Repi PDD

UNFCCC/CCNUCC
CDM – Executive Board Page 1
PROJECT DESIGN DOCUMENT FORM

FOR CDM PROJECT ACTIVITIES (F-CDM-PDD)
Version 04.1
PROJECT DESIGN DOCUMENT (PDD)
Title of the project activity Methane Capture and Flaring from Addis
Ababa Repi open dump fill
Version number of the PDD 01
Completion date of the PDD 04/10/2012
Project participant(s) Addis Ababa City Administration
Host Party(ies) Federal Democratic Republic of Ethiopia
Sectoral scope and selected methodology(ies) Sectoral Scope: 13,
Methodology: ACM0001 - Flaring or use of
landfill gas
Estimated amount of annual average GHG 46,494 t CO2e
emission reductions
UNFCCC/CCNUCC
SECTION A. Description of project activity

A.1. Purpose and general description of project activity
>>
The Addis Ababa City Administration (AACA) through its Solid Waste Recycling and Disposal Project
Office (SWRDPO) is responsible for the functioning of the currently active Repi Solid Waste Disposal
Site (SWDS) located 13 km south-west of Addis Ababa City Center. Repi SWDS has been used as an
unmanaged open dump since the year 1968. There is no further processing or treatment of the waste
received at the site.
According to the SWRDPO1, the amount of daily waste generation in 2010 from Addis Ababa was 1,125
tons, of which about 900 tons were collected and dumped at Repi SWDS. The largest contributor was
households, accounting for about 76%, with the other 24% coming from institutions, hotels, industries,
and street sweeping. According to the estimation based on data accessed from SWRDPO, the waste
quantity at the site in 2010 was about 3.5 million tons with a daily addition of 900 tons.
Repi has high proportion of organic and biodegradable component in the waste. As a result, methane is
uncontrollably released into the atmosphere leading to poor conditions in the local environment. There
are no provisions at the landfill to either collect, treat, destruct or utilize methane.
AACA had received a soft loan from the French Development Agency to sanitarily close the landfill and
implement gas ventilation systems. AACA awarded the Contract of Works for Reclamation, Gas and
Leachate Collection of Koshe Repi Landfill to Ekokem Palvelu Oy on 03/05/2011. AACA later realised
that significant quantity of methane was being released into the atmosphere from the landfill which if
destructed by flaring can result in mitigation of climate change. Further, their consultants for the
Supervision of Integrated Solid Waste Management (HoAREC) advised them to consider implementation
of a gas collection and flaring system which could be financed through the revenues from Clean
Development Mechanism.
Thus, AACA decided to implement the proposed project activity which envisages implementation of a
gas collection and flaring system. A supplementary contract agreement was signed between AACA and
Ekcom on 13/03/2012 for construction of horizontal gas extraction line. The contract for the flaring
system is yet to be awarded.
The project activity is proposed to be implemented in phases wherein Phase I involves sanitary closure of
a major section of the landfill site (18 hectares) to capture and flare LFG. Under Phase II a small active
portion of the site would continue to receive material until 2013 when a new landfill site 50 kilometres to
the north of Addis Ababa becomes operational. The landfill site would subsequently be closed, not
allowing any further dumping of material.
Thus in the absence of the proposed project activity (baseline scenario), the LFG would have been vented
to the atmosphere without being collected or flared leading to emissions of greenhouse gases (primarily
methane). The Project activity aims to reduce methane (CH4) emissions by flaring LFG. Destruction of
CH4 in this manner is expected to result in a substantial net reduction of greenhouse gas (GHG)
emissions, calculated ex-ante on a conservative basis at 464,935 tCO2 over the fixed crediting period of
ten years or an average of 46,494 tCO2e annually during this period.
The baseline scenario and the existing scenario prior to the implementation of the proposed project
activity are same.
1
SWRDPO is the responsible department in the city administration for the collection and disposal of solid waste.
UNFCCC/CCNUCC
Contribution of the project activity to sustainable development:

In accordance with the criteria for sustainable development identified by the Ethiopian Designated
National Authority (DNA), the project activity contributes to the sustainable development as follows:
1. The project activity will lead to improved air quality through capture of biogas leading to reduced
odor. The flaring system will improve environmental health by destroying most of the non- CH4
organic compounds, mainly volatile organic compounds (VOCs).
2. It is expected that the water quality within the Akaki river basin, will improve significantly
relative to the baseline due to the leachate pond constructed by the project and its treatment
before entering into to the river.
3. The project is expected to reduce the respiratory diseases as a result of which the productivity will
be enhanced. The reclaimed land will also significantly contribute to the city’s investment sector
which will create job opportunities.
4. The project activity will use clean technology and environmental management for the first time
for landfill sites in Ethiopia. This project will be the first in terms of proper closure and post-
closure management of landfill sites, collection and treatment of leachate, and capture and flaring
of gas. On successful implementation, the project will serve as an example for other landfills in
the region to follow suit.
5. The project activity improves access to basic services in Addis Ababa (solid waste management,
improving environmental health, provision of a clean environment and park development) and is
fully aligned with the general mandate of AACA. It is in line with the efforts of the
Environmental Protection Authority and the Ministry Health to catalyze carbon finance activity in
Ethiopia. Further, the project activity contributes to the development of clean and healthy
environment in the city.
6. The project activity will have no adverse impacts on community social structures, social heritage
or social amenities. It will create short-term jobs in the construction sector and long-term jobs in
the park development sector.
7. The project activity is expected to improve the sanitary situation and environment though
improved drainage, prevented odour, and reduced flies and pests. The project activity will lead to
reduction of health hazards to the population living around the area. The SWDS is in close
proximity to residential area and particularly to a school. Students in the school have suffered
from methane gas induced nausea in the past and odor is a major problem for those living and
passing through the area.
8. The project activity will reduce the risks of explosion in and around the landfill by actively
capturing and destroying the LFG generated in the landfill and thus avoiding uncontrolled
accumulation of LFG in the landfill.
9. The project activity will reduce emissions of greenhouse gases (methane) in the atmosphere
leading to contribution in mitigation of climate change.
A.2. Location of project activity

A.2.1. Host Party(ies)
>>
Federal Democratic Republic of Ethiopia
UNFCCC/CCNUCC
A.2.2. Region/State/Province etc.

>>
Addis Ababa City (chartered city)
A.2.3. City/Town/Community etc.

>>
Addis Ababa City, Kolfe-Keranyo Sub-City, Wereda 16, Repi SWDS
A.2.4. Physical/Geographical location

>>
The Repi SWDS is located about 13 kms south-west of Addis Ababa City Center (De Gaulle Square,
Municipality Building Complex of the City Administration of Addis Ababa), in the Kolfe-Keranyo Sub-
City area. The Landfill’s geographical coordinates are latitude 8° 58' 29.6754" N (or 8.9749° N) and
longitude 38° 42' 43.6314" E (or 38.7121° E).
The solid waste is dumped on the fringe of Tinshu Akaki River and the dumping area covers 364,000 m2
(or approximately 36.4 hectares). The site is on the north-eastern side of the new Addis Ababa Ring Road
heading to the western parts of the City.
Map 1. (Left) Addis Ababa with Repi SWDS highlighted in orange; (right) Repi SWDS in context with
surrounding neighbourhoods and ring road.
UNFCCC/CCNUCC
Map 2: Project site with construction plans
A.3. Technologies and/or measures

>>
As stated earlier, Repi SWDS has been used as an open dump receiving waste from the Addis Ababa
City. In the absence of the proposed project activity (baseline scenario), the LFG would have been vented
to the atmosphere without being collected or flared leading to emissions of greenhouse gases (primarily
methane).
Since the existing and the baseline scenarios are same, the facilities, systems and equipment before the
implementation of the project activity at the landfill site are as follows:
- 5 bulldozers, 1 new CAT, 4 old (Japan, CAT)
- 2 excavators
- 1 compactor (broken, out of use)
- 19 gas wells with safety valves (for venting)
There are no equipment to collect, treat, and utilize LFG in the landfill site prior to the proposed project.
LFG would have been released into the atmosphere by several gas-guide pipelines (vertical wells) without
flaring.
The proposed project activity envisages installation of a LFG collection system, a Gas pre-treatment
system, a flaring system and associated monitoring equipments. The salient features and technical details
of the equipment and systems are as follows:
1. LFG collection infrastructure specifications

a. Vertical Extraction Gas Wells
- Spacing: Spacing between gas wells will range from 60-120 m (200-400 ft) maximum and placed
so as to capture gas from all areas to avoid leakage of LFG.
- Depth of extraction wells: The boring depth shall reach 75% of the waste thickness or to the water
level. The depth of the well shall not extend to the bottom of the landfill or the liquid level.
- Boring: Long-arm excavator dug pits 1.5m in diameter.
UNFCCC/CCNUCC
- Extraction pipe diameter: The gas extraction HDP pipe will be 160 mm in diameter with
perforations.
- Gravel pack: The back fill of the gravel shall be washed with 16-20 mm diameter or greater than
the perforation of gas extraction wells.
- Size and spacing of perforation (screening): The perforation will have 13 mm diameter width.
- Cover material: The cover material will be clay soil of 50 cm thickness with porosity not less than
10-9m/sec or using acceptable level of clay soil porosity to prevent gas leakage.
b. Header pipe system

- Well heads will be built above ground level to provide simple access for adjustment and
monitoring.
- Material used for well heads and pipes will be HDPE to resist corrosion.
- Well heads will be connected to collection pipe-work.
c. Collection pipe network

Connection pipes will link the gas collection wells with the treatment system station. Material for
collection pipes will be HDPE. Connections will be made using flexible band seal couplings to
allow for rearrangements of the collection layout. LFG collection design layout will consider:
o Gas monitoring
o Prevention of blockage and disruption by water, leachate or condensates and waste
movement
o Condensate management
o Condensate collection and treatment system will be designed to accommodate the
movement of seepage, runoff, and leachate and treated in a pond before the receiving
river.
d. LFG treatment system

- Dewatering device will be installed upstream of the blower (before the gas reaches the flaring
shaft) to reduce gas moisture content.
- Gas will be drawn through the collection pipe-work to the point of treatment. This will be
achieved by incorporating a blower to generate a pressure differential.
- The blower will be composed of a single stage low pressure centrifugal blower providing at least
100 mbar of differential pressure.
e. Control systems
- The use of automated control reduces operational input and the proposed system will comprise of
automated control of the flow rate of landfill gas through a butterfly valve and burner control.
- Emergency slam shut valve will be included along with flame arrester.
- All equipment will have an appropriate level of corrosion protection.
2. Technical specifications of enclosed flare for LFG

- Combustor stack with ceramic fibre stacked modules
- Anti‐Flash Back Burner and Propane fired Pilot burner with UV flame detector
- LF Gas extraction Blowers (centrifugal Type), with variable frequency drive, Blower speed
control through PLC as per the conditions in the Blower logic chart
- Control Panel with HMI for fully automatic operation with PLC programmer and PID , separate
control console for mounting VFD’s
- Deflagration type Flame arrestor in main and pilot line
- Motorised Combustion air intake dampers, hinged type for ease of flare maintenance
- Moisture separator in gas line with instruments
- Skid mounted gas train assembly comprising of shut‐off valves & control Valves
- The combustor shell shall satisfy the following site conditions:
o Wind Speed : 110 kmph (maximum)
UNFCCC/CCNUCC
o Seismic Classification : Zone 4

o Site Elevation : greater than 2000 meters about sea level
o Electrical Area Classification : Safe area
- The enclosed flare shall satisfy the following process conditions
o Smokeless Capacity : 100%
o Destruction Efficiency: 99 %
o Operating Temperature : 800 ‐ 1000 Deg C the process parameters shall be set at this
temperature for PLC operation
o Retention Time : > 0.30 seconds (minimum) at 800 ‐ 1000 Deg C
The equipments required for implementation of the proposed project activity will be purchased from
reputed international suppliers. This will ensure that an environmentally safe and sound technology is
implemented.
A.4. Parties and project participants

>>
Private and/or public Indicate if the Party involved
Party involved
entity(ies) project participants wishes to be considered as
(host) indicates a host Party
(as applicable) project participant (Yes/No)
Federal Democratic Republic of Addis Ababa City No

Ethiopia. Administration (AACA)
A.5. Public funding of project activity

>>
The project activity has no recourse to any public funding. The LFG collection and flaring system is
being funded through AACA’s internal accruals.
UNFCCC/CCNUCC
SECTION B. Application of selected approved baseline and monitoring methodology

B.1. Reference of methodology
>>
Title of approved consolidated baseline and monitoring methodology: “Flaring or use of landfill gas”
Reference: ACM0001, Version 13.0.0 (EB 67), Sectoral scope: 13
It has been referred from the list of approved methodologies for CDM project activities in the UNFCCC
CDM website (http://cdm.unfccc.int/methodologies/PAmethodologies/approved.html).
The approved methodology also draws upon:
- “Emissions from solid waste disposal sites” Version 06.0.1 (EB 66, Annex 46)2
- “Combined tool to identify the baseline scenario and demonstrate additionality” Version 04.0.0 (EB
66, Annex 48)3
- “Project emissions from flaring” Version 02.0.0 (EB 68, Annex 15)4
- “Tool to calculate baseline, project and/or leakage emissions from electricity consumption” Version
01.0.0 (EB 39, Annex 7)5
- “Tool to calculate project or leakage CO2 emissions from fossil fuel combustion” Version 06.0.0 (EB
65, Annex 21, 25th November 2011)6
- “Tool to determine the remaining lifetime of equipment” Version 01.0.0 (EB 50, Annex 15)7
- “Tool to determine the baseline efficiency of thermal or electric energy generation systems” Version
01.0.0 (EB 48, Annex 12)8
- “Tool to determine the mass flow of a greenhouse gas in a gaseous stream” Version 02.0.0 (EB 61,
Annex 11)9
B.2. Applicability of methodology

>>
This methodology is applicable to project activities which:
(a) Install a new LFG capture system in a new or existing SWDS; or
 The project activity involves installation of a new LFG capture system in an existing SWDS.
Hence, the applicability criterion is satisfied.
(b) Make an investment into an existing LFG capture system to increase the recovery rate or
change the use of the captured LFG, provided that:
(i) The captured LFG was vented or flared and not used prior to the implementation of the
project activity; and
(ii) In the case of an existing active LFG capture system for which the amount of LFG
cannot be collected separately from the project system after the implementation of the
2
http://cdm.unfccc.int/methodologies/PAmethodologies/tools/am-tool-04-v6.0.1.pdf
3
4
http://cdm.unfccc.int/methodologies/PAmethodologies/tools/am-tool-06-v2.0.pdf
5
http://cdm.unfccc.int/methodologies/PAmethodologies/tools/am-tool-05-v1.pdf
6
7
8
9
UNFCCC/CCNUCC
project activity and its efficiency is not impacted on by the project system: historical
data on the amount of LFG capture and flared is available.
 The project activity envisages implementation of a new LFG capture system at an existing
landfill where there was no provision of LFG capture earlier. Hence, this applicability criterion
is not applicable.
(c) Flare the LFG and/or use the captured LFG in any (combination) of the following ways:
(i) Generating electricity;
(ii) Generating heat in a boiler, air heater or kiln (brick firing only) or glass melting
furnace; and/or
(iii) Supplying the LFG to consumers through a natural gas distribution network.
 The project activity envisages flaring of the captured LFG. Hence, the applicability criterion is
satisfied.
(d) Do not reduce the amount of organic waste that would be recycled in the absence of the
project activity.
 There was no provision of recycling of organic waste at the landfill. There are a few recycling
units in Addis Ababa which continue to operate without being affected by the project activity
since their source of organic waste is altogether different which was neither diverted earlier
nor will be diverted to the landfill post implementation. Hence, the applicability criterion is
satisfied.
The methodology is only applicable if the application of the procedure to identify the baseline scenario
confirms that the most plausible baseline scenario is:
(a) Release of LFG from the SWDS; and
(b) In the case that the LFG is used in the project activity for generating electricity and/or
generating heat in a boiler, air heater, glass melting furnace or kiln;
(i) For electricity generation: that electricity would be generated in the grid or in captive
fossil fuel fired power plants; and/or
(ii) For heat generation: that heat would be generated using fossil fuels in equipment
located within the project boundary.
 The “Combined tool to identify the baseline scenario and demonstrate additionality” Version
04.0.0 applied in section B.4 concludes that the most plausible baseline scenario for the
project activity is the release of LFG from the SWDS. Hence, the applicability criterion is
satisfied.
This methodology is not applicable:
(a) In combination with other approved methodologies. For instance, ACM0001 cannot be used
to claim emission reductions for the displacement of fossil fuels in a kiln or glass melting
furnace, where the purpose of the CDM project activity is to implement energy efficiency
measures at a kiln or glass melting furnace;
 ACM0001 Version 13.0.0 is the only methodology that has been applied in the project
activity. Hence, the applicability criterion is satisfied.
(b) If the management of the SWDS in the project activity is deliberately changed during the
crediting in order to increase methane generation compared to the situation prior to the
implementation of the project activity.
UNFCCC/CCNUCC
 Repi landfill has been operating as an open dump solid waste disposal site without any
provision for capture of LFG. The project activity is being implemented in phases wherein
Phase I involves sanitary closure of a major section of the landfill site to capture and flare
LFG. Under Phase II a small active portion of the site would continue to receive material until
2013 when a new landfill site 50 kilometres to the north of Addis Ababa becomes operational.
The landfill site would subsequently be closed, not allowing any further dumping of material.
Hence, after Phase II there would be no possibility of increase in methane generation at the
site compared to the situation prior to implementation of the project activity. Further, the
project proponent confirms that there will be no change in management of SWDS as compared
to the baseline situation in order to increase methane generation. Hence, the applicability
criterion is satisfied.
B.3. Project boundary

>>
According to ACM0001 Version 13.0.0 the project boundary of the project activity includes the site
where the LFG is captured and flared. The same has been shown below:
A summary of the greenhouse gases and sources included in and excluded from the project boundary is
provided below:
UNFCCC/CCNUCC
Source GHGs Included? Justification / Explanation

CO2 No CO2 emissions from decomposition of organic
waste are not accounted since the CO2 is also
Emissions from
released under the project activity.
decomposition of
CH4 Yes This is a major source of emissions in the baseline
waste at the
scenario.
SWDS site
N2O No N2O emissions are small compared to CH4
emissions from SWDS.
Baseline scenario
CO2 No There is no power generation included in the

Emissions from
project activity.
electricity
CH4 No Excluded for simplification.
generation
N2O No Excluded for simplification.
CO2 No There is no heat generation included in the project
Emissions from activity.
heat generation CH4 No Excluded for simplification.
CO2 No Excluded for simplification.
Emissions from CH4 No There is no involvement of supply of LFG through
the use of natural natural gas distribution network in the project
gas activity.
Emissions from CO2 No There are no emissions from fossil fuel
fossil fuel consumption in the project activity.
consumption for CH4 No Excluded for simplification. This emission source
purposes other is assumed to be very small
than electricity N2O No Excluded for simplification. This emission source
Project scenario
generation or is assumed to be very small

transportation due
to the project
activity
CO2 No There are no emissions from electricity
Emissions from
consumption in the project activity.
electricity
CH4 No Excluded for simplification. This emission source
consumption due
is assumed to be very small
to the project
N2O No Excluded for simplification. This emission source
activity
is assumed to be very small
B.4. Establishment and description of baseline scenario

>>
There are currently no landfill gas collection systems installed anywhere in the country. Originally, the
Addis Ababa landfill site was envisaged to be closed once it was filled to capacity, with the landfill gas
vented out into the atmosphere through ventilation systems. Thus, the approved design of the landfill
included only LFG ventilation system without any provision for collection. There are no approved plans
for methane collection from existing landfill sites in other municipalities in the region either. However,
the AACA has, taking CDM revenue into consideration, decided to install LFG collection and flaring
system to avoid emissions of methane into the atmosphere.
In accordance with the approved consolidated baseline methodology ACM0001, Version 13 (EB 67), the
“Combined tool to identify the baseline scenario and demonstrate additionality”, Version 4.0 (EB 66) is
being used to establish the baseline scenario as follows:
UNFCCC/CCNUCC
Step 0: Demonstration whether the proposed project activity is the First-of-its-kind
According to the "Guideline on additionality of first of its kind project activities”, Version 02 (EB 69,
Annex 7), a proposed project activity is the First-of-its-kind in the applicable geographical area if:
(a) The project is the first in the applicable geographical area that applies a technology that is
different from technologies that are implemented by any other project, which are able to deliver
the same output and have started commercial operation in the applicable geographical area
before the project design document (CDM-PDD) is published for global stakeholder consultation
or before the start date of the proposed project activity, whichever is earlier;
(b) The project implements one or more of the measures;
(c) Project participants selected a crediting period for the project activity that is a maximum of 10
years with no option of renewal;
A step by step demonstration of the project activity being the First-of-its-kind using the guideline is
presented below:
1. Applicable geographical area should be the entire host country. If the project participants opt to
limit the applicable geographical area to a specific geographical area (such as province, region,
etc.) within the host country, then they shall provide justification on the essential distinction
between the identified specific geographical area and rest of the host country.
As Ethiopia went through decentralization in the past twenty years, municipalities have
increasingly been responsible for managing solid waste operation and landfills. Even though
decentralization has given municipalities more autonomy, it has also created a constraint as many
have to raise their budget internally from taxes or other means10. This presents a unique challenge
for the municipalities in Ethiopia.
The economic development, in addition to high rate of urbanization and population growth, has
put a constraint on municipalities in delivering essential services. Lack of manpower and
technical skill remain to be the most important bottleneck in addressing solid waste collection and
landfill management in the country. While the current decentralized system allows local
administrations to be more accountable to citizens and be informed about the needs of the
communities, local administrations are also poorly equipped to establish, manage and/or monitor
solid waste collection and landfills11.
Productivity levels in the Ethiopian economy remain very low when compared with almost all
peer groups. Ethiopia has attracted relatively little FDI, and reform has stagnated. Ethiopian
products remain uncompetitive in international markets 12 . The limited progress in raising
productivity has contributed to Ethiopia‘s current macroeconomic challenges, in particular the
poor supply response to incentives and infrastructure spending, and the growing shortfall between
imports and exports. Access to finance remains a significant constraint in the country.
Given the unique circumstances and distinct investment climate of Ethiopia, technology adoption
capability of Ethiopia cannot be compared with other African countries. Thus, the applicable
geographical area for this analysis has been kept as the default i.e. Ethiopia.
10
Ethiopia Solid Waste & Landfill [Country Profile and Action Plan], Community Development Research through
funding from the Global Methane Initiative
11
Ethiopia Solid Waste & Landfill [Country Profile and Action Plan], Community Development Research through
funding from the Global Methane Initiative
12
Toward the Competitive Frontier: Strategies for Improving Ethiopia‘s Investment Climate June 2009, Finance
and Private Sector Development Africa Region, World Bank
UNFCCC/CCNUCC
2. Measure (for emission reduction activities) (for emission reduction activities) is a broad class
of greenhouse gas emission reduction activities possessing common features. Four types of
measures are currently covered in the framework:
a. Fuel and feedstock switch (example: switch from naphtha to natural gas for energy
generation, or switch from limestone to gypsum in cement clinker production);
b. Switch of technology with or without change of energy source including energy
efficiency improvement as well as use of renewable energies (example: energy
efficiency improvements, power generation based on renewable energy);
c. Methane destruction (example: landfill gas flaring);
d. Methane formation avoidance (example: use of biomass that would have been left to
decay in a solid waste disposal site resulting in the formation and emission of
methane, for energy generation).
The project entails reduction in GHG emissions by methane destruction through flaring. Thus,
this criterion is satisfied.
3. The project is the first in the applicable geographical area that applies a technology that is
different from any other technologies able to deliver the same output and that have started
commercial operation in the applicable geographical area before the start date of the
project.
Currently, there are no landfill gas collection and flaring systems installed anywhere in the
geographical boundary of analysis i.e. Ethiopia13. Thus, this criterion is satisfied.
4. Project participants selected a crediting period for the project activity that is a maximum of
10 years with no option of renewal”
Fixed crediting period of 10 years has been chosen for the project activity. Hence, this criterion is
satisfied.
The guidance further mentions that a proposed project activity that is identified as the First-of-its-kind
project activity is additional. As demonstrated in this section, the project activity under consideration is
the first-of-its kind, and hence is additional.
Outcome of step 0: The proposed project activity is the First-of-its-kind. Hence, case 2 of the “Combined
tool to identify the baseline scenario and demonstrate additionality” (Version 04.0.0) is being referred.
13
http://www.globalmethane.org/activities/actActivityDetailsForLandfill.aspx?myObjId=a07G000000PMKkVIAX
&mySiteObjId=a09A0000004vICIIA2
UNFCCC/CCNUCC
Step 1: Identification of alternative scenarios

Step 1a: Define alternative scenarios to the proposed CDM project activity
UNFCCC/CCNUCC
The methodology ACM0001, Version 13.0 specifies that in applying Step 1 of the combined tool,
baseline alternatives for the destruction of LFG, shall take into consideration , inter alia, the following
alternatives:
- LFG1: The project activity implemented without being registered as a CDM project activity (i.e.
capture and flaring or use of LFG);
This alternative faces prohibitive barriers, including investment barrier as highlighted in the next
step. However, it has been retained as a plausible alternative for step 1.
- LFG2: Atmospheric release of the LFG or capture of LFG and destruction through flaring to
comply with regulations or contractual requirements, or to address safety and odour concerns;
The atmospheric release of LFG is a plausible baseline scenario. However, there are no
regulations currently in the host country mandating the capture of LFG and its destruction
through flaring. Further, there are no contractual requirements necessitating the same either. The
project proponent is not implementing the project to address safety and odour concerns but to
reduce GHG emissions (methane) into the atmosphere which contribute to climate change.
This alternative also represents the existing situation in the landfill which is an open dump solid
waste disposal site (SWDS) without collection, treatment, destruction or utilization of LFG with
LFG from the site being directly discharged into the atmosphere.
- LFG3: LFG is partially not generated because part of the organic fraction of the solid waste is
recycled and not disposed in the SWDS;
No part of the organic fraction of the solid waste is being recycled at the Repi landfill; the entire
quantum of waste that reached the landfill is being disposed. Hence, this is not a plausible
baseline alternative.
treated aerobically and not disposed in the SWDS;
No part of the organic fraction of the solid waste is being treated aerobically, the entire quantum
is being disposed in the landfill. Hence, this is not a plausible baseline alternative.
incinerated and not disposed in the SWDS.
No part of the organic fraction of the solid waste is being incinerated, the entire quantum is being
disposed in the landfill. Hence, this is not a plausible baseline alternative.
The methodology states that in addition to the alternative baseline scenarios identified for the destruction
of LFG, alternative scenarios for the use of LFG shall also be identified, however considering that LFG
utilization is not an aspect of the project activity, the same is not being considered.
Outcome of Step 1a: As described above, plausible alternative scenarios for the Project are LFG1 and
LFG2.
Step 1b: Consistency with mandatory applicable laws and regulations
Considering that there are no regulations governing flaring and/or combustion of landfill gas in Ethiopia,
both the scenarios are not in conflict with any mandatory applicable legal and regulatory requirements.
Moreover, there is no legal requirement in Ethiopia which compels to implement either of the two
alternatives.
Outcome of Step 1b: Both plausible alternative scenarios i.e. LFG1 and LFG2 are in compliance with
mandatory legislation and regulations.
UNFCCC/CCNUCC
Step 2: Barrier analysis
Step 2a: Identify barriers that would prevent the implementation of alternative scenarios
Guideline 7 of the “Guidelines for Objective Demonstration and Assessment of Barriers” (Version 01)
states that “for projects in Least Developed Countries it is sufficient to transparently describe the
relevant barriers, as less stringency is needed with regards to data availability in the actual
demonstration of barrier, as compared to the projects in other countries. Projects in Least Developed
Countries are not bound by the provisions in this guideline and may use other approaches that are more
adapted to the local circumstances”. The rationale provided for this guidance is that Projects in Least
Developed Countries can be assumed in general to face significant barriers to their implementation. At the
same time, data availability in these countries is considerably limited which complicates the
demonstration of additionality.
The barriers identified for the proposed project activity are as follows:
a. Investment barriers
Capital for the implementation of this project activity is not adequately available due to a number of
reasons:
- No private capital is available from domestic or international capital markets due to real or
perceived risks associated with investment in the country where the proposed CDM project
activity is to be implemented, as demonstrated by the credit rating of the country or other country
investments reports of reputed origin – Euler Hermes Group, a leading global provider of trade
related credit insurance solutions in its review of the country (Ethiopia) has given it a country risk
grade “D” meaning highest risk14. The rating is based on an assessment of political stability,
economic stability and structural business environment which are all at a high risk in the country.
Many of the reputed credit risk rating agencies like Standard & Poor and Moody’s etc. do not
even provide a rating for Ethiopia in lieu of its dependence on foreign aid rather than foreign
direct investment.
- Poor private sector involvement in the sector: Most of the waste in the country is administered by
the government with no or little involvement of private sector15. Moreover, the development of
the private sector in general is hampered by lack of skills and capital, weak investment climate
and structural constrains such as market size and geography. Given this background, the proposed
project, which does not provide financial incentive, would be impossible to fund through private
sector capital.
- Poverty: In Ethiopia, where basic necessities are a struggle for a large part of the population, a
project activity that generates no income and provides no additional benefit apart from GHG
mitigation, cannot be considered feasible without additional funding. Ethiopia is one of the
world’s poorest countries (US 344.6 GDP in 2009)16 per capita and classified as ‘low income’.
Majority of the population lives in absolute poverty. The government has become increasingly
dependent on aid in supporting its economic activities. Ethiopia remains a major recipient of
14
http://www.eulerhermes-aktuell.de/de/dokumente/country-review-ethiopia-20090821.pdf/country-review-
ethiopia-20090821.pdf
15
http://www.krepublishers.com/02-Journals/JHE/JHE-33-0-000-11-Web/JHE-33-3-000-11-Abst-PDF/JHE-33-3-
179-11-2145-Regassa-N/JHE-33-3-179-11-2145-Regassa-N-Tt.pdf
16
http://data.un.org/CountryProfile.aspx?crName=Ethiopia
UNFCCC/CCNUCC
foreign humanitarian aid in Africa17 and majority of the Government’s direct budget relies on it.
A major portion of the population is engaged in subsistence farming and periodic famines remain
a severe constraint on per capita GDP growth. Acute food shortages caused by drought is the
most protracted economic problem and devastates a large portion of the Ethiopian population.
Rural communities plagued with crop failures, pests, and extensive livestock losses and become
dependent on international food assistance.
b. Technological barriers
Landfill gas capture technology is currently unavailable indigenously in the country, and will need to be
imported. Given that the technology is to be implemented in the country for the first time, skilled and/or
properly trained labour to operate and maintain the technology are not available. This will necessitate the
investment of additional capital in training of manpower to construct and operate the facility.
The appropriate technology, although available in the other countries, will need to be localized and
adapted to Ethiopia (with respect to local environment, variations in waste composition etc.). There is a
need for demonstration of the technology to confirm its appropriateness and acceptability. Transfer of the
technical knowhow including training of the manpower is a necessary element towards achieving this
objective. Thus, the technology requires financial support for its demonstration and success and this
project activity intends to achieve this objective with support from CDM.
Given that the alternative scenario LFG1 is prevented by the identified barriers, it can be eliminated from
further consideration. However, Step 3, investment analysis has also been demonstrated to strengthen the
additionality argument.
Step 3: Investment analysis
Since the CDM project activity and the alternatives identified in Step1 generate no financial or economic
benefits other than CDM related income, simple cost analysis can be applied for demonstrating financial
additionality.
The purpose of this step is to demonstrate that there is at least one alternative which is less costly than the
Project Activity. The cost of alternative LFG2 (atmospheric release of the LFG without capture and
flaring) is null. The costs of alternative LFG1 (project activity undertaken without being registered as a
CDM project) would incur a high front-end capital investment, future investments throughout the
project’s lifetime and annual operational costs. Further in the LFG1 scenario, no revenues are generated
by the project. Therefore, it is not likely to be implemented.
The front-end capital investments required for the implementation of the project activity are broadly
classified as follows:
Date Expense Source of funds Amount (ETB)

3 May 2011 Original contract between EKOKEM, Soft loan from 30,449,585
and AACA for landfill closure AFD to AACA
13 March 2012 Supplementary works agreement for AACA self-finance 6,804,421
landfill gas capture, between to EKOKEM
EKOKEM and AACA
(expected) Purchase of flaring and monitoring AACA self-finance 3,181,856
September 2012 equipment for CDM (estimated)
Total (ETB) 40,435,862
17
http://www.globalhumanitarianassistance.org/reports
UNFCCC/CCNUCC
Outcome of Step 3: LFG2 is the only likely alternative and is thus identified as the baseline.
Step 4: Common practice analysis
If the proposed project activity is the First-of-its-kind then this step is not applicable. Hence, common
practice analysis is not being undertaken.
Outcome of Step 4: Since the proposed project activity is first-of-its-kind and not regarded as common
practice, hence the proposed project activity is additional.
B.5. Demonstration of additionality

>>
The project activity has already been demonstrated as being additional in step B.5. Hence in accordance
with the “Guidelines for Completing the Project Design Document Form”, Version 1.0, EB 66, the same
information need not be replicated in both sections.
Since the start date of the proposed project activity is prior to the date of publication of the PDD for the
global stakeholder consultation, the project participants had submitted the duly filled ‘prior consideration
of CDM form’ dated 04/10/2010 to the UNFCCC secretariat as well as the host country DNA. A brief
timeline of events demonstrating action towards securing CDM status vis a vis project implementation is
provided below:
S. No. Date Event

1 25/01/2010 Preliminary Environmental and Social Impact Study submitted by
Pyory to Addis Ababa City Administration for the closure of the
landfill
2 04/10/2010 Prior consideration of CDM form filled and submitted to UNFCCC
and Ethiopian DNA
3 27/10/2010 Date of receiving of the prior consideration of CDM at the UNFCCC
(as mentioned on the website)
4 05/11/2010 No objection letter from the Federal Environmental Protection Agency
(The DNA of Ethiopia)
5 03/05/2011 AACA and Ekokem sign Contract of Works for Reclamation, Gas
venting and Leachate Collection of Koshe Repi Landfill
6 08/12/2011 Local Stakeholder Consultation public hearing held for Repi
7 13/03/2012 AACA signs supplementary contract with Ekokem for landfill gas
collection
B.6. Emission reductions

B.6.1. Explanation of methodological choices
>>
Baseline emissions
According to ACM0001 Version 13.0.0, the baseline emissions are determined according to equation 1 of
the methodology which is as follows:
BE y  BE CH4,y  BE EC,y  BE HG,y  BE NG,y
Where:
BEy = Baseline emissions in year y (t CO2e/yr)
BECH4,y = Baseline emissions of methane from the SWDS in year y (t CO2e/yr)
BEEC,y = Baseline emissions associated with electricity generation in year y (t CO2/yr)
UNFCCC/CCNUCC
BEHG,y = Baseline emissions associated with heat generation in year y (t CO2/yr)

BENG,y = Baseline emissions associated with natural gas use in year y (t CO2/yr)
The project activity does not involve electricity generation, heat generation or use of natural gas.
Therefore, BEEC,y = BEHG,y = BENG,y = 0.
The baseline emissions of methane from the SWDS are determined as per equation 2 of ACM0001
Version 13.0.0 which is as follows:
BE CH4, y  1 - OX top_layer   FCH4, PJ, y  FCH4, BL, y   GWPCH4
Where:
BECH4,y = Baseline emissions of LFG from the SWDS in year y (t CO2e/yr)
OXtop_layer = Fraction of methane in the LFG that would be oxidized in the top layer of the SWDS
in the baseline (dimensionless)
FCH4,PJ,y = Amount of methane in the LFG which is flared and/or used in the project activity in
year y (t CH4/yr)
FCH4,BL,y = Amount of methane in the LFG that would be flared in the baseline in year y
(t CH4/yr)
GWPCH4 = Global warming potential of CH4 (t CO2e/t CH4)
Since there was no flaring of methane in the baseline, FCH4,BL,y = 0.
Ex-post determination of FCH4,PJ,y
The amount of methane in the LFG which is flared and/or used in the project activity in year y (FCH4,PJ,y)
is determined as per equation 3 of ACM0001 Version 13.0.0 which is as follows:
FCH4, PJ, y  FCH4, flared, y  FCH4, EL, y  FCH4, HG, y  FCH4, NG, y
Where:
year y (t CH4/yr)
FCH4,flared,y = Amount of methane in the LFG which is destroyed by flaring in year y (t CH4/yr)
FCH4,EL,y = Amount of methane in the LFG which is used for electricity generation in year y
(t CH4/yr)
FCH4,HG,y = Amount of methane in the LFG which is used for heat generation in year y (t CH4/yr)
FCH4,NG,y = Amount of methane in the LFG which is sent to the natural gas distribution network
in year y (t CH4/yr)
Since the project activity does not involve electricity generation, heat generation or use of natural gas,
FCH4,EL,y = FCH4,HG,y = FCH4,NG,y = 0.
FCH4,flared,y is determined as per equation 4 of ACM0001 Version 13.0.0 which is as follows:
PE flare, y
FCH4, flared, y  FCH4,sent_flare, y 
GWPCH4
Where:
FCH4,flared,y = Amount of methane in the LFG which is destroyed by flaring in year y (t CH4/yr)
FCH4,sent flare,y = Amount of methane in the LFG which is sent to the flare in year y (t CH4/yr)
PEflare,y = Project emissions from flaring of the residual gas stream in year y (t CO2e/yr)
FCH4,sent_flare,y is determined directly using the “Tool to determine the mass flow of a greenhouse gas in a
gaseous stream” Version 2.0.0 as follows:
UNFCCC/CCNUCC
FCH4, m  Vm,db  v CH4, m,db   CH4, m

with
Pm  MM CH4
 CH4, m 
R u  Tm
Where:
FCH4,m = Mass flow of methane in the residual gaseous stream in the minute m (kg CH4/min)
Vm,db = Volumetric flow of the residual gaseous stream in the minute m on a dry basis (m³ dry
gas/min)
vCH4,m,db = Volumetric fraction of methane in residual gaseous stream in the minute m on a dry
basis (m³ CH4/m³ dry gas)
CH4,m = Density of methane in the residual gaseous stream in minute m (kg gas i/m³ gas i)
Pm = Absolute pressure of the residual gaseous stream in minute m (Pa)
MMCH4 = Molecular mass of CH4 (kg/kmol)
Ru = Universal ideal gases constant (Pa.m3/kmol.K)
Tm = Temperature of the gaseous stream in minute m (K)
PEflare,y is determined using the methodological tool “Project emissions from flaring” Version 2.0.0 as
follows:
Mass flow of methane in the residual gaseous stream in the minute m (FCH4,m) is determined using the
“Tool to determine the mass flow of a greenhouse gas in a gaseous stream” Version 2.0.0 as explained
above.
Since the project activity would involve enclosed flares, the flare efficiency for minute m (flare,m) shall be
determined as either:
 Option A: Default value for flare efficiency; or
 Option B: Measure the flare efficiency
In case of Option A, the flare efficiency for the minute m (flare,m) would be 90% when the following two
conditions are met to demonstrate that the flare is operating:
(1) The temperature of the flare (TEG.m) and the flow rate of the residual gas to the flare (FRG,m) is
within the manufacturer’s specification for the flare (SPECflare) in minute m; and
(2) The flame is detected in minute m (Flamem).
Otherwise flare,m is 0%.
In case of Option B, the flare efficiency of in the minute m is a measured value (flare,m = flare,calc,m) when
the following three conditions are met to demonstrate that the flare is operating:
(1) The temperature of the flare (TEG.m) and the flow rate of the residual gas to the flare (FRG,m) is
within the manufacturer’s specification for the flare (SPECflare) in minute m; and
(2) The flame is detected in minute m (Flamem).
Otherwise flare,m is 0%.
In applying Option B, flare,calc,m can be determined using either:
Option B.1: Biannual measurement of the flare efficiency
Option B.2: Measurement of flare efficiency in each minute
In case of Option B.1, flare,calc,m is calculated as follows:
1 2 FCH4, EG, t
 flare,calc, y  1  
2 t 1 FCH4, RG, t
UNFCCC/CCNUCC
Where:
flare,calc,m = Flare efficiency in the year y
FCH4,EG,t = Mass flow of methane in the exhaust gas on a dry basis at reference conditions in the
time period t (kg)
FCH4,RG,t = Mass flow of methane in the residual gas on a dry basis at reference conditions in the
time period t (kg)
T = The two time periods in year y during which the flare efficiency is measured, each a
minimum of one hour and separated by at least six months
In case of Option B.2, flare,i,calc,m is calculated as follows:
FCH4, EG, m
 flare,calc, y  1 
FCH4, RG, m
Where:
flare,calc,m = Flare efficiency in the minute m
FCH4,EG,t = Mass flow of methane in the exhaust gas on a dry basis at reference conditions in the
minute m (kg)
FCH4,RG,t = Mass flow of methane in the residual gas on a dry basis at reference conditions in the
minute m (kg)
FCH4,RG,m has been determined earlier as FCH4,m.
The methane mass flow in the exhaust gas on a dry basis (FCH4,EG,m) is determined as below:
FCH4, EG, m  VEG, m  fc CH4, EG, m  10 6
Where:
FCH4,EG,m = Mass flow of methane in the exhaust gas on a dry basis at reference conditions in the
minute m (kg)
VEG,m = Volumetric flow of the exhaust gas on a dry basis at reference conditions in minute m
(m3)
fcCH4,EG,m = Concentration of methane in the exhaust gas on a dry basis at reference conditions in
minute m (mg/m3)
The volumetric flow of the exhaust gas is determined as:
VEG, m  Q EG, m  M RG, m
Where:
VEG,m = Volumetric flow of the exhaust gas on a dry basis at reference conditions in minute m
(m3)
QEG,m = Volume of the exhaust gas on a dry basis at reference conditions per kilogram of
residual gas on a dry basis at reference conditions in minute m (m3 exhaust gas/kg
residual gas)
MRG,m = Mass flow of the residual gas on a dry basis at reference conditions in the minute m
(kg)
The mass flow of the residual gas is determined as:
M RG, m   RG, ref,m  VRG, m
Where:
UNFCCC/CCNUCC
MRG,m = Mass flow of the residual gas on a dry basis at reference conditions in the minute m
(kg)
RG,ref,m = Density of the residual gas at reference conditions in minute m (kg/m3)
VRG,m = Volumetric flow of the residual gas on a dry basis at reference conditions in the
minute m (m3)
and
Pref
 RG, ref,m 
Ru
 Tref
MM RG, m
Where:
RG,ref,m = Density of the residual gas at reference conditions in minute m (kg/m3)
Pref = Atmospheric pressure at reference conditions (Pa)
Ru = Universal ideal gas constant (Pa.m3/kmol.K)
MMRG,m = Molecular mass of the residual gas in minute m (kg/kmol)
Tref = Temperature at reference conditions (K)
and
MM RG, m   (v i, RG, m  MM i )
i
Where:
MMi = Molecular mass of residual gas component i (kg/kmol)
Vi,RG,m = Volumetric fraction of component i in the residual gas on a dry basis at reference
conditions in the hour h
i = Components of the residual gas. i = CH4 and N2
According to the methodological tool “Project emissions from flaring” Version 2.0.0, when applying this
equation, project participants may as a simplification, measure the volumetric fraction of methane and
consider the difference to 100% as being nitrogen (N2). Therefore, the same has been adopted by AACA.
The volume of the exhaust gas on a dry basis at reference conditions per kilogram of residual gas (QEG,m)
would be determined as:
Q EG, m  Q CO2, EG, m  Q O2, EG, m  Q N2, EG, m
Where:
QEG,m = Volume of the exhaust gas on a dry basis per kg of residual gas on a dry basis at
reference conditions in the minute m (m3/kg residual gas)
QCO2,EG,m = Quantity of CO2 volume in the exhaust gas per kg of residual gas on a dry basis at
QN2,EG,m = Quantity of N2 volume in the exhaust gas per kg of residual gas on a dry basis at
QO2,EG,m = Quantity of O2 volume in the exhaust gas per kg of residual gas on a dry basis at
with
Q O2, EG, m  n O2, EG, m  VM ref
Where:
UNFCCC/CCNUCC
QO2,EG,m = Quantity of O2 volume in the exhaust gas per kg of residual gas on a dry basis at
nO2,EG,m = Quantity of O2 (moles) in the exhaust gas per kg of residual gas flared on a dry basis at
reference conditions in minute m (kmol/kg residual gas)
VMref = Volume of one mole of any ideal gas at reference temperature and pressure (m3/kmol)
 MFN, RG, m  1  v O2,air  
Q N2, EG, m  VM ref      FO2, RG, m  n O2, EG, m 
 2  AM N  v O2,air 
 
Where:
QN2,EG,m = Quantity of N2 (volume) in the exhaust gas per kg of residual gas on a dry basis at
MFN,RG,m = Mass fraction of nitrogen in the residual gas in the minute m
AMN = Atomic mass of nitrogen (kg/kmol)
vO2,air = Volumetric fraction of O2 in air
FO2,RG,m = Stochiometric quantity of moles of O2 required for a complete oxidation of one kg
residual gas in minute m (kmol/kg residual gas)
nO2,EG,m = Quantity of O2 (moles) in the exhaust gas per kg of residual gas flared on a dry basis at
reference conditions in minute m (kmol/kg residual gas)
MFC, RG, m
Q CO2, EG, m   VM ref
AM C
Where:
QCO2,EG,m = Quantity of CO2 volume in the exhaust gas per kg of residual gas on a dry basis at
MFC,RG,m = Mass fraction of carbon in the residual gas in the minute m
AMC = Atomic mass of carbon (kg/kmol)
v O2, EG, m  MFC, RG, m MFN, RG, m  1  v O2,air  

n O2, EG, m       FO2, RG, m 
1  (v O2, EG, m / v O2,air )   AM C 2  AM N  v O2,air 
 
Where:
nO2,EG,m = Quantity of O2 (moles) in the exhaust gas per kg of residual gas flared on a dry basis
at reference conditions in minute m (kmol/kg residual gas)
vO2,EG,m = Volumetric fraction of O2 in the exhaust gas on a dry basis at reference conditions in
the minute m
vO2,air = Volumetric fraction of O2 in the air
MFN,RG,m = Mass fraction of nitrogen in the residual gas in the minute m
AMN = Atomic mass of nitrogen (kg/kmol)
MFC, RG, m MFH, RG, m MFO, RG, m
FO2, RG, m   
AM C 4AM H 2AM O
Where:
UNFCCC/CCNUCC

MFO,RG,m = Mass fraction of oxygen in the residual gas in the minute m
AMO = Atomic mass of oxygen (kg/kmol)
MFH,RG,m = Mass fraction of hydrogen in the residual gas in the minute m
AMH = Atomic mass of hydrogen (kg/kmol)
v i , RG , m AM j  NA j ,i
MFj, RG, m  i
MM RG ,m
Where:
MFj,RG,m = Mass fraction of element j in the residual gas in the minute m
vi,RG,m = Volumetric fraction of component i in the residual gas on a dry basis in the minute m
AMj = Atomic mass of element j (kg/kmol)
NAj,i = Number of atoms of element j in component i
j = elements C, O, H and N
i = Component of residual gas. If Option (a) is selected to measure the volumetric
fraction, then i = CH4, CO, CO2, O2, H2, H2S, NH3, N2 or if Option (b) is selected then
i= CH4 and N2
Thus, project emissions from ith flare are calculated as:
 1   flare ,i ,m  10 3
525600
PE flare,i, y  GWPCH4  F
m 1
CH4, i, RG, m
Where:
PEflare,i,y = Project emissions from flaring of the residual gas from ith flare in year y (tCO2e)
GWPCH4 = Global warming potential of methane valid for the commitment period (tCO2e/tCH4)
FCH4,i,RG,m = Mass flow of methane in the residual gas of ith flare in the minute m (kg)
flare,i,m = Flare efficiency of ith flare in minute m
n
PE flare, y   PE flare,i, y
i 1
Where:
PEflare,y = Project emissions from flaring of the residual gas from all flares in year y (tCO2e)
PEflare,i,y = Project emissions from flaring of the residual gas from ith flare in year y (tCO2e)
For low height flares, the flare efficiency in the minute m (flare,m) would be adjusted, as a conservative
approach, by subtracting 0.1 from the efficiency as determined in Options A or B.
Ex ante estimation of FCH4,PJ,y
The ex ante estimate of FCH4,PJ,y in done using equation 5 of ACM0001 Version 13.0.0 which is as
follows:
FCH4, PJ, y =  PJ  BE CH4,SWDS, y /GWPCH4
UNFCCC/CCNUCC
Where:
year y (t CH4/yr)
BECH4,SWDS,y = Amount of methane in the LFG that is generated from the SWDS in the baseline
scenario in year y (t CO2e/yr)
PJ = Efficiency of the LFG capture system that will be installed in the project activity
BECH4,SWDS,y is determined using the methodological tool “Emissions from solid waste disposal sites”
Version 06.0.1 as follows:
Since, the amount of methane generated from disposal of waste at the SWDS is calculated for year y,
equation 1 of the tool is used which is as follows:
BE CH4, y   y  1 - f y   GWPCH4  (1  OX ) 
16 y
 F  DOC f, y  MCF   W j, x  DOC j  e j
 k ( y  x ) k
 (1  e j )
12 x 1 j
Where:
BECH4,SWDS,y = Baseline, project or leakage methane emissions occurring in year y generated from
waste disposal at a SWDS during a time period ending in year y (t CO2e / yr)
x = Years in the time period in which waste is disposed at the SWDS, extending from the
first year in the time period (x = 1) to year y (x = y).
y = Year of the crediting period for which methane emissions are calculated (y is a
consecutive period of 12 months)
DOCf,y = Fraction of degradable organic carbon (DOC) that decomposes under the specific
conditions occurring in the SWDS for year y (weight fraction)
Wj,x = Amount of solid waste type j disposed or prevented from disposal in the SWDS in the
year x (t)
y = Model correction factor to account for model uncertainties for year y
fy = Fraction of methane captured at the SWDS and flared, combusted or used in another
manner that prevents the emissions of methane to the atmosphere in year y
GWPCH4 = Global Warming Potential of methane
OX = Oxidation factor (reflecting the amount of methane from SWDS that is oxidised in the
soil or other material covering the waste)
F = Fraction of methane in the SWDS gas (volume fraction)
MCFy = Methane correction factor for year y
DOCj = Fraction of degradable organic carbon in the waste type j (weight fraction)
kj = Decay rate for the waste type j (1 / yr)
j = Type of residual waste or types of waste in the MSW
According to ACM0001 Version 13.0.0:
 fy is assigned a value of 0 because the amount of LFG that would have been captured and destroyed is
already accounted for in equation 2 of the methodology
 x begins with the year that the SWDS started receiving wastes (1968 in case of project activity)
 The oxidation effect (OX) has already been accounted for in equation 2 of the methodology
 Sampling to determine the fractions of different waste types is not necessary because the waste
composition can be obtained from previous studies.
Project emissions
According to ACM0001 Version 13.0.0, the project emissions are calculated using equation 22 of the
methodology which is as follows:
PE y  PE EC, y  PE FC, y
UNFCCC/CCNUCC
Where:
PEy = Project emissions in year y (t CO2/yr)
PEEC,y = Emissions from consumption of electricity due to the project activity in year y
(t CO2/yr)
PEFC,y = Emissions from consumption of fossil fuels due to the project activity, for purpose
other than electricity generation, in year y (t CO2/yr)
The project activity does not involve consumption of electricity or fossil fuels.
Hence PEEC,y = PEFC,y = 0 and accordingly, PEy = 0.
Leakage
No leakage effects are accounted for under ACM0001 Version 13.0.0.
Emission reductions
According to ACM0001 Version 13.0.0, the emission reductions are calculated using equation 23 of the
ER y  BE y  PE y
Where:
ERy = Emission reductions in year y (t CO2e/yr)
B.6.2. Data and parameters fixed ex ante
Data / Parameter OXtop_layer

Unit Dimensionless
Description Fraction of methane that would be oxidized in the top layer of the SWDS
in the baseline
Source of data Methodological tool “Emissions from solid waste disposal sites” Version
06.0.1
Value(s) applied 0.1
Choice of data The value has been referenced from the methodological tool “Emissions
or from solid waste disposal sites” Version 06.0.1 that has determined it after
an extensive review of published literature on this subject, including the
Measurement methods
IPCC 2006 Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas Inventories.
and procedures
Purpose of data Calculation of baseline emissions
Additional comment This value is fixed ex-ante for the entire crediting period.
UNFCCC/CCNUCC
Data / Parameter GWPCH4

Unit t CO2e/t CH4
Description Global warming potential of CH4
Source of data IPCC
Value(s) applied 21 for the first and second commitment period.
Shall be updated according to any future COP/MOP decisions
Choice of data The value is based on IPCC reports and shall be updated according to any
or future COP/MOP decisions.
The Decision 4/CMP.718 states that for the second commitment period of
Measurement methods
the Kyoto Protocol, the global warming potentials used by Parties to
and procedures
calculate the carbon dioxide equivalence of anthropogenic emissions by
sources and removals by sinks of greenhouse gases listed in Annex A to
the Kyoto Protocol shall be those listed in the column entitled “Global
Warming Potential for Given Time Horizon” in table 2.14 of the Errata to
the contribution of Working Group I to the Fourth Assessment Report of
the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, based on the effects of
greenhouse gases over a 100-year time horizon19.
Data / Parameter NCVCH4

Unit TJ/t CH4
Description Net calorific value of methane at reference conditions
Source of data 2006 IPCC Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas Inventories
Choice of data The selected value is the upper limit specified for Natural Gas in Table
or 1.2 of 2006 IPCC Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas Inventories
Volume 2: Energy Chapter 1: Introduction
Measurement methods
and procedures
18
http://unfccc.int/resource/docs/2011/cmp7/eng/10a01.pdf (Page 24 of pdf file)
19
http://www.ipcc.ch/pdf/assessment-report/ar4/wg1/ar4-wg1-chapter2.pdf
UNFCCC/CCNUCC
Data / Parameter PJ

Unit Dimensionless
Description Efficiency of the LFG capture system that will be installed in the project
activity
Source of data Calculated using the USEPA model. Further, technical specifications of
the LFG capture system will be referred.
Value(s) applied 55%
Choice of data The value has been referred from the technical specifications of the LFG
or capture system that would be installed using the model developed by SCS
Engineers for the U.S. EPA Landfill Methane’s Landfill Methane
Measurement methods
Outreach Program.
and procedures
Data / Parameter Ru
Unit Pa.m3/kmol.K
Description Universal ideal gases constant
Source of data Technical literature
Value(s) applied 8,314
Choice of data -
or
Measurement methods
and procedures
Additional comment -
Data / Parameter MMCH4

Unit kg/kmol
Description Molecular mass of CH4
Source of data Technical literature
Choice of data -
or
Measurement methods
and procedures
UNFCCC/CCNUCC
Data / Parameter SPECflare

Unit Flow rate or heat flux - kg/h or m3/h
Temperature - °C
Maintenance schedule - number of days
Description Manufacturer’s flare specifications for temperature, flow rate and
maintenance schedule
Source of data Flare manufacturer
Value(s) applied -
Choice of data The flare specifications set by the manufacturer for the correct operation
or of the flare are as follows:
(a) LFG flow rate: 1500 m3/hr
Measurement methods
and procedures (b) Combustion temperature: 500 - 1000C

Data / Parameter MMCH4

Unit kg/kmol
Description Molecular mass of methane
Source of data Methodological tool “Project emissions from flaring” Version 02.0.0
Choice of data Referred from Table 1 of Methodological tool “Project emissions from
or flaring” Version 02.0.0
Measurement methods
and procedures
Data / Parameter MMN2

Unit kg/kmol
Description Molecular mass of nitrogen
Measurement methods
and procedures
UNFCCC/CCNUCC
Data / Parameter AMC

Unit kg/kmol (g/mol)
Description Atomic mass of carbon
Measurement methods
and procedures
Data / Parameter AMH

Description Atomic mass of hydrogen
Measurement methods
and procedures
Data / Parameter AMO

Description Atomic mass of oxygen
Measurement methods
and procedures
UNFCCC/CCNUCC
Data / Parameter AMN

Description Atomic mass of nitrogen
Measurement methods
and procedures
Data / Parameter Pref

Unit Pa
Description Atmospheric pressure at reference conditions
Value(s) applied 101,325
Measurement methods
and procedures
Data / Parameter Tref

Unit K
Description Temperature at reference conditions
Measurement methods
and procedures
UNFCCC/CCNUCC
Data / Parameter vO2,air

Unit -
Description O2 volumetric fraction of air
Measurement methods
and procedures
Data / Parameter VMref

Unit m3/mol
Description Volume of one mole of any ideal gas at reference temperature and
pressure
Measurement methods
and procedures
B.6.3. Ex ante calculation of emission reductions

>>
Baseline emissions
According to ACM0001 Version 13.0.0, the baseline emissions are determined according to equation 1 of
the methodology which is as follows:
BE y  BE CH4,y  BE EC,y  BE HG,y  BE NG,y
Where:
BECH4,y = Baseline emissions of methane from the SWDS in year y (t CO2e/yr)
BEEC,y = Baseline emissions associated with electricity generation in year y (t CO2/yr)
BEHG,y = Baseline emissions associated with heat generation in year y (t CO2/yr)
BENG,y = Baseline emissions associated with natural gas use in year y (t CO2/yr)
The project activity does not involve electricity generation, heat generation or use of natural gas.
Therefore, BEEC,y = BEHG,y = BENG,y = 0.
The baseline emissions of methane from the SWDS are determined as per equation 2 of ACM0001
Version 13.0.0 which is as follows:
UNFCCC/CCNUCC
BE CH4, y  1 - OX top_layer   FCH4, PJ, y  FCH4, BL, y   GWPCH4

Where:
BECH4,y = Baseline emissions of LFG from the SWDS in year y (t CO2e/yr)
OXtop_layer = Fraction of methane in the LFG that would be oxidized in the top layer of the SWDS
in the baseline (dimensionless)
year y (t CH4/yr)
FCH4,BL,y = Amount of methane in the LFG that would be flared in the baseline in year y
(t CH4/yr)
Since there was no flaring of methane in the baseline, FCH4,BL,y = 0.
The ex ante estimate of FCH4,PJ,y in done using equation 5 of ACM0001 Version 13.0.0 which is as
follows:
FCH4, PJ, y =  PJ  BE CH4,SWDS, y /GWPCH4
Where:
year y (t CH4/yr)
BECH4,SWDS,y = Amount of methane in the LFG that is generated from the SWDS in the baseline
scenario in year y (t CO2e/yr)
PJ = Efficiency of the LFG capture system that will be installed in the project activity
BECH4,SWDS,y is determined using the methodological tool “Emissions from solid waste disposal sites”
Version 06.0.1 as follows:
Since, the amount of methane generated from disposal of waste at the SWDS is calculated for year y,
equation 1 of the tool is used which is as follows:
BE CH4, y   y  1 - f y   GWPCH4  (1  OX ) 
16 y
 F  DOC f, y  MCF   W j, x  DOC j  e j
 k ( y  x ) k
 (1  e j )
12 x 1 j
Where:
BECH4,SWDS,y = Baseline, project or leakage methane emissions occurring in year y generated from
waste disposal at a SWDS during a time period ending in year y (t CO2e / yr)
x = Years in the time period in which waste is disposed at the SWDS, extending from the
first year in the time period (x = 1) to year y (x = y).
y = Year of the crediting period for which methane emissions are calculated (y is a
consecutive period of 12 months)
DOCf,y = Fraction of degradable organic carbon (DOC) that decomposes under the specific
conditions occurring in the SWDS for year y (weight fraction)
Wj,x = Amount of solid waste type j disposed or prevented from disposal in the SWDS in the
year x (t)
y = Model correction factor to account for model uncertainties for year y
fy = Fraction of methane captured at the SWDS and flared, combusted or used in another
manner that prevents the emissions of methane to the atmosphere in year y
GWPCH4 = Global Warming Potential of methane
OX = Oxidation factor (reflecting the amount of methane from SWDS that is oxidised in the
soil or other material covering the waste)
F = Fraction of methane in the SWDS gas (volume fraction)
MCFy = Methane correction factor for year y
UNFCCC/CCNUCC
DOCj = Fraction of degradable organic carbon in the waste type j (weight fraction)
kj = Decay rate for the waste type j (1 / yr)
j = Type of residual waste or types of waste in the MSW
The assumptions used to calculate the baseline emissions are as follows:
Parameter Description Value Source
Default value for site with humid/wet
conditions. Referred from:
Model correction factor to
ϕ 0.75 Methodology Tool - Emissions from
account for model uncertainties
Solid Waste Disposal Sites, Version
06.0.1.
Global Warming Potential
(GWP) of methane, valid for IPCC 2006 Guidelines for National
GWPCH4 21
the relevant commitment Greenhouse Gas Inventories
period(tCO2e/tCH4)
Fraction of degradable organic Methodology Tool - Emissions from
DOCf carbon (DOC) in MSW that 0.5 Solid Waste Disposal Sites, Version
decomposes in the SWDS 06.0.1.
Methodology Tool - Emissions from
Fraction of methane in the
F 0.5 Solid Waste Disposal Sites, Version
SWDS gas (volume fraction)
06.0.1.
Fraction of methane captured at
the SWDS and flared,
f 0 Landfill Administration
combusted or used in another
manner
Methane correction factor for Methodology Tool - Emissions from
MCF unmanaged solid waste disposal 0.8 Solid Waste Disposal Sites, Version
sites - deep 06.0.1.
Oxidation factor (reflecting the
amount of methane from SWDS Methodology Tool - Emissions from
OX that is oxidised in the soil or 0.1 Solid Waste Disposal Sites, Version
other material covering the 06.0.1.
waste)
LFG annual generation hours
Time 8760 Landfill Administration
(h)
2006 IPCC Guidelines for National
DCH4 Density of Methane (tCH4/m3) 0.0007168
Greenhouse Gas Inventories
Efficiency of the LFG capture
hPJ 0.55 Calculated as per the USEPA model
system
DOCj: Fraction of
Composition kj: Decay rate
degradable organic
Waste type j of Waste type for the waste Source
carbon (by weight)
at Landfill site type j
in the waste type j
DOCa: Wood and wood Methodology
43% 7% 0.03
products Tool -
DOCb: Pulp, paper and Emissions from
cardboard (other than 40% 8% 0.06 Solid Waste
sludge) Disposal Sites,
DOCc: Food, food waste, 15% 56% 0.185 Version 06.0.1.
UNFCCC/CCNUCC
beverages and tobacco

DOCd: Textiles 24% 10% 0.06
DOCe: Garden, yard and
20% 7% 0.1
park waste
Quantity of Waste Quantity of Waste

Year disposed at the landfill Year disposed at the landfill
(Metric Tonnes) (Metric Tonnes)
1968 13,977 1991 66,257
1969 14,955 1992 70,895
1970 16,002 1993 75,858
1971 17,122 1994 81,168
1972 18,321 1995 86,849
1973 19,603 1996 92,929
1974 20,975 1997 99,434
1975 22,444 1998 106,394
1976 24,015 1999 113,842
1977 25,696 2000 121,811
1978 27,494 2001 130,337
1979 29,419 2002 139,461
1980 31,478 2003 149,223
1981 33,682 2004 180,618
1982 36,039 2005 205,796
1983 38,562 2006 178,288
1984 41,262 2007 203,061
1985 44,150 2008 177,227
1986 47,240 2009 220,983
1987 50,547 2010 331,235
1988 54,085 2011 337,860
1989 57,871 2012 344,600
1990 61,922 2013 351,500
Using the above equation and assumptions, the ex-ante estimation of baseline emissions has been done in
an excel sheet.
Project emissions
According to ACM0001 Version 13.0.0, the project emissions are calculated using equation 22 of the
PE y  PE EC, y  PE FC, y
Where:
PEEC,y = Emissions from consumption of electricity due to the project activity in year y
(t CO2/yr)
PEFC,y = Emissions from consumption of fossil fuels due to the project activity, for purpose
other than electricity generation, in year y (t CO2/yr)
The project activity does not involve consumption of electricity or fossil fuels.
Hence PEEC,y = PEFC,y = 0 and accordingly, PEy = 0.
Leakage
UNFCCC/CCNUCC
No leakage effects are accounted for under ACM0001 Version 13.0.0.

Emission reductions
According to ACM0001 Version 13.0.0, the emission reductions are calculated using equation 23 of the
ER y  BE y  PE y
Where:
ERy = Emission reductions in year y (t CO2e/yr)
Therefore, using the above estimated value of baseline emissions, the ex-ante calculation of emission
reductions has been done in the excel sheet.
B.6.4. Summary of ex ante estimates of emission reductions

>>
Baseline Emission
Project emissions Leakage
Year emissions reductions
(t CO2e) (t CO2e)
(t CO2e) (t CO2e)
2013 76,187 0 0 76,187
2014 66,687 0 0 66,687
2015 58,605 0 0 58,605
2016 51,712 0 0 51,712
2017 45,819 0 0 45,819
2018 40,767 0 0 40,767
2019 36,423 0 0 36,423
2020 32,677 0 0 32,677
2021 29,436 0 0 29,436
2022 26,621 0 0 26,621
Total 464,935 0 0 464,935
Total number of
10
crediting years
Annual
average over the 46,494 0 0 46,494
crediting period
UNFCCC/CCNUCC
B.7. Monitoring plan

B.7.1. Data and parameters to be monitored
Data / Parameter Management of SWDS

Unit -
Description Management of SWDS
Source of data The following sources of data would be referred:
 Original design of the landfill
 Technical specifications for the management of the SWDS
 Local or national regulations
Value(s) applied Monitored ex-post
Measurement methods Project participants would refer to the original design of the landfill to
and procedures ensure that no practices are occurring that would increase methane
generation at the site compared to the situation prior to implementation of
the project activity.
Any change in the management of the SWDS after completion of Phase II
of implementation of the project activity would be justified by providing
reference to technical or regulatory specifications.
Monitoring frequency Annually
QA/QC procedures -
Purpose of data -
Additional comment The Repi landfill is currently an open dump solid waste disposal site
without any capture of LFG. The project activity is being implemented in
phases wherein Phase I involves sanitary closure of a major section of the
landfill site to capture and flare LFG. Under Phase II a small active portion
of the site would continue to receive material until 2013 when a new
landfill site 50 kilometres to the north of Addis Ababa becomes
operational. This additional waste will also be connected to the landfill gas
extraction infrastructure installed in the project activity. The landfill site
would subsequently be closed, not allowing any further dumping of
material. Hence, after completion of Phase II, the design of the landfill
would remain unchanged allowing no possibility of increase in methane
generation at the site compared to the situation prior to implementation of
UNFCCC/CCNUCC
Data / Parameter Vm,db

Unit m3 dry gas/h
Description Volumetric flow of the residual gaseous stream in the minute m on a dry
basis
Source of data Log books
Measurement methods The volumetric flow measurement would be at the actual pressure and
and procedures temperature. It would be calculated based on the wet basis flow
measurement plus water concentration measurement.
Monitoring frequency Continuously
QA/QC procedures Periodic calibration at least every 2 years would be carried out against a
primary device provided by the independent accredited laboratory of the
Federal EPA of Ethiopia. The calibration and frequency of calibration
would be done according to manufacturer’s specifications
Additional comment In case the flow measurement is on wet basis, the same would be converted
to dry basis using the “Tool to determine the mass flow of a greenhouse gas
in a gaseous stream” Version 02.0.0.
Data / Parameter vi,m,db

Unit -
Description Volumetric fraction of component i in residual gaseous stream in the
minute m on a dry basis where i = CH4, CO, CO2, O2, H2, H2S, NH4, N2
Measurement methods Continuous gas analyser would be used, operating on dry-basis. The
and procedures volumetric flow measurement would always refer to the actual pressure and
temperature.
QA/QC procedures The calibration would include zero verification with an inert gas (e.g. N2)
and at least one reading verification with a standard gas (single calibration
gas or mixture calibration gas). All calibration gases would have a
certificate provided by the manufacturer and would be under their validity
period.
UNFCCC/CCNUCC
Data / Parameter Tm
Unit K
Description Temperature of the gaseous stream in minute m
Measurement methods Instruments with recordable electronic signal (analogical or digital) would
and procedures be used.
QA/QC procedures Periodic calibration at least every 2 years against a primary device would
be conducted by an independent accredited laboratory. The calibration and
frequency of calibration would be as per the manufacturer’s specifications.
Additional comment It would be ensured that the gaseous stream flow temperature remains
below 60ºC, else, volumetric flow of the residual gaseous stream would be
changed to dry basis.
Data / Parameter Pm
Unit Pa
Description Absolute pressure of the residual gaseous stream in minute m
QA/QC procedures Periodic calibration at least every 2 years against a primary device would
be performed and records of calibration procedures would be kept available
along with the primary device and its calibration certificate.
UNFCCC/CCNUCC
Data / Parameter MRG,m

Unit Kg
Description Mass flow of the residual gas on a dry basis at reference conditions in the
minute m
Value(s) applied Would be measured ex-post
Monitoring frequency Continuously with averaging of values on a minute basis
QA/QC procedures Periodic calibration at least every 2 years would be carried out against a
primary device provided by an independent accredited laboratory. The
calibration and frequency of calibration would be as per manufacturer’s
specifications.
Additional comment Monitoring of this parameter (on a kg/h basis) would also be done for
confirming that the manufacturer’s specifications for flow rate/heat flux are
met.
Data / Parameter vO2,EG,m

Unit -
Description Volumetric fraction of O2 in the exhaust gas on a dry basis at reference
conditions in the minute m
Measurement methods Extractive sampling analysers would be used with water and particulates
and procedures removal devices or in situ analysers for wet basis determination. The point
of measurement (sampling point) would be in the upper section of the flare
(80% of total flare height). Sampling would be conducted with appropriate
sampling probes adequate to high temperatures level.
QA/QC procedures Analysers would be periodically but at least every 2 years calibrated
according to the manufacturer’s recommendation. A zero check and a
typical value check would be performed by comparison with a standard
gas.
UNFCCC/CCNUCC
Data / Parameter fcCH4,EG,m

Unit mg/m3
Description Concentration of methane in the exhaust gas of the flare on a dry basis at
reference conditions in the minute m
Measurement methods Extractive sampling analysers would be used with water and particulates
and procedures removal devices or in situ analysers for wet basis determination. The point
of measurement (sampling point) would be in the upper section of the flare
(80% of total flare height). Sampling would be conducted with appropriate
sampling probes adequate to high temperatures level.
QA/QC procedures Analysers would be periodically but at least every 2 years calibrated
according to the manufacturer’s recommendation. A zero check and a
typical value check would be performed by comparison with a standard gas
by an independent laboratory.
Additional comment In case measurement instruments read ppmv or % values, they would be
converted from ppmv to mg/m3 by multiplying by 0.716.
Also, 1% equals 10,000 ppmv.
Data / Parameter Flamem

Unit Flame on or off
Description Flame detection in the minute m
Measurement methods It would be measured using a fixed installation optical flame detector: Ultra
and procedures Violet detector or Infra Red or both
Monitoring frequency Once per minute - Detection of flame recorded as a minute that the flame
was on, otherwise recorded as a minute that the flame was off.
QA/QC procedures The equipment would be maintained and calibrated in accordance with
manufacturer’s recommendations.
UNFCCC/CCNUCC
Data / Parameter Maintenancey

Unit Calendar dates
Description Maintenance events completed in year y
Measurement methods Records of the date when maintenance events were completed in year y
and procedures would be maintained electronically. These maintenance logs would include
all aspects of the maintenance including the details of the person(s)
undertaking the work, parts replaced, or needing to be replaced, source of
replacement parts, serial numbers and calibration certificates.
Monitoring frequency Annually
QA/QC procedures Records would be kept in a maintenance log for two years beyond the life
of the flare
Additional comment These dates are required so that they can be compared to the maintenance
schedule to check that maintenance events were completed within the
minimum time between maintenance events specified by the manufacturer
(SPEC,flare)
B.7.2. Sampling plan

>>
There is no sampling required for this project activity.
B.7.3. Other elements of monitoring plan

>>
The authority and responsibility of project management as well as registration, monitoring, measurement
and reporting will rest collectively with AACA. The responsibility for ensuring proper and continuous
monitoring of the flaring operations is to be fulfilled by a project team established by HoA-REC, as
stipulated in Addendum to Contract for the Supervision of Integrated Solid Waste Management between
Addis Ababa City Administration and HoA-REC as signed in 2010.
The operation and management structure that will be implemented for the purpose of monitoring is
illustrated below:
UNFCCC/CCNUCC
CDM Team Responsibilities
 Reviewing the monthly and annual flaring statistics

Director, SWRDPO
from site.
Project In-charge /
 Evaluating the GHG performance
Head
 Identify opportunities for further improvement in
site.
HoA-REC
Technical Project  Implementation of appropriate corrective measures
Manager in case any discrepancies are identified in the
reported parameters.
 Aggregation and review of monthly reports from
each site supervisor.
CDM Team Member/Site  Ensuring calibration of the monitoring equipments
Supervisor as and when required
 Monitoring and reporting of the GHG performance

related parameters following the guidance provided
in the Project Design Document
 Preparation of the monthly and annual performance
Engineer - 1 Engineer - 2 Engineer - 3 reports.
 Reporting of any discrepancies identified in the
reporting parameters
 Ensuring calibration of the monitoring equipments
as and when required.
Monitoring Plan Objective and Organisation

The purpose of the monitoring plan is to measure the quantity of methane that is captured and destroyed
by flaring. Within the CDM team, a supervisor will be designated for the site and will be responsible for
compiling, monitoring and reporting of GHG performance related parameters (Process Parameters,
Procedures, Calibration).
This data collated from the site will be aggregated by the next superior CDM team member. The data and
documents received from the site supervisor will be compiled in a format called the CDM format / report.
Quality checks will also be undertaken at this level to ensure all discrepancies are addressed. The onus of
reviewing, storing and archiving of all CDM related information relevant to the project in a suitable
manner would rest with this team member.
The Technical Project Manager will aggregate and review all the data received from site supervisor. The
review will be conducted to ensure compliance to the requirements of the monitoring plan and other
CDM modalities and procedures including calibration frequency. Corrective measures will be applied in
case any discrepancy is observed. The Project Manager will further submit a consolidated report to the
Project In-charge who will finally review and sign the monthly performance from the project activity.
To ensure that the data is reliable and transparent, the project entity will establish Quality Assurance and
Quality Control (QA&QC) measures to effectively control and manage data reading, recording, auditing
as well as archiving data and all relevant documents.
Monitoring and Archiving of Data
The monitoring data is derived from instrument records kept by the project owners at SWRDPO and a
copy will be maintained by the CDM technical team at HoA-REC. The CDM team within the plant will
be responsible for collecting the monitoring data and will provide the metered results along with
calibration certificates (if available) in the CDM format / report.
UNFCCC/CCNUCC
The data will be archived electronically and be stored for 2 years after the end of the crediting period of
Procedure for Need Based Training of Employees Associated with Project Activity
The aim of the procedure is to ensure training of SWRDPO and HoA-REC staff members associated with
project activity. The training will be on the following aspects of equipments involved in the project
activity – start up techniques, operation, maintenance, monitoring of parameters, precautions, safety
instructions and emergency preparedness etc. The following procedure will be followed for training:
- A copy of Operation and Maintenance manual, safety instructions related to the equipment involved
in the project activity will be made available to the project staff members involved in the project.
- During commissioning of the new equipments (of the project activity), training on all above aspects
to all employees involved in the project activity will be provided.
- Whenever an employee handles the equipments involved in the project activity for the first time,
training will be provided to him/her on start up techniques, operation, maintenance, monitoring of
parameters, precautions, safety instructions and emergency preparedness etc.
- The training will be provided by the equipment supplier and HoA-REC.
Quality Assurance and Quality Control
AACA will implement QA&QC measures to calibrate and guarantee the accuracy of metering and safety
of the project operation. The metering devices will be calibrated and inspected properly and periodically
as per manufacturer specifications but at least every 2 years.
The CDM team will meet at least every three months to review project parameters, check data collected,
emissions reduced etc. The following will be the procedure for taking corrective action and addressing
any non-conformances discovered:
- All the mismatching data along with the name of the in-charge of logbooks name will be recorded in
a Note Book.
- The site supervisor in the CDM team will send FAR (Forward Action Request) or CAR (Corrective
Action Request) to the concerned CDM Member.
- After receipt of the communication, within one week, the concerned site in-charge will correct the
data and will reply to the site supervisor in the CDM team.
The corrected data will then be compiled by the site supervisor and archived electronically for at least 2
years beyond the crediting period.
UNFCCC/CCNUCC
SECTION C. Duration and crediting period

C.1. Duration of project activity
C.1.1. Start date of project activity
>>
13/03/2012
In accordance with the CDM Glossary of terms20, “the earliest date at which either the implementation or
construction or real action of a CDM project activity begins” has to be considered as the start date.
Further, Paragraph 67 of the EB 41 meeting report clarifies that “the start date shall be considered to be
the date on which the project participant has committed to expenditures related to the implementation or
related to the construction of the project activity. This, for example, can be the date on which contracts
have been signed for equipment or construction/operation services required for the project activity”.
Accordingly, in the context of the proposed project activity, the signing of the supplementary contract
agreement between Addis Ababa City Government and Ekolem-Palvelu Oy for reclamation, gas and
leachate collection of Repi Landfill has been considered as the start date.
C.1.2. Expected operational lifetime of project activity

>>
20 Years, 0 Months
C.2. Crediting period of project activity

C.2.1. Type of crediting period
>>
Fixed Crediting period
C.2.2. Start date of crediting period

>>
01/04/2013
C.2.3. Length of crediting period

>>
10 Years, 0 Months
20
http://cdm.unfccc.int/Reference/Guidclarif/glos_CDM.pdf
UNFCCC/CCNUCC
SECTION D. Environmental impacts

D.1. Analysis of environmental impacts
>>
The Ethiopian Environmental Protection Authority (EEPA) is responsible for framing and
implementation of laws related to environment in the Federal Republic of Ethiopia. Although there are
existing regulations related to management of solid waste in the country, there are no provisions for
mandating closure of the landfills and flaring/utilisation of landfill gas. Further, the Environment Impact
Assessment (EIA) proclamation (http://www.epa.gov.et/Download/Proclamations/Proc%20No.%20299-
2002%20Environmental%20Impact%20Assessment.pdf) does not categorically mentions whether the
proposed project activity requires conducting a mandatory EIA.
Inspite of no regulatory obligation, the project proponent appointed Poyry SAS to conduct an
Environment and Social Impact assessment of the project including for the development of a new landfill
post closure of the Repi and transfer stations. A detailed social assessment for closure and reclamation of
the landfill has also been conducted.
As mentioned earlier, the project activity is proposed to be implemented in two consecutive phases, which
will be completed within two years after its commencement. The first phase will involve the reclamation
of 18 ha of land of the site and it will involve the following steps:
- Reduce negative impact on Abuna Basslios secondary school by clearing the waste over 4 ha of area
neighbouring the school;
- Stabilize side banks in order to limit the risks of erosion from the creek and ensure long term stability
of banks and cover layer; and restore road on top of cover layer
- Limit rain water infiltration and leachate generation by final grading of waste deposit maximizing
runoff and by covering 18 ha of the landfill with a 0.7 m thick cover layer; and collect leachate and
runoff water in a trench drain surrounding the deposit; and
- Planting low vegetation over the surface of the reclaimed area.
The second phase focuses on the final closure of the site, which includes complete cover of the remaining
area, landscaping of the area in operation, plant vegetation, construction of the transfer station on the site,
and implementation of the environmental management plan.
The environmental impacts of the project activity are mostly positive and can be summarised as follows:
- Impact on the landscape

In the proposed project activity, a significant part of the landfill will be covered and this will accelerate
the remodelling process of the site. The implementation of techniques of compaction of waste as part of
the remodelling will reduce the risks of fire on the landfills.
- Impact on fauna and flora

The project will have a positive influence on the local ecosystem by remodelling the landscape and
allowing the development of grass and trees on the covered landfills. Additionally, the destruction of
gases like H2S and derivatives of methane, which constitutes a substantial nuisance in the neighbouring
zones (because of their scents), will also contribute to the development of the local ecosystem. The
improved management of waste, engendered by the project activity, will reduce the presence of rodents
(rats or similar) or birds, thus reducing the sanitary risks for the neighbouring population.
- Impact on air and climate

The flaring and destruction of the methane contained in landfill gas will contribute to the reduction of
greenhouse gas emissions which cause global warming. The project activity will prevent all nuisance
UNFCCC/CCNUCC
created by the total release of the landfill gas to the atmosphere, such as the release of H2S, mercaptenes
and other chemical compounds that result in bad odours and sanitary risks in the neighbouring
populations, such as diseases and asthma due to the air pollution.
- Impact on health and safety

As the waste pickers are subject to different toxic smokes and working in unsafe work conditions, the
waste pickers have encountered different health and safety problems as confirmed by the socioeconomic
survey results. Therefore, the closure of Repi dumping site will bring a positive health and safety impact
to the waste pickers.
There are public institutions like school and residences in the neighbourhood of the dumping site which
are vulnerable to health and environmental impacts caused by the dumping site. The most harmful
impacts from the Repi dumping site are associated with air pollution of the surrounding triggered by
windblown suspended particles originating from the dumpsite, uncontrolled release of gas and smoke
from the burning wastes of the site. Other harmful effects of the air pollution are the possibilities of
inhaling the floating particles which could be contaminated with toxic heavy metals, microbiological
pollution and unpleasant smell. There could also appear spreading of fire around the dump site which
exacerbates the ambient air pollution. There are also surface and groundwater contamination related
environmental problems. Therefore, the closure of site will bring significant positive environmental and
health impacts to the neighbourhood communities.
D.2. Environmental impact assessment

>>
As stated above, EIA is not mandatory for the proposed project activity according to existing guidelines
promulgated by the EEPA. However, the city administration has conducted an environment and social
impact assessment of the project, the results of which clearly demonstrate that the project activity will
bring about positive changes.
Despite the many positive environmental impacts that the project is expected to bring, the assessment
carried out concluded that the planned project activities will trigger loss of income or disrupt the basis of
the livelihood of the waste-pickers (i.e. project affected people) community in Koshe. Therefore, to
restore their livelihood or to enable them to get sustainable income (that is at least the same as to what the
waste picker used to earn), the following mitigation measures are proposed:
1. Restoring the livelihood of the waste pickers through creating new income generation opportunities
Organizing the waste pickers in SMEs

One of the proposed mechanisms to restore the livelihood of the project affected parties is to engage them
in new income generating activities by organizing them in small and micro enterprises (SMEs) and
providing them access to credit. In the discussion held with the project affected parties, some of the waste
pickers have a desire to be organized in cooperatives of small and medium enterprises and to get the
necessary skill trainings as well as provision of credit necessary to run their own business. On the other
side a consultation meeting was held with the Small and Micro Enterprise Development Bureau. The
Bureau asserted that there is strong government commitment to organize the waste pickers in SMEs. The
business sectors for which Small and Micro Enterprise Development Bureau give due attentions
(priorities) are:
1. Textile and Garments small (sub) sector

2. Preparation of dry foods small sector
3. Metal and wood works small sector
4. Construction small sector
5. Municipality service small sector
UNFCCC/CCNUCC
6. Urban Agriculture small sector

7. Cobble stone small sector
8. Hair dressing small sector
9. Commission agent for product sales small sector
10. Computer maintenance and ICT small sector
11. Broidery products small sector
The business areas where the project affected women want to be engaged as a way of restoring their
income are, Baltna works (traditional food preparation), Gulit works (open market stalls), hair dressing,
opening small shops, and trading of cloth. The areas of business activity the men waste pickers want to
engage in, among others are: metal works, mechanics, poultry, opening shop, and getting training on
driving license. The areas of interest raised by both women and men waste picker groups are compatible
with the SME sectors listed above. Therefore, there is a huge opportunity to organize them in SMEs
under the various sectors based on their choices and to help them come up with new income generating
activities that will restore their livelihood.
However, one of the requirements to get credit from the Micro Finance as a Small and Micro Enterprise is
to deposit 20% of the total investment cost the business needs. As it is pointed out in the survey result,
waste-pickers income is subsistence and thus they may not have sufficient capital to deposit the required
amount in a bank. Given the different socio–economic nature of the waste pickers, and the primary
responsibility of restoring their livelihood, the project office will have to support them by availing a credit
necessary to deposit the 20% of the total investment.
The current practice of SME organizers show that credit is given to groups and not to individuals.
However this can have drawbacks in the waste-pickers case unless some extra efforts are taken. As it is
indicated in the survey result, the cooperative culture and practice of saving in a group is none-existent in
the waste pickers. To this effect the credit scheme should take this in to account and needs to be given
intensive training on cooperative work culture and saving habits.
Enabling waste pickers to restore livelihood individually

Although a number of the waste pickers want to work in cooperatives, there are few individual waste
pickers who do not want to work there. Rather, they want to get the necessary support and work
individually. Such individual waste pickers, however, do not seem that they want to avoid the group
collateral scheme in getting credits. There will be two options to accommodate the interest of these waste
pickers. The first is to provide them with some coaching or indoctrination to make them understand the
benefits of working in cooperatives organised as SMEs. If that fails, credit has to be given to individual
waste pickers by group collateral to work on some of the business areas identified under the SME sectors.
To implement the above mitigation measures, the project office will have to formulate and develop an
action plan so that it can initiate, organize and facilitate the necessary support from the relevant
stakeholders as well as to monitor and evaluate the implementation of the mitigation measures. The action
plan will set the road map to organize interested waste pickers into SMEs and help them through to get
the trainings and credit provisions. The project office will also have to include in its plan important
stakeholders such as Woreda one in Kolfe-Keranyo and Wereda two in Nifas -Silk Lafto sub cities, and
seek their assistance to organize the waste pickers and to give them the necessary support to that end. The
basic work of organizing such groups into SMEs is done by the woreda level branches of the Bureau and
thus the project office will need to establish close working relationship with them at woreda level.
Care should be taken in the sequencing of the commencement of new income generating activities and the
closure of the dumping site. The commencement of the new income generating activity should be done
concomitantly with the closure of the dumping site. Otherwise if the new income generating activity lags
behind the closure, the waste pickers’ income could be affected in the mean time. Thus there should be a
mechanism to give some sort of subsidy for the possible transition time.
UNFCCC/CCNUCC
2. Professionalizing waste pickers in waste segregation and recovery system

The waste pickers have been doing this job for quite a long time, majority of them have been in this job
for more than ten years. Thus, they have already developed many years of experience in waste
segregation and recovery systems and they are valuable labour resource for waste management related
work. To reap this advantage and benefit the waste picker themselves, they have to be integrated with the
new formal solid waste management system of the city in a professional manner. Such practice will create
a win –win situation for both the government and the waste pickers.
According to the information obtained from the Recycling and Disposal Project Office, the new sanitary
landfill and transfer station has quite a large number of vacancies to be filled. One transfer station alone
will have about 246 vacancies and the four transfer stations will accommodate a total of 984 employees.
Therefore, the new sanitary landfill and transfer station will take in a large number of workers. This
provides huge potential opportunity to absorb the waste pickers who have interest to work in waste
segregation and recovery scheme at the new transfer stations.
This being the case, past experience of recruiting the waste pickers on formal employment basis has
shown failure. In the recent past, some waste pickers were employed as permanent workers for
preparation of compost in the Koshe dumping site. However the work failed to achieve its purpose mainly
because the employed waste pickers were reluctant to do the job on monthly salary payments. As a
consequence both the project office and the waste pickers do not appear to have any interest to work on
formal employment modalities. Therefore not to repeat the previous mistake, the integration of the waste
pickers should not be on permanent employment basis. Instead it would be more convenient to provide
them some concession and contract to operate the waste segregation and recovery scheme in the transfer
stations. In doing so, the waste pickers will be organized to form cooperatives of waste segregation and
recovery enterprises and enter into contracts. Moreover they have to get the necessary credit facilities and
support from the Small and Micro Enterprise Development Bureau. To conclude, the waste segregation
and recovery workers drawn from the project affected parties should work in a very formal and on private
business modality (entity).
In order to make the system more productive and efficient, the waste pickers will be required to be trained
regarding the new sanitary landfill, the transfer stations and the associated waste segregation and recovery
schemes as well as health and safety issues. In other words, they have to be professional waste pickers
that fulfil the necessary safety and health requirements.
Those waste pickers who happen to work on the new transfer stations will obviously move out to near
places of the Akaki and Filidoro transfer stations. Clearly, this would trigger relocation from their present
home. To this effect, those people should be provided with some relocation compensation schemes and
support. The project affected people should get preferential treatment to work on the Koshe transfer
station, which is one of the transfer stations to be built by the project office. The Filidoro and Akaki
transfer stations should be used as the next and last option to absorb interested waste pickers who desire
to become professional waste pickers.
3. Providing Alternative Employment

Although some segment of the waste pickers are reluctant to work on formal employment basis, others
especially those who are in the old age and have low level of education are keen to be employed. During
the focus group discussion some participants have expressed their preference to work in the reclamation
process such as in the biogas generation, greening and landscaping activities and as guards. Some others
have the desire to work as skip truck driver and driver assistant. The latter group feels that they have the
competence more than any other to work as driver assistance in the solid waste collection skip trucks.
This is because they are already strongly attached with the solid waste collection, disposal and recovery
works and hence they have special affinity to do it without any reservation.
UNFCCC/CCNUCC
Therefore, the project office in collaboration with the Addis Ababa Beautification and Solid Waste
Management Office will have to facilitate to give preferential employment opportunity for those waste
pickers who want to work as skip truck driver assistants when recruiting new staff for the job, and on
reclamation of the Koshe dumping site as well as on other related jobs in the new sanitary landfill.
4. Providing formal and non-formal training

Large numbers of the waste pickers have never attended school. Moreover, there are children who are
involved in waste picking activities that never attended school or are drop outs from school. This will be
the stumbling block for the waste pickers to get job opportunities in other areas of activities. Therefore,
there is a need to give support to pursue their formal education. This appears to be a long term
intervention, but can be handled by working together with interested NGOs. True Concern for
Community Development is one of the NGOs, who run their own development programme to assist the
waste picker’s community. Thus NGOs like these can play an important role in providing a helping hand
to enable the children to continue their education.
The older group (13 years and above) has been out of school for too long and they are more attached to
the waste picking way of life. For this reason, most of them have no other skills (or at least in the short
run they will have difficulties) to engage in other line of economic activities. They need to be trained
based on their respective capacities and capabilities. Considering the socio-economic condition of the
waste pickers, the training should be combined with vocational training, income generation activities
(‘learn and earn projects’) and entrepreneurship. This seems to be a good approach for the young and old
waste pickers (13 and above years old).
Once again the role of NGOs in conducting such trainings for the waste pickers is significant. True
Concern for Community Development is already running a vocational training programme that is offered
to the waste pickers. Working with them and others such as ENDA-Ethiopia will have a beneficial
outcome both for the waste pickers and the project office.
UNFCCC/CCNUCC
SECTION E. Local stakeholder consultation

E.1. Solicitation of comments from local stakeholders
>>
The city administration of Addis Ababa gives prime importance to public acceptance and awareness in
development projects. In recognition with the objective of informing and soliciting comments, the project
proponent identified all the stakeholders directly or indirectly affected by the implementation of the
project activity. These included local residents and communities surrounding the landfill, government
agencies, non-government/development organisations, representatives of schools etc.
In order to ensure maximum participation, the project proponent sent personal invitation letters alongside
putting up public notices in local language at relevant locations on 24/11/2011, well in advance of the
meeting date.
The stakeholder consultation meeting took place on 08/12/2011 at Hager Fikir Theatre Hall, Addis
Ababa. The meeting was attended by more than 70 stakeholders representing various sections of the
society such as scavengers (who work at the Repi landfill), artists, foresters, engineers, businessmen, solid
waste management experts, policemen, environmentalists, workers, local residents, government officials
etc. The meeting proceeded with the following agenda:
Time Program
OPENING
9:00
Ato Haile (Addis Ababa City Administration)
9:20 DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT ACTIVITY

Dr. Araya (HoA-REC)
9:40 QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS

Panel of experts – Moderated by Dr. Araya (HoA-REC)
10:00 EVALUATION FORM FOR PARTICIPANTS

Aysheshum (HoA-REC)
10:15 COFFE AND TEA BREAK
10:30 PANEL DISCUSSION ON PROJECT PERIOD

Panel of experts – Facilitated by Abiy (HoA-REC)
12:00 CLOSURE
Addis Ababa City Administration
E.2. Summary of comments received

>>
Ato Haile Fisseha, General Manager of the Addis Ababa City Administration, opened the meeting with a
briefing on how the 43-year-old landfill was already in the process of being closed and will serve as a
model for Ethiopia in terms of future landfill closures throughout the country. Dr. Araya of HoA-REC
then described the project activity in details including provision of information on impacts of the project
on environment and the communities. He further explained that the closure of the Repi landfill will
UNFCCC/CCNUCC
reduce carbon emissions. The methane capturing system will be a part of the planned CDM project that
will generate income for trash collection and the maintenance of a future landfill in and around Addis
Ababa.
The participants of the meeting were asked to fill evaluation forms of current conditions related to the
landfill. They engaged the panel of experts (representing the Addis Ababa City Administration, HoA-
REC, ENDA-Ethiopia and AfD) with first-hand accounts of life in the neighbouring community of Koshe
and their desire to fully participate in the facilitation of the Repi landfill closure.
An account of the questions asked by the participants and the clarifications provided thereof is provided
below:
Questions and answers on the project activity
1. Q: A resident expressed his thanks for the development of the project. He noted that previously, it had
been difficult trying to rent out homes and though the closure had been promised in the past, it never
happened. The question: When will the facility actually be closed?
A: Dr. Araya stated that the initial closure of Repi has already begun, and the first phase (closure of
the two inactive areas within the landfill) will result in 70% of Repi being closed by May 2012. The
entire closure process will take 2 years in total. The French Development Agency, AfD, has already
contracted a Finnish company to oversee the closure at a cost of 30,000,000 ET (approximately $1.7
million USD)
2. Q: A resident who has lived and worked in Repi for the past 24 years expressed that she is happy with
the project development. The questions: i) What will happen to the residents – and how will they
benefit from the closure; and ii) What will happen with the pungent smell of the dump, usually worst
in the months of September and October?
A.i) Ato Nega of the AACA stated that the organization ENDA-Ethiopia has received a 1 million ETB
(approximately $58,000 USD) to conduct an assessment of the existing Repi community, including
those living on the landfill, to determine their future needs.
A.ii) Dr. Araya of HoA-REC stated that the smell coming from the dump tends to be worse in the rain
and during the rainy season due to a higher release of methane gas. But by May 2012, there is
expected to be a great reduction in the release of methane and, subsequently, the smell.
3. Q: An official from the Energy Ministry asked, for how long can the methane be captured?
A: Dr. Araya stated that this is a 10-year CDM project and that the release of methane gas should be
reduced by ½ during that period.
4. Q: From the organization True Concern, this man stated that they have provided health benefits to
over 1,000 members of the neighboring community. The question: how many residents live on the
landfill?
A: Ato Nega of responded that Azeb will elaborate on community issues during the afternoon session,
but that approximately 500-600 residents are affected.
Discussion on the project period
1. Q: A resident expressed that he is very happy about the project and said that during the Derg
Regime, an official told them (in response to questions about the closure of Repi) that they came
UNFCCC/CCNUCC
to the trash; the trash did not come to them. Also, the smoke is not coming from leaves or wood-
it’s plastic. It is especially strong in the morning. The question: when will this smell subside?
A: Dr. Araya responded that beginning in May 2012, the smell should subside considerably.
2. Comment only: A resident expressed his thanks for the gathering, and the opportunity to share his
thoughts. He said the closure of Repi is a bit late, but that it’s never really too late. He also stated
that he takes medication every 6 hours because of the effects of the odor coming from Repi.
3. Comment only: An inspector from the local police station stated that someone should go to Repi
for a community briefing on this matter.
4. Q: A kebele (local sub-discrict) official comment that this community has been given hope for
some time on the closure of Repi and that he estimates that over 300 people scavenge at the
dumpsite and consider this a wealth-maker. The question: What are the plans for these
scavengers?
A: Azeb of ENDA replied that the community knows better than anyone what their best options
are which direction we should be going in, in terms of future planning. Her organization will
solicit suggestions from these community members at future community meetings. Also, she said
that she is open to suggestions from participants of today’s meeting for suggestions on how to
assist community members.
5. Comment only: What appeared to be a resident of the actual landfill asked, are we giving priority
to the trash or the community members? We need to clean up both the landfill and the community
members.
6. Q: A resident who lives and works in Repi stated that the direction of the river should matter in
the plan. The question: he had not heard of health services being offered to the community and
when will organizers register members of the community to ensure that they all receive necessary
benefits?
A: Azeb of ENDA replied that registration of community members has not begun yet.
7. Q: A police officer asked who is managing incoming vehicles, trucks especially, which
sometimes dump the trash, then travel in the opposite direction of oncoming traffic during their
return to Addis Ababa?
A: Dr. Araya oh HoA-REC replied that this will no longer be an issue once Repi is completely
closed.
8. Comment only: A participant emphasized the importance of keeping the residents in mind when
developing the business plan for the planned recreational park at Repi. He suggested that the
current residents living on the landfill could take on jobs such as tree planting.
E.3. Report on consideration of comments received

>>
The project proponents took note of all the comments and provided appropriate clarifications (as stated
above) to the queries/concerns of the local stakeholders. The following table provides a brief assessment
of the comments received:
Stakeholder comment Was comment Explanation (Why? How?)

UNFCCC/CCNUCC
taken into account

(Yes/ No)?
Resident thankful for the gathering, and Yes Reaffirmation of the benefits of the
that he had been getting sick from the project activity
landfill before the project activity.
Local police stated that the presentation Yes Another presentation of the project
should also be given in the locality in activity is planned for in the locality,
addition to in the City Hall. facilitated by ENDA.
Resident of the project site said that Yes The City Administration has put
both the waste and the people should be 1million ETB (US$58,000) into a
cleaned. project for the reintegration of those
affected by their loss of incomes by the
project activity.
Resident of the local area said that the Yes The final closure the landfill site will
City Administration should hire local not eventuate until the end of 2013.
people for labour of the landfill closure, However, interim works such as
for example tree planting. assistance during the landfill gas pump
tests have used local labourers.
Table: Assessment of Comments
A detailed stakeholder consultation report has been prepared which provides all the details on the
invitation process, meeting attendees, presentation content, queries and their responses, evaluation forms
etc.
UNFCCC/CCNUCC
SECTION F. Approval and authorization

>>
The letter of no objection from the Environmental Protection Authority, the Government of Ethiopia
dated 05/11/2012 is available. Final approval will be provided post submission of the final PDD.
-----
UNFCCC/CCNUCC
Appendix 1: Contact information of project participants
Organization name Addis Ababa City Administration represented by Solid Waste Recycling and
Disposal Project Office
Street/P.O. Box
Building Woreda 16
City Kolfe-Keranyo Sub-City, Addis Ababa
State/Region Addis Ababa
Postcode
Country Ethiopia
Telephone 2511911 652 053
Fax
E-mail
Website www.addisababacityadminstration.gov.et
Contact person Mr. Haile Fesseha
Title General Manager
Salutation Mr.
Last name Fesseha
Middle name
First name Haile
Department Addis Ababa City Administration
Mobile
Direct fax
Direct tel.
Personal e-mail
UNFCCC/CCNUCC
Appendix 2: Affirmation regarding public funding
There is no recourse to any public funding for the proposed project activity.
UNFCCC/CCNUCC
Appendix 3: Applicability of selected methodology
An account of the applicability of the selected methodology has already been stated under section B.2.
UNFCCC/CCNUCC
Appendix 4: Further background information on ex ante calculation of emission reductions
The information on ex ante calculations is already provided under section B.6.3.

UNFCCC/CCNUCC
Appendix 5: Further background information on monitoring plan
All information related to the monitoring plan has already been provided under section B.7.
UNFCCC/CCNUCC
Appendix 6: Summary of post registration changes
Not applicable.
-----
UNFCCC/CCNUCC
History of the document
Version Date Nature of revision

04.1 11 April 2012 Editorial revision to change version 02 line in history box from Annex 06 to
Annex 06b.
04.0 EB 66 Revision required to ensure consistency with the “Guidelines for completing
13 March 2012 the project design document form for CDM project activities” (EB 66, Annex
8).
03 EB 25, Annex 15
26 July 2006
02 EB 14, Annex 06b
14 June 2004
01 EB 05, Paragraph 12 Initial adoption.
03 August 2002
Decision Class: Regulatory
Document Type: Form
Business Function: Registration

Repi PDD

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Repi PDD

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Repi PDD

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

UNFCCC/CCNUCC

CDM – Executive Board Page 1

PROJECT DESIGN DOCUMENT FORM

PROJECT DESIGN DOCUMENT (PDD)

CDM – Executive Board Page 2

SECTION A. Description of project activity

CDM – Executive Board Page 3

Contribution of the project activity to sustainable development:

A.2. Location of project activity

CDM – Executive Board Page 4

A.2.2. Region/State/Province etc.

A.2.3. City/Town/Community etc.

A.2.4. Physical/Geographical location

CDM – Executive Board Page 5

Map 2: Project site with construction plans

A.3. Technologies and/or measures

1. LFG collection infrastructure specifications

CDM – Executive Board Page 6

b. Header pipe system

c. Collection pipe network

d. LFG treatment system

2. Technical specifications of enclosed flare for LFG

CDM – Executive Board Page 7

o Seismic Classification : Zone 4

A.4. Parties and project participants

Federal Democratic Republic of Addis Ababa City No

A.5. Public funding of project activity

CDM – Executive Board Page 8

SECTION B. Application of selected approved baseline and monitoring methodology

B.2. Applicability of methodology

CDM – Executive Board Page 9

CDM – Executive Board Page 10

B.3. Project boundary

CDM – Executive Board Page 11

Source GHGs Included? Justification / Explanation

CO2 No There is no power generation included in the

generation or is assumed to be very small

B.4. Establishment and description of baseline scenario

CDM – Executive Board Page 12

Step 0: Demonstration whether the proposed project activity is the First-of-its-kind

CDM – Executive Board Page 13

CDM – Executive Board Page 14

Step 1: Identification of alternative scenarios

CDM – Executive Board Page 15

Step 1b: Consistency with mandatory applicable laws and regulations

CDM – Executive Board Page 16

Step 2: Barrier analysis

CDM – Executive Board Page 17

Step 3: Investment analysis

Date Expense Source of funds Amount (ETB)

CDM – Executive Board Page 18

Step 4: Common practice analysis

B.5. Demonstration of additionality

S. No. Date Event

B.6. Emission reductions

CDM – Executive Board Page 19

BEHG,y = Baseline emissions associated with heat generation in year y (t CO2/yr)

CDM – Executive Board Page 20

FCH4, m  Vm,db  v CH4, m,db   CH4, m