15:32 20 Jun 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 | 4291 |
---|---|
Title of the proposed CDM project activity/PoA submitted for registration | Methane Recovery and Utilization Project of Dai Viet Co. Ltd, Vietnam |
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 explain the suitability of: (a) the exclusion of the cost of the coal fired boiler in the NPV calculation for the baseline scenario; (b) the input values, in line with the VVM version 01.2 paragraph 111.b , 111.c and 113.c as insufficient crosschecking was carried out by the DOE, in particular for: (i) the assumed cost to wastewater amount ratio (16,370 VND/m3); (ii) the electricity consumption by the project activity; (iii) the maintenance cost of the project activity as 0.2% of saving from coal; (iv) the investment cost of the baseline scenario; (v) the O&M cost of the baseline scenario; and (c) the correctness of computation of the amount of displaced coal in line with the VVM version 01.2 paragraph 111.d, as it appears that it has not considered the efficiency of the boiler in the baseline scenario. 2. The DOE is requested to further explain how it has validated the baseline scenario in line with the VVM version 01.2 paragraph 87, in particular: (i) how the DOE has confirmed that option 1 of alternative W1 is the least cost option among the 4 options; and how alternatives W3 and W4 have been eliminated due to barriers related to inferior financial returns, when the financial evaluation of these alternatives has not been carried out; and (ii) why other types of fossil fuels (natural gas and fuel oil) have not been considered in alternative H2. |
|
Date | 07 Apr 11 |
Offset now: visit the United Nations Carbon Offset Platform
Connect with us: