18:35 16 Aug 24
Registration Request for Review Form
CDM project activity/programme of activities registration request review form (CDM-REGR-FORM) (Version 03.0) |
---|
Reference number of the proposed CDM project activity/programme of activities (PoA) submitted for registration | 3262 |
---|---|
Title of the proposed CDM project activity/PoA submitted for registration | Siam Cement (Thung Song) Waste Heat Power Generation Project (TS46 Project) |
Please indicate, in accordance with paragraphs 37 and 40 of the CDM modalities and procedures, which validation requirement(s) may require review. A list of requirements is provided below. Please provide reasons in support of the request for review. Including any supporting documentation. | |
The following are requirements derived from paragraph 37 of the CDM modalities and procedures: | |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
|
The following are requirements derived from paragraph 40 of the CDM modalities and procedures: | |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
|
![]() |
|
Additional information | |
1. The DOE is requested to further substantiate the appropriateness of input values to the investment analysis, in particular, the beta coefficient for benchmark IRR calculation, total static investment, PLF (Kiln utilization factor), electricity tariff and annual O&M costs and its component, in line with the requirements of VVM/ver.1.2. para.110 & 111. 2. The DOE is requested to further substantiate how it has validated that equity IRR calculation is in accordance with the EB 51, Annex 58, para.10. 3. The DOE is requested to further substantiate how it has validated the sensitivity analysis in line with VVM/ver.1.2 para 111(e), in particular, the kiln utilization factor, which is forecasted to be 86% by 2020 in the PDD (p.17) and 89% by the same year in the excel sheet. 4. DOE is requested to further substantiate the appropriateness of the project boundary and facilities included in the boundary, in particular the Kiln 5 and internal grid, in line with the requirements of VVM/ver.1.2, para. 78-80. 5. The DOE is requested to further substantiate why not all possible options of baseline scenarios are considered and assessed in the PDD, in particular, the option requested by the applied methodology in case of ex-ante projected increase in electricity consumption (Step 1.B, second bullet (iii), page 4), which is installation of captive power with different fuel options. 6. The DOE is requested to substantiate: (a) the conservativeness of approach applied for calculation of fuel EF (COEFfuel,y) when 12 different types of fuels are combusted in one facility in the pre-project scenario, in line with VVM 1.2., para 92(d); and (b) why a clarification was not requested from the Board on the approach followed by the project participants (Annex 12, EB 31). 7. DOE is requested to: (a) substantiate how it has validated the appropriateness of grid (external vs. internal), (b) grid EF (VVM 1.2, para 91); and (c) provide the excel file for calculations of grid EF. 8. The DOE is requested to substantiate: (a) how it has validated that “annual production of clinker after implementation of project, Oclinker,y” is monitored in accordance with the applied methodology; and (b) if clinker output assessment approach is not in accordance with the approved methodology why the request for deviation has not been submitted, to the Board in accordance with Annex 12, EB 31. 9. The DOE is requested to substantiate how it has validated the monitoring parameters of the monitoring plan, in line with the applied methodology. |
|
Date | 29 Aug 10 |
Offset now: visit the United Nations Carbon Offset Platform
Connect with us: