13:35 28 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 | 3418 |
---|---|
Title of the proposed CDM project activity/PoA submitted for registration | Methane Recovery and Power Generation Project in High-concentrated Organic Wastewater Treatment in Hubei, China |
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 clarify how it has validated the suitability of: (a) the investment barrier in accordance with the VVM (version 01.1) para. 116, specifically, the need for the loan requiring CDM revenues considering that it was finally granted to the project participant after the project start date (signing of EIC service agreement) and whether the reason for the loan rejection is project-specific or due to the project participant’s financial situation; (b) the technological barrier in line with the VVM (version 01.1) para. 115, and with the “Guidelines for Objective Demonstration and Assessment of Barriers” EB50, Annex 13 Guideline 1, i.e., whether the training cost have a direct impact on the financial returns of the project activity and should therefore be assessed by investment analysis; and (c) the barriers due to the prevailing practice, in particular, whether there are industries with similar or comparable technologies to the project activity that have installed similar technologies in the country/region and how the application of the technology differs between such industries and the citric sector. 2. The DOE is requested to explain how it has validated compliance of the project activity with AMS-III.H version 12, para. 9, and para. 16 of the “General Guidance for SSC methodologies” version 12 (EB 41, Annex 20) i.e., whether the baseline proposed is the most plausible baseline scenario in view of the projected increase in citric acid processing capacity. 3. The DOE is requested to confirm that the data used to calculate the grid emission factor was available at the time of commencement of validation. In doing so, the DOE should indicate the data vintage used in the calculation and the date on which the DNA published such data. |
|
Date | 07 Oct 10 |
Offset now: visit the United Nations Carbon Offset Platform
Connect with us: