21:13 22 Nov 24
Info Report Check
Submission incomplete:
1: The monitoring report does not include information on relevant dates (e.g. construction, commissioning, start of operation) on the implementation of the included CPA. Refer to paragraph 259 of PS-PoA.
2: The monitoring report does not provide information on type, accuracy class, serial number, calibration frequency, date of last calibration and validity of meters. Refer to paragraph 263(b) of PS-PoA.
3: The monitoring report states that since this monitoring report represents only one CPA and the early emission reduction is not exceeding the small scale threshold of 60 ktCO2 per year, no further explanation is required. However, the threshold for type II project is not based on the amount of emission reductions. Refer to paragraph 272 of PS-PoA.
4: The DOE concluded that the monitoring has been carried out in accordance with the monitoring plan contained in the included CPA-DD:
(a) Responding to CR ID 03, the CME submitted supporting documents that the manager has selected number of non-sampled HDB buildings (equal to sample group) and visited end of each year to check the operation of LED lightings. However, there is no information in the monitoring report or verification report of the when the checks were conducted during the monitoring period, including the result of the checks;
(b) In light of point (a) above, the DOE is requested to clarify whether all blocks/building under the CPA are monitored for energy use and to explain why parameter energy use is determined only from sampled blocks, instead of all blocks, considering that page 12 of the monitoring report states that in this CPA, all the blocks are metered blocks;
(c) Responding to CR ID 04, the CME explained that two emission reduction spreadsheets have been established based on kWh meter readings and timer switch readings. The project emission calculated by kWh meter reading is higher than the timer switch reading. Hence, the entire monitoring report has followed kWh meter reading based computations. However, there is no supporting documents submitted in order to confirm that the project emission calculated by kWh meter reading is higher than the timer switch reading.
Refer to paragraph 346 of VVS-PoA.
5: The DOE is requested to explain how it verified the reliability of the sampling against the required precision. In doing so, the DOE shall describe the sample result and the achieved precision/reliability of each parameter Oi and Energy Use. Refer to paragraph 24(a) of Standard for Sampling and surveys for CDM project activities and programmes of activities (version 07).
6: The DOE confirmed that CME applied good practice by for data collection & sampling survey and the equipment used by the third party for sample surveyed are duly calibrated. However, without information on when the electricity meters were installed, it cannot be confirmed whether five years calibration/check frequency is complied with. Refer to paragraph 351 of VVS-PoA.
7: The DOE is requested to explain how it has verified the calculation of baseline emissions and project emissions, as:
(a) The verification report states calculation of project emissions is not applicable, whereas the CME calculated project emissions for the CPA;
(b) As shown in the ER sheet, the end date of calculation for project emissions is 29/05/2017, whereas for baseline emissions it is 31/05/2017, which is the last day of the current monitoring period.
(c) The values of parameter Oi in the monitoring report do not match the values of Oi in the ER sheet for baseline emissions calculation. For example, in the monitoring report for year 2015, the value of Oi is 4386 hours (page 15), whereas as per the ER sheet, the value of Oi is 4380 hours.
(d) The baseline emissions calculation in ER sheet considers 12 hours of operation per day. However, the total hours for a particular year in the calculation do not match the actual total hours. For example, in year 2017 (1 Jan - 31 May 2017), in the total hours shown in ER sheet (parameter Oi) are 1825 hours. However, considering there are 151 days during that period (1 Jan - 31 May 2017) and 12 operational hours per day, the total hour should be 1812 hours;
(e) The baseline emissions are calculated based on 12 hours of operation per day, instead of monitored parameter Oi.
Refer to paragraph 359(d) of VVS-PoA.
1: The monitoring report does not include information on relevant dates (e.g. construction, commissioning, start of operation) on the implementation of the included CPA. Refer to paragraph 259 of PS-PoA.
2: The monitoring report does not provide information on type, accuracy class, serial number, calibration frequency, date of last calibration and validity of meters. Refer to paragraph 263(b) of PS-PoA.
3: The monitoring report states that since this monitoring report represents only one CPA and the early emission reduction is not exceeding the small scale threshold of 60 ktCO2 per year, no further explanation is required. However, the threshold for type II project is not based on the amount of emission reductions. Refer to paragraph 272 of PS-PoA.
4: The DOE concluded that the monitoring has been carried out in accordance with the monitoring plan contained in the included CPA-DD:
(a) Responding to CR ID 03, the CME submitted supporting documents that the manager has selected number of non-sampled HDB buildings (equal to sample group) and visited end of each year to check the operation of LED lightings. However, there is no information in the monitoring report or verification report of the when the checks were conducted during the monitoring period, including the result of the checks;
(b) In light of point (a) above, the DOE is requested to clarify whether all blocks/building under the CPA are monitored for energy use and to explain why parameter energy use is determined only from sampled blocks, instead of all blocks, considering that page 12 of the monitoring report states that in this CPA, all the blocks are metered blocks;
(c) Responding to CR ID 04, the CME explained that two emission reduction spreadsheets have been established based on kWh meter readings and timer switch readings. The project emission calculated by kWh meter reading is higher than the timer switch reading. Hence, the entire monitoring report has followed kWh meter reading based computations. However, there is no supporting documents submitted in order to confirm that the project emission calculated by kWh meter reading is higher than the timer switch reading.
Refer to paragraph 346 of VVS-PoA.
5: The DOE is requested to explain how it verified the reliability of the sampling against the required precision. In doing so, the DOE shall describe the sample result and the achieved precision/reliability of each parameter Oi and Energy Use. Refer to paragraph 24(a) of Standard for Sampling and surveys for CDM project activities and programmes of activities (version 07).
6: The DOE confirmed that CME applied good practice by for data collection & sampling survey and the equipment used by the third party for sample surveyed are duly calibrated. However, without information on when the electricity meters were installed, it cannot be confirmed whether five years calibration/check frequency is complied with. Refer to paragraph 351 of VVS-PoA.
7: The DOE is requested to explain how it has verified the calculation of baseline emissions and project emissions, as:
(a) The verification report states calculation of project emissions is not applicable, whereas the CME calculated project emissions for the CPA;
(b) As shown in the ER sheet, the end date of calculation for project emissions is 29/05/2017, whereas for baseline emissions it is 31/05/2017, which is the last day of the current monitoring period.
(c) The values of parameter Oi in the monitoring report do not match the values of Oi in the ER sheet for baseline emissions calculation. For example, in the monitoring report for year 2015, the value of Oi is 4386 hours (page 15), whereas as per the ER sheet, the value of Oi is 4380 hours.
(d) The baseline emissions calculation in ER sheet considers 12 hours of operation per day. However, the total hours for a particular year in the calculation do not match the actual total hours. For example, in year 2017 (1 Jan - 31 May 2017), in the total hours shown in ER sheet (parameter Oi) are 1825 hours. However, considering there are 151 days during that period (1 Jan - 31 May 2017) and 12 operational hours per day, the total hour should be 1812 hours;
(e) The baseline emissions are calculated based on 12 hours of operation per day, instead of monitored parameter Oi.
Refer to paragraph 359(d) of VVS-PoA.
Offset now: visit the United Nations Carbon Offset Platform
Connect with us: