07:15 31 May 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 | 4226 |
---|---|
Title of the proposed CDM project activity/PoA submitted for registration | Utilisation of the thermal energy content of the waste gas of clinker cooler and pre-heater for power generation at a cement plant in Rajasthan |
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 shall further justify the suitability of the input values to the investment analysis in line with the paragraphs 111 (b) of VVM v1.2, in particular: (i) the total investment cost of the baseline and the proposed activity; (ii) the auxiliary consumption of the baseline and the proposed activity; and (iii) the annual O & M cost of the proposed activity (each element of the annual O&M cost should be separately validated) given that the DOE has not validated the suitability of these input values by cross checking against third party or publicly available sources. 2.The DOE shall further substantiate the accuracy of the plant load factor in line with the paragraph 111(a) of VVM v1.2 given that there is an inconsistency between the plant load factor (80%) determined based on technical scheme provided by the technology supplier and the PLF (57%) applied the investment analysis. 3.The DOE shall further substantiate the elimination of two baseline alternatives i.e. electricity import from grid and captive power generation using different fuel options, in particular, how it has validated that either they: i) have prohibitive barriers; or ii) are clearly economic unattractive as required by step 3 of Identification of baseline scenarios of AM0024 v02.1. 4.The DOE shall further substantiate means of validation of COEFIGS , COEF fuel,y and EIB in line with AM0024 v2.1 and paragraph 89-92 of VVM v1.2, in particular: (i) why the value of COEFIGS and COEF fuel,y are not calculated as required by the methodology ( page no 12 of methodology); and (ii) why EIB is not calculated using the historical value of the annual clinker production (6,91,254 t/yr) for BCW as required by the methodology. 5.The PP shall include the monitoring of OXID fuel (oxidation ratio of fuel used in clinker production) and OXID fuel/igs (oxidation ratio of fuel used in coal plant) as per the requirement of the methodology. 6.The DOE shall further justify why the reporting frequency for COEF fuel,y, NCVfuel,y , EF CO2,fuel,y are not in compliance with the applied methodology AM0024 v02.1. |
|
Date | 07 Apr 11 |
Offset now: visit the United Nations Carbon Offset Platform
Connect with us: