23:48 02 May 24
Info Report Check
Submission incomplete:
1: The PP/DOE are requested to describe the GHG sources with in the project boundary in the PDD as per EB 48 Annex 60 paragraph 10 (a).
Please note that the GHG sources included in the project boundary are not discussed in section B.3 of the PDD.
2: The PP/DOE are requested to list all the data and parameters to be monitored in line with applied methodology as per EB 48 Annex 60 paragraph 10 (a).
In doing so, the PP/DOE should ensure that all the monitoring parameters required by paragraph 22 of AMS III.B v.14 are included in the monitoring plan.
3: The PP/DOE are requested to indicate the starting date of crediting period in the PDD as per EB 48 Annex 60 paragraph 10 (a).
Section C.2.2.1 of the PDD indicates that the starting date of the fixed crediting period is "after CDM registration" but does not include any estimated starting date.
4: The DOE is requested to describe how each applicability condition of the methodology/ies is fulfilled by the project activity as per VVM v1.2 paragraph 76.
Please note that further description is required on how the project complies with each applicability condition of the methodology. In addition, the applicability condition # 8 has not been confirmed by the DOE.
5: The DOE is requested to provide a statement whether the identified boundary, sources and gases are justified for the project activity as per VVM v1.2 paragraph 80.
The DOE is requested to explain how it has validated the requirement as per VVM v1.2, paragraph 80 given that the selected sources and gases included in the project boundary are not documented in the section B.3 of PDD.
6: The DOE is requested to describe how the data/parameters used in the equations were verified as per VVM v1.2 paragraph 93.
In doing so, the DOE is requested to explain how it has validated the suitability of the net energy generated in the element process j (QBSL,j) and the quantity of natural gas consumed (FCy).
7: The DOE is requested to state whether the data and parameters are conservative and appropriate if they are fixed ex-ante (not need to monitor) during the project activity crediting period as per VVM v1.2 paragraph 91.
The DOE is requested to state whether the values for emission factors and NCVs of B-C oil and natural gas, the ex-ante fuel consumption of B-C oil, and the production of zinc oxide and zinc dust are conservative and appropriate. In doing so, the DOE is also requested to provide full details on the suitability of their sources (including dates, nature, values, etc.)
8: The DOE is requested to include information on how it has validated the input values to the financial calculations as per VVM v 1.2 paragraph 114 (a).
In particular, the DOE is request to provide a further validation opinion on: a) the initial investment cost, b) the O&M cost, c) the fuel price, d) the annual fuel consumption, e) the annual fuel cost, f) the annual production of zinc oxide and zince dust, and g) discount rates.
In doing so, the DOE is required to provide details on the sources of evidence used to cross-check each parameter, including dates, nature, values shown and how these sources are appropriate in the context of the project activity.
9: The DOE is requested to include information on how it has validated the sensitivity analysis as per VVM v1.2 paragraph 111 (e).
In particular, the DOE should explain why the natural gas price, B-C oil price and discount rates were excluded from the analysis.
10: The DOE is requested to identify if the FSR has been the basis of the investment decision as per VVM v 1.2 paragraph 113 (a).
The DOE should clarify whether the FSR is the source of input values to the investment analysis, given that the Validation Report (page 43) indicates that the project participants do not rely on values from FSR, whereas in page 19 of the same Validation report the DOE states that the validation team has cross checked that each cost (investment cost) is consistent with FSR.
11: The DOE is requested to provide local and sectoral expertise on the suitability of the input values to the investment analysis as per VVM v 1.2 paragraph 113 (c).
12: The DOE is requested to address the changes made to the project deign since the global stakeholder consultation was conducted as per VVM v1.2 paragraph 173(c).
1: The PP/DOE are requested to describe the GHG sources with in the project boundary in the PDD as per EB 48 Annex 60 paragraph 10 (a).
Please note that the GHG sources included in the project boundary are not discussed in section B.3 of the PDD.
2: The PP/DOE are requested to list all the data and parameters to be monitored in line with applied methodology as per EB 48 Annex 60 paragraph 10 (a).
In doing so, the PP/DOE should ensure that all the monitoring parameters required by paragraph 22 of AMS III.B v.14 are included in the monitoring plan.
3: The PP/DOE are requested to indicate the starting date of crediting period in the PDD as per EB 48 Annex 60 paragraph 10 (a).
Section C.2.2.1 of the PDD indicates that the starting date of the fixed crediting period is "after CDM registration" but does not include any estimated starting date.
4: The DOE is requested to describe how each applicability condition of the methodology/ies is fulfilled by the project activity as per VVM v1.2 paragraph 76.
Please note that further description is required on how the project complies with each applicability condition of the methodology. In addition, the applicability condition # 8 has not been confirmed by the DOE.
5: The DOE is requested to provide a statement whether the identified boundary, sources and gases are justified for the project activity as per VVM v1.2 paragraph 80.
The DOE is requested to explain how it has validated the requirement as per VVM v1.2, paragraph 80 given that the selected sources and gases included in the project boundary are not documented in the section B.3 of PDD.
6: The DOE is requested to describe how the data/parameters used in the equations were verified as per VVM v1.2 paragraph 93.
In doing so, the DOE is requested to explain how it has validated the suitability of the net energy generated in the element process j (QBSL,j) and the quantity of natural gas consumed (FCy).
7: The DOE is requested to state whether the data and parameters are conservative and appropriate if they are fixed ex-ante (not need to monitor) during the project activity crediting period as per VVM v1.2 paragraph 91.
The DOE is requested to state whether the values for emission factors and NCVs of B-C oil and natural gas, the ex-ante fuel consumption of B-C oil, and the production of zinc oxide and zinc dust are conservative and appropriate. In doing so, the DOE is also requested to provide full details on the suitability of their sources (including dates, nature, values, etc.)
8: The DOE is requested to include information on how it has validated the input values to the financial calculations as per VVM v 1.2 paragraph 114 (a).
In particular, the DOE is request to provide a further validation opinion on: a) the initial investment cost, b) the O&M cost, c) the fuel price, d) the annual fuel consumption, e) the annual fuel cost, f) the annual production of zinc oxide and zince dust, and g) discount rates.
In doing so, the DOE is required to provide details on the sources of evidence used to cross-check each parameter, including dates, nature, values shown and how these sources are appropriate in the context of the project activity.
9: The DOE is requested to include information on how it has validated the sensitivity analysis as per VVM v1.2 paragraph 111 (e).
In particular, the DOE should explain why the natural gas price, B-C oil price and discount rates were excluded from the analysis.
10: The DOE is requested to identify if the FSR has been the basis of the investment decision as per VVM v 1.2 paragraph 113 (a).
The DOE should clarify whether the FSR is the source of input values to the investment analysis, given that the Validation Report (page 43) indicates that the project participants do not rely on values from FSR, whereas in page 19 of the same Validation report the DOE states that the validation team has cross checked that each cost (investment cost) is consistent with FSR.
11: The DOE is requested to provide local and sectoral expertise on the suitability of the input values to the investment analysis as per VVM v 1.2 paragraph 113 (c).
12: The DOE is requested to address the changes made to the project deign since the global stakeholder consultation was conducted as per VVM v1.2 paragraph 173(c).
Offset now: visit the United Nations Carbon Offset Platform
Connect with us: