03:59 05 Dec 24
Info Report Check
Submission incomplete:
1: Scope: Temporary deviations from the registered monitoring plan or applied methodology (Annex 1 to the PS ver 7)
Issue:
According to the section B2.1 of the Monitoring Report, one temporary deviation has been raised and accordingly the DOE in the section 3.2.1 of the verification report provides its verification opinion; however it is observed that the Post-registration changes request form (CDM-PRC-FORM) has not been submitted.
2: Scope: The verification report does not list each parameter required by the monitoring plan and does not provide an statement on how the DOE verified the information flow (from data generation, aggregation, to recording, calculation and reporting) for these parameters including the values in the monitoring reports (VVS v7, para 281, 290 (e)).
Issue:
The verification report does not provide sufficient information on how the values in the monitoring report have been verified. It is observed that:
(a) The reported value of parameter EFCH4, BF is 0.000 in this #2 monitoring period (01/01/2011-31/12/2012) monitoring report which indicates the accuracy of the reported value (0.000) is 3 decimal places, whereas the average value (0.0000025) of the same parameter EFCH4, BF in the previous #1 monitoring period (02/09/2010-31/12/2010) monitoring report indicates 7 decimal places. It is not clear how the verification team verified the accuracy level of reported value of parameter EFCH4, BF (3 decimal places) in this monitoring period is sufficient.
(b) The QA/QC procedure in the approved monitoring plan requires "Check the consistency of the measurements by comparing the measurement results with measurements from previous years, relevant data sources (e.g. values in the literature, values used in the national GHG inventory) and default values by the IPCC. If the measurement results differ significantly from previous measurements or other relevant data source, conduct additional measurements."; however there is no further information provided with regard to the consistency check by comparing the measurement results with measurements from previous years, given that the value of "the project emissions from biomass controlled burning in the power plant" as calculated in the "cell D238" of the spreadsheet "2011 emissions" would be various from 375 tCO2e to 17,041 tCO2e if the EFCH4, BF value 0.0000022 (7 decimal places) which is the possible upper limit of methane concentrations values in the clear air indicated by page 43 of the Verification Report and 0.0001 (4 decimal places) are applied respectively.
1: Scope: Temporary deviations from the registered monitoring plan or applied methodology (Annex 1 to the PS ver 7)
Issue:
According to the section B2.1 of the Monitoring Report, one temporary deviation has been raised and accordingly the DOE in the section 3.2.1 of the verification report provides its verification opinion; however it is observed that the Post-registration changes request form (CDM-PRC-FORM) has not been submitted.
2: Scope: The verification report does not list each parameter required by the monitoring plan and does not provide an statement on how the DOE verified the information flow (from data generation, aggregation, to recording, calculation and reporting) for these parameters including the values in the monitoring reports (VVS v7, para 281, 290 (e)).
Issue:
The verification report does not provide sufficient information on how the values in the monitoring report have been verified. It is observed that:
(a) The reported value of parameter EFCH4, BF is 0.000 in this #2 monitoring period (01/01/2011-31/12/2012) monitoring report which indicates the accuracy of the reported value (0.000) is 3 decimal places, whereas the average value (0.0000025) of the same parameter EFCH4, BF in the previous #1 monitoring period (02/09/2010-31/12/2010) monitoring report indicates 7 decimal places. It is not clear how the verification team verified the accuracy level of reported value of parameter EFCH4, BF (3 decimal places) in this monitoring period is sufficient.
(b) The QA/QC procedure in the approved monitoring plan requires "Check the consistency of the measurements by comparing the measurement results with measurements from previous years, relevant data sources (e.g. values in the literature, values used in the national GHG inventory) and default values by the IPCC. If the measurement results differ significantly from previous measurements or other relevant data source, conduct additional measurements."; however there is no further information provided with regard to the consistency check by comparing the measurement results with measurements from previous years, given that the value of "the project emissions from biomass controlled burning in the power plant" as calculated in the "cell D238" of the spreadsheet "2011 emissions" would be various from 375 tCO2e to 17,041 tCO2e if the EFCH4, BF value 0.0000022 (7 decimal places) which is the possible upper limit of methane concentrations values in the clear air indicated by page 43 of the Verification Report and 0.0001 (4 decimal places) are applied respectively.
Offset now: visit the United Nations Carbon Offset Platform
Connect with us: