- 6 -

# **III. THE PROGRAM TO BE EVALUATED AND OUR DATA**

15. The current impact evaluation focuses on the first phase of the CFL bulb distribution program, implemented in 2009. In collaboration with EEPCO, the electricity consumption data were collected in Addis Ababa’s Bole-Kazanchis Service Area. This service center covers 13,000 customers in total; about 3,500 customers benefited from the program and received CFL bulbs (most exchanged four, as mentioned above).

16. In our sample, 2,000 customers were randomly selected from a group of CFL beneficiaries (i.e., treatment group). Another 2,000 customers were also randomly selected from a group of customers who did not benefit from the program (i.e., control group). Each customer’s monthly energy consumption and bill data were collected from January 2007 to August 2012. The sample period was intended to cover several years prior to and following implementation of the program, so that the program impact could be clearly distinguished from the trend component of the electricity demand. In our sample, 60 percent of beneficiaries received CFL bulbs in June 2009, and the rest received them in July 2009. The lengthy follow-up period allows for examination of the long-term effect of the program on people’s energy use.

17. According to engineering calculations, it is estimated that about 7.2 MW of energy could be saved by the first CFL program (Table 2). The differentials between old incandescent bulbs and new, efficient CFLs are 29W to 80W. Assuming that everything else remains constant, in theory, the demand for electricity would drop by 7.2 MW immediately after implementation of the program. This represents approximately 1 percent of EEPCO’s installed capacity. Recall that the first phase was implemented as a pilot and scaled up in the second and third phases. Under the same assumptions, the second phase is expected to reduce energy consumption by as much as 90 MW. This would be equivalent to nearly 10 percent of the total power generation capacity in Ethiopia in 2009.

18. It may appear that this initiative would contribute significantly to energy conservation. However, its actual impact remains to be examined further. At first glance, electricity consumption indeed dropped among beneficiaries of the program (Figure 3). But consumption by non-beneficiaries also dropped following its implementation. Thus, the program’s net impact remains questionable. Moreover, statistics also suggest that, in spite of the program, demand for electricity has been increasing over time, a fact that must also be taken into account. It is likely that demand for electricity tends to increase and become diversified as the economy grows. This is because current levels of consumption are very low and the demand is for primitive purposes. This raises the question as to whether the shortterm impact of this type of initiative could be different from its long-term impact.

19. Figure 3 also indicates that levels of electricity consumption among the treatment group (i.e., program beneficiaries) are systematically different from those of the control group (i.e., non-beneficiaries). Thus, the problem of self-selection must be taken into account in the program’s evaluation. Ultimately, the voluntary CFL bulb distribution program benefited the