Review of support to greenhouse gas reductions
A review of EEA and Norway Grants support to greenhouse gases reduction projects concludes that the projects are cost efficient and that the support is well targeted and filling a funding gap.
The focus of this review concern reduction of greenhouse gases through energy efficiency and renewable energy measures. The programme approach considers energy saving as the quickest, most efficient and most cost-effective approach for reducing greenhouse gas emissions and improving air quality, in particular in densely populated areas.
Key overall findings
• The effectiveness of the interventions, expressed as percentage reductions of CO2 emissions compared to the baseline, shows a high effectiveness of 56% reductions for energy efficiency in buildings and an even higher effectiveness when this intervention is combined with a change in the heating system.
• The effectiveness, expressed as percentage reductions of energy consumption compared to the baseline, also shows a high effectiveness of 57% reductions for energy efficiency in buildings.
• Most projects have important economic and social impacts as energy costs are reduced and social and health conditions improved for users of energy renovated buildings, mostly in schools and health institutions.
• The projects are cost efficient and strongly aligned with national environmental priorities.
• The contribution addresses a funding gap, and the report recommends continued funding of the area.
• The EEA and Norway Grants programme is addressing several objectives of which CO2 reductions is only one. The reduction costs therefore are relatively high compared to other CO2 reduction interventions.
• The close involvement of the beneficiary countries in deciding the priorities of the grant programme has ensured strong alignment with national priorities in the national energy and climate change policy.
• A more focused, simplified and well-tailored uniform way of documenting the expected and achieved sustainability effect in a future round of the programme could improve future reviews/evaluations of these aspects.