Designing a National Policy Framework for Thailand's NAMAs
Criteria/Selection of CO2 Countermeasures
In the analyses of CO2 countermeasures (CMs) for Thailand's NAMAs, the abatement costs of selected countermeasures from the national policies and plans, including their economic feasibility, were estimated. The selected countermeasures with appropriate abatement costs were proposed as measures for Thailand's NAMAs (see Fig. 6.7). The proposed countermeasures for Thailand's NAMAs were also assessed for their economic feasibility.
Domestically vs. Internationally Supported NAMAs
The CO2 countermeasures (CMs) obtained from the AIM/Enduse analyses can be classified into two types:
1. Domestic NAMAs performed voluntarily by the Thai government, sinceCO2 abatement costs are not excessive and the CO2 CMs could utilise domestic technologies and know-how
2. Internationally supported NAMAs which have high abatement costs and need support, technology transfer, know-how and capacity building from developed countries
Table 6.2 Internal rates of return (IRR) of CO2 CMs in renewable power generation
Note: Thailand implemented incentives for renewable electricity generation in its 'adder' scheme in 2008 and 'feed-in Tariff' scheme for solar PV in 2012
Economic Assessment of Domestic and Internationally Supported NAMAs
In addition to the incremental abatement costs of CO2 countermeasures, the internal rate of return (IRR) of each identified CO2 CM has been analysed. Table 6.2 presents the IRRs of CO2 CMs for renewable power generation. The CO2 CMs with high incremental abatement costs tend to have low IRRs, such as the IRRs of wind and solar power without incentives or 'adders' of only 1.5 % and -5.5 %, respectively. When the adders are taken into account, the IRRs of wind and solar power increase to 10.8 % and 9.0 %, respectively. Therefore, both wind and solar power should be considered as internationally supported NAMAs and since need international support to promote the nationwide use of such technologies as CO2 countermeasures.
On the other hand, renewables powered by biogas, small hydro and biomass have low incremental abatement costs of 0.02, 0.69 and 2.67 US$/t-CO2, respectively. In addition to incremental abatement costs, their IRRs without adders are 8.8 %, 5.4 % and 4.0 %, respectively. When 2011 adders are taken into account, their IRRs increase to 14.0 %, 11.7 % and 11.3 %, respectively (see Table 6.2). These IRRs are sufficient and result in financial viability for the renewable power producers in Thailand. Therefore, biogas, small hydro, and biomass power must be classified as domestic NAMAs in Thailand.
For the waste-to-energy sector, from the IRR point of view the MSW of local landfill technology is the best CO2 countermeasure. However, the identified four MSW technologies show negative IRRs. The IRRs without 2011 adders for MSW-Local landfill, MSW-INC, MSW-BD and MSW-Controlled landfill are-1.3 %, -4.5 %, -6.0 % and -8.0 %, respectively (see Table 6.3). The
corresponding incremental abatement costs are 32.85, 140.63, 164.73 and 395.32 US$/t-CO2, respectively. When adders were taken into account, their IRRs increase to 11.0 %, 9.0 %, 9.0 % and 10.0 % for MSW-Local landfill, MSW-INC, MSW-BD and MSW-Controlled landfill, respectively. Therefore, all CO2 countermeasures in
Table 6.3 Internal rates of return (IRR) of CO2 CMs in the waste-to-energy sector
the waste-to-energy sector will be considered as internationally supported NAMAs since they need financial incentives, technology transfers and capacity building.
For energy efficiency (EE) countermeasures, the payback periods of EE lighting, EE cooling and EE motors in industry were calculated (see Table 6.4). It was found that payback periods of the proposed countermeasures for EE NAMAs in industry are satisfactory. Their short payback periods for business investment are only 3.0–3.5 years. These results are consistent with the stakeholder consultation.