01:39 01 May 24
Info Report Check
Submission incomplete:
1: The DOE is requested to describe whether the assumptions and data used for the baseline identification are justified appropriately, supported by evidence and can be deemed reasonable as per VVM v1.2 paragraph 87 (c).
The VR lacks information on: (a) the 'other cost' for alternative A1 and A2; (b) how the DOE has crosschecked input to the alternative A2 values In line with the VVM version 01.2 paragraph 111 b and c, in particular: material cost, desulphurization cost, denitration cost, overhaul cost rate, number of employees, other cost and coal consumption rate.
2: The DOE is requested to state if all assumptions/ data/references used in the PDD for emission reduction calculations are in line with the methodology as per VVM v1.2 paragraph 92(a).
(a) The VR lacks information on how gross coal consumption rate (299 gce/kWh) and plant consumption rate (5.20%) have been validated in line with the VVM version 01.2 paragraph 91.
(b) The list of the plants identified in Steps 3 and 5, as well as relevant data on the fuel consumption and electricity generation of all identified power plants, have not been documented as required by the ACM0013 v04 page 9.
3: The DOE is requested to confirm the accuracy of the financial calculations carried out for the investment analysis as per VVM v 1.2 paragraph 114 (c).
The VR lacks information on how the DOE validated that the baseline alternative is available to the PP in the case of investment comparison analysis, as requested by ACM0013 page 5.
1: The DOE is requested to describe whether the assumptions and data used for the baseline identification are justified appropriately, supported by evidence and can be deemed reasonable as per VVM v1.2 paragraph 87 (c).
The VR lacks information on: (a) the 'other cost' for alternative A1 and A2; (b) how the DOE has crosschecked input to the alternative A2 values In line with the VVM version 01.2 paragraph 111 b and c, in particular: material cost, desulphurization cost, denitration cost, overhaul cost rate, number of employees, other cost and coal consumption rate.
2: The DOE is requested to state if all assumptions/ data/references used in the PDD for emission reduction calculations are in line with the methodology as per VVM v1.2 paragraph 92(a).
(a) The VR lacks information on how gross coal consumption rate (299 gce/kWh) and plant consumption rate (5.20%) have been validated in line with the VVM version 01.2 paragraph 91.
(b) The list of the plants identified in Steps 3 and 5, as well as relevant data on the fuel consumption and electricity generation of all identified power plants, have not been documented as required by the ACM0013 v04 page 9.
3: The DOE is requested to confirm the accuracy of the financial calculations carried out for the investment analysis as per VVM v 1.2 paragraph 114 (c).
The VR lacks information on how the DOE validated that the baseline alternative is available to the PP in the case of investment comparison analysis, as requested by ACM0013 page 5.
Offset now: visit the United Nations Carbon Offset Platform
Connect with us: