Paper 04(09), November 2009, Yerevan, Armenia Economic Development and Research Center (EDRC)
Armenia Renewable Resources and Energy Efficiency Fund
Assessment of Heat Supply and Heating Options in MultiApartment Blocks in Armenia Analytic Report on the Sample Household Survey
Yerevan 2009
2 | Page
Assessment of Heat Supply and Heating Options in Multi-Apartment Blocks in Armenia
Research Group Gagik Torosyan, Research Director Varsenik Mnatsakanyan Nune Ohanyan Kristine Sahakyan Varduhi Stepanyan
The survey was carried out in the framework of World Bank Urban Heating Project. “Assessment of Heat Supply and Heating Options in Multi-Apartment Blocks in Armenia� Economic Development and Research Center (EDRC), Yerevan 2009 info@edrc.am, www.edrc.am Armenia Renewable Resources and Energy Efficiency Fund info@r2e2.am, www.r2e2.am
Economic Development and Research Center (EDRC)
Page | 3
TABLE OF CONTENTS Introduction…………………………………………………………………………………………………………..……………… 5 Assessment of the Heating Situation in Multi-Apartment Buildings of Armenia……………………………………………… 7 Chapter 1. Survey on the Assessment of the Heating Situation……………………………………………………………….. 7 Chapter 2. Options Used for Heating and Hot Water Supply…………………………………………………………...……… 9 Chapter 3. Duration of the Heating Season………………………………………………………………………………..……. 13 Chapter 4. Heated Area………………………………………………………………………….…………………………….…... 14 Chapter 5. Average Temperatures…………………………………………………………………………………………..…… 18 Chapter 6. Expenditures on Heating and Hot Water……………………………………………………………………………. 21 Chapter 7. Illnesses due to Inadequate Heating………………………………………………………………………………… 24 Chapter 8. Moving Towards Safe and Clean Heating………………………………………………………………………….... 28 Chapter 9. Satisfaction and Preferences………………………………………………………………………………………….. 29 Chapter 10. Possibilities for Improving Heating and Social Cooperation………………………… …………………………. 33 Annex 1. Construction of the Sample…………………………………………………………………………………………….. 39 Annex 2. Survey sample by urban and rural areas…………………………………………………. …………………………. 43 Analytical Tables…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..... 45
4 | Page
Assessment of Heat Supply and Heating Options in Multi-Apartment Blocks in Armenia
List of Acronyms AHS (2005)
Assessment of the Heating Situation (Survey), 2005
AHS (2007)
Assessment of the Heating Situation (Survey), 2007
AHS (2009)
Assessment of the Heating Situation (Survey), 2009
AMD
Armenian Dram(s)
EDRC
Economic Development and Research Center
HH
A Household living in a multi-apartment block in urban areas of Armenia
MAB
Multi-apartment block (building)
MFE
Ministry of Finance and Economy
NSS
National Statistical Service of the Republic of Armenia
PSU
Primary Sample Unit
R2E2
Renewable Resource and Energy Efficiency
ISLS
Integrated (HH) Survey on Living Standards
Economic Development and Research Center (EDRC)
Page | 5
Introduction High rates of economic growth and development during the recent years in Armenia influence various aspects of the socio-economic life of the population, including the situation with heating and heat supply. Improvement in the situation with heating and heat supply is largely determined by the pace of connecting the HHs to the gas supply system in the country, as well as increased and tightened requirements to environmental and safety issues. Nonetheless, a large portion of the population is still facing serious problems in terms of efficient heating during winter, whereas achievement of clean and efficient heating in the country in terms of safety, economic, environmental and health aspects is a long-term task. In addition, the global financial and economic crisis also affects the situation which negatively affects the lives of Armenian HHs, thus affecting the situation with heating and heat supply. Therefore, it is extremely important to regularly monitor and evaluate the current situation which will allow developing policies and actions targeted at ensuring safety and quality of life for the entire population and, in particular for the poor . This can be achieved only through efficient collaboration of public and private sectors. Armenia and the World Bank signed a credit agreement in July 20, 2005 which aimed at promoting the use of clean, efficient, safe and affordable heating technologies in Armenian urban schools and multi-apartment blocks. Achievement of these goals was intended through: •
Technical assistance,
•
Provision of financing,
•
Heating of schools.
Provision of finance meant provision of credits through participating banks and financial institutions (banks and credit organizations), as well as provision of capital grants to poor HHs for heating purposes. In order to increase the volumes of capital grants to the poor, the Global Partnership for Output Based Aide provided additional grants to the Armenia Renewable Resources and Energy Efficiency Fund (R2E2). The latter extends capital grants to poor HHs living in multiapartment buildings to connect to natural gas supply system, purchase an individual heater or connect the apartment to a local heat-supply source. It is intended to regularly evaluate the efficiency of applying various heat options, the number of those who use affordable and safe heat option, the level of development of management bodies of multi-apartment blocks from the perspective to enter into collective heat supply contracts, etc. That will allow evaluating the progress in heat supply services and implemented projects. Studies and data on heating and heat supply situation in Armenia are very few. Some data on heating options can be found 2001 Census; however, the rapid developments in the country reduce the validity of these data significantly. Some, although very limited, data can be found in the HH Surveys of the NSS. Nonetheless, these Surveys do not target the heating issues and, therefore, cannot be very useful from that perspective. Comprehensive information on heating situation is contained in 2005 study carried out for the Thermo-supply Project Implementation Unit of the Ministry of Finance and Economy by the EDRC1 – “Assessment of Heating Situation” (sample survey of urban HHs). This was followed by the 2007 survey carried out for the R2E2 to monitor and assess the shifts and changes in the situation (Heat Supply and Heating Situation in MABs of Armenia). This, again contained a sample HH Survey, the findings of which were published in the 2007 report on Heat Supply and Heating Situation in MABs of Armenia That was the only study specifically targeted at the heating situation in Armenia. The R2E2, viewing regular studies and monitoring of the situation very important, initiated a new study in 2009 to monitor and evaluate the recent developments in this field- Assessment of Heating Situation 2007. The objective of the Assessment study was to assess the current trends and situation of heating in MABs, possibilities and opportunities to 1
For more information on Economic Development and Research Center, please, visit www.EDRC.am
6 | Page
Assessment of Heat Supply and Heating Options in Multi-Apartment Blocks in Armenia
improve them, as well as assess the capacities of MABs’ management bodies to introduce affordable and quality heat supply services with the cooperation with private companies. To that end, a sample survey was drafted and carried out on heating options in the MABs of Armenia, The present report was developed on the basis of the survey on heating options in the MABs of Armenia, the main objective of which is to summarize and describe the survey findings and data, analyze the current situation with the heating in MABs in urban areas of Armenia, prospects for improvement thereof, as well as opportunities for affordable and adequate heating. The Report consists of the following sections. Chapter 1 includes the technical description of the overall statistical survey on HHs under the Assessment of Heating Situation Survey and some of its findings. Then, the next section analyzes the major sources of energy, types of equipment used for heating and option of hot water supply. The third, fourth and fifth sections analyze the duration of the heating season, areas heated and average temperatures. Section 6 analyzes the costs of heating and hot water, whereas section 7 discusses the illnesses due to heating problems. Section 8 discusses the trends of introducing safe and clean heating options. Section 9 discusses such issues as satisfaction of HHs with heating and their preferences. Section 10 assesses the willingness to borrow loans to improve heating; as well as issues pertaining to energy saving, development of condominiums and cooperation among neighbors. Analytical tables are attached as an annex to the report per sections, along with an annex containing the sampling methodology. CD enclosed contains the survey database (in SPSS environment) for further analyses.
Economic Development and Research Center (EDRC)
Page | 7
Assessment of the Heating Situation in Multi-Apartment Buildings of Armenia Chapter 1. Survey on the Assessment of the Heating Situation The first sample survey of HHs on heating was first carried out in 2005, followed by surveys in 2007 and 2009. The surveys covered the urban HHs living in multi-apartment blocks and refer to the data on heating situation of the current and last winters. The present Report titled The Situation and Option for Heating in Multi-Apartment Blocks Armenia is prepared based on the findings of the 2009 Assessment of the Heating Situation (hereinafter – AHS). The AHS methodology allowed for the compatibility of data with 2005 and 2007 surveys. Conducting the 2009 AHS allowed creating a dynamic series of quantitative data and analyzing changes in the situation and the magnitude thereof. In this context, first, the survey collected information on heating in multiapartment blocks (hereinafter - MAB) the current and past winters, as well as ensured compatibility of data with those of surveys carried out in 2005 and 2007. Thus time series of indicators describing the situation during the past 6 years (2003/04, 2004/05, 2005/06, 2006/07, 2007/08 and 2008/09 winter seasons) were created. Analyses of those time-series and comparisons of different variables allows for better understanding of the occurred shifts and changes in order to assess the situation fully and in-depth. The main tool of the survey was the questionnaire. The latter and the survey methodology were developed by the Economic Development and Research Center. The AHS-2009 Questionnaire was developed based on AHS-2005 and AHS- 2005 questionnaires. The Questionnaire allows collecting such data with the analyses of which the main dependant variables can be estimated depending on various indicators: demographic, educational, employment, welfare, housing conditions, type of building, etc. The AHS-2009 Questionnaire consists of 10 sections with more than 70 questions. The first section contains the questions on HH members, including their socio-demographic characteristics. The second section refers to the type of apartment and building, number of floors, communal conditions, activities of condominiums, relations with neighbors, etc. Sections 3 and 4 cover the aspects of heated area and rooms, duration of heating, temperatures, type of energy and equipment used. Section 5 refers to the assessment of the used heat option and preferences, demand for heating loans, etc. Section 6 refers to the expenditures of the HH that allows estimating the level of consumption expenditures and, thus, assessing poverty. Section 7 covers the situation with various illnesses due to insufficient or low-quality heating. Section 8 covers additional data for assessing the welfare per income groups and types, as well as self-assessment of poverty. Section 9 contains several questions that aimed at assessing energy saving issues, in particular, regarding the quality o window panes and loans to replace them with new ones. At the end, the assessment of interviewers and technical data are summarized. Prior to starting the field works, we first developed modules for interviewers’ trainings and conducted 4 training courses. The field works were carried out in all Marzes of Armenia during June-July 2009. Interviews did not take place in about one quarter of addresses due to refusal or close doors. Refusal rate is quite high in Yerevan. In other urban areas interviews did not take place in about one third of addresses: the main reason was close doors (or not finding the address). This is in line with our past experience in other surveys. Each address, where no
8 | Page
Assessment of Heat Supply and Heating Options in Multi-Apartment Blocks in Armenia
interview took place was replaced with another address from the reserve list constructed on a mirror principle (selected through the same methodology). The surveyed HHs were selected through two-step stratified random choice approach that implies a sequence of certain steps. The sampling methodology is described in details in Annex 1. The applied sampling methodology allows ensuring reliable representation at Yerevan and Marz levels, as well as for total Armenia. The actual size of the sample was 2010 HHs that were included in 201 PSUs spread in almost all urban settlements in Armenia (See Table below and Annex 1). Summary of Survey sample per Marzes Number of Communities
Number of Communities in the Sample
Number of PSU
Sample
Structure of the General Population
Structure of the Sample
Re-weighting coefficients
Yerevan
12
12
70
700
55.2
34.8
1.584
Marzes
47
41
131
1310
44.8
65.2
-
Aragatsotn
3
3
4
40
1.2
2.0
0.605
Ararat
4
4
10
100
3.4
5.0
0.683
Armavir
3
3
11
110
3.8
5.5
0.695
Gegharqunik
5
4
8
80
2.8
4.0
0.702
Lori
8
6
28
280
9.5
13.9
0.681
Kotayq
7
6
28
280
9.7
13.9
0.697
Shirak
3
3
18
180
6.3
9.0
0.703
Syuniq
7
6
15
150
5.0
7.5
0.677
Vayots Dzor
3
3
3
30
1.1
1.5
0.744
Tavush
4
3
6
60
2.0
3.0
0.671
Total
59
53
201
2,010
100
100
-
For the purposes of our survey, the term Household refers only to those (groups of) individuals living in apartments in multi-apartment blocks in towns and cities that have a single budget and mostly live together. The following indicators are used as needed for the analyses of welfare: self-assessment of poverty, interviewer’s assessment, poverty indicators calculated based on consumption aggregate, quintile groups of population per consumption aggregate and HHs belonging to each quintile. Subjective assessment of HH members were used for self-assessment of poverty, as well as the responses to the question whether the actual income of the HH is lower, higher or equals to the minimum required amount of income. Poverty indicators calculated for consumption aggregate were calculated based on actual consumption expenditures of HHs in February, excluding the expenses for durable goods and apartment rent, as well as taking into account the economies of scale and adult equivalence effects. The method does not take into account the possible seasonal fluctuations. However, since our objective was not to assess poverty, but rather, analyses of major variables depending on welfare levels, our approach was adequate and sufficient.
Page | 9
Economic Development and Research Center (EDRC)
Chapter 2. Options Used for Heating and Hot Water Supply Heating and hot water options and energy sources used by HHs in Armenia were dynamically changing during the last years and still continue to do so. That takes place due to a number of factors: high pace of connecting to the natural gas supply system2, increasing welfare of population, higher safety and forest reservation requirements are the most important factors. This section is devoted to the analyses of heating and hot water options and heating equipment used by Armenian HH in multi-apartment blocks during 2008/2009 winter, as well as the trends thereof during the last 6 years. Thus, according to our Survey, almost all HHs in urban multi-apartment blocks heated their apartments (99.1%). The largest share of HHs not heated their apartments was recorded in Lori and Aragatsotn: 4.2% and 3.8% respectively. Figure 1. Trends of using the main sources of energy for heating during the last 6 years, % in the total of all HHs in each year
80.0
2003/2004 Winter 2006/2007 Winter
2004/2005 Winter 2007/2008 Winter 67.5
70.0 60.0
72.5
53.0
50.0 40.0
2005/2006 Winter 2008/2009 Winter
45.2 36.6
33.3
37.0
34.6
30.0
42.5
30.0
30.5
23.9 21.6
20.0
13.1
12.7
10.0
9.8
5.0 3.9
0.0 Electricity
Natural Gaz
Wood
Source: AHS-2009
The major energy source was natural gas. Figure 1 clearly shows that the share of HHs using this type of energy
grew drastically. In 2003/2004, their share was 13.1%, while in 2008/2009 it grew to 72.5%, growing from the previous year by 7.4%. Meanwhile, the share of HHs using electricity and wood is gradually shrinking. If in 2003/2004 almost half of all HHs used wood as main type of energy, only 3.9% did so in 2008/2009. 21.6% use electricity, whereas shares of HHs having centralized heating and other type of heating are very low. Figure 2 represents the Marz breakdown of usage of main energy types. It is apparent that natural gas is the main type in all Marzes. The highest proportion of HHs using natural gas is in Gegharqunik and Shirak Marzes (88.8% and 85% respectively) followed by Lori and Vayots Dzor Marzes (70.4% and 70%). The lowest share of gas usage for heating was recorded in Yerevan and Syuniq. In Syuniq, their share is 40% and is equal to the share of HHs using wood, whilst in Yerevan; it is 41.3% which is explained by higher usage of electricity.
2
As of September 1, 2009, the number of customers connected to the natural gas supply system was 585,164.
10 | Page
Assessment of Heat Supply and Heating Options in Multi-Apartment Blocks in Armenia
Figure 2. Marz breakdown of the use of main energy types for heating in 2008/2009 winter, % in the total for each Marz Natural Gaz 100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0%
3.8 15.4 3.8
2.6
7.5
87.0
88.1
69.2
7.7
Electricity
9.1
4.5
3.5
Wood
4.2 9.9
5.1
Other
73.1 89.5
72.3
1.8
12.0
4.5
11.8
4.7
Not heated
64.7
77.3
23.5
18.2
88.2
20.3
3.1
1.4
12.2
3.9
68.4
72.5
75.6
29.1
21.6
12.2
Source: AHS-2009
According to the Survey, the number of floors in the building, type and ownership do affect the choice of heating option. E.g. in high-rise (10 floors and above) buildings, the share of HHs using electricity is twice as higher as the average for the country and reaches 41.5%. Majority of HHs using wood in Marzes live in 6-8-storey blocks (20%), whilst in Yerevan and total for the country – in block with up to 4 floors (4.3% an 7.6% respectively) (See Annex: Section 1, Table 1.11). During the past six years, the share of HHs using natural gas for heating purposes in the MABs of Armenia increased 5.5 times. The fastest paces of connecting to the gas system were recorded in Ararat, Syuniq and Kotayq Marzes, where the number of HHs using gas for heating in 2008/2009 grew 28.4, 23.1 and 20.3 times respectively as compared to 2003/2004 (See Figure 3). Figure 3. Increases in the number of HHs using natural gas, times compared to 2003/2004 winter 2008/2009 winter 30.0
24.6 21.0
25.0 20.0 15.0
2007/2008 winter
2006/2007 winter
28.4 20.3 19.4 17.2
15.1 14.5 14.1
10.0 5.0 0.0
Source: AHS-2009
5.0 4.9 3.7
23.1 20.3
6.46.16.2 2.3
2.01.81.9
14.3
14.012.9
4.1 4.13.5 1.81.41.6
8.4 5.5 5.2 4.0
Page | 11
Economic Development and Research Center (EDRC)
30% of HHs, in addition to the main or primary heating option, also have an extra or secondary heating option. 22% of all HHs or 70% of those who use a secondary option, use electricity as secondary option. In 2006/2007 winter, mostly HHs using wood as primary heat option used a secondary option (87.9%3), decreasing to 43% in 2008/2009 (See Figure 4). Figure 4. Usage of a secondary heat option in 2008/2009 winter, per types of main heat option, % of HHs in the total for each heat option Electricity
45.0 40.0 35.0 30.0 25.0 20.0 15.0 10.0 5.0 0.0
Natural Gaz
Wood
Liquid Gaz 16.7
1.4 4.1
22.0
All HHs
1.3
1.4
12.7
6.2
11.1
29.0 17.7
16.7
Mostly Wood heated
Using Other Options
16.3
Mostly Electricity- Mostly Gaz -heated heated HHs HHs
Source: AHS-2009
Figure 5 depicts the trends of the usage of main heating equipment during the last 4 years. In the recent years, numbers of HHs using gas oven, wood oven, manufactured or self-made electric equipment is decreasing significantly. The increase in the number of the HHs using individual gas boilers is prominent: during the last 3 years it increased about 5 times. Figure 5. Heat equipment used during the last 4 years, % 2008/2009 Winter
2007/2008 Winter
2006/2007 Winter
2005/2006 Winter
50.0 43.542.7 45.0 39.7 40.0 35.4 35.0 30.0 25.0 20.1 19.4 17.8 20.0 17.1 17.0 17.9 12.5 13.1 15.0 11.5 10.4 11.0 9.9 8.6 7.7 10.0 5.1 7.0 5.8 4.35.7 2.0 3.9 5.0 1.51.4 1.9 1.4 1.31.5 0.0
Source:AHS-2009
3
Source: AHS (2007)
12 | Page
Assessment of Heat Supply and Heating Options in Multi-Apartment Blocks in Armenia
The following equipment was used for heating in 2008/2009 winter: manufactured heaters (43.5%), individual heat boiler (19.4%), manufactured and self-made electric appliances (10-11%). Figure 6 shows the types of equipment in relation income quintiles constructed in accordance with the selfassessment of poverty by HHs, as well as poverty per consumption aggregate. Manufactured das heaters are largely used both by poor and wealthier HHs. As it could be expected, the higher is the income or welfare of a HH, the higher is the number of HHs using individual boilers and the lower is the number of HHs using gas stoves and wood ovens. Figure 6. Use of heating equipment types per quintile groups, % Non-manufactured gaz heater Individual heating boiler Gaz stove Non-manufactured electric appliances Other Wealthy
3.2
42.8
Non-poor 1.2
44.7
Poor 1.8
43.1
Extreamely Poor 1.4
Manufactured gaz heater Central Heating Manufactured electric appliances Wood stove
26.8
Quintile 5
43.9 23.0 3.6
9.9
22.5
8.4
Quintile 3
45.1
19.7
Quintile 2 1.6
47.2
Quintile 1 3.4
45.2
25.2 10.6 7.7
11.7
7.9 8.2 11.1 13.9
8.5 19.7
3.6
16.3
9.1
17.7
32.5
43.1
10.2
14.3
8.5
38.1
Quintile 4 1.4
5.3 2.1
10.8
11.4
12.7 9.2 7.4
1.4
7.5 2.8 12.5
12.1
3.4 6.1 1.8
12.4
9.3
Source: AHS-2009
The main option for hot water used by HHs in 2008/2009, like in the previous two years, is the gas heater (used by 28.7% of HHs). The next most frequent equipment is the gas stove (19.1%) and individual boilers ¼18.4%¤ which gained large usage during the last years. The share of HHs using self-made electric heaters and ovens has decreased drastically (See Figure 7). 33.8% of HHs using natural gas and 40% of HHs having centralized heat supply or local collective heat supply also get hot water through gas heaters. Figure 7. Options used for hot water (including bathing), % 2008/2009 Winter
2007/2008 Winter
2006/2007 Winter
2005/2006 Winter
35.0 30.0 28.7 28.1 25.0 25.0 22.5 20.0 15.0 10.0
25.1 21.8
6.9 7.0 4.6 4.5
5.0
4.0 5.4 1.51.9
0.0 Gaz water heater Electric water tank, boiler
Source: AHS-2009
18.4 16.6
17.1 16.4 14.2 13.9 13.6 12.3
Electric water Not-manufacture heater, (gaiser electric water type) heater
Furance
4.7
19.1 19.4 16.7
3.6
Individual heating boiler
Gaz stove
Page | 13
Economic Development and Research Center (EDRC)
Chapter 3. Duration of the Heating Season The duration of the heating season 2008-2009 was shorter than in 2006-2007 mostly due to the weather. According to the survey data, for 57% of HHs in Armenia the heating season is 4-5 months, while for 18% - 6 months and more. Figure 8. Distribution of HHs for heating season duration, % of the total for each settlement Less than 3 months 100
6 monthsand more
4.7
17.6
90
4-5 months
34.5
80 70
54.6
60
57.6
50 40
59.5
30 20
40.7 24.8
10
6.0
Armenia
Yerevan
Marzes
Source: AHS-2009
The average heating season was relatively longer in Marzes, where 34.4% of HHs heated their apartments for more than 6 months. The shortest duration was recorded in Yerevan, where only 4.7% of HHs heated their apartments for 6 months and above (See Figure 8). Heating season was relatively long in Gegharkuniq, Shirak and Syuniq Marzes: 76.4%, 56.7% and 55.9% of HHs respectively heated their apartments for 6 months and longer. At the same time, it is apparent from the findings that the share of HHs that heated for up to 3 months is lower as compared to those in Yerevan (See Figure 9). Figure 9. Distribution of HHs for heating season duration, % of the total of each Marz 6 months and more 100% 80%
5.9
37.4
60%
20%
1.3
43.5 91.2
40%
84.2
51.6
Source: AHS-2009
2.9
14.3
23.6
10.5
less than 3 months 9.5
19.9 56.7
76.4
56.5
0%
4-5 months
55.9 85.7
74.0
6.1
20.0
42.5
40.2
0.8
3.9
4.8
75.0
5.0
14 | Page
Assessment of Heat Supply and Heating Options in Multi-Apartment Blocks in Armenia
Figure 10 depicts the duration of the heating season in HHs depending on the used energy source. It is visible that the type of energy used for heating also affects the duration of heating season. E. g. the season is shorter smong those who use electricity as compared to those HHs that use other types of energy. Figure 10. Duration of heating season in HHs per type of energy used, % in the total for each type of energy Electricity
Natural Gaz
Wood
Other
70 57.1
60
57.1
60.8 52.6
50 40
35.1
30
31.6 22.7
20
20.2
13.9 15.8
25.3
7.8
10 0 Less than 3 months
4-5 months
6 monthsand more
Source: AHS-2009
Figure 11 shows the duration of the heating season depending on the self-assessment of the poverty by each HH. Heating season is longer for HHs that consider themselves wealthy as compared to others, however, the difference is not significant. 20.7% of HHs considering themselves waelthy heated their apartments for 6 months and above in contrast to 37.7% in 2006/2007∗. Figure 11. Duration of heating season per self-assessment of wealth, % in the total for each group Extrimely Poor
70 60
52.0
Poor
Not-Poor
57.2 56.1
Wealthy
62.0
50 40 30
28.0 28.5
24.2
19.2 20.7
17.4
20
13.3
13.1
10 0 Less than 3 months Source: AHS-2009
∗
Source: AHS (2007)
4-5 months
6 monthsand more
Page | 15
Economic Development and Research Center (EDRC)
Chapter 4. Heated Area According to the Survey findings, the number of HHs heated their entire apartment in 2008/2009 almost doubled and reached 63.7%. Meanwhile, the number of HHs who do not heat apartments decreased by 83% reaching 0.9%. Figure 12 displays the number of heated rooms per apartments. 36% of HHs living in 2-room apartments heated only 1 room, 28.2% - in 3-room apartments and 24.7% - in apartments with 4 rooms and more. 45.3% of HHs living in apartments with 4 and more rooms heated the entire apartment. Figure 12. Number of heated rooms per total number of rooms, % in each type of apartment 1 room heated 70
2 rooms heated
63.5
3 rooms heated
4 and more rooms heated
57.0
60 50 40
45.3 36.0 28.2
30 20
40.3 30.8
24.7 13.8
12.6
23.7
16.8
10
4.3
0 2-room apartments
3-room apartments
4 and more room apartments
Total heated apartments
Source: AHS-2009
Figure 13 shows the levels of heating in 2008/2009 and 2007/2008 in terms of types of rooms heated. Almost all HHs heated the living room, with a clear trend of increasing from the previous year. In 2008/2009, the share of such households reached 95.7% as compared to 87% in the previous year. In the majority of cases, bathroom/toilettes, corridors, cabinets and kitchens are not heated. However, in comparison to previous years, the share of those that heat these rooms has increased. Only 30% of bedrooms, 33.3% of corrdiors and cabinets and 30.9% of kitchens were not heated in 2008/2009 winter. The share of those not heating toillettes/bathrooms has decreased, however staying quiute high. 63.7% of bathrooms/toillettes were not heated both the previous and current years. Figure 13. Heated rooms per types of rooms during 2008/2009 and 2007/2008 winters, % in the total for each type 120 100
Heated in 2008/2009 95.7
Heated in 2007/2008
Not heated in 2007/2008, nor in 2008/2009
87.0
80
69.4 68.8
60 40
30.0
20
66.4
62.8 33.3
67.2 65.2
33.3
68.7 65.6
30.9
4.1
0 Living room Source: AHS-2009
Corridor/hall
Kitchen
63.7 35.4
34.0
16 | Page
Assessment of Heat Supply and Heating Options in Multi-Apartment Blocks in Armenia
Figure 14 represents the level of complete heating of apartments broken down per main heating option. It is worth noting, that irrespective of the type of energy used, the numbers of un-heated apartments has decreased, while the number of entirely heated apartments has increased. E.g. overwhelming majority of HHs using natural gas heated the whole apartment in 2008/2009, as compared to 47.2%4 in 2006/2007. 64.1% of HHs using wood heat only some part of the apartment and 28.9% of those using electricity do so. It is worth noting that, unlike previous years, the share of HHs entirely heating their apartments is higher in Yerevan than in Marzes. Figure 14. Levels of apartment heating per type of energy used, % Heated entirely Wood
Heated partially
Not heated 64.1
35.9
Natural Gaz
28.9
71.1
Electricity
53.2
46.8
Marzes Yerevan
1.2
42.6
56.2
Armenia
0.9
35.4
63.7 0.0
0.5
29.6
69.9
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1.0
Source: AHS-2009
68.7% of HHs heated their kitchens during 2008/2009. This indicator, however, varies significantly depending on the type of energy used: 79.6% of those who use natural gas, 52% of those using wood and 37% of those using electricity did so (See Figure 15). Figure 15. Kitchens heated per type of energy used, % Kitchen heated Wood
52.0
48.0
Natural Gaz
79.6
Electricity
20.4
37.0
Marzes
63.0 33.3
66.7
Yerevan
70.4
Armenia
29.6
68.7 0.0
Source: AHS-2009
4
Kitchen not heated
Source: AHS (2007)
0.2
31.3 0.4
0.6
0.8
1.0
Page | 17
Economic Development and Research Center (EDRC)
The main energy type used by HHs that heated the bathroom and the toillette was natural gas, meanwhile, the number of HHs using wood and, especially, electricity doing so is very low: 18.2% and 9.1% respectively (See Figure 16). Figure 16. Bathrooms heated per type of energy used, % Toilette/bathroom heated Wood
Toilette/bathroom not heated
18.2
Natural Gaz
81.8 44.3
Electricity
55.7
9.1
90.9
Marzes
36.4
63.6
Yerevan
34.6
65.4
Armenia
35.4
64.6
0.0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1.0
Source: AHS-2009
Having children or elderly in the HH affects the levels of heating in the apartment. 60% of HHs with elderly heated the entire apartment with 66% of HHs without elderly having done so. Meanwhile, the levels of heating were higher in HHs with 2 or more elderly. This phenomenon is explained by the large number of single elderly living alone. The levels of heating are relatively higher in HHs with children (67% of such HHs heated the entire apartment, while only 62% of those without children do so). This indicator goes up in HHs with two children (See Figure 17). Figure 17. Heating levels depending on having children and elderly HH members, % Heated entirely
Heated partially
2 and more elderly
Not heated 38.9
61.1
1 elderly
58.9
39.7
1.5
HHs with elderly
59.5
39.5
1.0
No elderly
33.4
65.8
3 and more children
34.5
63.8
2 children
0.8 1.7
31.3
68.7
1 child
66.1
33.4
0.5
HHs with children
66.8
32.8
0.4
No children 0.0 Source: AHS-2009
36.9
62.0 0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1.1 1.0
18 | Page
Assessment of Heat Supply and Heating Options in Multi-Apartment Blocks in Armenia
The level of welfare is an important determinant in the level of heating of the apartment. Figure 18 represents the comparison of the heating levels and self-assessment of poverty. 81.1% of HHs considering themselves wealthy heated the entire apartment, and only 40% of those who considered themselves as extremely poor. In 2008/2009, 6.7% of HHs ranked themselves extremely poor did not heat the apartment at all as compared to 21.3%5 in 2006/2007: Figure 18. Comparison of the heating levels and poverty self-assessments, % Heated entirely
Heated partially
Wealthy
Not heated 18.9
81.1
Not poor
29.6
69.9
Poor
53.3
45.5
Extremely Poor
1.2
53.3
40.0 0.0
0.5
0.2
0.4
0.6
6.7 0.8
1.0
Source: AHS-2009
Chapter 5. Average Temperatures The average temperatures during the heating season depend on the type equipment and option of heating, as well as welfare and whether there are children/elderly in the HH. According to the Survey, the average temperature in multi-apartment blocks January 2009 was 17.3 degrees as compared to 15.9 degrees in 2007. Average temperatures in Marzes and Yerevan were almost similar – 17.1 and 17.7 degrees. Figure 19 shows that the average temperature in January was the highest in gas-heated HHs (18 degrees), while, in wood-heated and electricity heated apartments, it was the same – 16.2 degrees. In HHs that use other sources of energy, the average temperature was considerably lower – 12.9 degrees. Figure 19. Average temperatures per settlements and main heating option used, Co 19
17.3
17.1 17.7
17
18.0 16.2
16.2
15
12.9
13 11 7.8
9 7 5 Armenia Source: AHS-2009 5
Source: AHS (2007)
Yerevan
Marzes
Electricity Natural Gaz
Wood
Other
Not heated
Page | 19
Economic Development and Research Center (EDRC)
Figure 20 shows the distribution of HHs per groups of average temperatures. The HHs are broken down into the following groups: very cold (below 7Co), cold (8-14Co), not warm, mostly cold (15-18Co), warm (19-21Co) and very warm (above 21Co). According to the Survey, apartments of 13.6% of Armenian HHs were cold, 44.4% mostly cold, 37.2% - warm and 3.9% - very warm. As compared to 2007, the share of HHs with very cold apartments decreased by 2% in 2009, while the share of HH with warm apartments increased by 9.8%6. HHs with very cold apartments decreased from 5.2%7 in 2007 to 0.9% in 2009. The highest share of HHs with warm apartments was recorded in Yerevan (41.9%), while in Marzes – not warm apartments (50.1%). The picture changes depending on the type of energy used for heating. 20% of HHs using electricity recorded average temperatures of below 14 degrees (as compared to 48% in 2007), while 14% of them recorded 19 degrees and above (as compared to 11% in 2007). 51% of HHs with natural gas heating had 19 degrees and above (as compared to 41.1% in 2007). For 62% of wood-heated apartments, average temperatures were in the range of 15-18 degrees. Figure 20. Distribution of HHs per average temperature groups per Marzes depending on the heat option, % Less than 7 C° 100% 80%
3.9
8-14 C° 2.1
5.4
37.2
15-18 C°
31.6
41.9
66.0 44.4
39.7
15.2
11.1 16.7
62.0
33.3
46.2
50.0 37.7
20% 0%
22 C° and more
5.1
13.3
60% 40%
19-21 C°
27.8 20.3
13.6
13
14.4
20.0
10.3
Armenia
Yerevan
marzes
Electricity
Natural gaz
11.1
Wood
Other
Source: AHS-2009
Average temperatures vary significantly during day and night hours. Figure 21 shows the differences in temperatures in living rooms and bedrooms during day and night hours. Figure 21. Day and night temperatures in living rooms and bedrooms, average temperature groups, % Less than 7C° 100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0%
12.5
5.5
8- 14C° 0.6 8.7
20.2
38.5
41.3
39.8
38.8
43.8 46.5
44.9 28.9 2.8
15- 18C° 0.2 1.6 10.0 18.3
1.6
2.9
39.1 2.1
46.4 4.9
19- 21C° 2.0 16.0
Above 22C° 1.6 6.5 15.1 40.1
39.3
40.4 2.3
46.5
48.9 34.2 4.5
2.6
Living room Living room Bedroom 1 Bedroom 1 Bedroom 2 Bedroom 2 Bedroom 3 Bedroom 3 (day) (night) (day) (night) (day) (night) (day) (night) Source: AHS-2009 6
Source: AHS (2007)
20 | Page
Assessment of Heat Supply and Heating Options in Multi-Apartment Blocks in Armenia
It is warm during the day in 44.9% of living rooms, whilst only in 28.9% - during nights. It is worth noting that, during nighttime, it is mostly cold in bedrooms. Figure 22 shows the average temperatures in apartments depending whether there are children/elderly in the HH. It can be seen that average temperatures are higher in HHs with children. Meanwhile, in HHs with elderly, temperatures are lower especially when elderly people live alone. This is explained by the fact that elderly have lower income. Figure 22. Average temperatures depending on having children or elderly, Co 19 18 17
17.9
18.0
17.8
17.3
17.7
17.4
16
17.4
17.0
16.9
15 14 No children
HHs with children
1 child
2 children
3 and more children
No elderly HHs with elderly
1 elderly
2 and more elderly
Source: AHS-2009
Average temperatures largely depend on the heating equipment. Figure 23 shows the average temperatures depending on the type of equipment used. The highest temperatures are recorded in HHs with individual heat boilers, followed by centralized and local collective heat supply HHs, whereas the lowest – in HHs that use gas stoves or wood ovens. Figure 23. Average temperatures per heating equipment type, Co 21 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12
20.3 19.8
17.9
17.3
16.7 15.4
1
2
3
4
16.1
16.3
5
6
1-Non-manufactured gaz heater 2-Manufactured gaz heater 3-Individual heating boiler 4-Gaz stove 5-Non-manufactured electric appliances 6-Manufactured electric appliances 7-Centraized Heating and Local-collective heating boiler 8-Wood stove 9-Other
Source: AHS-2009
15.9
7
8
9
Page | 21
Economic Development and Research Center (EDRC)
Figure 24 below depicts the average temperatures in apartments in 2008/2009 depending on the income quintiles calculated based on the consumption aggregate. It is apparent that average temperatures increase along with increasing welfare. E.g. average temperatures equaled 15.8 degrees in the 1st quintile and 18.5 degrees in the 5th quintile. Figure 24. Average temperatures per quintiles, Co 19 18 17
17.6
16.9
18.5
18.0
15.8
16 15 14 13 12 Quintile 1
Quintile 2
Quintile 3
Quintile 4
Quintile 5
Source: AHS-2009
Chapter 6. Expenditures on Heating and Hot Water According to the Survey, average expenditures on heating in Armenia in 2008/2009 totaled AMD 18,260 increasing from AMD 15,150 in 2006/2007. Heating costed on average AMD 20,667 in Yerevan and AMD 15,263 - in Marzes. The mode of expenses on heating in Yerevan was AMD 20,000, while the mode for all Marzes – AMD 15,000 (the latter represents an increase of monthly mode expenses from 2007 in amount of AMD 5,0007). Figure 25 illustrates average monthly expenditures by areas and sources of energy. Figure 25. Average monthly expenditures on heating and hot water in Armenia, Yerevan and Marzes broken down per sources of energy, AMD 22,000 20,000 18,000 16,000 14,000 12,000 10,000 8,000 6,000 4,000 2,000 0
Mean Median Mode 20,667 20,000 20,000 20,00019,244 20,000 18,260 18,000 17,000 16,429 15,263 15,000 15,000 12,701 10,000
10,253
9,728
2,000
Armenia
Yerevan
Marzes
Electricity
Natural Gaz
Wood
Other
Source: AHS-2009
Total expenses on heating are the highest in HHs using natural gas: AMD 19,244 (the mode was AMD 20,000). Average monthly expenditures of electricity-heated HHs equaled AMD 16,429, while for wood-heated
7
Source: AHS (2007)
22 | Page
Assessment of Heat Supply and Heating Options in Multi-Apartment Blocks in Armenia
apartments – AMD 12,700. The most frequently recorded average monthly expenditure amount among electricity- and gas-heated apartments was AMD 20,000, while for wood-heated apartments – AMD 10,000. It is worth noting that the picture has changed since 2007: the highest average expenditures then were recorded in electricity-heated apartments (AMD 16,878), whereas expenses of gas- and wood-heated apartments were almost similar (AMD 14635 and AMD 13148): modes were respectively AMD 20,000, AMD 15,000 AMD 10,000. In 2008/2009 winter, 30.8% of Armenian HHs spent on heating more than AMD 20,000 per month as compared to 16.8% in 2006/2007 winter. In particular, expenses were above AMD 20,000 for HHs that used electricity, gas and wood (21.7%, 35% and 11.5% of HHs in each group, as well as 12.5% of HHs using other types of energy) (See Figure 26). Figure 26. Distribution of HHs per monthly expenditure groups (average monthly expenditures on heating and hot water), % Less than AMD 5,000
AMD 5001-10000
100% 30.8
80%
21.7
11.5 35.0
21.7
60%
23.1 21.7
40%
20.6
20%
19.9
AMD 10001-15000
11.5
18.8
24.4 25.0
24.3 20.1
35.9
18.7
27.1
5.6
7.8
16.8 3.8
16.7
Armenia
Electricity
Natural Gaz
Wood
0%
12.5
25.0 Other
Source: AHS-2009
It is worth noting that the number of HHs with less than AMD 5,000 expenss on heating decreased since 2007 by 55%, meanwhile, the number of HHs spending on average above AMD 20,000 per month and/or using natural gas for heating has increased 3 times. There is an apparent correlation between income quintiles and average monthly expenses on heating and hot water, presented in Figure 27. HHs in Quintile 1 spend on average monthly AMD 14,276, in Quintile 2 - AMD 15,627, in Quintile 3 – AMD 18,807, in Quintile 4 –AMD 19,384, whereas in Quintile 5 – AMD 21,403. Figure 27. Average monthly expenditures on heating and hot water broken down per quintiles, AMD 23,000 21,000 19,000 17,000 15,000 13,000 11,000 9,000 7,000 5,000
21,403
14,276
Quintile 1 Source: AHS-2009
18,807
19,384
Quintile 3
Quintile 4
15,627
Quintile 2
Quintile 5
Page | 23
Economic Development and Research Center (EDRC)
Figure 28 represents the levels of heating in apartments and variation of expenditures in groups of HHs with different average temperatures. One can notice that on average the variation in expenditures equals AMD 4,500. The picture was different in 2007: expenses in HHs with very cold, cold or warm apartments did not vary that much – by maximum of AMD 2,500. This speaks about the fact that the heating options used improved to a certain extent. Figure 28. Average monthly expenditures on heating and hot water broken down per groups of HHs that heat partially or entirely and temperature groups, AMD 32,000 28,000
26,107 21,972
24,000 20,000
18,260
20,061
16,443
16,000 12,000
16,377
14,739
15,156
12,119
21,455
19,784
7,313
8,000 4,000
Source: AHS-2009
Figure 29 analyzes the temperatures depending on the type of energy used for heating. It cane be seen that in different temperature groups, monthly expenses of HHs using electricity of natural gas do not vary significantly. The exceptions are very warm apartments where monthly expenses of electricity-heated apartments exceed those of gas-heated apartments by more than AMD 20,000. HHs with high temperatures (19-21 degrees) spend on average AMD 22,441 if heat with electricity, AMD 22, 161 if heat with natural gas and AMD 10,924 – if heating with wood. Figure 29. Average monthly expenditures on heating and hot water broken down per heat option and average temperatures, AMD Armenia 50,000 46,000 42,000 38,000 34,000 30,000 26,000 22,000 18,000 14,000 10,000 6,000 2,000
Electricity
Natural Gaz
Wood
21,972 22,441 16,443
12,11912,28712,809 9,402
7,313 7,288 4,012 3,000 Very cold
Source: AHS-2009
Cold
16,283 16,765 14,273
Not warm
47,564
26,107 22,161
25,704 18,000
10,924
Warm
Very warm
24 | Page
Assessment of Heat Supply and Heating Options in Multi-Apartment Blocks in Armenia
Figure 30 shows the average expenses on heating broken down for types of heating equipment and temperature groups. It becomes obvious that maintaining very high temperatures by manufactured electric heat appliances requires significantly high exppenses. Figure 30. Average monthly expenditures on heating and hot water broken down per heat appliance types and average temperatures, AMD Non-manufactured gaz heater individual heating boiler Manufactured electric appliances wood stove 66000 61000 56000 51000 46000 41000 36000 31000 26000 21000 16000 11000 6000 1000
Manufactured gaz heater gaz stove Non-manufactured electric appliances 65,000
35,000 27,088 21,755
23,811 13,483
8,269
16,745
12,385 13,415 8,757
13,973
28,914 20,000
18,000
10,924
3,000 Very cold
Cold
Not warm
Warm
Very warm
Source: AHS-2009
Chapter 7. Illnesses due to Inadequate Heating In 2008/2009 winter, cases of illnesses due to insufficient heating were recorded in 37.3% of HHs. This has significantly improved by 15.4% since 2006/2007 winter. Illness cases in Marzes exceed those in Yerevan by 15 percentage points (See Figure 31). Figure 31. Illness cases due to heating deficiencies in HHs, % HHs with illness cases Armenia, 2006/2007winter
55.9
44.1
Armenia, 2008/2009 winteer
37.3
Yerevan , 2008/2009winter
62.7
30.6
Marzes, 2008/2009 winter
69.4
45.6 0%
Source: AHS-2009
No illness cases
10%
20%
54.4 30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90% 100%
Page | 25
Economic Development and Research Center (EDRC)
The level of illnesses due to heating conditions is considerably higher in poorer regions with colder climate and longer winters. The largest cases of illnesses were recorded in Shirak and Syuniq: 46% and 50% respectively. Duration of heating season in these regions is 5-6 months. The Survey findings showed that illness cases due to inadequate heating largely depend on the type of energy source used for heating. The least cases were recorded in HHs with natural gas heating. The number of cases is considerably larger in HHs that use wood for heating (See Figure 32). Figure 32. Illness cases due to heating deficiencies in HHs broken down per heating options, % HHs with illness cases Electricity
No illness cases 56.4
43.6
Natural Gaz
65.9
34.1
Wood
45.6
54.4
Other
55.6
44.4 0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
Source: AHS-2009
Figure 33 shows Illness cases depending on whether there are children or elderly in the HH. Illness cases are higher in HHs with 3 and more children: 58.6%. Meanwhile, the same indicator for 2006/2007 was 48.3%. In HHs with elderly, cases of illnesses are 24% higher than in HHs without elderly. Figure 33. Illness cases due to heating deficiencies in HHs broken down for groups of HHs having children or elderly, % HHs with illness cases 2 and more elderly
No illness cases
37.3
1 elderly
62.7
44.9
HHs with elderly
55.1
42.8
No elderly
57.2
34.6
3 and more children
65.4 58.6
2 children
41.4
41.5
1 child
58.5
37.3
HHs with children
62.7
40.6
No children
59.4
35.4 0%
10%
20%
64.6 30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
Source: AHS-2009
30.4% of HHs that were heated entirely 47.8% of those who heated partially and 63.5% of not-heated ones had illness cases. Illness cases are also high in cases when kitchen is not heated: 44.8% (see Figure 34).
26 | Page
Assessment of Heat Supply and Heating Options in Multi-Apartment Blocks in Armenia
Figure 34. Illness cases due to heating deficiencies in HHs broken down per entirely/partially heated groups, % HHs with illness cases Toilette/bathroom not heated
No illness cases
46.1
Toilette/bathroom heated
53.9
33.7
Kitchen not heated
66.3 49.2
Kitchen heated
50.8
41.2
58.8
Not heated
63.5
Heated partially
36.5
47.8
Heated entirely
52.2
34.0 0%
10%
66.0
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90% 100%
Source: AHS-2009
Illness cases are determined also by average temperatures in apartments. Figure 35 shows that the highest shares of cases were recorded in cold and very cold apartments (67% and 64.7% respectively). In very warm apartments, only 15.2% of HHs had illness cases. Figure 35. Illness cases due to heating deficiencies in HHs broken down per temperature groups, % HHs with illness cases Very warm
15.2
Warm
84.8
22.2
Not warm
No illness cases
77.8 42.4
Cold
57.6 67.0
Very cold
33.0
64.7 0%
10%
20%
30%
35.3 40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
Source: AHS-2009
Illness cases depend also on the level of welfare. Figure 36 shows the correlation between quintile groups and cases of illnesses. As it can be seen, along with the increase in welfare, the illness cases decrease. Number of cases in extremely poor HHs were almost twice as much as In wealthier HHs.
Page | 27
Economic Development and Research Center (EDRC)
Figure 36. Illness cases due to heating deficiencies in HHs per poverty quintiles, % HHs with illness cases 100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0%
47.0
50.1
Quintile 1
60.6
53.0
49.9
No illness cases
39.4
Quintile 2
Quintile 3
69.9
73.9
30.1
26.1
Quintile 4
Quintile 5
Source: AHS-2009
The Survey showed that the higher the average monthly expenses the lower the illness cases. HHs that spend up to AMD 5,000, illnesses cases were recorded in 65.4%, while in HHs spending above AMD 20,000 – 25.3% of HHs (see Figure 37). Figure 37. Illness cases due to heating deficiencies in HHs per average monthly expenditures’ groups, % HHs with illness cases More than AMD 20001
25.3
AMD 15001-20000
No illness cases 74.7
33.2
AMD 10001-15000
66.8
41.1
AMD 5001-10000
58.9
48.1
Less than AMD 5,000
51.9 65.4
0%
10%
20%
30%
34.6 40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
Source: AHS-2009
91.4% of HHs who consider themselves extremely poor had illness cases if they use natural gas and 71.4% of them had cases if they use other heat options (see Figure 38). This can be explained by the fact that extremely poor HHs mostly used heating equipment with low efficiency. The Survey revealed that 17.9% of HHs using natural gas and considering themselves wealthy and non-poor has illness cases. 29.4% of HHs that used other options and considered themselves wealthy also had illness cases.
28 | Page
Assessment of Heat Supply and Heating Options in Multi-Apartment Blocks in Armenia
Figure 38. Illness cases in HHs that used natural gas and other heat option per poverty self-assessment groups, % HHs with illness cases
No illness cases
Gaz-heated
Wealthy
17.9
Not-Poor
82.1 28.7
Poor
71.3 54.3
45.7
Extrimely Poor
91.4
8.6
Other options of heat
Wealthy
29.4
Not-Poor
70.6
34.3
Poor
65.7 57.4
42.6
Extrimely Poor
71.4 0%
10%
20%
30%
28.6
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
Source: AHS-2009
Chapter 8. Moving Towards Safe and Clean Heating According to the Survey, the overall situation with heating has improved substantially during the last years; larger opportunities emerged in moving towards clean, safe and efficient heating in Armenia. The survey revealed that numbers of HHs using wood and self-made ovens is gradually decreasing due to increasing number of HHs using natural gas and manufactured heating equipment. In 2008/2009 winter, only 1.4% of HHs used self-made ovens (See Figure 39). However, one should note that the share of HHs using natural gas in 2008/2009 decreased by 6.2% from the previous year, while those using manufactured gas ovens – by 7%. Figure 39. Trends of moving towards safe and clean heating, % 2003/2004 winter 2006/2007 winter
2004/2005 winter 2007/2008 winter
2005/2006 winter 2008/2009 winter
80.0 70.0
62.9 59.0 53.6 45.2
60.0 50.0 40.0
45.2 36.0 15.712.6
10.0
44.8 39.3
30.0
30.0 20.0
72.6 67.5
13.0
23.3 8.4
1.5 1.4
0.0 HHs with non-manufactured heaters Source: AHS-2009
Gaz-heated HHs
HHs with manufactured gaz heaters
Page | 29
Economic Development and Research Center (EDRC)
Figure 40 shows the situation with usage of different appliances by HHs using natural gas. It can be seen that the usage self-made ovens has decreased to the minimum, as well as of the kitchen stove. In 2008/2009, the share of HHs using manufactured gas heaters decreased by 20% since 2006/2007, while the share of HHs using individual boilers increased and reached 26.4%. Figure 40. Appliances used for heating with natural gas in 2006/2007 winter, % 70 59.4
60 50 40
26.4
30 20
11.7
10
2.1
0 Non-manufactured gaz heater
Manufactured gaz heater
Individual heating boiler
Gaz stove
Source: AHS-2009
Chapter 9. Satisfaction and Preferences During 2008/2009 winter, 25.5% of HHs were fully satisfied with heating conditions in their apartments, while 42.9% - partly satisfied. In contrast to Marzes, where 15.8% of HHs are fully satisfied, 33.4% of HHs in Yerevan are fully satisfied (See Figure 41). The picture has not changed significantly since 2007/2008; however, it improved significantly since 2006/2007: number of HHs satisfied with heating increased by 6.3%∗, while that of non-satisfied – decreased by 5%. Figure 41. Satisfaction estimates from heating appliances in 2007/2008 and 2008/2009 (Armenia and Marzes), % Totally satisfied
Partially satisfied
Completely dissatisfied 49.2
50 40 33.3
31.7 30
25.5
49.0
42.6
42.9
33.4
37.8
37.4 28.9
32.3
37.1
35.1
30.3
24.0
20
15.8
13.9
10 0 Armenia, 2008- Armenia, 2007- Yerevan, 2008- Yerevan, 20072009 winter 2008 winter 2009 winter 2008 winteer Source: AHS-2009 ∗
Source: AHS (2007)
Marzes 20082009 winter
Marzes 20072008 winter
30 | Page
Assessment of Heat Supply and Heating Options in Multi-Apartment Blocks in Armenia
Figure 42 gives the estimates of satisfaction by HHs for used appliance types. 83.5% of HHs using individual heat boilers are fully satisfied (74%∗ felt so in 2007), followed by 17.3% of those using manufactured gas heaters (21.6% - in 2007∗) and 13.3% of those using self-made gas ovens (16.2%∗ - in 2007). Dissatisfaction is high among HHs that use wood stoves (61.6%), electric heaters (about 63%), kitchen ovens (51.2%). Figure 42. Satisfaction estimates from heating appliances for each type of appliance, % Totally satisfied
Partially satisfied
Wood stove
5.8
Manufactured electric appliances
4.2
31.0
Non-manufactured electric appliances 2.4
36.7
Gaz stove 2.9
Completely dissatisfied
32.6
61.6 64.8 60.9
45.9
51.2
Individual heating boiler
83.5
Manufactured gaz heater
17.3
Non-manufactured gaz heater
60.6
13.3 0%
15.2 1.3 22.1
40.0 20%
40%
46.7 60%
80%
100%
Source: AHS-2009
In 2008/2009 winter, only 21.7% of HHs using manufactured gas heaters were fully satisfied with their heating conditions: this has decreased by 34% since 2007. Overall, the share of fully satisfied HHs among those using manufactured gas appliances decreased by 37% reaching 17.3%∗. 33% of HHs using natural gas are fully satisfied with their heating which can be explained by higher degree of satisfaction among HHs having individual boilers (See Figure 43). Figure 43. Satisfaction levels of used heat appliances, % Totally satisfied
Partially satisfied
HHs swiched to manufactured gaz heaters in 2008/2009 Total for HHs using manufactured gaz heaters HHs swiched to natural gaz in 2008/2009 Total for all HHs using natural gaz Total for all HHs
Completely dissatisfied
21.7 17.3
50.0
28.3
60.6 38.0
35.1
33.0 25.5
22.1
46.3 42.9
26.9 20.7 31.6
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90%100% Source: AHS-2009
∗
Source: AHS (2007)
Page | 31
Economic Development and Research Center (EDRC)
Insufficient satisfaction from heating is explained by disadvantages of heat options. Figure 44 represents the estimates of disadvantages of each heating option. 35.5% of HHs noted that they do not see any disadvantage in the heating option they use. Main disadvantages are insufficient temperatures, unequal distribution of heat in the apartment and high cost of heating. Figure 44. Estimates of disadvantages of heat options, % 40
35.5
35 30 25 18.0
20 15
15.0 11.1
10.3
10 5
3.4
1.8
3.3
0 No disadvantages
Insufficient heat
Apartment gets dirty
Expensive
Source: AHS-2009
The highest preference was given to individual heat boilers (35.5%) decreasing from 2007 indicator by 2 percentage points∗. Preference of local collective boiler houses and centralized heat supply decreased since 2007: they were 22% and 21%∗ respectively in 2007 and 7% and 10% - in 2009. Preferences for gas heaters decreased from 15%∗ in 2007 to 9% in 2009 (See Figure 45). Figure 45. Heat option preferences in Armenia and Marzes, as % of total of each locality Armenia
Yerevan
Marzes
42.7
45 40
35.5
35
29.7
30 25 20 15 10
9.1
8.1
10.4
11.5
7.1
10.2 11.9
8.1
3.5
5
1.3 1.2 1.6
0 Gaz heater
Individual heating boiler
Local colective heating boiler
Centraized heating
Other
Source: AHS-2009
For 78.7% of HHs the reason for preferring one of heat options is the expectation of having sufficient levels of heat and warmth. 54% of HHs would prefer another heat option expecting increase in safety, 47% - in ∗
Source: AHS (2007)
32 | Page
Assessment of Heat Supply and Heating Options in Multi-Apartment Blocks in Armenia
cleanness and 26% - in affordability (See Figure 46). Both in Yerevan and in Marzes the main problem is insufficient heat and safety. The need for having cleaner heating is an issue in Marzes. Figure 46. Reasons for preferring other heat options, Armenia and Marzes, % in the total of the given Marz Armenia 45 40
Yerevan
Marzes
40.6 41.7 39.7
35
32.3
35.7 29.1
30 25
23.0
20
15.4
14.1
15
10.4
10
6.9
7.0
5 0 Safe
Clean
Affordable
Sufficient heat
Source: AHS-2009
84% of Armenian HHs do not use the preffered hea option due to financial constraints, 25% - due to difficulties in technical solution, 16% - lack of suppliers and 11% - due to other problems (See Figure 47). Financial constraints and technical difficulties are especially crucial in Marzes. Figure 47. Reasons for not using the preferred heat option in Armenia and Marzes, % of total for each locality Armenia 100 90
Marzes
91.4
83.8
80
Yerevan
75.6
70 60 50 40
34.7 25.4
30 20
15.3
16.3 17.6 15.2
Technical solutions
Suppliers
10
11.2 10.6 11.7
0 Financial Source: AHS-2009
Other
Page | 33
Economic Development and Research Center (EDRC)
Chapter 10. Possibilities for Improving Heating and Social Cooperation The Survey revealed that 52% of Armenian HHs are aware of the possibility of borrowing a loan to improve heating. At the same time, 12.5% would agree to borrow for that purpose. It is worth noting that, as compared to 2007, awareness increased 2.2 times, while the readiness to borrow decreased by 56%∗. Willingness to borrow from banks is especially high in Ararat and Kotayq (32% and 30% respectively) (See Figure 48). Figure 48. Awareness on heating loans and preparedness to borrow per Marzes, % Are aware 60.0
43.9
42.6
40.0 30.0
40.0
30.3 22.8
19.4
10.0
51.0
41.5
32.432.9
29.2
12.5
55.1
53.2
52.4
50.0
20.0
Willing to borrow
59.4
22.7 17.5
14.3 9.2
6.7
17.3
14.0
9.1
7.7
0.0
Source: AHS-2009
17% of HHs that prefer individual boilers are willing to borrow, together with 50% of those preferring air conditioners and 29% of those that prefer local collective heat supply. Awareness on borrowing opportunities is especially high among HHs that prefer individual boilers of local-collective heat supply, meanwhile it is the lowest among HHs that prefer electric appliances – 15.4% (see Figure 49). Figure 49. Awareness on loans and preparedness to borrow per preferred options, % Are aware
80.0
Willing to borrow
70.0 56.4
54.5
60.0
47.8
50.0
37.4
40.0
28.6
30.0 20.0 10.0 0.0
Source: AHS-2009 ∗
Source: AHS (2007)
55.8
17.2
15.4 7.7
8.3
7.5
16.0
50.0 42.9
34 | Page
Assessment of Heat Supply and Heating Options in Multi-Apartment Blocks in Armenia
As noted above, the number of HHs willing to borrow has decreased twice since 2007. It is also reflected in the distribution of such HHs per quintiles. Irrespective of the welfare level and average monthly expenses for heating, the number of HHs willing to borrow is almost the same – on average 12.4% (See Figure 50). Figure 50. Awareness on loans and preparedness to borrow per quintiles and actual expenses on heating, % Are aware
Willing to borrow
80 70.0 70 59.4 58.1 57.4 54.2 60 51.0 46.4 43.9 50 41.4 41.4 43.3 40 30 15.1 15.1 20 13.2 12.4 13.2 11.3 11.3 12.2 12.2 10.1 10.1 10 0
Source: AHS-2009
Figure 51 summarizes the statistics of heating expenditures and monthly repayments under a potential loan for Armenia and Marz breakdown. According to it, HHs ready to borrow are prepared to pay monthly AMD 10,036 during 3 year or AMD 8,784 – for a 7 years’ loan. HHs in Yerevan are inclined to pay relatively high amounts as monthly repayments that HHs in Marzes. Figure 51. Monthly loan repayments and heating expenditures, AMD Average monthly expenditures on heating Maximum monthly average expenditures, if heating is improved Average monthly loan repayment, 3-year loan Average monthly loan repayment, 7-year loan
25000 20000
20667 21004
18260 18856
15263
15000 10000
16163
11926 10036
8041
6784
8959 5994
5000 0 Armenia
Yerevan
Marzes
Source: AHS-2009
Figure 52 summarizes the average estimates of a hypothetical credit to improve heating for HHs in current AMDs, per preferred heat options. For example, HHs that preferred individual gas boilers ready to borrow a 3year loan are willing to pay AMD 350,000 or AMD 553,000 –under a 7-year term.
Page | 35
Economic Development and Research Center (EDRC)
Figure 52. Estimates of debt service (interest + principal payments) on heating loans per preferred appliances, AMD Average monthly loan service, 3-year loan Average monthly loan service, 7-year loan 600,000
552983 476739
500,000 400,000 300,000
453424 350001
347605
302032
261616
209637 200,000 100,000 0 Gaz heater
Individual heating boiler
Local-colective heating boiler
Air conditioner
Source: AHS-2009
From the perspective of efficient heating, the improvement of windows in apartments is crucial. 55.5% of Armenian HHs consider their windows as in normal condition, 23.5% - bad. Windows are especially in bad shape in HHs that use wood oven, kitchen stove and self-made electric appliances. In 95% of HHs using individual boilers window panes are in good or medium condition (see Figure 53). Figure 53. Assessment of window panes per types of heat appliances used, % Good condition
Average condition 50.0
Wood stove
25.2
49.8
Non-manufactured electric‌ 12.3
37.9
48.5
15.8
Gaz stove
48.8 61.7
13.1
Manufactured electric appliances
35.7 45.7
49.9
Individual heating boiler
26.7 55.5
21.0 0%
22.2
63.3
10.0
Armenia
4.4
61.9
15.9
Manufactured gaz heater Non-manufactured gaz heater
Bad condition
20%
40%
23.5 60%
80%
100%
Source: AHS-2009
According to 63.5% of Armenian HHs, they would save on heat and heating expenses if they replaced windows. This is the opinion of 70.6% of HHs using electricity, 60.1% of those using natural gas and 78.5% of those using wood. Figure 54 shows that, along with higher expenses on heating, the number of HHs that believe they would save on heating if windows were replaced decreases. This can be explained by the fact that HHs that can afford higher expenses for heating, are wealthier and have already replaced windows.
36 | Page
Assessment of Heat Supply and Heating Options in Multi-Apartment Blocks in Armenia
Figure 54. Shares of HHs, per heat option and settlements, which believe they would save heat and expenses on heating if windows were replaced, % 90.0 80.0 70.0 60.0 50.0 40.0 30.0 20.0 10.0 0.0
78.5 63.5
70.6
75.7
72.9
71.5 62.5
60.1
54.7 46.8
Source: AHS-2009
From the perspective of improving heating conditions and moving towards efficient, clean and safe heating, social collaboration and assistance are crucial. In this regard, development and effectiveness of condominiums, as well as collaboration opportunities within communities, districts, blocks and among neighbors, are important pre-requisites. Figure 55 represents the assessment of HHs on effectiveness of condominiums. According to it, 54% of HHs believe that condominiums do exist and operate, 24% of them are of the opposite opinion and 22% are not aware whether their block has one or not. The assessment of condominiums effectiveness is especially low in Marzes and the situation has not changed since 2007. Figure 55. Effectiveness of condominiums, Armenia and Marzes, assessment of HHs There is a condiminium
Marzes
No condiminiums
35.6
Not aware of
44.0
Yerevan
20.4
69.0
Armenia
7.8
54.0
0%
10%
20%
30%
23.2
24.0
40%
50%
60%
70%
22.0
80%
90%
100%
Source: AHS-2009
27% of HHs that have condominiums believes that their condominiums are well-established, while about the same number of HHs are not aware if condominiums are well-established and effective or not. Only 49% of HHs believes that condominiums do provide certain services (see Figure 56). Thus, the current situation or insufficient development of condominiums hampers improvement of heating and does not provide opportunities of having efficient heating.
Page | 37
Economic Development and Research Center (EDRC)
Figure 56. Assessment of effectiveness and provision of services of condominiums by HHs, % 60 45.8
50
38.3
48.7
40 27.0
30 20
27.2 5.3
10 0 Well-established Underdeveloped
No aware of
No services
Some services
No aware of services
Source: AHS-2009
It is important to increase the levels of social capital and social collaboration in communities in order to be in the position to improve heating conditions. The Table below summarizes the responses of HHs to the question “whether they have ever done one of the following activities together with your neighbors or some of them?”. According to their responses, 16% of HHs have renovated and cleaned their yards, 15% - planted trees, 11% renovated entrances, etc. Only 15% of HHs have ever done any of the mentioned improvements, 10% - two of those improvement activities. Table 1. Activities or works carried out collectively with neighbors, % of HHs (multiple responses) Renovation, rehabilitation of the yard
16.3
Planting trees and plants
14.6
Construction of a playing ground
4.3
Renovation of the entrance
11.0
Renovation of pipes
11.7
Illumination of the yard
4.2
Have done at least one of the listed improvements
31.8
Have done only one of the listed
14.9
Have done only two of the listed
10.0
Have done only three of the listed
3.8
Have not done only two of the listed
1.2
Have not done only one of the listed
0.5
Have done all of the listed
1.4
Never done any of the listed
68.2
Source: AHS-2009
The Table below summarizes the responses to the question “Whether it is feasible to organize the construction of a small boiler house for several apartments, one entrance or entire block in order to have clean and safe heating and hot water supply?”. 23% of HHs responded positivey mentioned a pre-condition “if someone
38 | Page
Assessment of Heat Supply and Heating Options in Multi-Apartment Blocks in Armenia
organizes it”, 14% - “if no monthly payments are required”. 18% of HHs responded negatively mentioned that neighbours would not collaborate, 21% - there is no need and 16% believe that it is too costly.Thus, insufficient social cooperation is an obstacle to having efficient and safe heating. Table 2. Possibilities to collectively build a small boiler house, % (multiple responses possible) 1
Yes, if there is someone to organize and coordinate
23.1
2
Yes, if a small monthly payments is required
13.8
3
Yes, if a long-term loan is available
2.3
4
Yes, if all understand the advantages
5.0
5
Yes, if the heating as a result of investment is more affordable than currently
10.5
6
Yes, other
0.7
7
No, apartment-owners will not collaborate
17.6
8
No, no need
21.1
9
No, it is to expensive: we cannot afford that
16.2
10
No, we do not trust such options
4.8
11
No, technical solutions will be difficult to find for our block
5.7
12
No, apartment owners are mostly very poor
11.5
13
No, other
5.1
Source: AHS-2009
Economic Development and Research Center (EDRC)
Page | 39
Annex 1. Construction of the Sample The objective of the Study of Heat Options of Households is to collect reliable data on current conditions of heating multi apartment blocks of Armenian towns and cities, opportunities for improvement thereof, as well as possibilities of providing adequate and affordable heat supply services through management bodies of MABs and private entities. The report comprises methodology of sample and questionnaire construction for survey on heat options of Hs in MABs of Armenia urban settlements. Construction of the Sample The Survey is aimed at studying the conditions of heating and hot water supply in MABs in Armenian towns and cities, options used, preferences etc. The main dependent variable is the choice of heat option used by HHs. At the same time, the following representation requirements were set for the Survey to comply: 1) representation at national level and 2) representation at Marz level. Based on these requirements, the sampling plan was drafted. Sampling was a multi-step process, the first stage of which included stratification of the general population and definition of the number of Primary Sampling Units (PSU). Thereafter, clusters (in this case, settlements) are chosen and for each of them the number of PSUs is determined depending on their probabilistic weights in the general population. During the next stage, PSUs in each cluster are selected randomly, and only after that HHs in each PSU are chosen on a random basis. The basis for stratification and clusterization of the general population was the official statistics. In particular, the NSS RA reports were used (“Housing and Communal Infrastructure of the Republic of Armenia”). According to that source8, the number of people living in multi-apartment blocks in Yerevan equaled 401.3 thousands, with 55.2% of that living in Yerevan. Based on these statistics, the general population was stratified, along with the determination of the number of PSUs in each stratum. To that, the following assumptions were made: first, we assumed that each apartment has only one HH and, second, the deviation in proportions of lived-in and empty apartments is not statistically significant and will not trigger distortion of the sample. Nevertheless, the above described official statistics on multi-apartment blocks was slightly adjusted, based on the numbers of actual population in each town/city according to 2001 Census. Definition of the Sample Size in Yerevan According to the official statistics (see the same source), the number of people living in multi-apartment blocks in Yerevan was 221.3 thousands as of the beginning of 2008, i. e. more than 55.2% of all urban population living in multi-apartment block in Armenia. Overall, the assumption for the stratification of the general population was that, the expected behavior in selecting the heat option by HHs in Yerevan is less widely spread, than in other Marzes and communities of Armenia. Therefore, each HH in Yerevan may represent more number of HHs in Yerevan, than any HH in Marzes. Two justifications are presented below for this assumption: 1. Selection and usage of a certain type of heating option by HHs, along with other factors, is largely determined by the specifics of the block and the community, namely, connection to the gas supply system, homogeneity of welfare of HHs, possible technical solutions, etc. The number of HHs living in one block in Yerevan is higher than in all Marzes. Therefore, when comparing, the more HHs in Yerevan will take similar decisions on heat options. 2. Districts of Yerevan have more similarities than urban communities in Marzes. In particular, 12 communities of Yerevan can be grouped into 3-4 groups with similar behavior and choices. Therefore, a randomly chosen HH in Yerevan is more likely to have similar characteristics with other HHs, than a randomly selected HH from Marzes would have (to other HHs in the same Marz). 8
See “Housing and Communal Infrastructure in Armenia in 2007” analytic report, NSS RA, Yerevan 2008
40 | Page
Assessment of Heat Supply and Heating Options in Multi-Apartment Blocks in Armenia
These assumptions are brought as a logical basis for the determination of the sample size in Yerevan. According to the TOR, the minimum size of the sample is 2000 HHs which was used as a basis for the construction of the sample. When constructing the sample of 2000 HHs, it was decided to assign only the minimum necessary sample size to Yerevan, so that we have more HHs surveyed in Marzes. The final sampling plan may result in the increase of the sample size by up to 2%, however, that shall not affect the total contract amount. Table 1. General population per Marzes Number of Communities
Number of Apartments
Share in total, %
Proportional distribution under sample size of 2000
Proposed distribution, under sample size of 2010
Yerevan
12
221,688
55.2
1103
700
Marzes
47
180,229
44.8
897
1310
Aragatsotn
3
4,837
1.2
24
40
Ararat
4
13,663
3.4
68
100
Armavir
3
15,289
3.8
76
110
Gegharqunik
5
11,227
2.8
56
80
Lori
8
38,117
9.5
190
280
Kotayq
7
39,008
9.7
194
280
Shirak
3
25,289
6.3
126
180
Syuniq
7
20,291
5.0
101
150
Vayots Dzor
3
4,461
1.1
22
30
Tavush
4
8,047
2.0
40
60
Total
59
401,917
100
2,000
2,010
Source: “Housing and Communal Infrastructure in Armenia in 2007� analytic report and dynamic time-series (2002-2007), NSS RA, Yerevan 2008
As it can be seen from the table above, if the sample is constructed in proportion to the general population, due to high weight of Yerevan in the total, more than half of the sample would fall onto HHs in Yerevan (1,103 HHs). In this case, in 6 of 10 Marzes sample size would not reach 80 HHs, while in Aragatsotn and Vayots Dzor the sample size would equal 24 and 22 HHs respectively. Taking these concerns into account (that representation and coverage of such Marzes may not be ensured sufficiently), and based on the assumption that HHs in Yerevan are more similar, it was decided to include 700 HHs from Yerevan in the sample (instead of 1,103 HHs) and 1300 HHs from Marzes (instead of 897 HHs). However, rounding of PSUs when constructing the sample reduces the number of HHs from Marzes to 1,290. Thus, in order to ensure the minimum required sample size of 2,000, it is necessary to conduct 1,310 interviews in Marzes (breakdown of the sample is presented in Table 1). Table 2. General population and proposed sample breakdown Number of Communities
Number of Apartments
Share in Total Number of Apartments (% of total)
Proportional distribution in the sample
Sample structure, number of HHs to be surveyed under sample size of 2010 HHs
Number of PSUs in the Survey
Yerevan
12
221,688
55.2%
1103
700
Marzes
47
180,229
44.8%
897
1310
70 131
Total
59
401,917
100%
2,000
2,010
201
Page | 41
Economic Development and Research Center (EDRC)
It should be noted that the linear proportionate method9 was used also for the construction of samples of 2005 and 2007 Surveys conducted by the EDRC. In this regard, the standard deviation for main indicators in Yerevan did not exceed the same for Marzes. This approach will allow increasing the possibilities of HHs in smaller Marzes to be included in the survey sample. Thus, the sample size is 2010 HHs, including 700 HHs from Yerevan and 1310 – from Marzes. Distortion of the linear proportion will assume that there will be a need to re-weight the indicators for the national level. Definition of the Sample Size in Marzes The requirements of representation and coverage of the Survey findings, as it was already noted, refer to national and Marz levels. I. e. the findings should be representative for each Marz. That implies that each HH selected from any cluster or settlement, “speaks” only on behalf of that Marz. General population of each Marz is all HHs living in multi-apartments in that Marz. Nevertheless, in order to avoid possible cluster effects and to ensure probability of including the maximum variety of HHs in the sample, the sample was constructed using PSUs. I.e. the number of PSUs in each stratum was determined based on probability scores per stratum. Each PSU contains 10 observations. This comes from the specifics of the survey and is justified by previous experience. Table 3. Proportional distribution of the sample and number of PSUs per Marzes Proportional distribution in the sample
Sample structure, number of HHs to be surveyed under sample size of 2010 HHs
Number of PSUs in the Survey
Number of Urban Communities
Number of Apartments
Share in the Total Number of Apartments (% of total)
Aragatsotn
3
4,837
2.7
24
40
4
Ararat
4
13,663
7.6
68
100
10
Armavir
3
15,289
8.5
76
110
11
Gegharqunik
5
11,227
6.2
56
80
8
Lori
8
38,117
21.1
190
280
28
Kotayq
7
39,008
21.6
194
280
28
Shirak
3
25,289
14.0
126
180
18
Syuniq
7
20,291
11.3
101
150
15
Vayots Dzor
3
4,461
2.5
22
30
3
Tavush
4
8,047
4.5
40
60
6
Total
47
180,229
100
897
1,310
131
Thus, on a Marz level each Marz is a stratum, where the number of PSUs is calculated based on their share in the general population, with some approximation, so that the each PSU has 10 HHs. The Table represents the breakdown of the sample and PSUs per Marzes. Approximation has triggered distortion of linear proportions that, again, will lead to the necessity to re-adjust the findings for the entire country. Selection of Cities/Towns The next stage of the sample construction implies selection of PSUs per clusters, as a result of which the towns/cities to be included in the sample are determined. Number of PSUs per towns/cities, like during the previous surveys, were selected based on probabilistic weights, however, in such a way to allow for the inclusion of almost all cities/towns. As a 9
See “Assessment of the Heating Situation in Urban Areas of Armenia” statistical report, EDRC, Yerevan, 2005
42 | Page
Assessment of Heat Supply and Heating Options in Multi-Apartment Blocks in Armenia
result, 41 towns and cities out of total of 47 towns and cities in Armenia were included in the sample (or 53 urban communities out of total 59). Only very small towns were not included in the sample, where the number of HHs in MABs had very low probabilistic weights. The list of selected towns/cities and number of PSUs in each of them are presented in Annex 1. For the selection of a PSU, first the necessary quantity of PSUs is randomly selected from the list of all PSUs. HHs are then selected from the database of HHs of respective PSU on a simple random basis, through random steps. The Survey is representative at each Marz level and is self-weighted. This, at the national level, is distorted due to steps to ensure higher chances of HHs in smaller Marzes to be included; therefore, the results shall be re-adjusted for the national level. The re-weighting or re-adjustment coefficients per Marzes are presented in the table below. Table 4. Structure of the Sample and re-weighting coefficients Number of Communities
Number of communities in the sample
Number of PSUs
Sample
Structure of the General Population
Structure of the Sample
Re-adjustment Coefficients
Yerevan
12
12
70
700
55.2
34.8
1.584
Marzes
47
41
131
1310
44.8
65.2
-
Aragatsotn
3
3
4
40
1.2
2.0
0.605
Ararat
4
4
10
100
3.4
5.0
0.683
Armavir
3
3
11
110
3.8
5.5
0.695
Gegharqunik
5
4
8
80
2.8
4.0
0.702
Lori
8
6
28
280
9.5
13.9
0.681
Kotayq
7
6
28
280
9.7
13.9
0.697
Shirak
3
3
18
180
6.3
9.0
0.703
Syuniq
7
6
15
150
5.0
7.5
0.677
Vayots Dzor
3
3
3
30
1.1
1.5
0.744
Tavush
4
3
6
60
2.0
3.0
0.671
Total
59
53
201
2,010
100
100
-
Survey Questionnaire The main tool of data collection and conducting the survey was the questionnaire of the “Heat Options Sample HH Survey� which complied with the Terms of references for the survey. For the drafting of the Questionnaire, the questionnaire of the 2007 Assessment of Heating Situation (conducted by the EDRC) was used. The Questionnaire was further improved based on the findings and lessons learnt since the previous survey. The Questionnaire consists of the following 9 separate sections: Section 1. List of HH members Section 2. Housing conditions and condominiums Section 3. Heated area Section 4. Heating and hot water supply options
Page | 43
Economic Development and Research Center (EDRC)
Section 5. Assessment of heating and preferences Section 6. HH expenses Section 7. Illnesses due to heating conditions Section 8. Additional welfare indicators Section 9. Interviewer’s assessment
The Questionnaire contains 70 questions, based on which more than 200 items of data will be collected on each interviewed HHs. Analyses of data collected on the basis of the Questionnaire will allow assessing the main dependent variables for various types of HHs: demographic, employment, education, welfare, housing conditions, types of blocks etc. Taking into account that the survey based on this Questionnaire was very successful and brought additional satisfactory results, the Questionnaire does not need to be tested. The Questionnaire fully ensures compatibility with previous surveys.
Annex 2. Survey sample by urban and rural areas HH
Urban
Revised number of HHs as of January 1st 2008
Construction, %
PSU number
Sample
1
Aragatsotn
4,837
100
4
40
Ashtarak
3,103
64.2
2
20
Talin
929
19.2
1
10
Aparan
805
16.6
1
10
Ararat
13,663
100
10
100
Artashat
5,146
37.7
4
40
Masis
3,772
27.6
3
30
Ararat
3,758
27.5
2
20
Vedi
987
7.2
1
10
Armavir
15,289
100
11
110
Vagharshapat
7,259
47.5
5
50
Armavir
5,281
34.5
4
40
Metsamor
2,749
18.0
2
20
Gegharquniq
11,227
100
8
80
Sevan
5,294
47.2
4
40
Gavar
2,600
23.2
2
20
Vardenis
1,558
13.9
1
10
Martuni
1,066
9.5
1
10
Lori
38,117
100
28
280
Vanadzor
26,565
69.7
20
200
Alaverdi
5,646
14.8
3
30
2
3
4
5
44 | Page
Assessment of Heat Supply and Heating Options in Multi-Apartment Blocks in Armenia Stepanavan
1,876
4.9
2
20
Tashir
1,114
2.9
1
10
Spitak
1,041
2.7
1
10
Akhtala
896
2.4
1
10
Kotayq
39,008
100
28
280
Abovyan
13,227
33.9
9
90
Hrazdan
12,398
31.8
9
90
Charencavan
7,926
20.3
5
50
Nor Hatchn
2,215
5.7
2
20
Byureghavan
2,126
5.5
2
20
Eghvard
960
2.5
1
10
Shirak
25,289
100
18
180
Gyumri
21,475
84.9
15
150
Artik
2,932
11.6
2
20
Maralik
882
3.5
1
10
Syuniq
20,291
100
15
150
Kapan
10,989
54.2
8
80
Goris
2,519
12.4
2
20
Sisian
2,492
12.3
2
20
Qadjaran
2,294
11.3
1
10
Agarak
1,191
5.9
1
10
Meghri
726
3.6
1
10
Vayots Dzor
4,461
100
3
30
Jermuk
2,074
46.5
1
10
Vayq
1,252
28.1
1
10
Eghegnadzor
1,135
25.4
1
10
Tavush
7,451
100
6
60
Idjevan
3,326
44.6
3
30
Dilijan
2,798
37.6
2
20
Berd
757
10.2
1
10
179,633
-
131
1310
6
7
8
9
10
Total marzes
Page | 45
Economic Development and Research Center (EDRC)
Analytical Tables Section 1: Analysis of Heating Options Table 1.1: Usage of Heating Options (Source of Energy) in HHs, % 2008/2009 Winter
2007/2008 Winter
2006/2007 Winter
Major
Secondary
Major
Secondary
Major
Secondary
Electricity
21.6
22.0
23.9
20.5
34.6
27.7
Natural Gas
72.5
4.2
67.5
5.2
53.0
8.4
Wood
3.9
1.3
5.0
1.7
9.8
1.2
Centralized Heating
0.5
0.0
0.6
0.0
0.4
0.0
Other
0.5
2.3
0.6
2.7
1.1
2.8
Heated HHs
99.1
29.8
97.6
30.1
99.0
40.1
Non-heated HHs Total HHs
0.9
70.2
2.4
69.9
1.0
59.9
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
Table 1.2: Usage of Secondary Heating Options per Major Option in 2008/2009 Winter, % Heated HHs per Major Heating Option
Not using
Using
Electricity
Natural Gas
Wood
Liquid Gas
Other
Total HHs
70.3
29.7
22.0
4.1
1.3
1.4
0.8
Electricity
75.5
24.5
0.0
16.2
1.0
6.2
1.1
Natural Gas
69.4
30.6
29.0
0.0
1.4
0.0
0.2
Wood
57.0
43.0
17.7
12.7
0.0
1.3
11.4
Other
50.0
50.0
16.7
11.1
16.7
0.0
5.6
Table 1.3: Non-heated HHs by Marzes, % 2008/2009 Winter
2007/2008 Winter
2006/2007 Winter
2005/2006 Winter
Aragatsotn
3.8
4.2
2.5
0.0
Ararat
0.0
1.5
1.0
2.0
Armavir
1.3
2.6
0.0
0.9
Gegharquniq
1.8
3.5
0.0
1.3
Lory
4.2
6.3
1.4
2.5
Kotayq
0.5
3.6
1.1
2.5
Shirak
0.0
3.1
1.1
8.9
Syuniq
0.0
1.0
0.7
4.0
Vayots Dzor
0.0
4.5
0.0
3.3
Tavush
0.0
2.4
0.0
1.7
Yerevan Armenia
0.5
1.4
1.1
3.3
0.9
2.4
1.0
3.2
46 | Page
Assessment of Heat Supply and Heating Options in Multi-Apartment Blocks in Armenia
Table 1.4: Usage of Major Heating Options in 2008/2009 Winter by Marzes, % Electricity
Natural Gas
Wood
Other
Not heated
Aragatsotn
7.7
69.2
3.8
15.4
3.8
Ararat
4.5
88.1
7.5
0.0
0.0
Armavir
9.1
87.0
2.6
0.0
1.3
Gegharquniq Lory
1.8
89.5
3.5
3.5
1.8
12.0
72.3
9.9
1.6
4.2
Kotayq
20.3
73.1
5.1
1.0
0.5
Shirak
3.1
88.2
4.7
3.9
0.0
Syuniq
23.5
64.7
11.8
0.0
0.0
Vayots Dzor
18.2
77.3
4.5
0.0
0.0
Tavush
12.2
75.6
12.2
0.0
0.0
Yerevan Armenia
29.1
68.4
1.4
0.5
0.5
21.6
72.5
3.9
1.0
0.9
Table 1.5: Dynamics of Mainly Electricity-heated HHs by Marzes, % 2008/2009 Winter
2007/2008 Winter
2006/2007 Winter
2005/2006 Winter
Aragatsotn
7.7
33.3
15.0
15.0
Ararat
4.5
4.5
19.0
25.0
Armavir
9.1
10.5
25.5
23.6
Gegharquniq
1.8
1.8
5.0
6.3
Lory
12.0
13.1
9.3
8.9
Kotayq
20.3
20.4
26.1
30.4
Shirak
3.1
5.5
3.9
2.8
Syuniq
23.5
27.5
18.0
18.0
Vayots Dzor
18.2
27.3
20.0
20.0
Tavush Yerevan Armenia
12.2
9.8
6.7
5.0
29.1
32.1
50.9
54.3
21.6
23.9
34.6
37.0
Table 1.6: Dynamics of Mainly Natural Gas-heated HHs by Marzes, % 2008/2009 Winter
2007/2008 Winter
2006/2007 Winter
2005/2006 Winter
Aragatsotn
69.2
66.7
65
65
Ararat
88.1
76.1
65
45
87
84.2
64.5
64.5
Gegharquniq
89.5
87.7
88.8
77.5
Lory
72.3
68.6
70.4
66.1
Kotayq
73.1
69.9
61.8
42.9
Shirak
88.2
81.1
85
76.1
Syuniq
64.7
56.9
40
36
Vayots Dzor
77.3
59.1
70
63.3
Tavush
75.6
75.6
65
51.7
Yerevan
68.4
63.4
41.3
35
Armenia
72.5
67.5
53
45.2
Armavir
Page | 47
Economic Development and Research Center (EDRC)
Table 1.7. Dynamics of Mainly Wood-heated HHs by Marzes, % 2008/2009 Winter
2007/2008 Winter
2006/2007 Winter
2005/2006 Winter
Aragatsotn
3.8
4.2
10
12.5
Ararat
7.5
14.9
11
24
Armavir
2.6
2.6
9.1
10
Gegharquniq
3.5
3.5
6.3
15
Lory
9.9
11
16.8
21.4
Kotayq
5.1
5.1
9.6
16.8
Shirak
4.7
6.3
4.4
7.2
Syuniq
11.8
14.7
40
41.3
Vayots Dzor
4.5
4.5
10
13.3
Tavush
12.2
12.2
28.3
41.7
Yerevan
1.4
2.3
5.9
6.6
Armenia
3.9
5
9.8
12.7
Table 1.8: Usage of Major Heating Options in Building with Natural Gas Supply by Marzes, % Electricity
Natural Gas
Wood
Centralized Heating
Other
Not heated
Aragatsotn
7.7
69.2
3.8
15.4
0.0
3.8
Ararat
4.5
88.1
7.5
0.0
0.0
0.0
Armavir
9.1
87.0
2.6
0.0
0.0
1.3
Gegharquniq
1.8
91.1
1.8
1.8
1.8
1.8
Lory
9.7
74.6
9.7
0.0
1.6
4.3
Kotayq
19.9
75.4
3.1
0.5
0.5
0.5
Shirak
1.6
91.8
3.3
0.8
2.5
0.0
Syuniq
15.1
76.7
8.1
0.0
0.0
0.0
Vayots Dzor
18.2
77.3
4.5
0.0
0.0
0.0
Tavush
12.2
75.6
12.2
0.0
0.0
0.0
Yerevan Armenia
26.6
71.1
1.2
0.3
0.2
0.5
19.4
75.4
3.2
0.5
0.5
0.9
Table 1.9: Usage of Major Heating Options by Type of Building and Apartment Ownership, % Electricity
Natural Gas
Wood
Other
Not heated
Stone Buiding, Stalin Design Stone Buildng, Khrushchev Design Stone Building, Other Design Bearing-wall Building, Khrushchev Design Bearing-wall Building, Other Design Monolith Other Design Apartment is Private
24.8
72.8
2.4
0.0
0.0
18.4
75.0
5.1
1.2
0.4
17.4
76.0
3.8
1.2
1.6
14.8 27.9 4.2
76.5 67.8 85.4
7.4 2.9 6.3
1.2 0.8 2.1
0.0 0.6 2.1
12.0
68.0
20.0
0.0
0.0
19.2
75.5
3.4
1.0
0.9
Apartment is Rented Neither Private, nor Rented
54.8
38.3
6.1
0.9
0.0
34.4
51.6
14.1
0.0
0.0
48 | Page
Assessment of Heat Supply and Heating Options in Multi-Apartment Blocks in Armenia
Table 1.10: Usage of Major Heating Options by Number of Floors in a Building, In Armenia, Marzes and Yerevan, % Electricity
Natural Gas
Wood
Other
Not heated
Up to 4 Floors
16.3
74.6
7.6
1.3
0.3
5 Floors
17.9
76.4
3.4
1.0
1.4
6-8 Floors
29.2
64.6
2.1
4.2
0.0
9 Floors
25.3
70.2
3.0
0.8
10 and nore Floors
41.5
57.2
1.3
0.0
0.0
Total Armenia
21.6
72.5
3.9
1.0
0.9
Up to 4 Floors
11.9
76.6
9.1
2.0
0.4
5 Floors
11.2
80.0
5.9
1.4
1.4
6-8 Floors
20.0
60.0
20.0
0.0
0.0
9 Floors
17.0
73.9
6.5
1.3
1.3
10 and nore Floors
50.0
50.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
Total Marzes, without Yerevan
12.5
77.9
7.0
1.6
1.2
Up to 4 Floors
24.8
70.9
4.3
0.0
0.0
5 Floors
26.0
71.7
0.5
0.5
1.3
6-8 Floors
29.5
65.9
0.0
4.5
9 Floors
28.8
68.5
1.6
0.5
0.5
10 and nore Floors
41.4
57.3
1.3
0.0
0.0
Yerevan
29.1
68.3
1.4
0.5
0.5
Table 1.12: Usage of Major Heating Options per Number of Rooms in Apartment Electricity
Natural Gas
Wood
Other
Not heated
1 Room
33.8
60.7
3.3
0.7
1.5
2 Rooms
21.5
72.8
4.2
1.1
0.4
3 Rooms
20.2
74.9
3.4
0.4
1.0
4 Rooms
12.7
78.3
4.2
3.7
1.1
5 and more Rooms
7.7
80.8
11.5
0.0
0.0
Table 1.13: Usage of Major Heating Options per Interviewer Assessment of the Overall Condition of the Apartment, % Electricity
Natural Gas
Wood
Other
Not heated
Very Bad
36.4
43.0
13.9
3.3
3.3
Bad
28.0
63.4
6.2
1.3
1.1
Good
19.5
77.4
2.3
0.3
0.5
Very Good
11.0
86.1
1.3
1.3
0.4
Table 1.14: Usage of Major Heating Options per Overall Condition of Windows in the Apartment, % Electricity
Natural Gas
Wood
Other
Not heated
Good
12.8
86.0
0.2
0.7
0.2
Average
21.7
73.3
3.8
0.6
0.5
Bad
29.4
58.8
7.6
1.9
2.3
Page | 49
Economic Development and Research Center (EDRC)
Table 1.15: Usage of Major Heating Options per Assessment of HH Average Monthly Income, % Electricity
Natural Gas
Wood
Other
Not heated
1001 USD and more
9.8
88.5
1.6
0.0
0.0
601-1000 USD
19.2
79.5
0.3
0.7
0.3
301-600 USD
25.4
71.2
2.4
0.4
0.6
101-300 USD
20.3
73.7
4.5
0.9
0.5
Up to 100 USD
20.6
59.8
12.4
2.9
4.3
Wood
Other
Not heated
Table 1.16: Usage of Major Heating Options per Assessment of HH Welfare, % Electricity
Natural Gas
According to Subjective Assessment of HH head
Extremely Poor
28.0
46.7
13.3
5.3
6.7
Poor
31.9
58.1
7.8
1.0
1.2
Non-poor
19.3
77.4
2.2
0.6
0.5
Wealthy
7.6
90.8
1.1
0.5
0.0
According to Subjective Assessment of Interviewer
Extremely Poor
25.0
46.3
15.0
6.3
7.5
Poor
32.8
58.1
7.3
0.7
1.1
Non-poor
20.1
76.3
2.5
0.6
0.5
Wealthy
7.2
91.0
1.3
0.4
0.0
Table 1.18: Usage of Major Heating Options per Quintile Groups, % Electricity
Natural Gas
Wood
Other
Not heated
Quintile 1
19.3
68.3
7.3
2.4
2.7
Quintile 2
21.7
70.7
5.8
1.3
0.5
Quintile 3
25.0
70.7
3.4
0.7
0.2
Quintile 4
19.0
77.1
2.8
0.2
0.9
Quintile 5
22.9
75.3
1.3
0.2
0.2
Table 1.19: Major Heating Devices Used, % 2008/2009 Winter
2007/2008 Winter
Armenia
Yerevan
Marzes
Armenia
Yerevan
Marzes
Non-manufactured Gas Heater
1.5
0.5
2.8
1.4
0.5
2.6
Manufactured Gas Heater
43.5
31.3
58.7
42.7
30.7
57.9
Individual Heating Boiler
19.4
26.0
11.1
17.1
23.3
9.3
Gas Stove
8.6
10.8
5.8
7.7
9.6
5.3
Non-manufactured Electric Appliances
11.0
15.2
5.7
12.5
16.5
7.5
Manufactured Electric Appliances
10.4
13.3
6.9
11.5
15.4
6.6
Wood Stove
4.3
1.6
7.6
5.7
2.5
9.7
Other
1.4
1.4
1.3
1.3
1.6
1.0
50 | Page
Assessment of Heat Supply and Heating Options in Multi-Apartment Blocks in Armenia
Table 1.20: Major Heating Devices Used per Heating Options, % Electricity
Natural Gas
Wood
Centralized Heating
Other
Non-manufactured Gas Heater
0.0
2.1
0.0
0.0
0.0
Manufactured Gas Heater
0.0
59.4
0.0
0.0
0.0
Individual Heating Boiler
0.0
26.4
0.0
0.0
0.0
Gas Stove
0.0
11.7
0.0
0.0
0.0
Non-manufactured Electric Appliances
50.1
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
Manufactured Electric Appliances
47.6
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
Centralized Heating
0.0
0.0
0.0
100.0
0.0
Wood Stove
0.0
0.0
100.0
0.0
70.0
Other
2.3
0.4
0.0
0.0
30.0
Table 1.21: Major Heating Devices Used per Subjective Assessment of Welfare, % Extremely Poor
Poor
Non-poor
Wealthy
Non-manufactured Gas Heater
1.4
1.8
1.2
3.2
Manufactured Gas Heater
26.8
43.1
44.7
42.8
Individual Heating Boiler
0.0
3.6
23.0
43.9
Centralized Heating
0.0
0.2
0.4
0.5
Gas Stove
22.5
9.9
8.4
0.5
Manufactured Electric Appliances
8.5
14.3
10.2
5.3
Non-manufactured Electric Appliances
19.7
17.7
9.1
2.1
Wood Stove
19.7
8.5
2.3
1.1
Other
1.4
1.0
0.6
0.5
Table 1.22: Major Heating Devices per Quintile Groups, % Quintile 1
Quintile 2
Quintile 3
Quintile 4
Quintile 5
Non-manufactured Gas Heater
3.4
1.6
0.7
1.4
0.9
Manufactured Gas Heater
45.2
47.2
45.1
43.1
38.1
Individual Heating Boiler
7.7
10.6
16.3
25.2
32.5
Centralized Heating
0.3
0.3
0.7
0.2
0.2
Gas Stove
13.9
11.1
8.2
7.9
3.6
Manufactured Electric Appliances
7.4
9.2
12.7
11.4
11.7
Non-manufactured Electric Appliances
12.4
12.1
12.5
7.5
10.8
Wood Stove
9.3
6.1
3.4
2.8
1.3
Other
0.3
1.8
0.5
0.5
0.9
Page | 51
Economic Development and Research Center (EDRC)
Table 1.23: Options for Getting Hot Water (including for shower), % 2008/2009 Winter
2007/2008 Winter
Major
Secondary
Major
Secondary
Gas Water Heater
28.7
0.3
28.1
0.4
Electric Water Tank, Boiler
4.6
0.6
4.5
0.7
Electric Water Heater (Geyser type)
13.9
1.1
13.6
1.0
Non-manufactured Electric Immersion Heater
12.3
7.5
14.2
7.1
Furnace
1.5
1.1
1.9
1.6
Individual Heating Boiler
18.4
0.0
16.6
0.0
Local-collective Heating Boiler
0.2
0.0
0.1
0.0
Centralized Heating
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.0
Gas stove
19.1
18.0
19.1
17.1
Other Devices/Options
0.9
1.2
0.9
1.2
Hot Water Users
99.6
30.0
99.2
29.1
Hot Water Non-users
0.3
70.0
0.8
70.9
Table 1.22: Options for Getting Hot Water (including for shower) per Major Heating Options, % Electricity
Natural Gas
Wood
Centralized Heating
Other
Not heated
Total
Gas Water Heater
15.3
33.6
12.7
40.0
0.0
23.5
28.7
Electric Water Tank, Boiler
5.3
4.4
3.8
20.0
0.0
0.0
4.6
30.1
9.4
12.7
0.0
0.0
0.0
13.9
36.5
4.2
20.3
10.0
30.0
35.3
12.3
Furnace
0.0
0.4
27.8
0.0
30.0
0.0
1.5
Individual Heating Boiler
0.0
25.3
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
18.4
Gas stove
11.0
21.5
21.5
0.0
20.0
23.5
19.1
Centralized Heating
0.0
0.2
0.0
30.0
0.0
0.0
0.3
Other
1.6
0.9
1.3
0.0
10.0
0.0
0.9
Not heated
0.2
0.1
0.0
0.0
10.0
17.6
0.3
Electric Water Heater (Geyser type) Non-manufactured Electric Immersion Heater
52 | Page
Assessment of Heat Supply and Heating Options in Multi-Apartment Blocks in Armenia
Section 2: Duration of Heating Season Table 2.1: Duration of Heating Season by Marzes, % Up to 2 Months
3 Months
4 Months
5 Months
6 Months
More than 6 Months
Not heated
Aragatsotn
-
-
20.8
33.3
25.0
16.7
4.2
Ararat
-
2.9
41.2
50.0
5.9
-
-
1.3
13.0
45.5
37.7
1.3
-
1.3
-
-
7.1
16.1
55.4
19.6
1.8
Lory
1.1
9.5
16.3
33.2
33.2
2.6
4.2
Kotayq
0.5
5.6
31.0
42.6
19.3
0.5
0.5
Shirak
-
0.8
4.7
37.8
44.1
12.6
-
Syuniq
1.0
2.9
20.6
19.6
54.9
1.0
-
-
4.8
33.3
52.4
9.5
-
-
Tavush
2.5
2.5
17.5
57.5
17.5
2.5
-
Yerevan
1.4
38.7
44.1
10.5
4.7
-
0.5
Armenia
1.0
23.8
34.6
22.1
15.7
1.9
0.9
Armavir Gegharquniq
Vayots Dzor
Table 2.2: Duration of Heating Season per Major Heting Options Used, % Up to 2 Months
3 Months
4 Months
5 Months
6 Months
More than 6 Months
Not heated
Armenia
1.0
23.8
34.6
22.1
15.7
1.9
0.9
Yerevan
1.4
38.7
44.1
10.5
4.7
-
0.5
Marzes
0.6
5.3
23.0
36.5
29.3
4.2
1.2
Electricity
1.8
33.3
39.4
17.7
7.6
0.2
-
Natural Gas
0.9
21.8
34.1
23.0
18.0
2.1
-
Wood
-
13.9
25.3
35.4
22.8
2.5
-
Other
-
15.8
31.6
21.1
10.5
21.1
-
Table 2.3: Duration of Heating Season per Type of Building, %
Stone Buiding, Stalin Design Stone Buildng, Khrushchev Design Stone Building, Other Design Bearing-wall Building, Khrushchev Design Bearing-wall Building, Other Design Monolith Other Design
Up to 2 Months
3 Months
4 Months
5 Months
6 Months
More than 6 Months
Not heated
1.6
23.2
39.2
19.2
16.0
0.8
-
1.2
18.2
38.8
19.8
19.4
2.3
0.4
1.0
17.2
35.2
23.2
18.9
2.9
1.6
3.8
30.0
41.3
13.8
10.0
1.3
-
0.6
31.4
31.8
22.7
11.7
1.1
0.6
2.0
22.4
14.3
30.6
24.5
4.1
2.0
-
20.0
40.0
24.0
12.0
4.0
-
Page | 53
Economic Development and Research Center (EDRC)
Table 2.4: Duration of Heating Season per Overall Condition of Windows in Apartment, % Up to 2 Months
3 Months
4 Months
5 Months
6 Months
More than 6 Months
Not heated
Good
1.2
28.7
42
15
11.2
1.7
0.2
Average
0.8
22.9
32.3
23.5
17.5
2.4
0.5
Bad
1.3
22
32.8
25.2
15.4
1.1
2.3
Table 2.5: Duration of Heating Season per HH Average Monthly income Assessment, % Up to 2 Months
3 Months
4 Months
5 Months
6 Months
More than 6 Months
Not heated
-
36.7
30.0
11.7
20.0
1.7
-
601-1000 USD
1.7
27.7
44.9
13.7
11.0
0.7
0.3
301-600 USD
0.8
29.3
38.2
16.4
12.8
1.8
0.6
101-300 USD
0.7
17.5
29.2
30.4
19.5
2.2
0.5
Up to 100 USD
2.4
20.0
26.2
27.1
17.6
2.4
4.3
More than 6 Months 1.9
Not heated 0.9 0.5
1001 USD and more
Table 2.6: Duration of Heating Season per Presence of Children and Elderly in HH, % Up to 2 Months 1.0
Armenia Yerevan Marzes No Children HH with Children 1 Child 2 children 3 and more Children No Elderly HHs with Elderly 1 Elderly 2 and more Elderly
3 Months
4 Months
5 Months
6 Months
23.8
34.6
22.1
15.7
1.4
38.7
44.1
10.5
4.7
-
0.6
5.3
23.0
36.5
29.3
4.2
1.2
1.5
25.1
35.7
20.0
14.8
1.8
1.2
0.1
21.8
32.2
25.9
17.3
2.2
0.4
0.3
25.7
33.4
22.5
16.0
1.6
0.5
-
16.5
30.6
31.0
19.4
2.5
-
-
22.0
32.2
23.7
15.3
5.1
1.7
1.2
22.5
34.3
22.4
16.9
2.0
0.7
0.8
26.7
34.8
21.4
13.4
1.8
1.1
0.6
27.9
32.7
21.3
14.4
1.7
1.5
0.5
23.8
40.5
22.2
11.4
1.6
-
Table 2.7: Duration of Heating Season per Subjective Assessment of HH Welfare, % Up to 2 Months
3 Months
4 Months
5 Months
6 Months
More than 6 Months
Not heated
Armenia
1.0
23.8
34.6
22.1
15.7
1.9
0.9
Yerevan
1.4
38.7
44.1
10.5
4.7
-
0.5
Marzes
0.6
5.3
23.0
36.5
29.3
4.2
1.2
According to HH head Subjective Assessment
Extremely Poor
1.3
26.7
24.0
28.0
12.0
1.3
6.7
Poor
1.4
27.1
30.9
26.3
12.4
0.8
1.2
Non-poor
1.0
23.2
36.0
20.1
17.1
2.2
0.5
-
17.4
40.2
21.7
17.4
3.3
-
Wealthy
According to Interviewer Subjective Assessment
Extremely Poor
1.2
24.7
23.5
32.1
9.9
1.2
7.4
Poor
1.5
28.5
31.6
23.9
12.3
1.1
1.1
Non-poor
1.0
23.1
36.1
20.7
16.9
1.8
0.5
-
17.0
36.8
22.4
18.8
4.9
-
Wealthy
54 | Page
Assessment of Heat Supply and Heating Options in Multi-Apartment Blocks in Armenia
Section 3: Heated Area Table 3.1: Entirety of Apartment Heating per Number of Rooms, % Heated
1 Room 2 Rooms
1-room Apartments 98.5
2-room Apartments 36.0
-
3 Rooms 4 and more Rooms Not heated
3-room Apartments 28.2
4 and more room Apartments 24.7
Total Apartments 40.3
63.5
13.8
12.6
30.8
-
57.0
16.8
23.7
-
-
-
45.3
4.3
1.5
0.5
1.0
0.5
0.9
Table 3.2: Heated Rooms per types in 2007/2008 and 2008/2009, as % in each room type Heated in 2008-2009
Not heated in 2007-08, nor in 2008-09
Heated in 2007-2008
Living Room
95.7
87.0
4.1
Bedroom
69.4
68.8
30.0
Corridor/Holl
66.4
62.8
33.3
Cabinet
67.2
65.2
33.3
Kitchen
68.7
65.6
30.9
Bathroom/Toilette
35.4
34.0
63.7
Table 3.3: Entirety of Apartment Heating per Major Heating Options Used, % Heated Entirely
Heated Partially
Not Heated
Kitchen Heated
Kitchen Not Heated
Bathroom/Toil ette Heated
Bathroom/To ilette Not Heated
Armenia
63.7
35.4
0.9
68.7
31.3
35.4
64.6
Yerevan Marzes Electricity
69.9 56.2
29.6 42.6
0.5 1.2
70.4
29.6
34.6
65.4
66.7
33.3
36.4
63.6
46.8
53.2
-
37.0
63.0
9.1
90.9
Natural Gas
71.1
28.9
-
79.6
20.4
44.3
55.7
Wood Other Not heated
35.9
64.1
-
52.0
48.0
18.2
81.8
55.6
44.4
-
77.8
22.2
52.6
47.4
-
-
100.0
-
100.0
-
100.0
Table 3.4: Entirety of Apartment Heating per Type of Building, % Heated Entirely
Heated Partially
Not Heated
Kitchen Heated
Kitchen Not Heated
Bathroom/Toi lette Heated
Bathroom/T oilette Not Heated
61.9
38.1
-
58.7
41.3
33.1
66.9
68.1
31.5
0.4
63.2
36.8
39.3
60.7
60.6
37.7
1.6
69.2
30.8
36.2
63.8
62.0
38.0
-
60.8
39.2
40.0
60.0
67.1
32.2
0.6
72.6
27.4
33.1
66.9
Monolith
36.7
61.2
2.0
63.3
36.7
36.2
63.8
Other Design
57.7
42.3
-
73.1
26.9
48.0
52.0
Stone Buiding, Stalin Design Stone Buildng, Khrushchev Design Stone Building, Other Design Bearing-wall Building, Khrushchev Design Bearing-wall Building, Other Design
Table 3.5: Entirety of Apartment Heating per HH Size
Page | 55
Economic Development and Research Center (EDRC)
Heated Entirely
Heated Partially
Not Heated
Kitchen Heated
Kitchen Not Heated
Bathroom/Toil ette Heated
Bathroom/To ilette Not Heated
All HHs
63.7
35.4
0.9
68.7
31.3
35.4
64.6
1 Member HH
59.5
37.5
3.0
49.5
50.5
20.8
79.2
2 Members HH
60.7
38.2
1.2
62.2
37.8
28.4
71.6
3 Members HH
64.2
35.0
0.8
68.6
31.4
35.1
64.9
4 Members HH 5 and more Members HH
65.9
33.3
0.8
72.0
28.0
41.6
58.4
64.9
35.0
0.2
76.0
24.0
39.1
60.9
Table 3.6: Entirety of Apartment Heating per Presence of Children and Elderly in HH, % Heated Entirely
Heated Partially
Not Heated
Kitchen Heated
Kitchen Not Heated
Bathroom/Toil ette Heated
Bathroom/T oilette Not Heated
No Children
62.0
36.9
1.2
65.9
34.1
34.0
66.0
HH with Children
66.8
32.8
0.4
73.8
26.2
38.0
62.0
1 Child
66.0
33.4
0.5
71.4
28.6
34.3
65.7
2 children
68.7
31.3
-
76.4
23.6
43.1
56.9
3 and more Children No Elderly
63.8
34.5
1.7
77.2
22.8
36.8
63.2
65.8
33.4
0.7
69.7
30.3
37.3
62.7
HHs with Elderly
59.5
39.5
1.1
66.7
33.3
31.7
68.3
1 Elderly
58.9
39.7
1.5
67.2
32.8
31.9
68.1
2 and more Elderly
61.1
38.9
-
65.9
34.1
30.6
69.4
Table 3.7: Entirety of Apartment Heating per Assessment of HH Monthly Income, % Heated Entirely
Heated Partially
Not Heated
Kitchen Heated
Kitchen Not Heated
Bathroom/To ilette Heated
Bathroom/To ilette Not Heated
1001 USD and more
91.7
8.3
-
95.1
4.9
50.0
50.0
601-1000 USD
82.9
16.8
0.3
85.2
14.8
52.8
47.2
301-600 USD
67.6
31.8
0.6
71.1
28.9
37.5
62.5
101-300 USD
54.9
44.6
0.5
63.7
36.3
30.9
69.1
Up to 100 USD
47.1
48.6
4.3
47.6
52.4
15.1
84.9
Table 3.8: Entirety of Apartment Heating per Assessment of HH Welfare, % Heated Entirely
Heated Partially
Not Heated
Kitchen Heated
Kitchen Not Heated
Bathroom/Toil ette Heated
Bathroom/Toil ette Not Heated
97.2
According to HH head Subjective Assessment
Extremely Poor
40.0
53.3
6.7
45.1
54.9
2.8
Poor Non-poor Wealthy
45.5
53.3
1.2
52.2
47.8
15.5
84.5
69.9 81.1
29.6 18.9
0.5 -
74.2 85.4
25.8 14.6
42.0 56.7
58.0 43.3
Extremely Poor
35.8
56.8
7.4
42.1
57.9
1.3
98.8
Poor
43.7
55.2
1.1
51.8
48.2
14.5
85.5
Non-poor
69.9
29.6
0.5
73.2
26.8
41.0
59.0
Wealthy
79.8
20.2
-
87.0
13.0
58.3
41.7
According to Interviewer Subjective Assessment
Section 4: Temperature Analysis
56 | Page
Assessment of Heat Supply and Heating Options in Multi-Apartment Blocks in Armenia
Table 4.1: Share of Rooms in Apartment per Average Temperature Groups during Day and Night Times, % Heated Rooms
Very Cold
Cold
Not Warm, Mostly Cold
Warm
Very Warm
%
Up to 7C
8-14C
15-18C
19-21C
Above 22C
Living Room
95.7
0
12.5
39.7
44.9
2.8
Bedroom 1
69.4
0.5
8.7
41.3
46.5
2.9
Bedroom 2
62.4
0.3
10
38.5
46.4
4.9
Bedroom 3
52.3
0
6.5
40.1
48.9
4.5
Corridor/Hall
66.4
0.6
10.2
36.1
50
3.1
45
3
18.8
33.2
42.7
2.3
Cabinet
67.2
0
6.9
21.3
60.4
11.4
Kitchen
68.7
0.3
12.3
41.2
42.9
3.2
Bathroom/Toilette
35.4
1.9
16.1
39.3
40.6
2.1
Closed Habitable Balcony
Table 4.2: Share of Rooms in Apartment per Average Temperature Groups during Nighttimes, % Heated Rooms
Very Cold
Cold
Not Warm, Mostly Cold
Warm
Very Warm
%
Up to 7C
8-14C
15-18C
19-21C
Above 22C
Living Room
95.7
5.5
20.2
43.8
28.9
1.6
Bedroom 1
69.4
1.6
18.3
38.8
39.1
2.1
Bedroom 2
62.4
2
16
39.3
40.4
2.3
Bedroom 3
52.3
1.6
15.1
46.5
34.2
2.6
Corridor/Hall
66.4
4
18.6
41.2
33.6
2.6
45
7.5
23.9
37.6
29.2
1.9
Closed Habitable Balcony Cabinet
67.2
3.5
3.4
33.7
55.8
3.5
Kitchen
68.7
4.7
22
43.3
28.2
1.7
Bathroom/Toilette
35.4
7.5
22.4
37.8
30.5
1.9
Table 4.3: Average Temperature in Apartments in January, 2009 by Marzes, %
Aragatsotn Ararat
Average Temperature C0
Very Cold
Cold
Not Warm, Mostly Cold
Warm
Very Warm
Up to 7C
8-14C
15-18C
19-21C
Above 22C
4.2
4.2
54.2
33.3
4.2
17.6
-
10.3
45.6
36.8
7.4
17.8
Armavir
1.3
7.9
40.8
48.7
1.3
18.1
Gegharquniq
1.8
5.4
44.6
46.4
1.8
17.3
Lory
7.3
39.3
36.1
15.7
1.6
17
Kotayq
0.5
9.7
61.5
28.2
0
17.2
Shirak
-
6.3
53.2
39.7
0.8
17.1
Syuniq
-
17.8
48.5
30.7
3
17.3
Vayots Dzor
-
18.2
45.5
36.4
0
17.3
Tavush
-
22.5
52.5
25
0
16.5
Yerevan
-
13
39.7
41.9
5.4
17.7
Armenia
0.9
13.6
44.4
37.2
3.9
17.3
Page | 57
Economic Development and Research Center (EDRC)
Table 4.4: Average Temperature in January,2009 per Duration of Heating Season, % Average Temperature, C0
Very Cold
Cold
Not Warm, Mostly Cold
Warm
Very Warm
Up to 7C
8-14C
15-18C
19-21C
Above 22C
Up to 2 Months
4.8
38.1
42.9
14.3
-
14.2
3 Months
1.5
15.6
41.3
37.1
4.6
17.1
4 Months
0.1
10.1
42.3
41.2
6.2
17.8
5 Months
-
13.9
51.3
33.4
1.3
17.3
6 Months
-
14
45.1
38.7
2.2
17.4
More than 6 Months
-
2.6
47.4
47.4
2.6
17.1
52.9
47.1
-
-
-
7.7
Average Temperature, C0
Not heated
Table 4.5: Average Temperature in Apartments in January, 2009 per Major Heating Option Used, % Very Cold
Cold
Not Warm, Mostly Cold
Warm
Very Warm
Up to 7C
8-14C
15-18C
19-21C
Above 22C
Armenia
0.9
13.6
44.4
37.2
3.9
17.3
Yerevan
0
13
39.7
41.9
5.4
17.7
Marzes
1.9
14.4
50.1
31.6
2.1
17.1
Electricity
0.2
20
66
13.3
0.5
16.2
Natural Gas
0.7
10.3
37.7
46.2
5.1
18
Wood
1.3
20.3
62
15.2
1.3
16.2
Other
11.1
27.8
33.3
16.7
11.1
Not heated
17.6
82.4
0
0
0
7.8
Average Temperature, C0
Table 4.6: Average Temperature in Apartments in January, 2009 per Type of Building, %
Stone Buiding, Stalin Design Stone Buildng, Khrushchev Design Stone Building, Other Design Bearing-wall Building, Khrushchev Design Bearing-wall Building, Other Design Monolith Other Design
Very Cold
Cold
Not Warm, Mostly Cold
Warm
Very Warm
Up to 7C
8-14C
15-18C
19-21C
Above 22C
0.8
15.1
38.9
40.5
4.8
17.4
0.4
13.2
44
39.3
3.1
17.4
0.9
13.7
48.9
33.9
2.6
17.3
0
12.5
58.8
26.3
2.5
17
0.6
11.5
40.3
42.4
5.2
17.7
10.4
25
39.6
22.9
2.1
15.4
0
40
32
8
20
16.4
58 | Page
Assessment of Heat Supply and Heating Options in Multi-Apartment Blocks in Armenia
Table 4.7: Average Temperature in Apartments in January, 2009 per Overall Condition of Windows, % Very Cold
Cold
Not Warm, Mostly Cold
Warm
Very Warm
Average Temperature, C0
Up to 7C
8-14C
15-18C
19-21C
Above 22C
Good Condition
0.5
5
29.9
56.6
8.1
18.8
Average Condition
0.4
11.6
48.1
36.6
3.3
17.5
Bad Condition
2.1
25.3
48
22.7
1.9
16.1
Table 4.8: Average Temperature in Apartments in January, 2009 per HH Size, % Very Cold
Cold
Not Warm, Mostly Cold
Warm
Very Warm
Up to 7C
8-14C
15-18C
19-21C
Above 22C
0.9
13.6
44.4
37.2
3.9
17.3
1 Member HH
2
31
43
22.5
1.5
16.1
2 Members HH
0.9
19.2
43.2
35.2
1.5
16.9
3 Members HH
1.1
11.1
48.2
34.8
4.9
17.5
4 Members HH
0.8
9.3
41.3
42.5
6.1
17.9
5 and more Members HH
0.3
8.9
45.5
41.4
3.9
17.8
All HHs
Average Temperature, C0
Table 4.9: Average Temperature in Apartments in January, 2009 per Presence of Children and Elderly in HH, % Very Cold
Cold
Not Warm, Mostly Cold
Warm
Very Warm
Average Temperature, C0
Up to 7C
8-14C
15-18C
19-21C
Above 22C
No Children
0.9
15.9
45.1
34.4
3.7
HH with Children
0.7
9.6
43.1
42.4
4.2
17.9
1 Child
0.5
10.9
42.1
41.3
5.1
17.8
2 children
0.7
8.1
43.7
44.4
3.2
18
3 and more Children
1.7
8.6
46.6
39.7
3.4
17.7
No Elderly
0.9
11.3
45
37.7
5.1
17.4
HHs with Elderly
17.3
0.8
18.2
43.1
36.4
1.5
17
1 Elderly
1
19.2
42.8
35.7
1.3
16.9
2 and more Elderly
0
16.2
43.8
37.8
2.2
17.4
Table 4.10: Average Temperature in Apartments in January, 2009 per Assessment of HH Average Monthly Income, % Very Cold
Cold
Not Warm, Mostly Cold
Warm
Very Warm
Up to 7C
8-14C
15-18C
19-21C
Above 22C
0
1.6
19.7
67.2
11.5
19.6
601-1000 USD
0.3
4.8
32
56.4
6.5
18.7
301-600 USD
0.4
5.9
45.7
42.6
5.3
18.1
101-300 USD
0.4
17.8
49.2
30.8
1.9
16.9
Up to 100 USD
5.3
38.8
45.9
9.1
1
14.6
1001 USD and more
Average Temperature, C0
Page | 59
Economic Development and Research Center (EDRC)
Table 4.11: Average Temperature in Apartments in January, 2009 per Assessment of HH Welfare, %
Very Cold
Cold
Not Warm, Mostly Cold
Warm
Very Warm
Up to 7C
8-14C
15-18C
19-21C
Above 22C
Average Temperature, C0
According to HH head Subjective Assessment
Extremely Poor
6.8
56.8
33.8
2.7
0
13.2
Poor
1.4
28.3
55.6
14.1
0.6
15.8
Non-poor
0.5
6.6
43.2
45.4
4.3
18.1
0
3.8
25.9
58.4
11.9
19.4
Wealthy
According to Interviewer Subjective Assessment
Extremely Poor
7.5
52.5
37.5
1.3
1.3
13.4
Poor
0.7
30.2
57.3
11.7
0.2
15.7
Non-poor
0.6
7.1
43.3
45.4
3.6
18
0
2.7
26.3
56.3
14.7
19.5
Wealthy
Table 4.12: Average Temperature in Apartments in January, 2009 per Quintile Groups, % Very Cold
Cold
Not Warm, Mostly Cold
Warm
Very Warm
Average Temperature, C0
Up to 7C
8-14C
15-18C
19-21C
Above 22C
Quintile 1
3.9
27.2
46.6
22.1
0.3
15.8
Quintile 2
1.3
14.1
53.9
29.3
1.3
16.9
Quintile 3
0.2
10.7
47
38.4
3.6
17.6
Quintile 4
-
11.8
37
43.4
7.9
18
Quintile 5
0.2
5.2
38.9
49.5
6.1
18.5
Table 4.13: Average Temperature in Apartments in January, 2009 per Heating Device Used, % Very Cold
Cold
Not Warm, Mostly Cold
Warm
Very Warm
Average Temperature, C0
Non-manufactured Gas Heater Manufactured Gas Heater Individual Heating Boiler
0
25.8
58.1
12.9
3.2
16.7
0.3
10
45.4
42
2.2
17.9
0
1.3
14
71.3
13.4
19.8
Gas Stove
4.1
29.8
49.1
15.8
1.2
15.4
0.5
21.5
63
14.6
0.5
16.1
0.5
18.7
68.9
11
1
16.3
0
0
33.3
33.3
33.3
20.3
Wood Stove
1.1
24.1
59.8
13.8
1.1
15.9
Other
5.6
11.1
33.3
44.4
5.6
17.3
Non-manufactured Electric Appliance Manufactured Electric Appliance Centralized Heating
60 | Page
Assessment of Heat Supply and Heating Options in Multi-Apartment Blocks in Armenia
Section 5: Analysis of Expenditures on Heating and Hot Water Table 5.1: Average Monthly Expenditures on Heating and Hot Water in 2008/2009 Winter, AMD Mean
Median
Mode
Std. Deviation
Range
Minimum
Maximum
Armenia
18,260
17,000
20,000
9,736
89,000
1,000
90,000
Yerevan
20,667
20,000
20,000
10,192
88,500
1,500
90,000
Marzes
15,263
15,000
15,000
8,002
49,000
1,000
50,000
Electricity Natural Gas Wood
16,429
15,000
20,000
10,164
69,000
1,000
70,000
19,244
18,000
20,000
9,382
88,600
1,400
90,000
12,701
10,000
10,000
7,736
41,000
1,000
42,000
Other
10,253
9,728
2,000
7,862
23,000
2,000
25,000
Table 5.2: Distribution of HHs per Average Monthly Expenditures on Heating and Heating Options Used, % Average Expenditures, AMD
Up to 5000
5001-10000 AMD
10001-15000 AMD
15001-20000 AMD
20001-25000 AMD
25001 AMD and more
Armenia
18,260
5.6
19.9
20.6
23.1
12.9
17.9
Yerevan
20,667
3.2
15.2
16
24.9
16.2
24.6
Marzes
15,263
8.4
25.8
26.4
20.9
8.9
9.6
Electricity Natural Gas Wood
16,429
7.8
27
21.7
21.7
8.7
13
19,244
3.8
16.8
20
24.3
14.7
20.3
12,701
16.7
35.9
24.4
11.5
5.1
6.4
Other
10,253
25
18.8
25
18.8
12.5
0
Table 5.3: Distribution of HHs per Average Monthly Expenditures on heating and Heating Device Used, % Average Expenditures, AMD
Up to 5000
5001-10000 AMD
10001-15000 AMD
15001-20000 AMD
20001-25000 AMD
25001 AMD and more
13,662
10
26.7
36.7
16.7
6.7
3.3
17,783
2.2
20.8
25.6
27.1
15
9.3
26,909
0.5
2.3
6.2
21.8
17.9
51.3
13,343
18.3
28.4
19.5
18.3
6.5
8.9
15,809
6
31.5
20.8
21.8
8.3
11.6
17,063
8.9
23.4
22.4
22
9.3
14
Wood Stove
11,842
17.9
35.7
25
10.7
4.8
6
Other
17,492
9.1
9.1
31.8
18.2
18.2
13.6
Nonmanufactured Gas Heater Manufactured Gas Heater Individual Heating Boiler Gas Stove Nonmanufactured Electric Appliance Manufactured Electric Appliance
Page | 61
Economic Development and Research Center (EDRC)
Table 5.4: Distribution of HHs per Average Monthly Expenditures on Heating by Marzes, % Average Expenditures AMD
Up to 5000
5001-10000 AMD
10001-15000 AMD
15001-20000 AMD
20001-25000 AMD
25001 AMD and more
Aragatsotn
16,112
0
17.4
30.4
30.4
13
8.7
Ararat
18,550
1.5
23.9
26.9
14.9
11.9
20.9
Armavir
17,655
3.9
16.9
28.6
19.5
16.9
14.3
Gegharquniq
17,513
6.9
22.4
19
25.9
12.1
13.8
Lory
11,398
20.2
34.4
21.3
15.3
4.9
3.8
Kotayq
1,637
6.8
24
28.1
21.9
7.8
11.5
Shirak
16,439
4
16.7
30.2
29.4
11.9
7.9
Syuniq
14,620
6.9
27.7
31.7
19.8
6.9
6.9
Vayots Dzor
14,350
4.5
36.4
31.8
13.6
4.5
9.1
Tavush
11,873
10
42.5
22.5
22.5
0
2.5
Yerevan
20,637
3.2
15.2
16
24.9
16.2
24.6
Armenia
18,260
5.5
19.9
20.7
23.1
12.9
17.8
Table 5.5: Distribution of HHs per Average Monthly Expenditures on Heating and Type of Building, % Average Expenditures, AMD
Up to 5000
5001-10000 AMD
10001-15000 AMD
15001-20000 AMD
20001-25000 AMD
25001 AMD and more
17,752
4.8
17.5
23
25.4
12.7
16.7
15,788
7.9
26.4
22.8
20.1
11.4
11.4
16,259
6.2
24
23.7
25.2
10.5
10.4
17,995
6.3
16.3
17.5
28.8
18.8
12.5
20,908
3.7
14.4
17.5
21.4
15
28
Monolith
14,409
14.6
16.7
20.8
27.1
12.5
8.3
Other Design
15,197
4
40
16
16
12
12
Stone Buiding, Stalin Design Stone Buildng, Khrushchev Design Stone Building, Other Design Bearing-wall Building, Khrushchev Design Bearing-wall Building, Other Design
Table 5.9: Distribution of HHs per Average Monthly Expenditures on Hating and HH Size, % Average Expenditures , AMD
Up to 5000
5001-10000 AMD
10001-15000 AMD
15001-20000 AMD
20001-25000 AMD
25001 AMD and more
1 Member HH
10,530
22.3
38.1
20.8
12.2
3.6
3
2 Members HH
14,842
8.4
28.4
23.4
21.3
9.6
9
3 Members HH
18,345
4.9
15.9
21.6
26.8
15.1
15.7
4 Members HH
20,011
2.7
14.1
21
25.3
12.4
24.5
5 and more Members HH
20,845
1.2
16.1
18.3
23.8
16.9
23.7
HHs
62 | Page
Assessment of Heat Supply and Heating Options in Multi-Apartment Blocks in Armenia
Table 5.11: Distribution of HHs per Average Monthly Expenditures on Heating and Assessment of HH Average Monthly Income, % Average Expenditures, AMD
Up to 5000
5001-10000 AMD
10001-15000 AMD
15001-20000 AMD
20001-25000 AMD
25001 AMD and more
31,153
3.3
3.3
5
13.3
6.7
68.3
24,673
0
8.9
10.3
23.4
16.2
41.2
301-600 USD
20,226
1.3
12
19.5
28.5
19.7
19
101-300 USD
14,988
5.8
27.4
28.1
22.8
8
7.9
Up to 100 USD
9,295
28.5
41
17.5
8
3.5
1.5
Total
18,260
19.9
20.7
23.1
12.9
17.9
100
1001 USD and more 601-1000 USD
Table 5.12: Distribution of HHs per Average Monthly Expenditures on Heating and Assessment of HH Welfare, % Average Expenditures, AMD
Up to 5000
5001-10000 AMD
10001-15000 AMD
15001-20000 AMD
20001-25000 AMD
25001 AMD and more
According to HH head Subjective Assessment
Extremely Poor Poor
7,632
35.2
42.3
12.7
4.2
2.8
2.8
13,823
9.5
32.9
25.5
17.4
7.9
6.9
Non-poor
19,541
3
15.4
19.8
26.7
14.7
20.4
Wealthy
24,573
0.5
6
16.8
21.2
19
36.4
According to Interviewer Subjective Assessment
Extremely Poor Poor
7,868
33.8
45.9
8.1
5.4
2.7
4.1
13,475
10
33.8
26.7
16.2
7.1
6.2
Non-poor
19,379
3.1
15.7
20
26.8
15.1
19.3
Wealthy
24,354
0.4
6.3
15.7
22.4
16.6
38.6
Table 5.13: Distribution of HHs per Average Monthly Expenditures on Heating and Welfare and Quintile Groups, % Average Expenditures, AMD
Up to 5000
5001-10000 AMD
10001-15000 AMD
15001-20000 AMD
20001-25000 AMD
25001 AMD and more
Quintile 1
14,276
9.7
34
20.7
17.3
8.2
10
Quintile 2
15,627
7.4
23
26.6
22.2
10.6
10.3
Quintile 3
18,807
6
15.5
22
23.2
15.8
17.7
Quintile 4
19,384
4.4
14.4
21.6
25.6
12.3
21.6
Quintile 5
21,403
1.6
16.1
13.4
25.6
16.3
27
Page | 63
Economic Development and Research Center (EDRC)
Section 6: Analysis of Cases of Illness Due to Heating Conditions Table 6.1: Cases of Illness due to Heating Conditions in 2008/2009 Winter, % in total HHs HHs with Illness Cases
No Illness Cases
More Frequent Illness Cases
The Same Frequency of Illness Cases
Less Frequent Illness Cases
Armenia
37.3
62.7
15.9
60.0
24.1
Yerevan
30.6
69.4
18.1
55.1
26.9
Marzes
45.6
54.4
13.8
64.9
21.3
Aragatsotn
40.0
60.0
-
80.0
20.0
Ararat
47.8
52.2
9.1
47.0
43.9
Armavir
31.2
68.8
28.1
53.1
18.8
Gegharquniq
14.3
85.7
9.1
68.2
22.7
Lory
75.8
24.2
17.4
71.0
11.6
Kotayq
35.9
64.1
12.3
77.8
9.9
Shirak
48.8
51.2
12.3
70.8
16.9
Syuniq
55.9
44.1
9.5
55.6
34.9
Vayots Dzor
36.4
63.6
33.3
55.6
11.1
Tavush
37.5
62.5
10.0
90.0
-
Electricity
43.6
56.4
14.8
69.9
15.3
Natural Gas
34.1
65.9
16.4
56.0
27.6
Wood
54.4
45.6
16.7
72.2
11.1
Other
44.4
55.6
-
83.3
16.7
Table 6.2: Cases of Illness due to Heating Conditions per Heating Options Used and by Marzes, % in total HHs HHs with 1 Illness Case
HHs with 2 Illness Cases
HHs with 3 and more Illness Cases
Armenia
34.6
30.3
35.1
Yerevan
34.1
27.8
38.1
Marzes
35.2
32.2
32.6
Aragatsotn
44.4
33.3
22.2
Ararat
45.5
30.3
24.2
Armavir
58.3
33.3
8.3
Gegharquniq
33.3
55.6
11.1
Lory
21.5
31.9
46.5
Kotayq
36.6
29.6
33.8
Shirak
43.5
35.5
21.0
Syuniq
37.9
34.5
27.6
Vayots Dzor
14.3
14.3
71.4
Tavush
53.3
26.7
20.0
Electricity
38.7
29.6
31.7
Natural Gas
32.7
30.4
36.9
Wood
35.6
28.9
35.6
Other
22.2
44.4
33.3
64 | Page
Assessment of Heat Supply and Heating Options in Multi-Apartment Blocks in Armenia
Table 6.3: Cases of Illness due to Heating Conditions per Presence of Children and Elderly in HHs, % HHs with Illness Cases
No Illness Cases
Armenia
37.3
62.7
Yerevan
30.6
69.4
Marzes No Children
45.6 35.4
54.4 64.6
HH with Children
40.6
59.4
1 Child
37.3
62.7
2 children
41.5
58.5
3 and more Children No Elderly
58.6
41.4
34.6
65.4
HHs with Elderly
42.8
57.2
1 Elderly
44.9
55.1
2 and more Elderly
37.3
62.7
Table 6.4: Cases of Illness due to Heating Conditions per Welfare and Quintile Groups, % No Illness Cases
HHs with Illness Cases
HHs with 1 Illness Case
HHs with 2 Illness Cases
HHs with 3 and more Illness Cases
Quintile 1
50.1
49.9
23.4
29.9
46.7
Quintile 2
47.0
53.0
30.7
29.2
40.1
Quintile 3
60.6
39.4
33.3
32.7
33.9
Quintile 4
69.9
30.1
46.2
31.5
22.3
Quintile 5
73.9
26.1
47.4
27.2
25.4
Table 6.5: Cases of Illness due to Heating Conditions per Type of Building and Entirety of Apartment Heating, % in total No Illness Cases
HHs with Illness Cases
Stone Buiding, Stalin Design
54.0
46.0
Stone Buildng, Khrushchev Design
59.4
40.6
Stone Building, Other Design
58.3
41.7
Bearing-wall Building, Khrushchev Design
50.0
50.0
Bearing-wall Building, Other Design
68.8
31.2
Monolith
33.3
66.7
Other Design
42.3
57.7
Entirely Heated
69.6
30.4
Partially Heated
50.9
49.1
Not Heated
35.3
64.7
Kitchen Heated
66.4
33.6
Kitchen Not Heated
55.2
44.8
Bathroom/Toilette Heated
72.4
27.6
Bathroom/Toilette Not Heated
57.6
42.4
Page | 65
Economic Development and Research Center (EDRC)
Table 6.6: Cases of Illness due to Heating Conditions per Average Temperature in Apartment in January, 2009, % HHs with Illness Cases
No Illness Cases
HHs with 1 Illness Case
HHs with 2 Illness Cases
HHs with 3 and more Illness Cases
18
16.5
16.2
16.7
16.6
35.3
64.7
27.3
27.3
45.5
33
67
42.1
26.2
31.7
Not Warm, Mostly Cold
57.6
42.4
34.3
29.1
36.5
Warm
77.8
22.2
29.7
35.1
35.1
Very Warm
84.8
15.2
38.9
27.8
33.3
Average Temperature in Apartment, C
Very Cold Cold
Table 6.7: Cases of Illness due to Heating Conditions per Expenditure on Heating, % No Illness Cases
HHs with Illness Cases
HHs with 1 Illness Case
HHs with 2 Illness Cases
HHs with 3 and more Illness Cases
Up to 5000 AMD
34.6
65.4
53.5
22.5
23.9
5001-10000 AMD
51.9
48.1
38.9
32.3
28.8
10001-15000 AMD
58.9
41.1
32.2
33.3
34.5
15001-20000 AMD
66.8
33.2
35.6
30.1
34.4
20001 AMD and more
74.7
25.3
22.3
28.3
49.4
Table 6.8: Cases of Illness due to Heating Conditions per HH Size, % No Illness Cases
HHs with Illness Cases
HHs with 1 Illness Case
HHs with 2 Illness Cases
HHs with 3 and more Illness Cases
All HHs
62.7
37.3
34.7
30.2
35.1
1 Member HH
53.0
47.0
100
-
-
2 Members HH
65.1
34.9
29.7
70.3
-
3 Members HH
68.2
31.8
31.9
20.2
47.9
4 Members HH
65.4
34.6
29.2
27.5
43.3
5 and more Members HH
54.0
46.0
19.4
29.4
51.3
Table 6.9: Cases of Illness due to Heating Conditions per Assessment of HH Average Monthly Income, % No Illness Cases
HHs with Illness Cases
HHs with 1 Illness Case
HHs with 2 Illness Cases
HHs with 3 and more Illness Cases
1001 USD and more
80.3
19.7
0
16.7
1002 USD and more
77.7
22.3
18.8
25
56.3
1003 USD and more
68.9
31.1
32
29.3
38.7
1004 USD and more
50.5
49.5
36.2
33.2
30.7
1005 USD and more
44.5
55.5
47
27.4
25.6
66 | Page
Assessment of Heat Supply and Heating Options in Multi-Apartment Blocks in Armenia
Table 6.10: Cases of Illness due to Heating Conditions per Assessment of Welfare, % No Illness Cases
HHs with Illness Cases
HHs with 1 Illness Case
HHs with 2 Illness Cases
HHs with 3 and more Illness Cases
According to HH head Subjective Assessment
Extremely Poor
18.9
81.1
43.3
28.3
28.3
Poor
42.8
57.2
35.9
32.1
32.1
Non-poor
68.3
31.7
33.1
29
37.9
80
20
29.7
32.4
37.8
Wealthy
According to Interviewer Subjective Assessment
Extremely Poor
25
75
40
26.7
33.3
Poor
42.2
57.8
36.3
30.5
33.2
Non-poor
67.4
32.6
32.4
30.9
36.8
Wealthy
78.5
21.5
37.5
29.2
33.3
Page | 67
Economic Development and Research Center (EDRC)
Section 7: Satisfaction with and Preferences in Heating Conditions Table 7.1: Assessment of Disadvantages of Heating Options Used, % No Disadvantage s
Dry Air
Insufficient Heat
Unequal Heat Distribution
Apartment Gets Dirty (or Full of Smoke)
Unpleasant smell
Uncomfortabl e Device Placement
Unsafe
Expensive
Other
Armenia
35.5
10.3
18.0
15.0
2.2
-
1.2
3.4
11.1
3.3
Yerevan
47.0
8.7
15.6
12.6
0.9
2.5
0.5
2.3
9.6
0.3
Marzes Non-manufactured Gas Heater
22.0
12.5
21.3
18.3
3.1
1.5
2.0
4.9
13.5
0.9
3.3
16.7
36.7
20.0
3.3
0.0
0.0
6.7
13.3
0.0
Manufactured Gas Heater
31.8
9.8
17.6
23.4
0.7
0.5
2.7
4.7
8.8
0.0
Individual Heating Boiler
84.6
0.5
0.3
0.8
0.3
0.0
0.3
0.0
12.8
0.5
Gas Stove
18.2
10.0
22.9
17.1
0.0
15.9
0.0
7.6
8.2
0.0
Manufactured Electric Appliances
13.6
21.6
40.8
7.0
0.0
0.0
0.5
2.3
14.1
0.0
Non-manufactured Electric Appliances
17.6
24.3
21.4
15.2
1.9
0.0
0.0
1.9
17.6
0.0
Wood Stove
4.7
1.2
28.2
16.5
29.4
8.2
0.0
3.5
8.2
0.0
Table 7.2: Preferance in Heating Options per Currently Used One, % Current Option is Sufficient
Electric Heating Appliances
Armenia
34.2
1.3
0.6
9.3
35.5
7.0
10.3
0.4
1.4
Yerevan
43.5
1.9
0.0
8.2
29.7
3.5
12.1
0.0
1.2
Marzes Non-manufactured Gas Heater
22.8
0.6
1.2
10.7
42.6
11.4
8.2
0.9
1.6
13.8
3.4
0.0
10.3
37.9
13.8
17.2
3.4
0.0
Manufactured Gas Heater
28.6
0.2
0.8
2.1
46.5
10.9
8.7
0.8
1.4
Individual Heating Boiler
94.8
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
1.3
2.8
0.0
1.0
Gas Stove
7.1
1.2
0.0
32.1
45.2
3.6
8.9
0.0
1.8
Manufactured Electric Appliances
8.8
6.0
0.5
25.6
31.6
5.1
21.9
0.0
0.5
Non-manufactured Electric Appliances
7.5
2.8
0.0
11.3
52.6
5.6
17.4
0.5
2.3
Wood Stove
8.1
1.2
3.5
29.1
36.0
9.3
10.5
0.0
2.3
Wood Stove
Gas Heater
Individual Heating Boiler
Local-collective Heating Boiler
Centralized Heating
Air Conditioner
Other
Table 7.3: Assessment of Satisfaction from Heating Options per Currently Used Heating Devices, % Completely Satisfied
Partially Satisfied
Not Satisfied
Armenia
25.5
42.9
31.7
Yerevan
33.4
37.8
28.9
Marzes
15.8
49.2
35.1
Non-manufactured Gas Heater
13.3
40
46.7
Manufactured Gas Heater
17.3
60.6
22.1
Individual Heating Boiler
83.5
15.2
1.3
Gas Stove
2.9
45.9
51.2
Manufactured Electric Appliances
2.3
36.7
60.9
Non-manufactured Electric Appliances
4.2
31
64.8
Wood Stove
5.8
32.6
61.6
Table 7.4: Assessment of Satisfaction from Heating Options per Heating Devices (Gas) Completely Satisfied
Partially Satisfied
Not Satisfied
25.5
42.9
31.7
33
46.3
20.7
38
35.2
26.9
Manufactured Gas Heater Users
17.3
60.6
22.1
HHs that Switch over to Manufactured Gas Heater in 2008-2009
21.7
50
28.3
All HHs HHs that Use Natural Gas Options HHs that Switched over to Natural Gas in 2008-2009
Table 7.5: Reasons fo Heating Device Preferance Safe
Clean
Affordable
Sufficient Heat
Other
Armenia
40.6
15.4
10.4
32.3
1.3
Yerevan Marzes
41.7
7.0
14.1
35.7
1.6
39.7
23.0
6.9
29.1
1.2
14.8
33.3 27.3
Preferred Heating Devices
Electric Heating Appliance Wood Stove Gas Heater Individual Heating Boiler Local-cllective Heating Boiler Centralized Heating Air Conditioner
33.3
14.8
36.4
18.2
9.1
38.2
23.7
11.3
25.8
40.5
15.3
3.0
40.7
51.4
19.3
10.7
18.6
38.5
6.8
36.1
18.5
50.0
37.5
0.0
12.5
3.7 9.1 1.1 0.6 0.0 0.0 0.0
Other
16.7
4.2
12.5
25.0
41.7
Page | 69
Economic Development and Research Center (EDRC)
Table 7.6: Reasons for Not Using Preferred Heating Device Lack of Money
Difficulty in Technical Solutions
Absence of Suppliers
Other
Armenia
83.8
25.4
16.3
11.2
Yerevan
75.6
15.3
17.6
10.6
Marzes
91.4
34.7
15.2
11.7
Preferred Heating Devices
Electric Heating Appliance
100.0
-
-
-
Wood Stove
81.8
-
-
18.2
Gas Heater
87.7
5.3
0.5
6.4
Individual Heating Boiler
86.1
5.2
0.4
8.2
Local-collective Heating Boiler
70.0
12.1
12.9
5.0
Centralized Heating
61.4
10.6
24.6
3.4
Air Conditioner
87.5
-
12.5
-
Other
30.4
21.7
4.3
43.5
Section 8: Awareness on Loans and Preparedness to Borrow for Heating Improvement Table 8.1: Awareness on Loans and Preparedness to Borrow per Quintile Groups and Actual Expenditures on Heating, % Unaware of Loans
Aware of Loans
Willing to Borrow
Unwilling to Borrow
Quintile 1
58.6
41.4
10.1
89.9
Quintile 2
56.1
43.9
15.1
84.9
Quintile 3
45.8
54.2
12.2
87.8
Quintile 4
41.9
58.1
11.3
88.7
Quintile 5 Up to 5000 AMD
40.6
59.4
13.2
86.8
58.6
41.4
10.1
89.9
5001-10000 AMD
56.7
43.3
15.1
84.9
10001-15000 AMD
53.6
46.4
12.2
87.8
15001-20000 AMD
49.0
51.0
11.3
88.7
20001-25000 AMD
42.6
57.4
13.2
86.8
25001 AMD and more
30.0
70.0
12.4
87.6
Table 8.2: Awareness on Loans and Preparedness to Borrow per Heating Devices Used, % Unaware of Loans
Aware of Loans
Willing to Borrow
Unwilling to Borrow
Non-manufactured Gas Heater
38.7
61.3
26.7
73.3
Manufactured Gas Heater
52.2
47.8
16.8
83.2
Individual Heating Boiler
66.3
33.7
2.8
97.2
Gas Stove
55.0
45.0
11.2
88.8
Manufactured Electric Appliances
45.7
54.3
8.2
91.8
Non-manufactured Electric Appliances
54.5
45.5
16.0
84.0
Wood Stove
38.4
61.6
10.5
89.5
70 | Page
Assessment of Heat Supply and Heating Options in Multi-Apartment Blocks in Armenia
Table 8.3: Awareness on Loans and Preparedness to Borrow per Heating Devices Preferred, % Unaware of Loans
Aware of Loans
Willing to Borrow
Unwilling to Borrow
Electric Heating Appliance
84.6
15.4
7.7
92.3
Wood Stove
45.5
54.5
9.1
90.9
Gas Heater
63.4
36.6
7.5
92.5
Individual Heating Boiler
43.8
56.2
17.1
82.9
Local-collective Heating Boiler
45
55
28.6
71.4
Centralized Heating
52.2
47.8
16
84
Air Conditioner
57.1
42.9
57.1
42.9
Other
48.1
51.9
3.8
96.2
Section 9: Opportunities of Energy Saving Table 9.1: Assessment of Overall Condition of Windows per Type of Building, % Good Condition
Average Condition
Bad Condition
Armenia
21.0
55.5
23.5
Yerevan
28.7
50.3
21.0
Marzes Stone Building, Stalin Design Stone Building, Khrushchev Design Stone Building, Other Design Bearing-wall Building, Khrushchev Design Bearing-wall Building, Other Design Monolith Other Design
11.4
62.0
26.5
17.5 19.8 20.1 20.0 23.2
59.5 54.9 53.7 51.3 58.6
23.0 25.3 26.1 28.8 18.3
14.6
43.8
41.7
20.0
28.0
52.0
Table 9.2: Assessment of Overall Condition of Windows per Heating Options, Heating Device Used and Quintile Group, % Good Condition
Average Condition
Bad Condition
Electricity Natural Gas Wood Other Non-manufactured Gas Heater Manufactured Gas Heater Individual Heating Boiler Gas Stove Manufactured Electric Appliances Non-manufactured Electric Appliances Wood Stove Quintile 1
12.4 24.8 1.3 15.8 10.0 15.9 49.9 15.8
55.7 56.1 53.2 36.8 63.3 61.9 45.7 48.5
31.9 19.0 45.6 47.4 26.7 22.1 4.4 35.7
12.3
49.8
37.9
13.1
61.7
25.2
1.2
50.0
48.8
5.7
53.0
41.4
Quintile 2
15.4
52.7
31.9
Quintile 3
19.1
59.7
21.2
Quintile 4
26.2
58.3
15.5
Quintile 5
34.2
53.1
12.7
Page | 71
Economic Development and Research Center (EDRC)
Table 9.3: HHs that will Save on Heating Expenditures in Case of Window Replacement, % HHs who will save
There is no need in replacement
HHs who need to replace 1-2 windows
HHs who need to replace 3-4 windows
HHs who need to replace more than 4 windows
Armenia
63.5
44.6
11.8
23.4
20.2
Yerevan
57
54.4
9.8
19
16.7
Marzes
71.5
32.5
14.2
28.9
24.4
Electricity
70.6
38.8
13.3
27.8
20.2
Natural Gas
60.1
48
10.8
22
19.2
Wood
78.5
25.3
17.7
25.3
31.6
Quintile 1
67.6
32.4
11
30.4
26.2
Quintile 2
70.2
33.4
14.4
26.9
25.3
Quintile 3
58.5
48.1
11
22.5
18.4
Quintile 4
58.4
50.5
12.5
21.5
15.5
Quintile 5
64.2
54.5
10.5
17.7
17.3
16,536
20,957
14,386
15,517
17,153
Up to 5000 AMD
75.5
22.7
21.8
26.4
29.1
5001-10000 AMD
73
31.5
16.6
31.5
20.4
10001-15000 AMD
71.6
37.1
13.8
26.7
22.3
15001-20000 AMD
62.5
46
11.7
24.3
18
20001-25000 AMD
54.7
59.9
5.1
17.5
17.5
25001 AMD and More
46.8
62.7
5.6
12.3
19.3
Average Actual Expenditures, AMD