This handbook serves as a guide to deploying battery energy storage technologies, specifically for distributed energy resources and flexibility resources. Battery energy storage technology is the most promising, rapidly developed technology as it provides higher efficiency and ease of control. With energy transition through decarbonization and decentralization, energy storage plays a significant role to enhance grid efficiency by alleviating volatility from demand and supply. Energy storage also contributes to the grid integration of renewable energy and promotion of microgrid.
The Clean Energy Financing Partnership Facility (CEFPF or the Facility) was established by the Asian Development Bank (ADB) in April 2007, to assist developing member countries (DMCs) improve energy security and transit to low-carbon use through cost-effective investments, particularly in technologies that result in greenhouse gas (GHG) mitigation (Appendix 1). CEFPF is composed of the Clean Energy Fund (CEF), the Asian Clean Energy Fund (ACEF), the Carbon Capture and Storage Fund (CCSF) and the Canadian Climate Fund for the Private Sector in Asia (CFPS). The Facility contributes to the energy sector in achieving the scaled up ADB's annual target set in September 2015, ADB pledged to double its annual climate financing to $6 billion by 2020, with $4 billion for climate mitigation and $2 billion for climate adaptation. The energy sector aims to contribute about $3 billion to climate mitigation. The overall implementation progress and operational results of CEFPF from 01 January to 31 December 2017, measured against the design and monitoring framework (DMF), are provided in this 2017 Annual Report. The DMF is attached as Appendix 2.
The annual portfolio performance report (APPR) is a Management report that details the state of the sovereign and nonsovereign portfolios of the Asian Development Bank (ADB) in 2017. It presents a snapshot of ADB's operating performance in 2017, analyzes portfolio composition and trends, and identifies key issues. It serves as a key reference for country portfolio reviews, regional department portfolio reviews, and preparation of country partnership strategies. It outlines the composition of and illustrates trends in the two portfolios by approvals, commitments, disbursements, sector, country, and modality. It presents findings and recommendations on measures to sustain and improve quality and effectiveness of the portfolio for delivering results to the clients.
The Multitranche Financing Facility Annual Report 2017 consolidates the key findings on MFF performance that were reported in the annual multitranche financing facility (MFF) progress reports by the five regional departments. As required by the MFF policy paper, 1 these progress reports provide, for all approved MFFs in each country, (i) progress made on each of the physical and nonphysical components; (ii) risks and issues, and actions being taken to mitigate the risks and resolve the issues; (iii) updated design and monitoring frameworks; (iv) the status of compliance with clients' commitments to take or maintain certain undertakings over the term of the MFF; and (v) any changes in circumstance or material facts relating to the investment program or plan.2 The coverage and focus of the MFF annual reports were significantly revised in 2017 and each annual MFF progress report was significantly improved in 2018. This has been done to strictly comply with the reporting requirements of the MFF policy (footnote 1).
During early 2000s, the state of Madhya Pradesh faced formidable difficulties in providing energy supplies needed to spur its poverty reduction and economic development. According to the report and recommendation of the President (RRP), transmission capacity in Madhya Pradesh was inadequate as investment in the transmission network did not match increasing demand.1 The distribution system could not provide reliable supply to consumers, which suffered from severe capacity shortages with distribution losses of about 40%–45% in many areas.
The annual portfolio performance report (APPR) is a Management report that details the state of the sovereign and nonsovereign portfolios of the Asian Development Bank (ADB). It presents a snapshot of ADB's operating performance in 2016, analyzes portfolio composition and trends, and identifies key issues. It concludes with agreed actions to improve portfolio performance.
The Clean Energy Financing Partnership Facility (CEFPF or the Facility) was established by the Asian Development Bank (ADB) in April 2007, to assist developing member countries (DMCs) improve energy security and transit to low-carbon use through cost-effective investments, particularly in technologies that result in greenhouse gas (GHG) mitigation (Appendix 1). CEFPF is composed of the Clean Energy Fund (CEF), the Asian Clean Energy Fund (ACEF), the Carbon Capture and Storage Fund (CCSF) and the Canadian Climate Fund for the Private Sector in Asia (CFPS). The Facility contributes to the energy sector in achieving the scaled up ADB's annual target set in September 2015, ADB pledged to double its annual climate financing to $6 billion by 2020, with $4 billion for climate mitigation and $2 billion for climate adaptation. The energy sector is expected to contribute about $3 billion to climate mitigation. The overall implementation progress and operational results of CEFPF from the period 01 January to 31 December 2016, measured against the design and monitoring framework (DMF) and the 2016 Annual Work Program, is provided in this 2016 Annual Report. The DMF is attached as Appendix 2.
The Asian Development Bank (ADB) introduced the multitranche financing facility (MFF) in 2005 as a new pilot lending modality. The MFF became a regular ADB lending modality in 2008 through the policy paper on Mainstreaming the Multitranche Financing Facility. The MFF policy paper requires ADB's regional departments to prepare a consolidated annual report for all MFFs approved in each country to give the Board of Directors an opportunity to seek early clarification of the performance of each approved MFF. As required by the MFF policy paper, the Multitranche Financing Facility Annual Report, 2016 analyzes MFF performance in terms of (i) the progress made on physical and nonphysical investments, (ii) key implementation risks and issues with mitigative actions undertaken, (iii) the status of compliance with clients' commitments to take or maintain certain undertakings over the term of the MFF, and (iv) key substantive changes to the MFF. The annual report focuses on the MFF performance ratings, and the annual portfolio performance report focuses on general quantitative and comparative analyses on the overall MFF portfolio performance. The information in this annual report is based on the annual MFF progress reports, which provide details on the status of each approved MFF and its individual tranches, prepared by ADB's five regional departments. These progress reports include URLs to each of the project data sheets, which present progress toward outcomes and the delivery of outputs.
1. The provisions set forth in the Board paper establishing the Asia Pacific Disaster Response Fund (APDRF) require a review before replenishment may be sought. Any request for replenishment must be based on such a review, including an assessment of the fund's effectiveness and the appropriateness of its implementation arrangements. 2. The review covers the period from January 2015 to December 2016 in particular detail while also reporting on overall fund performance since its establishment in 2009. An earlier review covering the period April 2009 to December 2014 was circulated to the Asian Development Bank (ADB) Board of Directors in February 2015.2 As of January 2015, a total of eight grants were under implementation or awaiting submission of the audit report. A further eight new grants were approved by the President between January 2015 and December 2016. This review covers fund performance, including fund resources; fund allocations; timeliness; use of funds; liquidation; and auditing. It also assesses the implementation arrangements and grant effectiveness, including the appropriateness of arrangements, the satisfaction of eligibility criteria, the performance of eligibility criteria in targeting resources, the value-added contribution of the grants, and project impact. It concludes with a summary of fund performance and a discussion of opportunities for improvement.
1. The Board of Directors of the Asian Development Bank (ADB) adopted the policy on combating money laundering and the financing of terrorism on 1 April 2003. The policy calls on ADB to (i) assist developing member countries (DMCs) in establishing and implementing effective legal and institutional systems to combat money laundering and the financing of terrorism (ML/FT), (ii) increase collaboration with other international organizations, (iii) strengthen internal controls to safeguard ADB funds, and (iv) upgrade ADB's staff capacity. 2. As required by the policy, a review of its implementation was carried out in 2008, covering activities from April 2003 to March 2008. The ensuing information paper, Review of Enhancing the Asian Development Bank's Role in Combating Money Laundering and the Financing of Terrorism, was circulated to the Board in April 2008.2 The paper also envisaged a periodic review of ADB's work under the policy, taking into account developments in international law and standards as well as demand from its DMCs. 3. A second review of policy implementation was carried out in 2012, covering activities from April 2008 to September 2012. The ensuing information paper, Second Review of Enhancing the Asian Development Bank's Role in Combating Money Laundering and the Financing of Terrorism, was circulated to the Board in November 2012.4 The present paper is on the third review, covering ADB's activities under the policy from October 2012 to June 2017.
Korea has experienced a long-lasting surplus in its current account since the Asian financial crisis in 1998. Recently the surplus has grown wider, with Korea recording a current account surplus of 7.7 percent of GDP in 2015 and 7.0 percent of GDP in 2016. Such a persistent and massive current account surplus in one economy becomes a cause for country-level debates, and accordingly, Korea has been one of the countries suspected as a currency manipulator by the U.S. Treasury Department. The recent empirical studies such as Han and Shin (2016), however, argue that the current account surplus in Korea reflects the consequences of rapid demographical changes in Korea. The surplus is expected to disappear within 25 years as Korea will become one of the most aged economies in the world. Here, we investigate what factors determine the current account balance and the recent current account surplus in Korea.
This report summarizes the investments in clean energy made by the operations departments of the Asian Development Bank (ADB) in 2015, condensing information from project databases and formal reports in an easy-to-reference format. This report was prepared by ADB's Clean Energy Program which provides the cohesive agenda that encompasses and guides ADB's lending and nonlending assistance, initiatives, and plan of action for sustainable growth in Asia and the Pacific.
The petroleum subsidy alone was over RM20 billion, which corresponds to around 10 percent of the total government expenditure. Malaysia's fiscal deficit was 4.5 percent of the gross domestic product (GDP) in 2012, and the government aims to reduce it to 3 percent by 2015 and to 0 percent by 2020. The country has already started implementing policies to phase out the fuel subsidies. In December 2014, the government of Malaysia officially removed subsidy for fuels and introduced the "managed float system." The Special Industrial Tariff for electricity will also be abolished by 2020. If the subsidy in natural gas being sold to electricity companies is removed, electricity price could increase to almost double. However, the Automatic Price Mechanism on transport fuel, such as gasoline, has shifted to the flotation method per 1 December 2014. Currently, the retail price of gasoline and diesel are influenced by market price. Consequently, the price hike in transport fuel after the removal of energy subsidies turned out to be overestimated. According to this study using the 2010 Malaysian Input-Output (I-O) Table, any increase prices in electricity and transport fuel leads to a serious price impacts to other sectors in Malaysia. Looking at other price changes historically, the rise of Production Price Index in Malaysia, such as wholesale price index and consumer price index was around 9 percent and 4.9 percent, respectively, from 2000 to 2012. When compared to these numbers, the price impact of a subsidy removal ranges from 5 percent to 6 percent is considered significant and hence mitigation measures such as phasing out subsidies particularly for the highly impacted sectors are increasingly important. Electricity price hikes largely affect the hotel and restaurant sector relative to other sectors. On the other hand, a transport fuel price hike affects several sectors widely. Our study shows the overall effects of subsidy removal and accordingly we propose two options on the usage of the subsidy budget. First, the Malaysian government can use its energy subsidy budget to reduce the fiscal deficit. This option can lower GDP (1.5 percent lower compared with the reference case), with deficit improvement of 0.9 percentage.
Using a multi-faceted approach, The Asia Foundation identifies key policy barriers to inclusive and green growth, and supports agents of change who individually or by mobilizing others drive necessary reforms and actions. The important role women can and do play in economic growth is an underlying and cross-cutting theme of our work. Fundamental to our success is a political economy approach based on multi-disciplinary analysis and a deep understanding of key actors, power dynamics, and incentives for action. Through strategic, flexible, and evolving interventions, we are committed to creating effective coalitions by liaising with champions for reform, engaging sector-specific "development entrepreneurs" who enjoy the confidence of stakeholders and can drive forward the reform process, and using action research to highlight new issues, find solutions to existing questions, and raise public awareness.
