M-DEV0285: Deviation request to allow the use of the “Tool for the demonstration and assessment of additionality” to assess the additionality of a project activity, under methodology ACM0006.

Reference M-DEV0285
Submitted by TÜV SÜD (14 Jan 2010)
Project activity “Usina Interlagos Cogeneration Project”
Concerned methodology(ies)
ACM0006 ver. 6: Consolidated methodology for electricity generation from biomass residues
Title/subject of deviation Deviation request to allow the use of the “Tool for the demonstration and assessment of additionality” to assess the additionality of a project activity, under methodology ACM0006.
PDD PDD (1053 KB)
Description
The reason for request for the deviation is as listed below:
According to the methodology ACM0006, version 9, Project participants shall identify the most plausible baseline scenario and demonstrate additionality using the latest approved version of the “Combined tool to identify the baseline scenario and demonstrate additionality”. For Interlagos Biomass Cogeneration Project, Project participants are requesting not to use the “Combined tool to identify the baseline scenario and demonstrate additionality”, but the latest version of the “Tool for the demonstration and assessment of additionality” instead, considering the information presented below.
Explanation for the use of the “Tool for the demonstration and assessment of additionality”
and not using the "Combined tool to identify the baseline scenario and demonstrate additionality".
1. The alternatives to the project activity are:
- A new plant operating with low energy efficiency and not exporting electricity to the grid;
- The project activity implemented without being registered as a CDM project; and
- The country providing the same amount of energy using the current generation system, which is electricity supplied by large hydro and thermal power stations. The use of the “Tool for the demonstration and assessment of additionality” is justified under the consideration that methodologies using the “Combined Tool” are only applicable if all potential alternative scenarios to the proposed project activity are available options to project participants. For grid-connected power projects, such as Interlagos, one of the alternatives would be the electricity production by other facilities. This alternative is not under the control of project participants. In those cases, according to the “Combined tool to identify the baseline scenario and demonstrate additionality” footnote 1, participants could continue to use the “Additionality Tool”.
Furthermore, considering the request for clarification AM_CLA_0120 submitted to the Meth Panel and based on the answer received to this clarification request,, project proponents are requesting a deviation with the purpose of:
(i) Allowing that the baseline for incremental electricity, as defined in ACM0006, produced as a consequence of the project activity and exported to the grid is defined by default as being the grid; and
(ii) Allowing the use of the additionality tool to assess the additionality of the project activity.
As recommended by the Meth Panel for clarification AM_CLA_0120, project proponents will select in step 1 the baseline scenario for biomass residues and heat supply using the combined tool, as currently described in ACM0006.
Assessment
According to the Meth Panel´s answer in AM_CLA_0120, project proponents may wish to wait until the revision of the methodology is ready or may submit a Request for Deviation. The procedure described above, namely the submission of a Request for Deviation, follows the guideline of the Meth Panel. No amendment to the approved methodology used by the proposed project activity is necessary.
Impact
The estimates of the emissions reductions for the proposed project activity are not altered as a consequence of this request for deviation.
Link to the documentation made available at validation stage Link to relevant documentation
Signed form Signed form (711 KB)
Decision This request for deviation has been accepted.
Current status 15 Mar 2010 - Deviation accepted
Historic statuses 14 Jan 2010 - Submission received
26 Jan 2010 - Successfully passed the Completeness Check
24 Feb 2010 - Awaiting EB decision