Most Number of PCEEP Applications (Chiller Owner Category) is given
to companies that enrolled the most number of PCEEP Applications from 2012-2015.
The Special Citation for Most Number of PCEEP Applications (Chiller Supplier Category) is given
to chiller suppliers that referred the most number of PCEEP applications to the PMU from 2012-
2015. Chiller Suppliers is assisting the PMU in marketing the PCEEP to chiller owners. MOUs
were signed by the Chiller Suppliers with the DENR-EMB.
Best in Chiller Management of the Year
This Award is given to the Chiller manager of the Project Beneficiary that obtained the highest
rank among the PCEEP Excellence Awardees.
Highest Greenhouse Gas (GHG) emissions reduction (Corporate)
This Award is given to Project Beneficiary (Corporate) who obtained the highest cumulative
Greenhouse Gas (GHG) emission reduction during the coverage period.
IV. Criteria for the Awards
The following are the criteria for each award/recognition category.
PCEEP Excellence Award
To qualify for the PCEEP Excellence Award, the Project Beneficiary must be able to achieve
“Excellent” rank during the “Coverage Period” prior to the annual awards. The Criteria for the
evaluation would be as follows:
92
Aspects Criteria Points Max.
Points
Means of
Verification
(a) Efficiency of
Newly Installed
Chillers is
within the
Technical
Specification
Average Chiller Efficiency
i) Within +10% of the
rated/full load efficiency
ii) Outside the range but less
than/equal 0.63 kW/TR
iii) Above 0.63 kW/TR
30 points
15 points
0 point
30
-CMIS
Reports
-Technical
Specifications
of new chiller
(b) Actual
Electricity
Saving is
within the
Projected
Electricity
Savings
predicted in the
Investment
Analysis
Electricity Savings
i) Above 5% savings from
Baseline
ii) Between 1% - 5% savings
from Baseline
iii) Below 1%
30 points
15 points
0 point
30
-FIRR
Analysis
-CMIS
Reports
-Electricity
bills of the
coverage
period
(c) Effective
Operational
Plan and
Housekeeping
In Place
Operational Plan and Proper
Housekeeping
i) Conduct of regular
preventive and maintenance
activities to ensure chiller
reliability and efficiency during
the coverage period (i.e.,
regular contractor)
ii) Proper housekeeping
iii) Provision of Health and
Safety Gears and Emergency
Plan in case of refrigerant
leakage and oil spills
10 points
5 points
5 points
20
-P&M
Contractor or
in-house
service
accredited by
DTI (under
RAC)
-Service
Reports
-evaluation
checklist
-pictures
-Evacuation
Plan
-Health and
Safety
Standards
checklist
(d) Regular and
On-Time
Submission of
Monthly
Monitoring
Logs to the
CMIS
CMIS Reports
i) On-Time Submission of
Accurate/Valid Chiller Data to
the CMIS 100% of the time
ii) Late submission of Chiller
Data to the CMIS
20 points
10 points
20
-CMIS
Reports
Total Points 100
93
To distinguish the categories of PCEEP Awards, the following ranking shall be observed:
Points Rank Awards Category
90 – 100 Excellent PCEEP Excellence Awards
60 – 89 Satisfactory PCEEP Plaque of Recognition
Below 60 Certificate of Recognition
V. Coverage Period
The coverage period refers to the number of months considered in the evaluation for the
PCEEP Awards. The coverage period shall be January to September of the current year. To qualify
for the 2015 PCEEP Awards, the enrolled chiller system of Project Beneficiaries must be
operational since January 2015.
VI. Selection Procedure
The selection procedure and notification to qualify for the annual PCEEP Awards and
Recognition shall be as follows:
Step 1: The PMU shall screen and verify the monitoring reports submitted by Project
Beneficiaries vis-à-vis the CMIS and conduct technical review of prospective
PCEEP awardees. The PMU shall notify the Project Beneficiaries that they are
being considered for the PCEEP Awards.
The PMU shall endorse the candidates for the PCEEP Awards to the Technical
Working Group.
Step 2: The TWG shall conduct site validation (Annex 2).
The TWG shall be assisted by Resource Person (i.e., PCEEP Chiller Specialist) who
shall provide technical inputs to the TWG.
Step 3: The TWG shall prepare a Complete Staff Work recommending the list of candidates
for the PCEEP Awards to the Steering Committee.
Step 4: The Steering Committee shall deliberate and endorse the list of recommended
PCEEP Awardees to the DENR Secretary for approval.
Step 5: The DENR Secretary shall approve the list of PCEEP Awardees.
Step 6: The PMU shall inform the respective Project Beneficiaries of the results of the
evaluation of the PCEEP Awards and Recognition.
VII. Schedule of Activities
The following is the proposed schedule of activities related to the PCEEP Awards and
Recognition:
Activities Schedule Responsible Unit
Screening October 1st - 15th PMU
Notification for Consideration in the
PCEEP Awards
October 20th PMU
TWG
Evaluation/Validation/Deliberation
October 21st -
November 9th
TWG
94
Endorsement to Steering Committee November 10th TWG
Steering Committee
Meeting/Deliberation
Nov. 15th SC
Endorsement to the DENR Secretary Nov. 20th SC
Notification of the PCEEP Awardees Last day of November PMU
PCEEP Awards and Recognition 2nd week of December PMU, SC, OSec
VIII. PCEEP Awards Date and Venue
The PCEEP Awards and Recognition shall be held in December of the current year in
Metro Manila.
IX. Budgetary Requirements
The budget requirement for the conduct of the PCEEP Awards and Recognition in 2015
and 2016 shall be covered by the OTF/MLF. Cost items include the following: traveling expenses
for TWG validation, meetings, venue and meals of the ceremony, plaques, tokens, audio visual
presentation materials, hosts, among others.
X. Proposed Program
10:00 am Invocation and National Anthem DENR
10:10 am Welcome Remarks PCEEP Director
10:20 am Opening Remarks
The World Bank Representative
or Guest of Honor
DENR USec for Policy, Planning,
and Special Projects
10:30 am Introduction of the Keynote Speaker ASEC for FASPS
Chair of Steering Committee
10:35 am Inspirational message DENR Secretary
11:00 am Awarding Ceremony
(a) PCEEP Excellence Awards
(b) Plaque of Recognition
(c) Special Citations
DENR Secretary
Assisted by the Chair of Steering
Committee
11:30 am Messages
(a) PCEEP Excellence Awardee
(b) Plaque of Recognition Awardee
(c) Special Citation Awardee
Photo-Opportunity
Closing Remarks Director for FASPS
12:00 noon Lunch / Cocktails
95
Annex 1: Notification Letter PCEEP Awards Form 1
Project Beneficiaries
Sir:
This is to inform you that you are considered for the CY[____] Philippine Chiller Energy
Efficiency Project Award and Recognition.
The TWG will be conducting a validation on ____________ to gather information relative to the
review and evaluation of your eligibility to the PCEEP Awards and Recognition.
Sincerely yours,
Project Director
96
Annex 2: Evaluation Sheet
PCEEEP Awards Form 2
Republic of the Philippines
Department of Environment and Natural Resources
EVALUATION SHEET
Applicant: [Name of the Project Beneficiary]
Aspects Criteria Points Points
Earned
Means of Verification Remarks
a) Efficiency of Newly
Installed Chillers is
within the Technical
Specification
Average Chiller
Efficiency
i) Within +10% of
the rated/full load
efficiency
ii) Outside the range
but less
than/equal 0.63
kW/TR
iii)Above 0.63
kW/TR
30 points
15points
0 point
(Max – 30
points) -CMIS Reports
-Technical Specifications of new
chiller
Refer to Procedure
/ Methodology for
Criteria 1 and 2
b) Actual Electricity
Saving is within the
Projected Electricity
Savings predicted in
the Investment
Analysis
Electricity Savings
i) Above 5% savings
from Baseline
ii) Between 1% - 5%
savings from Baseline
30 points
15 points
0 point
(Max – 30
points) -FIRR Analysis
-CMIS Reports
-Electricity bills of the coverage
period
Refer to Procedure
/ Methodology for
Criteria 1 and 2
97
iii) Lower than 1%
a) Baseline
Electricity
Consumption =
_____kWh
b) Baseline
electricity cost =
____________
PhP/kWh
c) Actual Electricity
Consumption =
______kWh
d) Actual electricity
cost =
___________
PhP/kWh
% savings=[( cd - ab) /
cd] x 100
% Savings = ___%
98
c) Effective Operational
Plan and
Housekeeping In
Place
Operational Plan and
Proper Housekeeping
i) Conduct of regular
preventive and
maintenance activities to
ensure chiller reliability
and efficiency during the
coverage period
ii) Provision of Health
and Safety Gears and
Emergency Plan in case
of refrigerant leakage
and oil spills
iii) Proper housekeeping
10 points
5 points
5 points
(Max – 20
points)
Documents Yes No
P&M Contractor
DTI Accreditation
(under RAC)
Service Reports
Evacuation Plan
Health and Safety Standards
Proper signage
Fire extinguisher
PPE
Proper lighting
Proper ventilation
Proper housekeeping
No water/oil spills
No scrap materials
scattered
Proper garbage
disposal
Proper labelling of
chemicals
Proper storage of
chemicals
d) Regular and On-Time
Submission of
Monthly Monitoring
Logs to the CMIS
CMIS Reports
i) On-Time Submission
of Chiller Data to the
CMIS 100% of the time
20 points
(Max – 20
points)
99
ii) Submission of Chiller
Data to the CMIS
10 points
Total Points
Type of PCEEP Award
Points Rank Awards Category
90 – 100 Excellent PCEEP Excellence Awards
60 – 89 Satisfactory PCEEP Plaque of Recognition
Below 60 Certificate of Recognition
Recommendation:
After thorough review of the PCEEP Awards and Recognition requirements, the Technical Working Group of the PCEEP Awards and Recognition
is hereby recommending the conferment of [Name of the PCEEP award] to [Name of Project Beneficiary] during the CY[Year] PCEEP Awards
and Recognition Ceremony in December [Year].
________________________________
PCEEP Deputy Project Director
(Chair of the TWG)
____________________________________
Representative from DENR-FASPO
Member-TWG
____________________________________
Representative from EMB-Climate Change
Member-TWG
___________________________________
Representative from DENR-FMS
Member-TWG
Representative from DENR Policy and
Planning Service
Member-TWG
____________________________________
Representative from EMB-POD
Member-TWG
Representative from the Strategic
Communication and Initiative Service
Member-TWG
Representative from EMB MIS
Member-TWG
100
Procedure / Methodology for Criteria 1 and 2
Aspects Criteria Procedure
e) Efficiency of
Newly
Installed
Chillers is
within the
Technical
Specification
Average Chiller Efficiency
i) Within +10% of the
rated/full load efficiency
= 30 points
ii) Outside the range
but less than/equal
0.63 kW/TR = 15
points
iii) Above 0.63 kW/TR
= 0 point
1. Determine the rated/full
load efficiency (kW/TR)
from the Technical
Specifications of new
chiller
2. Determine the range of
efficiency (+10%) of the
rated/full load efficiency as
indicated in the Technical
Specifications of new
chiller
3. Obtain the average
efficiency (kW/TR)
generated from the CMIS
for the coverage period
4. Compare results of Step 3
from Step 2 and the
following scores will be
assigned:
Within +10% of the
rated/full load
efficiency = 30
points
Outside the range
but less than/equal
0.63 kW/TR = 15
points
Above 0.63 kW/TR
= 0 point
5. In case of multiple chillers,
steps 1-4 shall be followed
for each chiller. Then,
calculate the average
points.
iii) Actual
Electricity
Saving is
within the
Projected
Electricity
Savings
predicted
in the
Electricity Savings
i) Above 5% savings
from Baseline
ii) Between 1% - 5%
savings from
Baseline
iii) Lower than 1%
1. Based on the Investment
Analysis calculated by PMU,
determine the baseline
electricity consumption
(kWh) and cost (PhP/kWh).
2. Obtain the actual electricity
consumption (kWh) from the
CMIS.
3. Secure the average actual
electricity cost for the
101
Investment
Analysis
a) Baseline Electricity
Consumption =
_____kWh
b) Baseline electricity
cost =
____________
PhP/kWh
c) Actual Electricity
Consumption =
______kWh
d) Actual electricity
cost = ___________
PhP/kWh
% savings=[( cd - ab) / cd] x
100
% Savings = ___%
coverage period from the
Project Beneficiaries.
4. Compute the percent savings
using the following formula:
Percent savings=[( cd - ab) /
cd] x 100
a) Baseline Electricity
Consumption =
_____kWh
b) Baseline electricity cost
= ____________
PhP/kWh
c) Actual Electricity
Consumption =
______kWh
d) Actual electricity cost =
___________ PhP/kWh
5. Assign points based on
the following:
Above 5% electricity
savings from Baseline =
30 points
Between 1% - 5%
savings from Baseline =
15 points
Lower than 1% = 0
point
6. In case of multiple
chillers, steps 1-5 shall
be followed for each
chiller. Then, calculate
the average points.
102
APPENDIX 7
PCEEP AWARDEES
103
APPENDIX 7
The Project was able to conduct two (2) awards and recognition ceremonies with the first one
on June 26, 2014 held at the Manila Peninsula, Makati City and thee second was on October
12, 2016 held at the Pacific Hall of Hotel H20, Manila.
PCEEP Awardees (June 26, 2014)
Plaques of Recognition for Project Partners
1. The Peninsula Manila
2. Bank of the Philippine Islands
3. Waterfront Cebu City Hotel and Casino
4. New World Hotel Makati
5. Marco Polo Davao Hotel
6. SM City Iloilo
7. BA Lepanto Condominium
Certificates of Recognition for Prospective Project Partners
1. Office of the President
2. Cultural Center of the Philippines
3. Trinoma Malls
4. 6750 Ayala Avenue Joint Venture
5. Tower One and Exchange Plaza
6. Ayala Life FGU Tower
7. Makati Stock Exchange Building
8. International School Manila
9. Pacific Star Building
10. SM South Mall
11. Lufthansa Technik Philippines
12. Manila Pavilion
13. Social Security System
14. Metro Colon Cebu
15. Metro Ayala Cebu
16. Metro Mandaue Cebu
PCEEP Awardees (October 12, 2016)
PCEEP Awardees Category of Awards
1. Waterfront Cebu City Hotel and
Casino / Cofely Philippines
Excellence Award
2. The Peninsula Manila Excellence Award
3. Trinoma Malls Plaque of Recognition
4. SM City Iloilo Plaque of Recognition
5. Bank of the Philippine Islands Plaque of Recognition
6. International School Manila Plaque of Recognition
7. Manila Pavilion Certificate of Recognition
104
PCEEP Special Awardees Category of Awards
1. Stellar Equipment and
Machinery Inc. (SETI)
Special Citation for Most Number
of PCEEP Applications (Chiller
Supplier Category)
2. Engr. Karsten Carlo Pica and
Engr. Vincent Lazaro
Best in Chiller Management of the
Year (Engie Services, Inc. –
formerly Cofely Philippines and
Waterfront Cebu City Hotel and
Casino)
3. Trinoma Malls (North Triangle
Depot Commercial
Corporation / Ayala Land
Malls, Inc.
Highest GHG Emission Reduction
for CY2015 (Corporate Category)
105
APPENDIX 8
SUMMARY OF PCEEP SATISFACTION SURVEY
106
APPENDIX 8
Survey Conclusions
1. The target participants for the survey were partially achieved. Project beneficiaries were
16, prospective beneficiaries were 5, and the remaining 5 who answered others.
2. Majority of the respondents found out about the project through Chiller
suppliers/Energy saving companies. This means that the other means were not
maximized like the use of DENR Web Site and there was no social networking
advertisement as expected by some of the respondents.
3. All participants agreed that PCEEP would address the climate change as well as the
depletion of the the ozone layer.
4. Majority of the participants claimed that the support from government environmental
advocacy motivated them to join the PCEEP project, and some of the respondents said
that the subsidy attracted them, as well as the notion that the old chillers will be replaced
anyway. Some also mentioned that they were motivated because PCEEP is supportive
to the corporate social responsibility of the chiller owners.
5. Majority of the participants strongly agreed that the project is appropriate for big
buildings like hotels, mall, office buildings, hospitals, passenger terminals,
manufacturing industries, and the like. Majority also said that the project helped in
reducing greenhouse gas (GHG) emission and claimed that the project resulted in a
significant reductionof energy consupmption and electricity cost, as well as the
promotion of the use of energy efficient chillers. Some of the participants believed that
the project facilitated the cholorofluorocarbon (CFC) phase-out obligation with lesser
cost to the chiller owners, in the same manner that the project facilitated the compliance
to DENR administrative order 2013-25 or the revised regulation on the chemical control
of ozone depleting substances, and some respondents agreed that the project accelated
the replacement of inefficient ozone depleting substances (ODS) based chillers.
6. Most of the participants strongly agreed that the eligibility criteria set are not bias to a
specific brand of chiller and some agreed that the said criteria can easily be compiled
with. Majority also claimed that these criteria are appropriate and were provided and
explained by the PMU although some said that the eligibility criteria are too many.
9. Some of the respondents said that the confidentiality of information is one of the
problems and challenges that they encountered in complying the eligibility criteria. A
few of them said that the problem is related to less support from chiller owner
management.
10. Majority of the respondents strongly agreed that the DENR witnessed the
commissioning of the new chillers. Someof them believed that the World Bank
procurement methods used by the project are acceptable to the chiller owners. In
general, most of the participants agreed that the chiller suppliers offered complete
chiller set-up, and can deliver, install, commision the chillers on schedule.
107
11. Some of the participants said that the number one problem that they encountered during
the procurement of the new chillers is related to importation issues and port congestion,
followed by other matters like checking of a more efficinet units, delayed commissiong.
A few mentioned also the delay of budget approval by chiller owner management and
the inconsistency in procurement docucuments (i.e., purchase order, delivery, receipts,
sales invoice, etc.). While some is about the non-compliance to technical speficifations
by the chiller suppliers, however, no one claimed that there is failure in terms of
bidding.
12. Majority of the participants claimed that the technical assistance provides timely and
reliable response to project related issues, and facilitates submission of project, as well
as the submission of monitoring reports.
13. Most of the respondents stated that they stongly agreed that the protocols in the
recovery of reinfrigerant and destruction of the old compressor are acceptable and can
be easily compiled with. Some of the participants agreed that the contractors for the
refrigerant recovery and destruction of the old compressors submit reports on time,
however the respondents disgreed that the recovery of the refrigerant and destruction
of the old compressors would entail addtional cost.
14. Majority stated that the number one issue that the respondents encountered during the
recovery of the refrigerant and destruction of the old compressors is related to the
availability of the contractors for the refrigerant recovery and destruction of the old
compressors, followed by having an additional cost to recover the refrigerant and
destruction of the old compresors
15. Majority of the respondents generally agreed that the PCEEP CMIS is accesible,
helpful, and the monitoring report format is acceptable, as well as the monitoring
protocol is doable and reasonable.
16. Majority of the participants said that they encountered monitoring issues and challenges
that usually happens after sales and/or because no proper turnover. While there are
some who said that there is a need for an additional personnel in charge of monitoring.
17. Majority of the respondents agreed that the SCDs to be submitted are cleary understood,
doable, acceptable, and the templates prepared by the PMU is helpful.
18. Most of the responses related to the issues and challenges in complying in SCDs
pertains to the confidentiality of information, while some of the concerns include other
issues like no proper turnover.
19. Most of the respondents agreed that the timeframe for the processing of the subsidy is
reasonable, while some of them strongly agreed that the 15% subsidy is attractive.
Although it is evident that some would want the subsidy to be higher but other content
that they are not personally benefiting from it anyway.
20. Majority of the respondents strongly agreed that their participation in the PCEEP
helped improve the company image. Some said there is an added income in terms of
electricity savings and subsidy provided funds to their company, as well as improving
the ambiance of the building and enhancing the tenant’s satisfaction.
108
21. All of the respondents would recommend the chiller replacement because this will
improve the ambiance of the building, will provide addtional income in terms of
electricity savings, will creat a safe environment for all living things, this is eco-
friendly, efficient, and could address climate change.
Recommendations
To be able to compare the benefits of chiller replacement, it is recommended that those
who never planned to join the project also be checked on their electric consumptions
for an accurate comparison.
The project would benefit particularly chiller owners, but promoting this activity
publicly through social networking and tri-media advertisements it would have more
impact since the website, primer, and other ways did not catch the attention of the target
beneficiaries.
Project like this should be promoted year round and even be extended since some target
participants are just waiting for the result of those who first join to avoid risk.
Since the project is appropriate for big buildings, projects for smaller buildings who are
much more in number be given the chance to benefit for similar projects.
It is recommended to simplify the eligibility criteria so as more may participate in the
project.
Limit the confidential information that would be needed for Private Corporation so as
the speed up the processing of requirements and that the building owners would easily
agree on the release of information/requirements.
Special importation procedures be given to project beneficiaries so as to facilitate fast
delivery.
Simplify the management protocol on review and approval of SGA to give time or
opporutinity for the chiller owners to comment/revise the pro-forma SGA.
Ensure that there is proper protocol for after sales or proper turnover. An additional
personnel in charge of monitoring should be hired to ensure proper documentation and
monitoring.
Additional subsidy should be given on top of the 15% subsidy. Give bonuses to chiller
operators from the subsidies given the project.
Project of this kind also be implemented in a small case basis.
109
APPENDIX 9
PCEEP CONSULTANTS’ SCHEDULES
110
APPENDIX 9
Consultants' Schedules
Expertise Name of Consultant Year Hired
Person-
Months
Rendered
Team Leader cum Carbon Specialist Mr. Jo-Rex Camba Nov. 2012 48
Measurement, Monitoring and Verification
(MMV) and Chiller Specialist
Engr. Jose Grajeda
Nov. 2012 48
Management Information System (MIS)
Specialist Engr. Herbert Narisma Oct. 2012 36
Financial Management Specialist Ms. Susan Cruz Oct. 2013 24
Information, Education and Communication
(IEC) Specialist Mr. Ferdinand Esguerra Oct. 2015 27
Total 183
111
APPENDIX 10
PCEEP PROPOSED SUSTAINABILITY PLAN
112
APPENDIX 10
1. Background and Rationale
The Philippines – Chiller Energy Efficiency Project (hereafter referred to as “PCEEP”
or “the Project”) is a World Bank-assisted project that provided financial incentives and
technical assistance to Chiller Owners who opted to replace inefficient and ODS-based chillers
before the natural attrition of the equipment.
The Project’s overall objective is to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by reducing
inefficient chillers, including both old chlorofluorocarbon (CFC)-based chillers and non-CFC-
based, utilizing the grants from the Global Environment Facility (GEF) and Ozone Trust Fund
(OTF).
Since its inception in 2011, the Project was able to highlight co-benefits of
demonstrating energy efficiency. These co-benefits include climate benefits i.e., reducing the
direct and indirect greenhouse gas emissions resulting from the early replacement of inefficient
chillers. Specifically, the Project targeted the replacement of 30,649 tons of refrigeration
covering approximately 53 new chillers installed throughout the country. Of these
replacements, the Project targeted the abatement of at least 5.7 tons of ozone depleting potential
(ODP), saved at least 29.7 GWh of electricity, and reduced at least 62.4 kilotons of carbon
dioxide equivalent by end of project life.
As the project is nearing its completion on January 1, 2017, there is a need to
mainstream the activities of the Project in the DENR and/or EMB having been designated as
the Project Management Unit (PMU).
During the review mission of the World Bank in July 2016, the Bank reiterated the
allocation of sufficient funds by the DENR to close the Project and be able to mainstream the
post-PCEEP activities into the regular programs of the DENR and/or EMB.
Also, DENR Memorandum Circular No. 24 dated September 30, 1994, prescribed for
the development of a sustainability plan that would provide for the smooth integration of the
Project’s activities into the regular activities of the agency. In doing so, the agency would be
able to provide the required technical and financial resources for various activities to be carried
out immediately after the project life. Moreover, the sustainability plan is integral in the
development of the Project Completion Report of terminating projects of the DENR.
In preparation for the development of the Sustainability Plan of the PCEEP, the PMU
of the PCEEP conducted a workshop to develop the Sustainability Plan for the Project on
October 17-18, 2016. The workshop was held at the Hotel Centro Palawan in Puerto Princesa
City and attended by personnel from the DENR and EMB Central Offices and selected EMB
regional offices, namely, EMB IV-A, EMB-VII, EMB-IX, EMB-Negros Island Region and
EMB-National Capital Region.
To facilitate the discussion, the following themes were adopted to be able to solicit
insights, suggestions and recommendations from the participants:
(a) Sustaining Chiller Replacements and Enabling Policies Beyond the PCEEP
(b) Mainstreaming of PCEEP Activities into the regular programs of the DENR and
EMB, and
113
(c) Management of the PCEEP Chiller Management Information System
The first theme focused on the discussion on the development of strategies and enabling
policies that would sustain the interests of chiller owners beyond 2016. This include
appreciation of the present scenarios and proposing strategies and enabling policies to the
DENR/EMB.
The second theme focused on the discussion on the mainstreaming of PCEEP activities
into the regular programs of the DENR and EMB. These activities include monitoring of
Project Beneficiaries during the monitoring period defined in the Sub-Grant Agreement (SGA),
recognition of best practices in chiller operation, IEC campaigns on the relationship of
inefficient chillers and climate change and use of ODS refrigerants and ozone depletion, among
others.
The third theme focused on the management of the PCEEP Chiller Management
Information System (CMIS) by the DENR and/or EMB after the project life.
This Sustainability Plan aims to provide the blueprint of various activities that may be
adopted and undertaken by the DENR and EMB during the post-PCEEP implementation. The
development of sustainability strategies would ensure continuity of the various economic and
environmental benefits created by the PCEEP furthering the market transformation in the
chiller sector. These benefits include abatement of ODS consumption and reduction of CO2
emission.
This report contains different sustainability strategy recommendations and
justifications for pursuing the various measure to sustain the positive impacts of the Project.
The presentation of the sustainability strategy recommendations in this Plan would be a
component basis. The Project has four (4) components and each component has specific
activities to be accomplished that lead to the achievement of the overall project objectives.
These components are as follows:
(a) Component 1: Investment in Chiller Replacement
(b) Component 2: Measurement, Monitoring and Verification (MMV)
(c) Component 3: Performance Standards and Technical Assistance
(d) Component 4: Project Management
2. Sustainability Strategy Recommendations
2.1 COMPONENT 1: INVESTMENT IN CHILLER REPLACEMENT
During the Project implementation, this component provides for financial incentives
(i.e., 15% of the new chiller cost either its ex-works or normative cost, whichever is lower) to
accelerate the replacement of inefficient chillers to non-CFC energy efficient ones, in advance
of the natural attrition rate of the existing chiller.
The Project received external funding in the amount of USD 2.6 million from the Global
Environment Facility (GEF) to be utilized to finance 15% of the new chiller cost in the form
of subsidy to qualified chillers enrolled by Chiller Owners. The Project also received grant
from the Ozone Trust Fund (OTF) amounting to USD 1 million.
In order to effect the subsidy payments, the Chiller Owners were required to sign sub-
grant agreements (SGAs) with the DENR and need to comply with the conditions of the SGAs.
Chiller Owners who later became Project Beneficiaries i.e., successfully replaced their old and
inefficient chillers with more energy efficient ones are required to submit their monitoring logs
to the PCEEP CMIS in the next 10-years.
114
At the end of the project life, the GEF grant would also be terminated and access to the
PCEEP subsidy would no longer be available. In fact, the PMU received several inquiries from
various companies asking if the Project would be extended or whether similar initiative would
be implemented by the DENR. However, there are no existing similar initiatives currently
being undertaken or proposed in the DENR that provide incentives for chiller owners who
would decide to accelerate the replacement of old and inefficient chillers beyond the project
life. The challenge therefore is to develop strategies that would continue the market
transformation created by the Project in the Chiller Sector in the absence of financial incentives.
These strategies would include different approaches that would influence chiller owners to
replace their old and inefficient chillers even without the subsidy provided by the Project.
These approaches would include use of market instruments and enforcement of regulatory
directives. It is also evident that promotion of energy efficiency is not a mandate of the DENR
as it is under the Department of Energy.
Recommended Strategies:
The following are the recommended strategies that may be adopted by the DENR and EMB
in order to sustain the interests of chiller owners and continue the market transformation in the
chiller sector in the country.
(a) Collaboration with other agencies in developing chiller efficiency standards and
relevant legislations on energy efficiency
The DENR particularly the Foreign-Assisted and Special Projects Service (DENR-
FASPS) could work with the Department of Energy and Bureau of Product Standards
of the Department of Trade and Industry to develop efficiency standards for energy
efficient chillers for various establishments. This approach aims to influence the
consumer behavior with regard to employing more energy efficient chillers in
buildings. Moreover, the DoE is the lead agency tasked to develop energy efficiency
standards for electrical equipment. In addition, the project outcomes could also be
valuable input to the House/Senate Bills on energy efficiency.
The experiences of the DENR in the PCEEP would be able to provide baseline
information on the current practices of various establishments that utilize chillers.
These efficiency standards could be in the form of energy ratings and labeling. The
chiller efficiency standards could have positive impacts on the consumer behavior i.e.,
Chiller Owners would consider the efficiency ratings when procuring efficient chillers.
This approach is similar to the EEIR Rating of home appliances sold in the market.
In order to effect this strategy, the DENR may share with the DOE the Project
Completion Report of the PCEEP that highlighted this recommendation.
(b) Strict enforcement of the DENR Administrative Order No. 25 series of 2013
In December 2013, the DENR issued DAO No. 2013-25, also known as the “Revised
Regulation on the Chemical Control Order for Ozone Depleting Substances”. The
DAO mandates the nationwide ban on Chlorofluocarbons (CFCs) importation and
phase out schedule of Hydrochlorofluocarbons (HCFCs).
The Project supported the phasing out of both CFCs and non-CFC refrigeration with
the introduction of non-ODS refrigerant-based chillers. In the absence of the subsidy,
the EMB, as the lead agency in the enforcement of DAO 2013-25, should strictly
enforce the administrative order. Based on the experience of the PCEEP, there are
115
companies that still operate CFCs-based chillers. The EMB through the Philippine
Ozone Desk (EMB-POD) should intensify activities leading to the development of the
inventory of the ODS chillers in the country. In this manner, the EMB could easily
identify companies that contravene the administrative order and influence these
companies to shift to non-ODS based chillers even without the provision of subsidies.
3.2 COMPONENT 2: MEASUREMENT, MONITORING, & VERIFICATION
This component of the Project involves the development of a monitoring regime that
measures, collects and analyzes monitoring data submitted by Project Beneficiaries that would
be utilized by project stakeholders as a management tool to monitor and assess the
accomplishments and overall performance of their chiller replacement programs.
One of the significant milestone under this component is the development of the PCEEP
Chiller Management Information System. The PCEEP CMIS is an online platform that
monitors the performance of the chiller replacements of project beneficiaries in terms of chiller
efficiency, energy savings, and greenhouse gas emission reduction.
Under the current CMIS, Project Beneficiaries are required to submit the prescribed
monitoring logs generated by the chillers enrolled in the PCEEP by uploading them in the
CMIS on a monthly basis. This is in compliance to the provisions of the SGAs entered by the
Project Beneficiaries with the DENR-EMB. Project Beneficiaries could log in to the CMIS
using specific account name and password. During the project, the CMIS is being monitored
and maintained by the Measurement, Monitoring and Verification (MMV) Consultant and
Management Information System (MIS) Consultant. Assisting the consultants is a Database
Management Assistant (DMA). The MMV Consultant performs the quality control and quality
assurance of the data submitted by Project Beneficiaries through the CMIS. On the other hand,
the MIS Consultant ensures the reliability and security of the CMIS to ensure prompt
submission of the monitoring logs by the Project Beneficiaries. The PCEEP CMIS is being
hosted by the EMB through a dedicated server stationed at the EMB Statistics and Information
System Management Section (EMB-SISMS). Moreover, the DENR procured additional server
as part of the mainstreaming and sustainability initiatives of the DENR to the EMB.
Recently, additional improvements were made by the MIS Consultant in the PCEEP
CMIS. The system automatically generates reports which would be transmitted to the Project
Beneficiaries and concerned EMB offices electronically via email. The automated responses
are would include the following information: (a) average efficiency, (b) energy savings and (c)
emission reduction. For example, the CMIS would be designed to automatically furnish the
CCD copies of the ER report for a particular Project Beneficiary.
However, the involvement of the Consultants is expected to be terminated by the end
of the project life i.e., January 1, 2017. It is therefore important to develop strategies to
mainstream the MMV activities of the PCEEP into the regular activities of the EMB thru the
SISMS of the Policy, Planning and Project Development Division (PPPDD).
Recommended Strategies:
The following recommended strategies may be adopted by the DENR/EMB in order to
continue/sustain the monitoring activities of the Project after its project life:
116
(a) Uploading of the PCEEP Tool Kits in the PCEEP webpage and FASPs Knowledge
Center of the DENR
The PCEEP developed a number of tool kits that were used to assess the eligibility of
baseline chiller units in the Project. These include: (a) the Power-Output Function
(POF) Regression Analysis and (b) Investment Analysis worksheets.
The POF Regression Analysis was used by the PMU to assess the efficiency of the
baseline chiller units. The POF Regression Analysis would calculate kW/TR of baseline
chillers by inputting the required data in the spreadsheet.
As part of the sustainability strategies, these toolkits will be made available at the
PCEEP page that will be maintained by the SISMS of the PPPDD and at the FASPs
Knowledge Center of the DENR FASPS website. The PCEEP page will be hosted in
the EMB website. Chiller Owners who may be interested about the Project could simply
download the POF Regression Analysis and Investment Analysis worksheets and the
instructions of how to use the toolkits from the PCEEP Website. These would help them
assess the efficiency of their existing chiller units and the internal rate of return should
they decide to replace their existing chillers. In such manner, the toolkits may be able
to capacitate chiller owners arrive at the well-informed decision with regard to
replacing the old and inefficient chillers.
(b) Linkages with Energy Savings Companies (ESCOs)
The Project was able to partner with ESCOs and successfully linked them to Project
Beneficiaries. To sustain this linkage, the EMB may provide list of ESCOs in the
PCEEP page in order to link interested chiller owners to these companies who were
actively engaged in chiller replacement programs as well as preventive and
maintenance activities. The PCEEP page will be maintained by the SISMS of the EMB-
PPPDD.
(c) Inclusion of the Ozone Depleting Substances (ODS) and Greenhouse Gas (GHG)
Emission Reduction (ER) Reporting in the SMR
In the proposed revised SMR template, companies are required to report the amount of
ODS consumed in the SMR. In order to build the capacities of the Project Beneficiaries,
the EMB could hold capacity building activities to train the Pollution Control Officers
of Project Beneficiaries monitor the ODS. The EMB POD and the CCD may provide
guidance on the sources of ODS and the calculation of the ODS emissions specifically
from the chiller replacement projects.
(d) Management of the PCEEP Facebook Account
The Project maintains a Facebook account which features activities of the project. The
management of the FB account will be turned over to the EMB thru the Environmental
Education and Information Division (EMB-EEID) or the Environmental Compliance
Assistance Center (ECAC).
3.3 COMPONENT 3: TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE
This component of the Project involved enhancing the knowledge of the Project
Beneficiaries and the DENR/EMB. During the post-PCEEP implementation, it is important
that the EMB regional offices as well as the Project Beneficiaries to familiarize the enhanced
PCEEP website and database. Building the capacities of the EMB regional offices would
117
ensure continuous submission of monitoring reports by the Project Beneficiaries in the PCEEP
CMIS. Aside from capacity building activities, the EMB may consider continuous recognition
of Project Beneficiaries and promotion of the success stories and benefits of the Project in
various fora.
The following recommended strategies may be adopted by the DENR/EMB in order to
capacitate the EMB and Project Beneficiaries and sustain the monitoring activities of the
Project after its project life.
(a) Conduct of the Training on the CMIS involving EMB Regional Offices
One of the strategies to ensure continuous engagement of Project Beneficiaries
particularly in the submission of the monthly monitoring logs would be the engagement
of the Regional Ozone Desk Officers (RODO) and/or Environmental Monitoring and
Evaluation Officers (EMEO) of the EMB regional offices with chiller units enrolled in
the PCEEP. Specially, the RODO and/or EMEO would undergo CMIS training to
familiarize the system. The EMB regional offices personnel would be given access to
the PCEEP CMIS as “Viewer” so they could monitor the submission of monitoring
reports and chiller performance of Project Beneficiaries in their respective regions.
Annex 1 of the sustainability plan enumerates the Project Beneficiaries in Regions IV-
A, VI, VII, XI, NIR and NCR.
The Project would provide dedicated desktop units to the EMB regional offices to
capacitate the RODO and/or EMEO in the performance of their function related to the
CMIS monitoring. The training would be conducted by the MMV Consultant and
CMIS Consultant together with the SISMS staff of the EMB Central Office.
(b) Building on the Success Stories of the Project
The EMB and DENR may continue to promote the success stories of the Project
through various fora and conferences organized by both institutions. The Project also
developed information, education and communication (IEC) materials particularly the
PCEEP Documentary Video. The DENR and EMB may consider entering agreements
with movie houses where the 1-minuter documentary video of the PCEEP may be
shown. For example, the SM Cinemas are holding “Green Film Festivals” at least once
a month in selected SM cinemas and attended by high schools and college students. The
DENR and EMB may also consider presentations during conferences and symposiums
of professional organizations such as the hotel and restaurant associations, malls
association, among others. Project Beneficiaries will also be invited as resource persons
during said gatherings. Moreover, the PCEEP documentary video may be presented in
environmental education events organized by the EEID.
3.4 COMPONENT 4: PROJECT MANAGEMENT
This component of the Project involves management aspect of activities to be
conducted during the post-PCEEP implementation. This may include assigning EMB staff and
specific tasks to be carried out. This would also include provision of budget to sustain the
activities during the post-PCEEP implementation.
The following recommended strategies may be adopted by the DENR/EMB in order to
effectively and efficiently sustain the monitoring activities of the Project after its project life:
(a) Designation of a CMIS Focal Person in the EMB MIS Office
118
The EMB may consider designating a CMIS Focal Person in the EMB MIS Office who
is capable of maintaining the PCEEP CMIS server and website. The CMIS Focal Person
may be a plantilla position personnel or contractual personnel who assume regular
functions in the EMB Central Office.
The CMIS Focal Person shall have the following tasks:
i. Monitors the submission of monthly monitoring reports by Project Beneficiaries
in the PCEEP CMIS. The CMIS would automatically reflects project
beneficiaries who failed to upload monitoring reports in the CMIS Dash Board.
ii. In case the project beneficiaries failed to upload the monitoring reports, the
CMIS Focal Person will follow up with concerned Project Beneficiaries every
15th day of the succeeding month.
iii. The CMIS Focal Person would generate reports from the CMIS particularly the
greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions reduction (ER) achieved by the project
beneficiaries. The GHG ER will be submitted to the Climate Change Division
for inclusion in the EMB reports.
iv. The CMIS Focal Person would also be responsible for the regular preventive
and maintenance (P&M) activities of the CMIS servers particularly in ensuring
the reliability and security of the PCEEP CMIS (i.e., renewal of the antivirus
licenses of the software). The CMIS Focal Person should ensure inclusion of
the required budgetary requirements for the P&M activities for the CMIS.
v. The CMIS Focal Person would also manage the PCEEP page.
The EMB Director may issue a Special Order in this regard. Alternatively, the Section
Head of the Statistics and Information Management System Section of the EMB may
designate regular or contractual staff for this purpose.
(b) Management of the PCEEP Facebook Page
The EEID of the EMB may consider the management of the PCEEP Facebook page.
(c) GHG Emission Reductions
The climate Change Division of the EMB may consider the GHG emission reduction
reports generated by the CMIS in their annual reporting of the GHG emission
reductions.
(d) Turnover of PCEEP Equipment to the EMB
The PCEEP equipment would be turned over to the EMB. The DENR and EMB should
ensure proper transfer of accountability of the equipment in accordance to existing rules
and regulations.
The equipment includes the following: (a) desktops, (b) laptops, (c) servers, (d)
telecommunication equipment, (e) hanging cabinets, (f) camera, (g) Smart TV, among
others.
In order to sustain post-PCEEP activities, specific office equipment are proposed to be
turned-over to concerned offices/divisions. The EMB Regional Offices will be
provided with desktop units. The EMB ROs will conduct regular monitoring activities
on the chillers in their respective regions that were granted the PCEEP subsidy. The
servers that hosted the PCEEP CMIS will be turned over to the SISMS of the EMB-
PPPDD who will continue to manage and maintain the PCEEP CMIS. Turnover of
other office equipment will be agreed upon by the DENR and the EMB.
119
3. Budgetary Requirement
The World Bank agreed to provide a four-month grace period prior to the closing of the
Designated Accounts for the GEF and OTF. During the winding down phase of the Project, it
was agreed that the DENR would provide the corresponding funds to sustain the winding down
activities until April 2017.
The PMU is proposing a PhP1.1 million budget that would cover the financial requirement
for the winding down activities. Php0.8 million will come from the DENR FASPs Support
Fund which will be used for the winding down activities of the PCEEP i.e., salaries of project
support staff, procurement of office supplies, airfares and vehicle rental, among others, while
the PhP 0.3 million from the EMB regular fund will be used specifically for the CMIS training
activities.
Moreover, the post-PCEEP implementation would not require additional funding
requirement other than the renewal of the software licenses on the server. In the current
practice, the EMB accommodates the renewal of the software licenses of the server.
Timeline
Activities Responsible Office Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun
1. Adoption of the Plan i.e., issuance of SO DENR
2. Preparation and Approval of the CY2017
WFP
PMU / DENR
3. Turnover of Equipment DENR / EMB-AFD
4. Uploading of the Toolkits and ESCO Links PMU / EMB-SISMS
5. Designation of the CMIS Focal Person EMB
6. CMIS Training involving EMB Regl
Offices
PMU / EMB ROs
7. Revision of the SMR Template EMB-PPPDD /
DENR
8. Mainstreaming of the PCEEP Awards and
Recognition in the PEPP Recognition
PMU / EMB PEPP
9. Collaboration with DoE on the
development of a Chiller Efficiency
Standard/Rating
DENR
120
APPENDIX 11
PHOTO DOCUMENTATION
121
COMMISSIONING OF ENERGY EFFICIENT CHILLERS
Commissioning of the new energy efficient chillers at the International School Manila
Commissioning of the new energy efficient chillers at the Insular Life Corporate Center
APPENDIX 11
122
REFRIGERANT RECOVERY FROM OLD CHILLERS
Refrigerant recovery at the Peninsula Manila by Carrier Concepcion Philippines
123
Refrigerant recovery at the Philippine National Bank by Carrier Concepcion Philippines
DESTRUCTION OF THE COMPRESSORS OF THE OLD CHILLERS
Destruction of the compressor of old compressor at the Marco Polo Hotel Davao
124
Destruction of the compressor of the old compressor at the Robinsons Place Bacolod
PCEEP AWARDS AND RECOGNITION CEREMONY
Awards and Recognition Ceremony on June 26, 2014 at the Peninsula Manila
Dr. Viraj Vithoontien, PCEEP Task Team Leader, delivers his message on behalf of the Country
Director of the World Bank. Together with him are: Atty. Juan Miguel T. Cuna, former EMB
125
Director, Assistant Secretary Rommel Abesamis of DENR-FASPS and Dir. Edwin G. Domingo
of DENR-FASPS.
DENR and World Bank Officials with PCEEP Awardees and Miss Earth 2014.
Awards and Recognition Ceremony on October 12, 2016 at the Hotel H2O Manila
Assistant Secretary Rommel Abesamis delivering the keynote speech during the
recognition ceremony.
126
DENR officials with the PCEEP awardees
WORLD BANK MISSIONS
Assistant Secretary Rommel Abesamis presiding the PCEEP Implementation Review Mission
of the World Bank in February 2015
127
World Bank Review Mission Team together with the DENR, meeting with officials of Insular
Life Assurance Company in January 2016
CEREMONIAL SIGNING OF SUB-GRANT AGREEMENTS WITH PROJECT
PARTICIPANTS
Assistant Secretary Rommel Abesamis delivering his keynote address during the ceremonial
signing of sub-grant agreements with project participants on November 12, 2013.
128
Ceremonial signing of sub-grant agreement for the chiller replacement at the Radisson Blu Cebu
Hotel in June 2014.
ATTENDANCE TO INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCES
District Cooling Mission in the United Kingdom (December 1-6, 2015)
(L) Representatives from the DENR headed by Usec. Analiza Rebuelta-Teh and Cofely UK Limited/Engie. (Top R)
The Queen Elizabeth Olympic Park is the location of the DCS Learning Mission in the UK. (Bottom R) Cofely UK
Limited and Engie giving presentations to the DENR participants.
129
District Cooling Mission in Japan (December 5-9, 2015)
Representatives of the DENR attending the DCS Learning Mission at the Shinjuku District Energy Center
in Shinjuku, Tokyo, Japan. (Upper Left Photo: Engr. Hannibal Ramos of DENR General Services
Division, Engr. Jose Grajeda of the PCEEP-PMU, Ms. Carolina Lopez and Ms. Maybell Mangubos of the
DENR Financial Management Services and Mr. Peter Ramil Reyes of DENR GSD.
District Cooling Mission in Doha, Qatar (February 18-22, 2016)
Chiller room of the IDCP-The Pearl Qatar (L-R: Engr. Gerardo Parco, World Bank; Engr. Rodrigo Ella,
Qatar Cool, Mr. Israel Helios Inocencio, DENR; Engr. Sanjay Ruly, Qatar Cool, Mr. Jo-Rex Camba,
DENR, and Engr. Emmanuel David, DENR)
130
Regional EAP ODS Workshop in Bali, Indonesia (February 24-26, 2016)
DENR Delegates: Asec. Rommel R. Abesamis (second from left), Ms. Michico Venus A. Navaluna,
Deputy Project Director of the PCEEP (fifth from left) and Engr. Harold Gonzales of HPMP
(sixth from left.
District Cooling for Efficient Energy Workshop in Medellin, Colombia (June 9-10, 2016)
(L-R): DENR delegates together with the World Bank representatives. Engr. Gerardo Parco, PCEEP Task
Team Leader, Ms. Consolacion Crisostomo, DENR-EMB-PPPDD and Ms. Michico Venus A. Navaluna,
PCEEP Deputy Project Director (fourth from Left)
131
107th Annual Conference and Trade Show of International District Energy Association (IDEA), St.
Paul, Minnesota, USA (June 20-23, 2016)
(L-R): The DENR delegation is composed of: Asec. Rommel R. Abesamis (Head of the DENR
Delegation), Mr. Eddie Abugan of DENR-FASPS (Project Preparation Division), Mr. Inocencio Castillo
of DENR-FMS (Budget Division) and Ms. Michico Venus A. Navaluna, PCEEP Deputy Project Director.
