15:15 12 Sep 24
Info Report Check
Submission incomplete:
1: The DOE shall determine whether the monitoring of parameters related to GHG emission reductions or net anthropogenic GHG removals in the registered PDD has been implemented in accordance with the registered monitoring plan (paragraph 360 of VVS for PA version 2)
The data collection procedure in the monitoring report (P 7) states that the Project Participant has used the values of the 51 WTGs to calculate the net value. However, the spreadsheet submitted shows that the net electricity supplied derived from only 2 value addition. Further, and the Verification Report (p 25) states the electricity metered at substation (by M1 and M2) is used for billing as well as for emission reductions calculation. The DOE is required to provide further information on how it verified the monitoring of the data used to calculate the parameter EGfacility,y since there are discrepancies between the monitoring report and the verification report.
2: The DOE verified that the project participant has applied maximum permissible error 0.2% in electricity exported and imported for the calibration delayed period, i.e. January to July 2015. However, spreadsheets shows that the maximum permissible error was only applied on the measured net electricity supply but not added on the electricity import value (paragraph 366 of VVS 02.0 for PA version 2)
The DOE verified that the project participant has applied maximum permissible error 0.2% in electricity exported and imported for the calibration delayed period, i.e. January to July 2015 as per the paragraph 366 and appendix of VVS. However, the spreadsheets shows that the maximum permissible error is applied to the net electricity supply. Therefore further clarification is required on how the DOE verified the delayed calibration as per paragraph 366 of VVS 02.0.
1: The DOE shall determine whether the monitoring of parameters related to GHG emission reductions or net anthropogenic GHG removals in the registered PDD has been implemented in accordance with the registered monitoring plan (paragraph 360 of VVS for PA version 2)
The data collection procedure in the monitoring report (P 7) states that the Project Participant has used the values of the 51 WTGs to calculate the net value. However, the spreadsheet submitted shows that the net electricity supplied derived from only 2 value addition. Further, and the Verification Report (p 25) states the electricity metered at substation (by M1 and M2) is used for billing as well as for emission reductions calculation. The DOE is required to provide further information on how it verified the monitoring of the data used to calculate the parameter EGfacility,y since there are discrepancies between the monitoring report and the verification report.
2: The DOE verified that the project participant has applied maximum permissible error 0.2% in electricity exported and imported for the calibration delayed period, i.e. January to July 2015. However, spreadsheets shows that the maximum permissible error was only applied on the measured net electricity supply but not added on the electricity import value (paragraph 366 of VVS 02.0 for PA version 2)
The DOE verified that the project participant has applied maximum permissible error 0.2% in electricity exported and imported for the calibration delayed period, i.e. January to July 2015 as per the paragraph 366 and appendix of VVS. However, the spreadsheets shows that the maximum permissible error is applied to the net electricity supply. Therefore further clarification is required on how the DOE verified the delayed calibration as per paragraph 366 of VVS 02.0.
Offset now: visit the United Nations Carbon Offset Platform
Connect with us: