Ulu Jelai Hydropower Plant Project
[]
Host party(ies) Malaysia
Methodology(ies) ACM0002 ver. 12
Standardised Baselines N/A
Estimated annual reductions* 263,424
Start date of first crediting period. 01 Jan 15
Length of first crediting period. 7 years
DOE/AE DNV-CUK
Period for comments 13 Oct 11 - 11 Nov 11
PP(s) for which DOE have a contractual obligation Mitsubishi UFJ Morgan Stanley Securities Co., Ltd.
The operational/applicant entity working on this project has decided to make the Project Design Document (PDD) publicly available directly on the UNFCCC CDM website.
PDD PDD (664 KB)
Local stakeholder consultation report: N/A
Impact assessment summary: N/A
Submission of comments to the DOE/AE Compilation of submitted inputs: 
Dear Project Developer of the Ulu Jelai Hydropower Project,
I have the following question with regards to your project activity:

1. Currently Malaysia is having a 40% surplus in power. Would it be able to estimate what will be the additional surplus of electricity that is expected with this 372MW installed capacity hydropower project? The Peninsula Malaysia Grid is mainly connected with fossil fuel based (mainly natural gas and coal) power units. When this project is connected to the Grid, would the current fossil fuels based electricity generation plants which make up the current 40% surplus be shut down or reduced production? 

2. Malaysia has plenty of potential in hydropower generation due to its geographical conditions. Considering that, since TNB is the National Utilities Board, why such potential source it is not promoted to be converted to actual power which would benefits the users and the producers since the fossil fuel price (especially coal) has been increasing.

3. Over the past few months, the local news had reported that many of the IPPs’ PPA will expired soon and also the intention to install another 1000MW installed capacity of thermal power plant. In that case, is the project a National Interest project to partly substitute the building of 1000MW installed capacity thermal plant for maintaining the power supply in the country and also to prevent any intimidating from the IPPs?   

4. The water is taken from two side stream intakes. Would the outfall/tailrace of the project return to the two streams? It has claimed that the project would lead to social sustainability, but how would this be sustaining if the drawing of the water is from one stream and discharge at another stream. With such scenario, the drawing of the water will affect the downstream activity especially the livelihood of the Orang Asli. What has it been reported in the EIA regarding the possibility of affected the social environment?

5. The replication of the WACC does not seem to get 9.71%. In that case, does the project activity still meet the additionality?

6. The interest rate on loan is 6%. It is rather confusing why the 6% is not applied to calculate the WACC and 6.72% is preferred?
Submitted by: Nazreen Abdullah

The comment period is over.
* Emission reductions in metric tonnes of CO2 equivalent per annum that are based on the estimates provided by the project participants in unvalidated PDDs