The project used some existing equipments, so total static investment is only 70 million CNY. Net electricity delivered to grid can reach 100,000 MWh when running under full capacity. Information is availabe http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?hl=zh-CN&gbv=2&gs_sm=3&gs_upl=16375l16375l0l17656l1l1l0l0l0l0l109l109l0.1l1l0&q=cache:vWydMLEE6tkJ:http://www.lcte.cn/shownews.asp?id=185+http%3A//www.lcte.cn/shownews.asp%3Fid%3D185&ct=clnk

According to Enterprise Income Tax Law and VAT policy from State Administration of Taxation, income tax payment has10% deduction and VAT is all refundable for biomass power generation project. The project can get sufficient return.

If you carefully read through the PDD it is confirmed that this is not a genuine CDM project at all. What is the exact project cost? The project cost is covering what? The machinery is second hand purchased or fresh and new from an OEM? In either case DOE to check all the quotations, proposals, purchase orders, invoices, way bills, transport bills, proof of payments like bank statements. 
DOE to check with banks by way of written confirmation the amount transacted, to whom the money is paid, when the money is paid, is the party paid is the correct party as shown in the purchase orders. It is very clear that the values, party names, dates are fabricated and misrepresented in this project. DOE should terminate their contract for this project immediately. This is the only way out to protect the value of CDM process. It looks like PP is purchasing second hand or second quality equipment by inflating the purchase order values and invoices. This must be probed thoroughly and real values to taken for additionality calculation. Then I’m sure the additionality is not there at all in this project. How is the base line defined in this project? Base line is hypothetically defined with no proper evidences and proper justification. 
DOE cannot take the base line as suggested by the PDD.  Please note that there are no emissions beyond the real and factual base line. This project definitely qualifies for zero CER’s, not even one CER. DOE cannot assume values and things as giving by this PP. Whatever values are considered throughout the project in all documents including the real DPR (not the one prepared for CDM, the one given to the banks and others), they must be validated, verified and double checked. Do not ask PP for DPR. Ask the parties who have been given DPR by the PP. Get directly from the bank and others by each page of the DPR and Feasibulity report signed. Such document can be considered as a real DPR or FR. This project is genuinely a fabricated, false and misinterpreted project with no base line and additionality.