16:28 22 Dec 24
Info Report Check
Submission incomplete:
1: 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: For the parameter “Transmission loss during electricity export (EGT-E)”, the monitoring report (page 17) indicates that the parameter values were calculated from the parameters “the total electricity supplied/exported by all the windmills connected to the sub-station, X” and “the reading of the bulk meter installed at the sub-station, Y”. However, no information is provided: (a) for the parameter values for “X” and “Y”; and (b) to show how the “EGT-E” values were calculated.
2: Scope: The verification and certification report does not describe how the reported data have been cross-checked with other sources as per VVS version 09.0 paragraph 403 (b).
Issue: The verification and certification report does not describe how the reported data have been cross-checked with other sources as per VVS version 09.0 paragraph 403 (b).
Issue: The registered PDD (page 33) and the monitoring report (page 20) indicate two different data source for the parameter “Net electricity supplied to the regional electricity grid (EGy)” (i.e. “invoice of electricity sale to HESCOM” or “calculation method”). The PP/DOE are requested to clarify which is the data source for EGy used in emission reduction calculations. If the EGy is sourced from “calculation method”, the DOE is also requested to report how the calculated values were cross-checked with the receipt of sales as required by ACM00002 ver. 07 (page 16).
3: Scope: The verification and certification report does not provide a conclusion on the verified amount of emission reductions achieved nor/or confirm that appropriate methods and formulae for calculating baseline emissions, project emissions and leakage have been followed as per VVS version 09.0 paragraphs 403 (c) and 409 (j).
Issue: The monitoring report (page 20) mentions that the transmission losses incurred during import of electricity (EGT-I) is 15% of the imported electricity (i.e. EGT-I = 0.15*EGI). However, the emission reductions spreadsheet (cell F9) has considered 115% of EGI as EGT-I. Please address this inconsistency.
4: Scope: The verification and certification report does not provide the findings of the desk review and/or site visit, and/or does not describe how the sampling size for on-site inspection was determined and field check was carried out as per VVS version 09.0 paragraph 409 (c).
Issue: The DOE (verification report page 5) has reported that on-site inspection was not conducted and that this was considered to be in line with conditions set under EB 90 meeting report (para 41 (b)). However, it is noted that the provisions under para 41 are part of the EB’s guidance to the Secretariat’s work, which is not yet an approved CDM requirement (please refer to EB 90 para 40).
The DOE is requested to report how it verified the implementation and operation of the project activity through on-site inspection in line with VVS version 09.0 paragraph 373 (b)
1: 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: For the parameter “Transmission loss during electricity export (EGT-E)”, the monitoring report (page 17) indicates that the parameter values were calculated from the parameters “the total electricity supplied/exported by all the windmills connected to the sub-station, X” and “the reading of the bulk meter installed at the sub-station, Y”. However, no information is provided: (a) for the parameter values for “X” and “Y”; and (b) to show how the “EGT-E” values were calculated.
2: Scope: The verification and certification report does not describe how the reported data have been cross-checked with other sources as per VVS version 09.0 paragraph 403 (b).
Issue: The verification and certification report does not describe how the reported data have been cross-checked with other sources as per VVS version 09.0 paragraph 403 (b).
Issue: The registered PDD (page 33) and the monitoring report (page 20) indicate two different data source for the parameter “Net electricity supplied to the regional electricity grid (EGy)” (i.e. “invoice of electricity sale to HESCOM” or “calculation method”). The PP/DOE are requested to clarify which is the data source for EGy used in emission reduction calculations. If the EGy is sourced from “calculation method”, the DOE is also requested to report how the calculated values were cross-checked with the receipt of sales as required by ACM00002 ver. 07 (page 16).
3: Scope: The verification and certification report does not provide a conclusion on the verified amount of emission reductions achieved nor/or confirm that appropriate methods and formulae for calculating baseline emissions, project emissions and leakage have been followed as per VVS version 09.0 paragraphs 403 (c) and 409 (j).
Issue: The monitoring report (page 20) mentions that the transmission losses incurred during import of electricity (EGT-I) is 15% of the imported electricity (i.e. EGT-I = 0.15*EGI). However, the emission reductions spreadsheet (cell F9) has considered 115% of EGI as EGT-I. Please address this inconsistency.
4: Scope: The verification and certification report does not provide the findings of the desk review and/or site visit, and/or does not describe how the sampling size for on-site inspection was determined and field check was carried out as per VVS version 09.0 paragraph 409 (c).
Issue: The DOE (verification report page 5) has reported that on-site inspection was not conducted and that this was considered to be in line with conditions set under EB 90 meeting report (para 41 (b)). However, it is noted that the provisions under para 41 are part of the EB’s guidance to the Secretariat’s work, which is not yet an approved CDM requirement (please refer to EB 90 para 40).
The DOE is requested to report how it verified the implementation and operation of the project activity through on-site inspection in line with VVS version 09.0 paragraph 373 (b)
Offset now: visit the United Nations Carbon Offset Platform
Connect with us: