Understanding CDM Methodologies - SuSanA
Understanding CDM Methodologies - SuSanA
Understanding CDM Methodologies - SuSanA
Create successful ePaper yourself
Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.
Experiences from<br />
Use of ACM 0004<br />
Expansion of<br />
Applicability<br />
Conditions<br />
Contracts to avoid<br />
double Counting<br />
More detailed<br />
Set of Baseline<br />
Scenarios<br />
Conservative<br />
Choice among<br />
Plausible<br />
Alternatives<br />
More Stringent<br />
Default Values<br />
as Difficulties in<br />
Measurement is<br />
realised<br />
Challenges encountered in the application of the methodology<br />
ACM 0012 has not been applied by any registered project or project<br />
submitted for registration. Therefore, only the experience related to<br />
application of elements of ACM 0004 in ACM 0012 can be used. The main<br />
challenges encountered in the application of ACM0012/0004 and resulting<br />
changes can be categorized into the following: (i) applicability conditions, (ii)<br />
baseline scenario definition, iii) project boundary, (iv) baseline emissions and<br />
(v) project emissions.<br />
The applicability conditions of ACM 0004 were too narrow and it became<br />
clear that there are other technologies than waste gas and heat use for<br />
electricity generation. Therefore, cogeneration and direct heat use have been<br />
added. Waste pressure use (e.g. through top recovery turbines) had already<br />
been added in a revised version of ACM 0004 222 . Electricity export to the<br />
grid and energy sales have been allowed, if contracts are signed that exclude<br />
double counting 223 . The project can be done by an energy service company.<br />
The concept of “recipient plant” was introduced to cover the plants to which<br />
energy exports are made 224 .<br />
Baseline scenario definition was seen as too coarse and the role of noneconomic<br />
factors on decision making acknowledged. The original set of<br />
6 baseline scenarios that looked at energy production and use within the<br />
project boundary was substituted by a baseline scenario matrix with 21<br />
entries in three columns, covering waste heat generation, energy production<br />
and energy use. Instead of choosing the most economically attractive<br />
alternative, the alternative with the lowest emissions among the “credible<br />
and plausible” alternatives has to be chosen as baseline scenario. Proof of<br />
pre-project flaring/venting is now required.<br />
Additional items have to be included in baseline emissions and a more<br />
conservative approach applied, as it became clear that measurement of<br />
some parameters is difficult. Emissions from fossil fuel burning for gas flaring<br />
have been added. Determination of boiler efficiency of captive power plants<br />
has been made more stringent, by asking for optimal operating conditions,<br />
the higher of two manufacturer’s nameplate efficiencies, establishment of<br />
load-efficiency curves or use of a high default efficiency. Default efficiencies<br />
such as 100% for a power plant boiler have been replaced by 60% for the<br />
entire captive power plant 225 . A further element of conservativeness has<br />
been introduced through the discount factor in case waste gas production<br />
increases.<br />
Waste gas can be used in power generating units supplied by other fuels 226 .<br />
Shares of steam generation can be applied as proxies if the heat rate of the<br />
waste gas cannot be measured 227 .<br />
Project emissions: The item electricity generation for gas cleaning<br />
equipment was added. The oxidation factor was deleted, increasing the level<br />
of project emissions.<br />
222<br />
This was due to clarification request AM_CLA_0015.<br />
223<br />
Response to clarification request AM_CLA_0041.<br />
224<br />
This issue was first raised in clarification request AM_CLA_0005, but not fully resolved until introduction of<br />
ACM 0012.<br />
225<br />
Response to clarification request AM_CLA_0040<br />
226<br />
The 7th request for deviation (Nov. 23, 2005) led to a corresponding revision of ACM 0004<br />
227<br />
AM_REV_033<br />
78