EE Governance...key findings on EE policies by International Energy Agency

Here I would like to share some information and my personal views  on the development of EE governance in Malaysia based on the presentation by Mr. Robert Tromop, Head of Energy Efficiency Unit in the International Energy Agency at IGEM 2012, KLCC. 

I believe he has the right credentials to speak about the given topic since he informed us that he personally invited by the Secretary General of the ministry to have have that special session at IGEM 2012 to talk about EE policies and governance for countries. 

Among the participants in the workshop by Mr. Tromop were the Secretary General of the ministry and other officers from related organizations  such as Energy Commission, SEDA  Malaysia, TNB, SIRIM, MAESCO, some universities and etc.

I was a very interesting session when Mr. Tromop shared findings from studies by IEA for may years and at many countries on EE policies and gave his views openly and independently especially when he answered questions and responded to remarks from the audience. 

With Robert Tromop, Head of  EE Unit, IEA at  IGEM 2012 KLCC

Here I extracted some of his presentation slides which I believe were key areas that need to be given due attention for a successful and sustainable implementation of EE initiatives in Malaysia. 

Most of the slides presented by Mr. Tromop were self explanatory especially for those who have been involved in energy efficiency at various levels and programs. He was again reiterated some key points that many local and international experts pointed out to the government on the governing of EE but yet to receive the much desired responses and productive actions.

EE Governance

The above figure clearly shows what are the key elements to govern EE in any country comprehensively.Are all that so new most of us who were in that workshop ? My answer is NO since what was summarized by Mr. Tromop is not something that has been shared by many other EE experts    for many years in many similar events. On top of that, findings from the National EE Master Plan(NEEMP) Study by local and international EE experts carried out in 2009-2010 indicated almost the same conclusions.

I did ask Mr. Tromop on the top 3 components namely Enabling Frameworks, Institutional Arrangements and Coordination Mechanisms, do we need all of them  and his answer was YES, all of them must be there all the time at the same time to have a really good start. It would be similar to the sub components under the main components as well since they are required to ensure EE implementation could be sustained and leading towards achieving the intended targets for the nation. 

EE Law

Some may argue that why do we need another law for EE. Do we enough  existing law that can be utilized to get what we really want to see in EE development? Yes  we have some laws but the issue here is, is there anyone looking into it and trying hard enough to utilize it or to make it usable for regulate EE implementation? Who is suppose to do that and for the past 20 years, what have achieved with the current law and organizational regulatory setup on energy?

A dedicated EE law has been proven as one of the key policy instruments for a successful and sustainable implementation of EE in many countries. Are we trying to be naive or we are just to arrogant to follow good things that have been proven worked in many economies in the world on how to approach EE for their respective country.

I strongly believe the recent move by the ministry to stop drafting the EE Act was another step that will bring us backward. To make it worst that move was taken without at other plan on how to make a big leap for EE development as an alternative other than as recommended in the Draft NEEMP. To prove that, basically there has been almost ZERO new  development  on the strategic policy and actions on EE for Malaysia in the whole 2012 when most of the time was used by some people in the  policy making side to bicker among themselves about their personal agendas.

Sadly to say that, we saw only much promises and individuals to disrupt the good development in EE  rather than productive actions which are urgently needed strategically that will improve our approach towards EE.

I was involved at various stages of the development of the Draft NEEMP for Malaysia.It started from the early idea to have the NEEMP study in 2008, then the development of the Term of Reference for the study, the study by the consultants appointed and finally reviewing the report submitted  as a member in the technical evaluation committee at the ministry from 2009 until 2010 when I was the   Head of Demand Side Management in Energy Commission.

The progress of the Draft NEEMP has been quite unique to me since it was developed after going through different level of reviews and by different group of people involved in EE in Malaysia and some foreign experts.

Firstly, the consultant appointed by the Ministry in the form of a consortium comprising established EE experts from Malaysia  and  among the leading energy economists and EE technical experts from Japan.

Secondly , another established EE expert from Denmark was appointed for the purpose of having an independent review of the findings and recommendations in the report and to look at key areas and numbers that could be be worth  it to be reviewed to come up with improved plan.

Then finally, in the end of 2010, the reviewed plan was reviewed again by another group of EE experts from APEC under the APEC Peer Review for Energy Efficiency for participated member countries. Details of the findings and recommendations can be accessed at http://www.ieej.or.jp/aperc/PREE/PREE_Malaysia.pdf.

That review by APEC was carried out by another group of EE experts especially from Japan, USA and Singapore.

Energy Commission is now the lead agency for EE in Malaysia as decided and announced by the ministry in one of the EE seminars recently and but until today no one has any idea what does that meant. My understanding is EC is continue what they have been doing for many years with no clear goals and targets at certain time frame.  So, we are now back where we  were before despite there are some practical and achievable  EE initiatives recommended in the draft NEEMP document which do not require additional fund  or new  law  for EE to be introduced. However, to be fair, everyone now will have to wait for EC to prepare and later announce their plan as a lead agency for EE in the country

Several options have been recommended in the draft plan and reviewed few times based on feedback from various parties in order to make it more realistic but at present I cannot see anyone is seriously looking into it. Many  proven mechanisms and practices could be considered to ease the funding burden from the government but require collective efforts and understanding to ensure the  NEEMP implementation will be sustainable but what we need now is the champion at the policy making side to convince the government.

Various engagements have been carried out in the development of Draft NEEMP for Malaysia with key stakeholders in EE but the draft has been asked to be reviewed again due to personal opinions.

Example of countries that have introduced their strategic plans for EE implementation. What is taking Malaysia so long until today?

The final version of the NEEMP is still a confidential document but some of the key findings and recommendations have been presented by the ministry at several  sessions with key stakeholders such as related government ministries and agencies, industry & professional associations, NGOs, consumer groups and etc in 2011.

From what have been shared, key findings and recommendations for NEEMP were not  much different from what have been faced and happened in many other countries when they started to embark on long-term EE initiatives in more sustainable manner.

Something that may be  different compare to them for Malaysia is about the nature of of energy prices which is heavily subsidized and level of authorities on energy that placed at different government entities.

What I could recall from those  presentations  about some of the key barriers for EE in Malaysia are as follows:

• Lack of overall national level plan for energy efficiency that can be referred by all energy using sectors
• Lack of consistency in embarking on the energy efficiency
• Lack of legal and regulatory framework for energy efficiency
• Lack of champion to drive the introduction of strategic energy efficiency  plan
• Low energy prices due to government subsidies
• Lack of sustainable funding sources and financing mechanisms for energy efficiency projects and programs

The above findings is shared by all the three EE expert groups that involved in the development and reviewing the Draft NEEMP.

The failure to have common targets and goals for EE at the national level will lead towards uncoordinated individual  and organizational efforts which may end up in many parties doing the same thing at smaller scales with less or insignificant  impacts to be seen and measured to convince the majority to take part.

Key points on the importance evaluation of impacts from EE programs

Key recommendations in the draft NEEMP are basically as counter measures to overcome the identified barriers and those measures were again, confirmed and very well outlined by Mr. Tromop in his presentation based on findings by IEA on how to govern EE in a country. The draft NEEMP  document is actually a comprehensive outline of the governance of EE in Malaysia. I could not say that is a perfect document but should be comprehensive enough as guide for the country to make  significant change forward in EE. 

There have been some questions and arguments of some of the key numbers especially on the key indicators such as energy saving targets in energy consumption, generation capacity and etc but these number can be reviewed and discussed to come up with numbers that all stakeholders will be comfortable with.

My conclusion is  Malaysia would not be able to get different or better  results from EE initiatives with the way EE has been governing now and this has been a practice for many many years with no clear policy. EE efforts have been implemented mainly on project basis with no clear steps to be taken upon the completion of each project. 

I remember being asked some EE related questions at some public event at international level as a government officer where I would be happy to answer on how many EE projects implemented in Malaysia over the years because we have implemented many indeed. My trouble always when trying answer any EE question on how much Malaysia has achieved from all EE projects that already implemented because I do not  have the answer and I do not think anyone in Malaysia would any definite answer too. Why? It is  simply because no one is accountable for evaluating the impacts of all those EE initiatives and we can get all sorts of numbers from many sources which no one could verify and stand with it.

We need to have the EE Policy and then to be followed by the creation of a Legal and Regulatory Framework for EE implementation with clearly defined national goals and target. This EE policy will serve as a common goal for everyone on what we would like to achieve for our EE efforts in the country.

To do that we also need to have a Centralized Agency for Energy Efficiency which will be fully accountable for EE implementation with required competencies to lead EE industry with their assistance and on -going support measures to all energy using sectors. 

We need to have a well developed Funding and Financial Mechanisms which we have a plenty of options that can be explored, considered and then introduced. 

While having all the above, we need to continue to carry out  capacity building and training programs to produce more EE professionals to support EE  implementation  through on-going  education and awareness programs.

I strongly believe the above 4 areas are key thrusts of implementing EE initiatives for Malaysia as already proven in many countries and again highlighted in the presentation by Mr. Robert Tromop from IEA.