16:29 25 Apr 25
Info Report Check
Submission incomplete:
1: 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).
The DOE is requested to clarify how it has validated the appropriateness of the value used for parameter LF AD (methane leakage from anaerobic digester), as the 0.02 value used by the PP (PDD, page 48) is less conservative than the IPCC default value indicated by the methodology (ACM0010 ver 05 p. 27).
2: For input values based on FSRs that are approved by national authorities for proposed CDM project activities, the DOE is requested to ensure that the values used in the PDD and associated annexes are fully consistent with the FSR, and where inconsistencies occur the DOE should validate the appropriateness of the values (VVM paragraph 113 (b)).
The DOE is requested to clarify if the FSR from which input values were derived (FSR dated 30/10/2009 as per Validation Report, p. 74) is consistent with the approved FSR (dated 2/5/2009 according to CL 13 in p. 104 of the Validation Report). Likewise, it should be clarified which version of the FSR received the 9/7/2009 approval mentioned on page 20 of the PDD.
1: 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).
The DOE is requested to clarify how it has validated the appropriateness of the value used for parameter LF AD (methane leakage from anaerobic digester), as the 0.02 value used by the PP (PDD, page 48) is less conservative than the IPCC default value indicated by the methodology (ACM0010 ver 05 p. 27).
2: For input values based on FSRs that are approved by national authorities for proposed CDM project activities, the DOE is requested to ensure that the values used in the PDD and associated annexes are fully consistent with the FSR, and where inconsistencies occur the DOE should validate the appropriateness of the values (VVM paragraph 113 (b)).
The DOE is requested to clarify if the FSR from which input values were derived (FSR dated 30/10/2009 as per Validation Report, p. 74) is consistent with the approved FSR (dated 2/5/2009 according to CL 13 in p. 104 of the Validation Report). Likewise, it should be clarified which version of the FSR received the 9/7/2009 approval mentioned on page 20 of the PDD.
Offset now: visit the United Nations Carbon Offset Platform
Connect with us: