09:25 29 Apr 25
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 | 3183 |
---|---|
Title of the proposed CDM project activity/PoA submitted for registration | Xinjiang Midong Tianshan Cement Co.Ltd’s 1600td Utilization Calcium Carbide for Cement Clinker 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 needs to further explain how the input values to the investment analysis for the project activity are suitable in line with the VVM paragraph 109 in particular: (a) the CCR price, as the CCR supplier is transporting and disposing of the CCR to the landfill in the baseline; (b) higher repair cost compared to the baseline scenario; (c) higher 'other manufacture expenditure' and higher 'other management expenditure' compared to the baseline scenario. Furthermore, what expenses are covered under such expenditures; (d) higher coal and electricity consumption compared to the baseline scenario; and (e) more employees compared to the baseline scenario. 2. The DOE shall explain how it has considered the application of the baseline methodology is appropriate, as the approach to determine the relevant baseline emission factors (except the non-carbonate CaO and MgO content) have not been specified for the Greenfield projects, and the Methodology Panel (at its 40th meeting, AM_CLA_0084) did not consider the methodology is applicable to greenfield project, which is further reconciled by the Board at its 53rd meeting. 3. The DOE needs to further explain how the requirement of Option 1 to determine the sample of the non-carbonate CaO and MgO in the baseline scenario based on 12 months data has been met, as it was determined based on 11 months data only. Moreover, the DOE needs to further explain how the requirement of the sampling to be statistically significant with a maximum uncertainty range of 20% at a 95% confidence level has been met. |
|
Date | 17 Jun 10 |
Offset now: visit the United Nations Carbon Offset Platform
Connect with us: