04:10 10 Jan 25
Info Report Check
Submission incomplete:
1: Scope: The validation report does not contain a confirmation whether the temporary deviation from the registered monitoring plan or applied methodology does not require prior approval of the Board and the provisions of Appendix 1 of PS apply to those deviations as per VVS version 09.0 paragraphs 289, 298, 300, 301 and 302.
Issue: The DOE is requested to provide further information on how it can be considered temporary deviations on the delay in the NCV measurements that do not require prior approval by the Board as 1) the paragraph 3 of Appendix 1 of project standard version 09.0 that is applicable for project emissions and 2) the NCVs are used for the baseline and project emissions. Furthermore, as paragraph 2 of the appendix is applicable for baseline emissions, the DOE is also requested to explain 1) how the temporary deviation is in line with paragraph 2, hence does not require prior approval from the Board and 2) how the values from the IPCC have been applied in the calculation.
2: Scope: The verification and certification 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 for these parameters including the values in the monitoring reports as per VVS version 09.0 paragraphs 393 and 409 (e).
Issue: The DOE is requested to explain how it has verified the parameter average net energy efficiency of heat generation in the boiler that would generate heat in the absence of the project activity, in particular:
(i) How the use of 86.3% complies with the requirement of the methodology (p 72) (i.e “Either use the higher value among (a) the measured efficiency and (b) manufacturer’s information on the efficiency OR assume an efficiency of 100% as a conservative default value”); and
(ii) How the DOE concluded that the use of efficiency of 86.3% is more conservative and results in lower emission reductions compared with the use of 100% efficiency.
3: Scope: The verification and certification report does not provide an assessment on whether the calibration of measuring equipments was conducted at a frequency specified by the applied methodology, the standardized baseline and/or the monitoring plan as per VVS version 09.0 paragraph 400.
Issue: The DOE is requested to provide further information on the delayed calibration for weighbridge 230-WI-011, 230-WI-006 and 230-WI-004 from 27 October to 15 November 2014 considering that 1) the adjustment for the delay was applied for November 2014 and 2) the amount of the biomass consumption in October was more than twice of the consumption in November 2014.
1: Scope: The validation report does not contain a confirmation whether the temporary deviation from the registered monitoring plan or applied methodology does not require prior approval of the Board and the provisions of Appendix 1 of PS apply to those deviations as per VVS version 09.0 paragraphs 289, 298, 300, 301 and 302.
Issue: The DOE is requested to provide further information on how it can be considered temporary deviations on the delay in the NCV measurements that do not require prior approval by the Board as 1) the paragraph 3 of Appendix 1 of project standard version 09.0 that is applicable for project emissions and 2) the NCVs are used for the baseline and project emissions. Furthermore, as paragraph 2 of the appendix is applicable for baseline emissions, the DOE is also requested to explain 1) how the temporary deviation is in line with paragraph 2, hence does not require prior approval from the Board and 2) how the values from the IPCC have been applied in the calculation.
2: Scope: The verification and certification 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 for these parameters including the values in the monitoring reports as per VVS version 09.0 paragraphs 393 and 409 (e).
Issue: The DOE is requested to explain how it has verified the parameter average net energy efficiency of heat generation in the boiler that would generate heat in the absence of the project activity, in particular:
(i) How the use of 86.3% complies with the requirement of the methodology (p 72) (i.e “Either use the higher value among (a) the measured efficiency and (b) manufacturer’s information on the efficiency OR assume an efficiency of 100% as a conservative default value”); and
(ii) How the DOE concluded that the use of efficiency of 86.3% is more conservative and results in lower emission reductions compared with the use of 100% efficiency.
3: Scope: The verification and certification report does not provide an assessment on whether the calibration of measuring equipments was conducted at a frequency specified by the applied methodology, the standardized baseline and/or the monitoring plan as per VVS version 09.0 paragraph 400.
Issue: The DOE is requested to provide further information on the delayed calibration for weighbridge 230-WI-011, 230-WI-006 and 230-WI-004 from 27 October to 15 November 2014 considering that 1) the adjustment for the delay was applied for November 2014 and 2) the amount of the biomass consumption in October was more than twice of the consumption in November 2014.
Offset now: visit the United Nations Carbon Offset Platform
Connect with us: