06:42 28 Apr 24
Info Report Check
Submission incomplete:
1: According to the CDM VVS for project activities version 2.0, the DOE shall identify any concerns related to the conformity of the actual CDM project activity and its operation with the registered PDD and determine whether any deviation or the proposed or actual changes in the implementation or operation of the project activity comply with the relevant requirements in the “CDM project standard for project activities. (Please refer to section 8.2, 9.2.3 and paragraph 373.)
The methodology (page 23-24) permits the use of default IPCC emission factors when the operating temperature or pressure if outside the permitted ranges. For the parameter CIn2o,i, "N2O concentration at N2O destruction facility inlet", the methodology (page 36) and the registered monitoring plan (page 41, PDD) require continuous monitoring. For the 159 days period during which "the inlet N2O Analyzer AT-3201 was in downtime" (page 32 of Monitoring Report, page 34 of Verification Report), the DOE has concluded the verification without raising a temporary deviation request. Kindly please provide the justification and rationale.
2: The spreadsheet shall contain the formulae for the calculation of emission reductions as required by the registered monitoring plan, and by the applied methodology.
The methodology applicability is limited to the existing production capacity i.e. 600 t/d 100% HNO3 x 330 d/y = 198,000 t/y as per the registered PDD (page 5). It appears that the emission reductions have been calculated considering the 600 t/d without considering the 330 days per year. Kindly please provide an explanation to supplement the calculation of emission reductions considering the requirement related to capping at 600 t/d 100% HNO3 x 330 d/y, given that the length of the monitoring period correspond to 365 days i.e. one year.
3: The verification and certification report shall state whether the calibration of measuring equipment that has an impact on the claimed emission reductions is conducted as specified in the registered monitoring plan and the methodology.
The DOE has not provided the basic details related to the compliance with EN14181, information such as the dates, and summary of results of QAL2, QAL3 and AST, if any, should be presented, including the DOE's verification assessment on the application of the calibration function/correction factor where relevant.
1: According to the CDM VVS for project activities version 2.0, the DOE shall identify any concerns related to the conformity of the actual CDM project activity and its operation with the registered PDD and determine whether any deviation or the proposed or actual changes in the implementation or operation of the project activity comply with the relevant requirements in the “CDM project standard for project activities. (Please refer to section 8.2, 9.2.3 and paragraph 373.)
The methodology (page 23-24) permits the use of default IPCC emission factors when the operating temperature or pressure if outside the permitted ranges. For the parameter CIn2o,i, "N2O concentration at N2O destruction facility inlet", the methodology (page 36) and the registered monitoring plan (page 41, PDD) require continuous monitoring. For the 159 days period during which "the inlet N2O Analyzer AT-3201 was in downtime" (page 32 of Monitoring Report, page 34 of Verification Report), the DOE has concluded the verification without raising a temporary deviation request. Kindly please provide the justification and rationale.
2: The spreadsheet shall contain the formulae for the calculation of emission reductions as required by the registered monitoring plan, and by the applied methodology.
The methodology applicability is limited to the existing production capacity i.e. 600 t/d 100% HNO3 x 330 d/y = 198,000 t/y as per the registered PDD (page 5). It appears that the emission reductions have been calculated considering the 600 t/d without considering the 330 days per year. Kindly please provide an explanation to supplement the calculation of emission reductions considering the requirement related to capping at 600 t/d 100% HNO3 x 330 d/y, given that the length of the monitoring period correspond to 365 days i.e. one year.
3: The verification and certification report shall state whether the calibration of measuring equipment that has an impact on the claimed emission reductions is conducted as specified in the registered monitoring plan and the methodology.
The DOE has not provided the basic details related to the compliance with EN14181, information such as the dates, and summary of results of QAL2, QAL3 and AST, if any, should be presented, including the DOE's verification assessment on the application of the calibration function/correction factor where relevant.
Offset now: visit the United Nations Carbon Offset Platform
Connect with us: