03:03 01 Sep 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 | 4630 |
---|---|
Title of the proposed CDM project activity/PoA submitted for registration | Shaanxi Haiyan Coke Making Group 24MW Waste Coke Oven Gas (COG) Based Electricity Generation Plant |
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 how the annual O&M cost considered in the investment analysis can be considered suitable, in particular : a) The fuel cost of waste gas (Coke Oven Gas) as the baseline scenario represents the release of waste gas into the atmosphere after incineration and the coke production lines are owned by the project participant itself. b) How the evidences and sources of information used to cross check other sub-items of annual O&M are applicable and suitable to the project activity. Please refer to EB 60 meeting report, Paragraph 93 and VVM, v01.2, paragraph 113(c).. 2) The DOE should further substantiate the elimination of W5 baseline option (a portion of the waste gas produced at the facility is captured and used for the captive electricity generation, while the rest of the waste gas produced at the facility is vented/flared). In doing so, the DOE should explain whether the baseline option has prohibitive barriers or is clearly economic unattractive, as required by applied methodology. Please refer to step 3 of identification of baseline scenarios of ACM0012 v3.2.. 3) The DOE is requested to further substantiate how it has validated the suitability of Method 3 Case 1 selected to calculate fcap in accordance with the requirements of applied methodology. In doing so, the DOE should further clarify : (a) What evidences are used to confirm that the measurements of waste energy and enthalpy based on temperature, pressure and gas flow in the waste gas pipe is technically difficult. (b) Whether Method 3 Case 2 is applicable to the project given that the energy is recovered from WECM and converted into final output energy through intermediate energy recovery equipments, waste gas boilers using intermediate source (steam). Please refer to capping of baseline emissions section of ACM0012 v3.2 ( page 24).. |
|
Date | 16 Feb 12 |
Offset now: visit the United Nations Carbon Offset Platform
Connect with us: