Name

Guadalupe Solar PV Project

Low head Hydropower Development Project, Punjab Pakistan
Kinguele Aval hydropower plant
Kodeni Solar
El Sauce Solar Power Project, Chile
El Roble Solar Power Project, Chile
Diego de Almagro Solar Power Project, Chile
El Laurel Solar Power Project, Chile
El Jahuel Solar Power Project, Chile
Waste Heat Recovery based power generation at UCWL
Wind Power Project in Tamil Nadu by Green Infra Renewable Energy Limited (SECI-1)
102 MW Gulpur Hydropower Project
Solid Waste Processing facility at Thumbovila-Karadiyana Landfill Site in Western Province, Sri Lanka
Sol de Septiembre PV CDM Project
Grid-connected Solar PV project in Kael
Mandalay Kyar Ni Kan Landfill Methane Recovery Project
Mandalay Thaung Inn Myauk Inn Landfill Methane Recovery Project
Grid-connected Solar PV project in Kahone
Methane capture project
Methane capture project
Gangneung landfill Gas Recovery and Flaring Project
Guajira I Wind Farm
10 MW Solar Power Project by Krishna Wind Farm Developers Pvt. Ltd.
Bundled Solar Power Project by Emami Power Limited
Hasang Hydro Electric Power Plant
Ras Ghareb Wind Energy Project
Wind Power Project by Mangalam Fashions Limited & Group in Andhra Pradesh
Solar and Wind Project by Agrawal Renewable Energy Pvt. Ltd
Methane capture project
Expansion San Pedro Wind Farm
Renewable Energy Power project by DDWL
Solar Project by Parampujya Solar Energy Pvt. Ltd.
250 MW Solar Power Plant in Pavagada Solar Park in Karnataka
50 MW (DCR) Nalgonda Solar PV Power Project by Parampujya Solar Energy at Telangana
50 MW Mahoba Solar PV Power Project by M/s Prayatna Developers Pvt. Ltd. at Mahoba, UP
50 MW Kurnool Solar PV Power Project by M/s Prayatna Developers Pvt. Ltd. at Gani, Kurnool, AP.
Reduction of N2O emissions from the new NA plant 6 of Hu-Chems Fine Chemical Corp.
216 MWac Adani Green Energy (Tamilnadu) Solar Power Project
72 MWac Ramnad Solar Power Project
72 MWac Kamuthi Renewable Energy Project
Associated Gas Recovery and Utilization at Khamilah oil field area at Block-27 in Wilayat lbri of the Sultanate of Oman
Reducing Gas Leakages within the Jalalabad Gas Distribution Network in Bangladesh
Reducing Gas Leakages within the Karnaphuli Gas Distribution Network in Bangladesh
Reducing Gas Leakages within the Bakhrabad Gas Distribution Network in Bangladesh
Reducing Gas Leakages within the Pashchimanchal Gas Distribution Network in Bangladesh
San Pedro Bio-Energy Project
Farahantsana hydropower plant
Quinta PV CDM Project
Rinconada PV CDM Project
San Vicente PV CDM Project
Wind project by LWEPL-2
Santa Rosa PV CDM Project
Los Andes PV CDM Project
12MW PV Bundling CDM Project
8.6MW PV Bundling CDM Project
10MW solar PV based power generation by Helios Beau Champ Limited in Mauritius
Wind Power Project in Madhya Pradesh by EnvironmentFirst-214
70MW Solar Power Plant Project in Ba Ria - Vung Tau, Vietnam
Solar PV based power generation by Voltas Green in Mauritius
Cam Lam VN Solar Power Plant
Cam Lam KN Solar Power Plant
22 MW Solar Power Project by HZL at Rampura agucha Mine, Ra
Reforestation of Grazing Lands Hacienda El Manantial in Puerto Lopez, Colombia
Wind power project in Gujarat by Kaze Energy Limited
Wind power project in Ratlam, MP
Nova Power Solar Project in Korhogo, Cote d'Ivoire
Gimcheon SEED 1.5MW PV power plant project
LFG power plant in Changwon
19.2 MWp Solar Power Project by HZL at Debari and Dariba, Rajasthan
SHP Salto Santo Antonio CDM Project (JUN1205), Brazil
Henrietta solar PV project
Solitude 16 MW solar PV
Nam Kap Hydropower Project
Ambatolampy 20 MW solar PV
Mangdechhu Hydroelectric Project Authority
Energy efficiency measures at Mindspace, Hyderabad, Building no. 12A, 12B, 12C& 20 of Sundew Properties Ltd.
Kelar Natural Gas Combined Cycle Project
Musalpetti Wind Power Project
SHP Lajari CDM Project (JUN1200), Brazil
Off-grid Solar PV project at IAMGOLD Essakane SA Gold Mine
Bundled Solar Power Project by EKI Energy Services Limited (EKIESL-CDM.July-14-01)
100-MW Solar PV Power Plant at Quaid-e-Azam Solar Park, Lal Sohanra, Cholistan, Bahawalpur, Pakistan
Puelche Project/Cancura Factory Biomass Boiler for Heat Generation
Nam Ngao Hydropower Project
Bundled Wind Power Project by Woodside Fashions Limited & Group (EKIESL-CDM.June-16-01)
Wind Power Project by Markdata Green Energy (EKIESL-CDM.January-15-01)
Wind farm at Lalpur, Gujarat
Wind energy project by KWEPL - 1
Wind power project in Madhya Pradesh (2), India
70 MW Bhadla Solar power plant by Fortum Finnsurya Energy Pvt Ltd (EKIESL-CDM-APRIL-16-01)
Solar Power Project by Fortum FinnSurya Energy Pvt Ltd
Biomass based Thermal Energy Generation at J.N.P Products, Bharuch , India
20 MW Solar Project in Sanwreej, Jodhpur, Rajasthan
Nuevo Mondoñedo Landfill Gas Recovery, Flaring and Energy Production and Transformation for Leachate Evaporation
11.35 MW bundled renewable energy based power generation by Interocean Group
Wind Power Project by The KTM Jewellery Ltd (EKIESL-CDM-May-16-01)
Wind Power Project by Evergreen Boardlam (EKIESL-CDM-APRIL-16-03)
Nam Mang 1 Hydropower Project
Renewable Power Project by Emami Power Ltd
Solar Power Project by EnKing International (EKIESL-CDM-May-16-03)
Clean energy project in Jaisalmer, Rajasthan
Wind Power Project by Wires & Fabriks (EKIESL-CDM.February-15-03)
Beijing Haidian Beibu Gas-fired Cogeneration Project
1.2MW Renewable Energy Power Project based on Biogas from dairy buffalo manure at Pariyat, Jabalpur District, Madhya Prad
Wind Power Project by Hetero Wind Power (EKIESL-CDM-May-16-02)
Nam Sor Hydropower Project
Flare Gas Recovery in Tabriz Oil Refinery
Renewable Power Project by the Kiran Group (EKIESL- CDM. September 15-02)
Wonju Landfill Gas Recovery Project for Electricity Generation
ACP Thermal Harvesting™ Project
Nam Hinboun Hydropower Project
9.5 MW wind energy based power generation by Interocean Group
Bundled Renewable Power Project by EKI Energy Services Limited (EKIESL-CDM.February-15-04)
Grid-connected Solar PV project in Mérina Dakhar
15 MW Wind Power Project by RSPL Ltd (EKIESL-CDM-May-16-04)
Renewable Energy Project by Pramatha Power Pvt. Ltd. Goa (EKIESL- CDM. April 16-04)
Bundled Renewable Power Project by Jai Bharat Gp (EKIESL-CDM.April16-02)
5 MW Solar Power Project by Baba Group (EKIESL-CDM-May-16-03)
Waste Heat Recovery based power generation at JK Lakshmi Cement Limited, in Sirohi, Rajasthan, India
Nam Ngiep II Hydropower Project
Institutional Improved Cook Stoves for Schools and Institutions in Uganda
Bundled Wind Power Project by EKI Energy Services Limited (EKIESL-CDM.April-13-02)
Pando and Monte Lirio Hydroelectric Plants
Solar Power Project by Hero Group (EKIESL-CDM.May-15-01)
Wind Power Project in Maharashtra by SJVN Limited
Solar Power Project by Rishabh Renergy (EKIESL-CDM.May-15-02)
Small Hydroelectric Power Plants Projects: São Pedro, Carangola, Calheiros, São Simão, Funil, São Joaquim, Fumaça IV, Jataí, Ir
Boiler Second Economizer in Yansab, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia
Bundled Renewable Power Project by Sharma Industries (EKIESL-CDM.December-14-02)
New gas fired power plant at Ressano Garcia
Soubré Hydropower Project
Fauji Cement Company Limited Waste Heat Recovery Project
Bundled Wind Energy Project in Indian States
850 kW Wind Power Project in Kolhapur
Grid-connected Solar PV project in Bokhol
Grid-connected Solar PV project in Méouane
Akuo Kita Solar Project
TOACHI – PILATON HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT
Small Hydro Power Plant Bugres CEEE
Small Hydro Power Plant Ernestina CEEE
La Ferme – Bambous 15 MW solar power farm
Energia dos Ventos I, II, III, IV and X CDM Project (JUN1184), Brazil
Biogas recovery and CHP production in modules 1 & 2 of West Tehran Wastewater Treatment Plant
Production of biodiesel from non-food oil seeds
102 MW Wind Power Project, ONGC, Rajasthan, India
Mpanga 18 MW Run-of-River Hydropower Project
50 MW Solar Photo Voltaic Plant at Rajgarh (MP)
NURU Light - Cameroon
Biogas recovery and electricity generation from M’zar Wastewater treatment plant, Morocco
Implementation of Co-generation plant for Production of Potable Water in Qeshm Island
Biogas recovery and CHP production in modules 5 & 6 of Tehran South Wastewater Treatment Plant
Replacement of Main Oil Line (MOL) Pumps at Neelam & Heera Asset of ONGC
Sogamoso Hydroelectric Project
Waste Heat Recovery based power generation by Shree Cement Limited at Ras, Rajasthan, India
Energy Efficiency measures in Buildings of the Mindspace Airoli Project, Navi Mumbai developed by Serene Properties Pvt. Ltd
4 MW Small Hydro Project by Shansha Hydro Power Project Co-Operative Society Ltd.
8.4 MW renewable energy based power generation by Hi-Tech
Nam Nga 2 Hydropower Project
Wind Power Project by Wires & Fabriks (EKIESL-CDM.February-15-03)
CO2 production from biomass in Mauritius for use in industrial processes
Solar Power Project by Fortum FinnSurya (EKIESL-CDM.February-15-01)
Los Laureles Hydroelectric Project
Oeste de Caucaia Landfill Project Activity
49.5 MW Sachal Wind Power Project, Jhampir
Papel Misionero Cogeneration Project Activity with Biomass
Dois Arcos Landfill Gas Project Activity
Wind Power Project by B. G. Shirke Construction Technology Pvt. Ltd. and Shirke Infrastructure in Maharashtra, India
Solar Power Project by NarasimhaSwamy Solar Generations (EKIESL-CDM.February-15-05)
Oblogo 1 Landfill Gas Recovery and Flaring Project
Energy Efficiency measures at Commerzone Industrial Park, Pune
3.3 MW Wind Power Project by Classic Marble (EKIESL-CDM.December-14-01)
Renewable Power Project by Hindustan Gum (EKIESL-CDM.August-15-01)
Punta Negra Hydroelectric Project
GHG Emissions Reduction through Modjo Common Effluent Treatment Plant
Bundled Solar Energy Project in Madhya Pradesh by EnvironmentFirst, India
Biogas CDM Project of SUCHI
Clinker Optimization in cement types production at Derba MIDROC cement plant
10MW Solar Power Project (EnvironmentFirst-213)
Solar Energy Project by EnvironmentFirst Energy Services, India
Wind Power Project by Gujarat Guardian (EKIESL-CDM.February-15-02)
Nam Pha Gnai Hydropower Project
Wind Energy Project at Devbhoomi Dwaraka,Gujarat by Powerica Limited
Biomass based power project of VPL
Small scale Jhansi JFM A/R CDM Project on degraded lands in Jhansi Forest Division, Uttar Pradesh, India
Small scale Mahoba JFM A/R CDM Project on degraded lands in Mahoba Forest Division, Uttar Pradesh, India
Small scale Renukoot JFM AR CDM Project on degraded lands in Renukoot Forest Division, Uttar Pradesh, India
Small scale Sonbhadra JFM A/R CDM Project on degraded lands in Sonbhadra Forest Division, Uttar Pradesh, India
Sewage treatment Plant for Panama Bay and city sanitation
Small scale Obra JFM A/R CDM Project on degraded lands in Obra Forest Division, Uttar Pradesh, India
Small scale Lalitpur JFM A/R CDM Project on degraded lands in Lalitpur Forest Division, Uttar Pradesh, India
Small scale Kashi JFM A/R CDM Project on degraded lands in Kashi Forest Division, Uttar Pradesh, India
Small scale Mirzapur JFM A/R CDM Project on degraded lands in Mirzapur Forest Division, Uttar Pradesh, India
Small Hydro Power Project at NTPC-Singrauli
Chakshi Mini Hydro Power Project
Network Energy Optimization
Gas Flaring Reduction Project at GGS, Chariali, Sibasagar, ONGC, Assam
Biogas based power generation project in Maharashtra, India
Energy efficiency measures at Mindspace Airoli Building No 3, 8 and 14 of Serene Properties Pvt Ltd at Navi Mumbai
Grid Connected Bundled Wind Power Project in Karnataka and Maharashtra
Khukhni and Mussapur Small Hydro Power Project
Utilization of waste gas from DRI Kiln for power generation in Raipur, India
Small scale Chitrakoot JFM A/R CDM Project on degraded lands in Chitrakoot Forest Division, Uttar Pradesh, India
Dubai 200MW Photovoltaic Plant
India FaL-G Brick and Blocks Project No.6
5MW Thap Sakae Photovoltaic Solar Cell Power Plant Project, Thailand
Energy efficiency measures at Mindspace Airoli, building nos: 1, 2, 4 and 5&6 of Serene Properties Pvt.Ltd.at Navi Mumbai
Itezhi Tezhi Hydro Power
Grid Connected Solar Photovoltaic project by M/s Solar Semiconductor Power Company (India) Private Limited in the State of
Kahak Wind Farm Project
Small Hydro Power Project in Panwi, Himachal Pradesh
Wind Power Project by SLL in Kutch
Small scale Allahabad JFM A/R CDM Project on degraded lands in Allahabad Forest Division, Uttar Pradesh, India
Wind Power Project by M/s Kukreja Enterprises at Jath, Maharashtra, India
Grid connected natural gas based power project in Raigad District, Maharastra, India
5.6 MW Grid connected Renewable Bundled Hydro Electric Project
Wind Power Project by M/s. D. J. Malpani in Maharashtra
Wind Power Project in Maharashtra State, India
Electricity and heat Generating through a cogeneration system in Gerencia Refinería Barrancabermeja (GRB), Ecopetrol, S.A.
Xenamnoy-6 Hydropower project
Nam Samoy Hydropower Project
37.5 MW Wind power project at Pratapgarh, Rajasthan
Calofic Biomass Steam Plant in Can Tho, Vietnam
Santa Teresa Hydropower Plant
Medium Pressure Steam Condensate water recovery
Liberty Oil Mills Limited – Wind Power Project
Emission reduction on account of process modification at Aluminium metal recycling unit
Mitigation of GHG: Rubber based agro-forestry system for sustainable development and poverty reduction in Pakkading, Bolik
Merida Municipal Solid Waste to Energy
3 MW SAL-II Hydro Electric Project by Himgiri Infrastructure Development Pvt. Ltd.
SHP Lajeado CDM Project (JUN189), Brazil
Use of biomass as an alternative fuel for the production of Calcium Oxide
Los Andes Photovoltaic Farm
Chanju I Hydro Electric Project
Grid Connected Solar PV Project by M/s. Giriraj Enterprises in Rajasthan
Wind Power Project in Tamil Nadu, India
Project Asona - CCGT – Takoradi - Ghana
Zina Solar PV power plant project
Nakivubo Wastewater Treatment Plant Methane Capture and Utilisation Project
10MW Hydroelectric Power Project at Munirabad, Karnataka
Energy Efficiency Measures at MindSpace Building No 11 at Hyderabad
130 MW Aras (Gara Chilar) Hydropower Plant
Hydropower station Murdhari 1&2 (Hydroelectric Power Station Murdhari in Albania)
Bundled Charmadi Mini Hydel and Aniyur Hole Small Hydro Project at Karnataka, India.
Nuru Lighting Project - Uganda
Flare Gas Recovery in Sarkhoon and Qeshm Gas Treating Company
Wind Power Project by M/s. Giriraj Enterprises at Jath & Shahuwadi, Maharashtra
Wind Power Project by M/s D. J. Malpani at Jath in Maharashtra
Bundled Wind Power Project by EKI Energy Services Limited (EKIESL-CDM.January-14-04)
Inner Mongolia Caijiagou Wind-farm Project
Hydro Power Project at Romai
Wind Power Plants Eurus II and Renascença V CDM Project
Panuco Bagasse Cogeneration Project
Biogas recovery from wastewater treatment in PT. Umbul Mas Wisesa Palm Oil Mill
Bundled Wind Power Project- EnKing International (CDM.June-10-01)
Reducing Gas Leakages within the Titas Gas Distribution Network in Bangladesh
Bundled Wind Power Project at Tamil Nadu, India
Grid connected 5 MWp Solar PV power plant in Belakavadi village, Mandya District of Karnataka State, India
SHPS POÇO FUNDO AND PROVIDÊNCIA CDM PROJECT (JUN1133), BRAZIL
Sento Sé Wind Power Project
4.2 MW Wind power project at Kutch, Gujarat by Kush Synthetics Pvt. Ltd.
5 MW Solar PV Power Plant CDM Project by OPG Energy Private Ltd., - Baap, Jodhpur, Rajasthan, India
6.95 MW Bundled Wind Power Project in Gujarat
Waste heat recovery based captive power generation by Ambuja Cements, Rajasthan
6 MW Solar Power Project by Arhyama Solar Power
Khwae Noi Hydropower Project
Grid connection of an isolated electricity system on the Pacific Coast of Colombia (Cauca – Nariño)
Energy Efficiency Measures at MindSpace Building No 14 at Hyderabad
Biomass Based Co-generation project at Karnal, Haryana
SMC WHRB 1&2
Waste heat recovery from stoves of Blast Furnace-3 of Visakhapatnam Steel Plant
Dak Pring Hydropower Project
6.55 MW Renewable energy generation project, India
“Feed switchover from Naphtha to Natural Gas at Phulpur plant of IFFCO” at Phulpur, Allahabad, Uttar Pradesh by M/s Indian
Priyadarshini, Pertinent and Pristine – Wind Power Project
Wind Power Project by Rajasthan Gum Private Limited (EKIESL-CDM.September-12-02)
Bundled Wind Power Project by EKI Energy Services Limited (EKIESL-CDM.April-13-03)
Bundled Wind Power Project by EKI Energy Services Limited (EKIESL-CDM.September-12-01)
Nam Sana Hydropower Project
Akij Particle Biomass Thermal Energy Generation CDM Project
Pareh Sar Combined Cycle Power Plant
Fuel Switch at Corobrik’s Driefontein Brick Factory in South Africa
India FaL-G Brick and Blocks Project No.4
Rondinha Small Hydroelectric Power Plant
Omdurman Landfill Municipal Solid Waste Composting Project
Punta Palmeras Wind Power Project
20 MW BEL Wind Power Project in Maharashtra
OML58 IPP Gas Fired Generation Project
Wind Energy Project in Gujarat by Enn Enn Corp Limited
Bundled Solar Power Project by EKI Energy Services Limited (EKIESL-CDM.September-13-02)
Bundled Solar Power Project by EKI Energy Services Limited (EKIESL-CDM.June-13-02)
Baitun Hydroelectric Project
Bajo de Mina Hydroelectric Project
Nam Lik 1 Hydropower Project
Bundled Wind Power Project- EnKing International (CDM.Dec-10-01)
Segredo Hydropower Plant CDM Project Activity
5.6 MW CDM Bundled Solar Power Project in the state of Maharashtra
Villonaco Windpower
Landfill Closure and Gas capture CDM project by GAIL at Ghazipur, India
Biogas CDM Project of SHTCDP
Biogas CDM Project of IFDP
4.05 MW Champamati small hydro power project
Talimarjan Clean Energy Generation Project
India FaL-G Brick and Blocks Project No.5
CDM Biogas Project of Mahasakthi Women Cooperative Federation
Wind energy project by LWEPL - 1
SHP Nova Mutum CDM Project (JUN1178), Brazil
Wind energy project by KWEPL - 3
Improved Cook Stove Project 1, Nkhata Bay District, Malawi
Improved Cook Stove Project 2, Nkhata Bay District, Malawi
Khun Dan Prakarnchon Hydropower Project
Rural Electrification Project for Clean Energy, Better Living and Sustainable Growth in Bhutan
21.8 MW Wind Power project at Jangi Vandhiya, Gujarat by Powerica Limited
Grid Connected Wind Power Project - Bundle 3
Waste Heat Recover Project by BPSL, India
Energy Efficiency Measures at MindSpace Building No 9 at Hyderabad
HPP José Luiz Müller de Godoy Pereira (JUN1173), Brazil
Nam Long Hydropower project
Mampuri Wind Power Project 3
Ilha Comprida Hydro Power Plant CDM Project Activity
Las Palmas Small Hydroelectric Power Plant
Bundled Wind Energy Project in Maharashtra, India
20 MW LNJP Wind Project Power Project, Rajasthan
Inner Mongolia Shangdi Wind-farm Project
BIOGAS RECOVERY AND HEAT GENERATION FROM PALM OIL MILL EFFLUENT (POME), COOPEAGROPAL
5 MW Small Hydro Project by Jawala Hydro Power Pvt. Ltd
Biomass Power Project- Pragya Energy Pvt. Ltd. (EKI.CDM.December-10-02)
Power Generation from Cooling of coke in Coke Oven Battery#4 of Rashtriya Ispat Nigam Limited
Grid Connected Solar PV Project by M/s. Giriraj Enterprises in Maharashtra
Bundled Wind Project-II of Shivashri in Sadawaghapur Maharashtra
Gove Hydroelectric Power Plant CDM Project - Angola
Efficiency Improvement by Boiler Rehabilitation in fossil fuel-fired (Natural Gas) Steam Boiler System
Bundled micro hydro power generation project in West Bengal, India
Waste Heat Recovery Power Plant at Fecto Cement Limited.
Energy Efficiency Measures at MindSpace Building No 6 at Hyderabad
Grid connected electricity generation plant using natural gas at Jurong Island in Singapore
Biomass based power plant in Mahendargarh, Haryana
SHPs Tambaú, das Pedras and Rio do Sapo CDM Project (JUN1132), Brazil
SHP Paracambi CDM Project (JUN 1064), Brazil
1.7 MW Wind Power project by City Corporation Ltd
Bundled wind power project at Satara, Maharashtra
Bundled Wind Power Project in Tamilnadu, India, co-ordinated by Tamilnadu Spinning Mills Association (TASMA-II (B))
Mile 24 Regional Sanitary Landill LFG Project
Genaveh Combined Cycle Power Plant
Casa Nova Wind Power Plant CDM Project
Suba and Usaquen hydroelectric CDM umbrella project
5.25 MW Bundled Wind Power Project in Tamilnadu
1.2 MW Captive Power Generation through biomass at Maa Durga Rice Products (P) Ltd., Orissa
Bundled Wind Power Project by Texonic Instruments
Inner Mongolia Chayouhouqi Hongmu Phase I 20MWp Solar Power Project
TPI Polene Power Waste Heat Recovery Power Plant Project, Thailand
Grid Connected Wind Power Project - Bundle 1
5 MW Solar PV Power Project at NTPC Faridabad
Canhanduba Landfill Project
Manufacture and utilization of bio-coal briquettes in Stutterheim, South Africa
Fengning Luotuogou Wind Power Project Phase II
Grid Connected Wind Power Project in Gujarat, India
5.1MW Grid Connected Wind Electricity Generation at Ngong Hills, Kenya.
5 MW Solar Photovoltaic Power Project by Backbone Enterprises Limited in Gujarat, India
Queixada Small Hydroelectric Power Plant CDM Project
Kanchanjunga Hydro Power Project in Himachal Pradesh, India
Inner Mongolia Zhuozi Bayin Solar Power Plant Project
3 MW Captive Wind Project by Bhagwati Spherocast Pvt. Ltd in Gujarat
Hydro Power Plant Ulog
Bundled Wind Power Project at Rajasthan India
Bundled Wind Project in RTK
Installation of a tri-generation system supplying energy to a commercial Building
Power Generation using Waste pressure Energy of BF gas from Ga
3MW Beedalli Mini Hydel Project, Kodagu District, Karnataka, India
Bundled Wind Power Project by MLCO
Bundled Wind Power Project by Aditya Marine Limited (EKIESL-CDM.January-12-03)
Renascenca and Ventos de Sao Miguel Wind Power Bundled Project
“Tucuruí-Macapá-Manaus Electrical Interconnected grid” (for simplicity hereafter referred to simply as the “LT-Amazonas Proj
Real Waste Heat Recovery CDM Project
Expansion of coffee manufacturing capacity from 4000MT/Annum to 12000MT/Annum
Perunthenaruvi small hydro electric project
Xe Namnoy 2 - Xe Katam 1 Hydropower Project
Inner Mongolia Eergetu Phase I Wind Farm Project
Solar PV power project by Moser Baer Photo Voltaic Limited
2.1 MW Wind Power Project by Kaizen Switchgear Products in Rajkot District of Gujarat
Solar Power Plant of 15MW in Gujarat by Palace Solar Energy Private Limited
BQS improved cookstoves for Burundi restaurants
Sinohydro Group Ltd. Jiangsu Rudong 100MW Intertidal Zone Offshore Wind Power Project
Fes New Landfill Gas Recovery Reuse and Flaring Project
5 MW Solar PV Power Plant CDM Project by Swiss Park Vanijya Pvt. Ltd.,- Tinwari, Jodhpur, Rajasthan, India
Xinjiang Ili Kukesu River Halajun Hydropower Project
5.4 MW bundled Wind power project activity in kutch district of Gujarat
Installation of natural gas based combined cooling heating and power (CCHP) systems in DLF Building 8 in Gurgaon, India
Gas Collection, Incineration and Electricity Generation System at Da Phuoc Integrated Waste Management Facility
Chongli Xiqiaoliang Phase II 48MW Wind Power Project
2.1 MW Wind Project of Colourtex Industries Ltd. at Kutch district in Gujarat state, India.
BQS improved cookstoves for Burundi’s schools
BQS improved cookstoves for Burundi police camps and prisons
El Diamante 5 MW hydroelectric project
Inner Mongolia Huanghe Industry and Trade (Group) Qianlishan Coal Coking Co., Ltd. Coke Dry Quenching (CDQ) Technical Rec
Grid Connected Solar PV Project by M/s. D. J. Malpani in Rajasthan
Xenamnoy 1 Hydropower Project
Fengcheng Yuhuashan Wind Power Project
Renewable energy generation at Hamira
Furong River Haokou Hydropower Project
Jiangxi Datang International Anyuan Jiulongshan Wind Power Project
Flare Gas Recovery Facilities Project in Unit 49 of MAB Refinery - KNPC
Xinjiang Jingou River Six-level Hydropower Project
Henan Yuanbaoshan Wind Power Project
3.7 MW Bundle Wind Power Project in Maharashtra
Biomass power plant by Sahagreen Forest Project
Barapole Small Hydro Electric Project
Solar Photovoltic Power project at Charanka , Patan District in Gujarat
Restoration of Degraded Lands through Reforestation in Aberdare Forest Complex & National Park area, Kenya
Restoration of Degraded Lands through Reforestation in MAU Forest Complex, Kenya
Grid connected wind power project by CFML
SHPs Coronel Araújo and Passo Ferraz CDM Project (JUN1059), Brazil
Semangka Hydro Electric Power Project
Energy Efficient Green Building at New Delhi by ONGC Ltd
Nam Ngiep 3A Hydropower Project
Bundled Grid Connected Wind Power Project by Gayathri Sustainable Energies India Private Limited.
10.5MW PowerGen Lanka Small Scale Wind Power CDM Project in Sri Lanka
Fuel Switch at the Hot Plate Mill of MAKSTIL A.D
CLP 49.5MW Laiwu Phase I Wind Power Project
Vilangad Small Hydroelectric Project(VSHEP), Kerala (India)
Chathankottunada Stage-II SHEP
Jiangxi Datang International Songmen Mountain Wind Power Project
E.CL Wind Farm Project
Cucuana Hydroelectric Power Plant
Jiangxi Datang International Jishan Wind Farm Project
Hydro Kuhlemann Geração and Fi Bra Geração: Grid connected renewable electricity through the SHPs Karl Kuhlemann and He
Santa Rita Hydroelectric Plant
8.40MW Bundled Wind Power Project in Rajasthan by Friends Salt Works & Allied Ind. & Gautam Freight Pvt. Ltd.
“Yoshlik” Landfill Gas Capture Project, Uzbekistan
Niassa Reforestation Project
1.5 MW Wind Power Project in Rajasthan by Jivraj Tea Limited
5 MW Biomass Gasification based power project by FEPL
Agrahara Mini Hydel Scheme – I & II
Aftaab 5MW Solar PV Power Plant
Henan Mianchi Shangqu Wind Power Project
Hydro Power Project at Masli and Hydro Power Project at Tangnu
Alternative Green Power to Grid
Inner Mongolia Hangjinqi Balagong 10MWp Solar Power Plant Project
Zorlu Enerji Wind Project
FANAPEL Biomass-based CHP
Kirkoswald Small Scale Hydro Power CDM Project in Sri Lanka
Biomass Power Project of Gia Lai Cane Sugar and Thermoelectricity Joint Stock Company
Bundled wind power project in Tamil Nadu, India
Wind power project in Gujarat
Wind Power Project of RVC
Biogas Recovery in Siak
Denawaka Ganga Mini Hydro Power Project
SEC Northern Energy Holding Co., Ltd. Xilinguole Xianghuangqi 20MWp Solar PV Power Generation Project
4 MW wind power project at Tuticorin, Tamilnadu, India
La Merced de Jondachi Hydroelectric Project
Minas San Francisco Hydroelectric Project
5.45 MW Bundled Wind Power Project in Rajasthan, India
Natural Gas based Combined Cycle Power Plant, GPPC at, Gujarat
Bundled Wind Energy Project
Wind Electricity Generation at Tamil Nadu, India
Monreal Hydroelectric Project in Aysen
Xinxiang Pingyuan Tongli Cement Corporation Ltd. Increasing Blend in P·O42.5 Cement Project
2.5 MW wind energy based power generation in Tamil Nadu by KBSPL
Da Dang-Dachomo Hydropower Project
Gunung Megang Add-on Combined Cycle Project
Punatsangchhu-I Hydroelectric Project, Bhutan
Bundled Wind Power Project by EKI Energy Services Limited (EKIESL-CDM.January-12-01)
Puerto Chivos Landfill Gas Project
CDM Project CAAL
6.3 MW Wind Power Project by Diamond Power Infrastructure Ltd.
Liangzhou District 50MWp Grid-connected Solar PV Power Project
Zhuzhou Longting Longfeng Wind Farm Project
Datang International Faku Shuangtaizi Wind Power Project
Siteki, Plumbungan, Ketenger #4 and Cileunca Small-Scale Hydroelectric Power Projects
Hy Brazil Energia S/A renewable energy generation project bundle – Group 2 and Group 3
Solar PV Project – Shyri-1
Hedcor Tudaya 1&2 Hydroelectric Power Project
Divisa Small Hydropower Project
Shaanxi Shifeng Cement Waste Heat Recovery Project
Anaerobic digestion and heat generation at Sugar Corporation of Uganda Limited
Small Scale Wind Energy project in India by Shabnam Petrofils Pvt. Ltd
Sao Salvador Itaberai Wastewater Treatment
Inner Mongolia Adaohai Mine Gas Utilization Project
Hedcor Irisan 3.8MW Hydroelectric Power Project
Tunjita Diversion Hydroelectric Project
Cikaso Hydroelectric Power Project in Indonesia
Solar Thermal Power Project by APCL
Beijing Haidian District Liulitun Landfill Gas Power Generation Project
Kithulgala Small Scale Hydropower CDM Project in Sri Lanka
Mimosa Coal Mine Methane Project
Cabo Leones Wind Farm
Datang International Faku Wulongshan 48MW New Wind Power Project
Chorokhi Hydro Power Plant Project
Bundled Wind Power Project- EnKing International (CDM.November-10-02)
Qian’an Wangxin Caizi Town Windfarm Project Phase II
Kamchay Hydroelectric BOT Project
1.25 MW Wind Power Project in Jamnagar, Gujarat
Bundle Wind Power Project-Enking International (CDM.Aug-09-01)
Wind Power Electricity Generation in Maharashtra
Guanaquitas 9.74 MW Hydroelectric project
Greenhouse Gas emissions reduction by recovering metals and materials through Electronic Waste collection and recycling pro
Bundled wind power project in the state of Gujarat
MCL wind power project in Tamilnadu, India
Small Hydro Power Plants in Braço do Norte River Bundled Project Activities (hereafter referred to simply as “SHPPs in Braço d
3 MW Wind Power Plant of SMC at Gosa village in Porbandar district of Gujarat state, India
Installation of Waste Heat Recovery System at SO3 absorption towers by Indian Farmers Fertiliser Cooperative Ltd IFFCO, Para
Kiriwaneliya Mini Hydro Power Project
FERREIRA GOMES HYDRO POWER PLANT CDM PROJECT ACTIVITY
Reduction in Greenhouse Gas emissions through replacement of Fuel Oil with Natural Gas in refinery furnace operations at Ess
4.25MW grid connected wind farm by Avaneetha Textiles (P) Ltd., Tamil Nadu, India at village Andipatti taluk, Uthamapalayam
9.9 MW Bundled Wind Power Project in Tirupur, Tamilnadu
Dak Rong 4 Hydropower Project
Energy efficiency improvement in Shenzhen Mawan power Co., Ltd.
Fornasa Geração de Energia and Pegoraro Energia: Grid connected renewable electricity through the SHPs Canta Galo, Estânci
Fuel Switching from Petroleum to Natural Gas Project of Fengda Electric Power Co., Ltd.
Kukke Stage - 1 Hydro-Electric Project
Quijos Hydroelectric Project
San Matias Wind Farm
Inner Mongolia Helin Shimenzi 49.5MW Wind Power Project
Energy efficiency measures in Office Building at Kalina of Ivory Property Trust
Handan LFG Power Generation Project
351.43 MW Natural Gas Based Combined Cycle Power Plant at Hazira, Gujarat
Bundle Wind Power Project – EnKing International (CDM.OCT-09-01)
2.5 MW Wind Project by Gokul Refoils & Solvent Limited
CTR Maceio Landfill Gas Project
24 MW Wind Energy based Power Generation In Theni, Tamil Nadu
Grid Connected Wind Power Project by M/s. Venkatrama Poultries Limited at Tirupur, Tamil Nadu
13.65 MW Wind Power Project of Khatau Narbheram & Co. in Tamil Nadu, India
Tiefa Coal Mine Methane Utilisation for Power Generation Project
Grid connected Solar PV Project in Rajasthan by GAIL (India) Ltd.
Renewable Energy Project Bundled by Livia Polymer Bottles Pvt. Ltd
Huizhou Dongjiang Hydropower Project
El Fraile Small Hydro Power Plant
15 MW wind power project by Green Infra Wind Energy Assets Ltd
Mulei County Yuanheng Coal Chemical Industry Co., Ltd. Semi-coke Waste Gas for Power Generation Project
Tianjin Guanzhuang Municipal Solid Waste Incineration Project
Beijing Northwest Thermal Power Center Jingneng Gas-fired cogeneration Project
Natural Gas Based Combined Cycle Power Generation, at Kothapeta, East Godavari, Andhra Pradesh, India.
MACAÚBAS LANDFILL GAS PROJECT
Niger Acacia Senegal Plantation Project
The Mazar-Dudas Bundled Hydropower Project
Mini hydroelectric project. Escalona Energy
Biomass based power project in Punjab
Piasa Bagasse Cogeneration
2.1 MW Wind Power Project by Om Vinyls Private Limited
Green Electricity Generation from Wind Power Project located in Coimbatore, India
Guizhou Wujiang Shatuo Hydropower Project
Energy efficiency measures at Terminal T3
Methane Recovery Project at Pronaca Swine Farms
Angelina Small Hydropower Plant Project Activity.
Bundled wind power project - Enking international (CDM.Nov-10-01)
5.10 MW Wind Power Project by Shyam Metalics & Energy Limited in Maharashtra, India
Changwon Water Supply Sewerage Control Office-Kyungnam Power bundling PV power plant project
Installation of Natural gas based combined cooling heating and power (CCHP) systems in DLF Building 5 in Gurgaon, India
Hernic’s Electricity Generation from Waste Gas Project
0.8MW Wind based Power Generation by Dwarkesh Engineering in Rajasthan
5.3 MW Bundled Wind Power project in India
Biogas recovery from wastewater treatment in Hargy Oil Palms Ltd Palm Oil Mill.
Substitution of coal with alternate fuels at Lucky Cement Limited, Karachi Plant
Fukang 33MW CMM Based Electricity Generation Project
P.S.CH. Biogas Plant
Wind Power Project by Gujarat Multi Gas Base Chemicals Pvt. Ltd. (EKIESL-CDM.May-12-01)
Fuxin Coal Mine Methane Utilization Project
CTR da Caturrita landfill gas project
Gansu Ganzhou District Nantan Phase I 50MWp Solar Photovoltaic Power Project
Renewable Wind Energy Project in India
Rio Grande landfill gas project
CTDR Bob Ambiental landfill gas project
IFM Integrated Clean Energy Project
Methane Recovery and Use of the Biogas in the Dak To Tapioca Starch Making Plant of APFCO, Vietnam
Clinker Optimization in cement types production at Derba MIDROC cement Plant
CPTR Marituba landfill gas project
Tuokexun Wind Farm Phase III Project
Green Building at Kolkata
Hangtian Wanyuan Gaizhou Tazigou Wind Farm Project
9.9 MW Biomass based power plant at Khas, Gujarat
Vajrakarur wind power project in Andhra Pradesh
CEMEX Panama: Alternative fuels and biomass project at kiln 2 of Bayano cement plant
Chaglla Hydroelectric Power Plant CDM Project
Shanxi Majunyu CMM Power Generation Project
9 MW Wind Power Project of Khatau Narbheram & Co. in Tamil Nadu, India
Heilongjiang Nongkenyuanda Biomass Cogeneration CDM Project At Heilongjiang Province, China
Nghi Son Waste Heat Recovery and Utilization Project
Biogas recovery and electricity generation from anaerobic treatment of industrial wool scouring effluent
Wind Power Project by Surana Corporation Limited at Tamil Nadu, India
LMEL 25 MW Waste Heat based Captive Power Plant.
Wind Project Activity by White House
Hangzhou Huadian Banshan NG Combined Cycle Cogeneration Project
Methane Capture and Flaring from Addis Ababa Repi open dump fill
Lanchinha Wind Farm
Dariali Hydroelectric Power Project
Generation of electricity from a bundled 10.2 MW Wind Power Project by KRBL Limited
Efe'e Landfill Gas to renewable electricity Project
5 MW Solar Photovoltaic based Power Generation in Jodhpur, Rajasthan
100 MW Wind Power Project in Dongola
Municipal Solid Waste to Energy Project by Western Power Company (Pvt) Ltd
Lower Kotmale Oya Mini Hydro Power Project
Cabeço Preto Wind Farm
Wind Power Project by Plasti Surge Industries Pvt. Ltd.
Electricity Generation using renewable wind energy by Sahyadri Industries Limited
Shandong Province Jinjiang Biodiesel Production Project
Yunnan Nanwahe River Bundled Hydropower Project of China
Beijing Jingneng Weilai Kejicheng Gas-fired Cogeneration Project
0.85 MW x 2 Wind Turbine Generator project
Tian Siang Oil Mill (Air Kuning) Biogas Project
Cleanstar Mozambique - Maputo Ethanol Cookstove and Cooking Fuel Project 1
Inner Mongolia Huanghe Industry and Trade (Group) Wanchen Energy Resources Co., Ltd. Qianfeng Cement Plant 4800 t/d clin
Bundled Wind Power Project by EKI Energy Services Ltd. (EKIESL-CDM.January-12-02)
Los Pocitos Landfill Gas Utilization Project
Inner Mongolia Huanghe Industry and Trade (Group) Wanchen Energy Resources Co., Ltd. Qianfeng Cement Plant 4800 t/d clin
Incineration of Spent wash to operate 1 MW captive cogeneration project at OGPSCL
Quantou Group Zaozhuang Jinqiao Cement Corporation., Ltd Increasing Blend In Cement Production Project
Mulibettu Hydro Power Project
11.9 MW Wind Power Project at Tamil Nadu, India.
5MW Solar PV Power Plant by AEPL
6.5 MW Bundled Wind Power Project in Rajasthan, India
"Ensenada Hydroelectric Project"
Energy efficiency improvement project through modification of heat exchanger network at Kenya Petroleum Refineries Ltd
Grid connected solar PV based power generation at Rajasthan by Lexicon Vanijya Pvt. Ltd
Grid connected solar PV based power generation at Rajasthan by Symphony Vyapaar Pvt Ltd
Solar Power project in Rajasthan
Yunnan Tengchong Yongxing River First Level Hydropower Station
Yunnan Tengchong Yongxing River Second Level Hydropower Station
Ikutmaju Biomass Cogeneration Project
Maesod Wastewater Treatment and Biogas Utilisation Project
Talara Wind Farm Project
Nallakonda wind farm in Andhra Pradesh
Monte Rosa Vinasse Dewatering Project (Hereinafter MRVDP)
Tanghe Tailong Cement WHR project
Fal G brick manufacturing by Magnum Concretes Pvt. Ltd
Beijing Northeast Power Center Jingneng Gasfired Cogeneration Project
Cupisnique Wind Farm Project
Beijing Caoqiao Natural Gas CCGT Project
Gangakhed Sugar & Energy Private Ltd (GSEPL) 30 MW Bagasse Based Co-generation Power Project
Carbonization Project - Mitigation of Methane Emissions in the Charcoal Production of V&M Florestal, Minas Gerais, Brazil.
3 MW solar PV power project by Par Solar Private Limited at village Gadna Dist- Jodhpur in Rajasthan, INDIA
Thangarabalu Small Hydel Project at Karnataka
Tram Tau Hydroelectric Power Plant
Ningxia Qingtongxia Solar PV Power Station Project
Combined Cycle at Loma de la Lata Thermo Unit Project
Solar Power project at Patan District in Gujarat
CGR CATANDUVA LANDFILL GAS PROJECT
Mudanjiang Guojiagou Landfill Gas Power Generation Project
Mejillones Sulphuric Acid Plant
CDM Project for Forestry Restoration in Productive and Biological Corridors in the Eastern Plains of Colombia
CTR Rosario Landfill Gas Project
Tijuana Landfill Gas Project.
Cadereyta Landfill Gas Project
Poza Rica Landfill Gas Project.
SHP MORRO AZUL CDM PROJECT (JUN1164)
Bundled biomass based steam generation project in India
2.75 MW Bundled Wind Power Project in Karnataka
KI Biogas Co., Ltd. Wastewater Treatment for Energy Generation, Nakhon Ratchasima
9MW Pure Low Temperature Waste Heat Recovery and Utilisation for Power Generation Project of Linxiang Conch Cement Co
Guiyang MRTS Line I Project
Domestic production and sales of enhanced energy-efficient refrigerators in India by LG Electronics India Pvt Ltd.
Gramang Hydel power Project
Jilin Anbai Gaosu Lesheng Wind Farm Phase II Project
AWMS METHANE RECOVERY PROJECT SG-1
Construction of Sumgayit Combined Cycle Power Plant
Shanxi Linfen Dyestuff Efficiency Improvement Project
Song Bac Hydropower Project
50 MW Mindanao Geothermal Power Plant 3 Project
Rice husk based Power project in Nakhonratchasima, Thailand
Srisangdaw Biopower Power Plant Project
Eiamheng Tapioca Starch Industry Co.,Ltd. Tapioca starch wastewater biogas extraction and utilization project, Nakhonratchas
19.5 MW wind power project in Ossiya, Rajasthan by Gujarat Fluorochemicals Limited (GFL)
Shuochen Niujialing Wind Power Generation Project in Shanxi Province
Pujiangling MSW Incineration for Power Generation Project in Fujian Province
Methane recovery and electricity generation from POME at Pelakar Mill, Jambi, Indonesia
Afforestation/Reforestation on Degraded Lands in Southwest Sichuan, China
Dapein (1) Hydropower Project in Union of Myanmar
Qingtongxia Aluminium Co., Ltd. 350kA Electrolytic Cells Upgrade & Retrofit Project
Thermal energy generation using biomass by Ozone Envirotech (P) Ltd.
Mae Klong Hydropower Project
Pasak Jolasid Hydropower Project
10.2 MW Wind Energy CDM Project by RRECL at village Pohara, Pohara-Baramsar, District Jaisalmer, Rajasthan, India
Hefei City Municipal Solid Waste Incineration Power Generation Project
Serra de Santana III Wind Farm.
Gas Flare Recovery at Suez Oil Processing Company, Egypt
Serra de Santana II Wind Farm.
Lautaro Generation Project
Fuel Switching From Fossil Fuel to Biomass for Thermal Energy in Bhavnagar.
Wind Power Project By Unique Forwarders (CDM.OCT.-11-02)
Makeni power project
4.8 MW Wind Power CDM Project by Golden Hatcheries
1.5 MW Small Hydro Project at Yeleswaram, East Godavari Dist., Andhra Pradesh, India
Demonstration project for annual production 4, 000, 000 m3 biogas from organic waste in Anyang City
Electricity generation through environment friendly technology
Small scale bundle wind energy project in India.
LTML Wind Energy Project in Tamil Nadu
Thermal Energy Generation using Biomass Briquette at M/s. Garware Polyester Limited, Waluj, Aurangabad, India
6.6 MW Bundled Wind Power Project in Tamil Nadu
Qingdao MSW Incineration Power Generation Project
Hebei Zhuozhou biomass combined stoves and heaters (BCSH) Project 1
2.5 MW power generation through installation of wind turbine generators in Tamil Nadu, India
Oil Search Limited Flare and Vent Gas Conservation Project
Bundled wind power project Cape Verde
Namwasa Central Forest Reserve Reforestation Initiative
Green Energy Project at Gujarat by Powerica Limited
Grid Connected Gas based Combined Cycle Power Project in Andhra Pradesh
Mwenga Hydro Power Project
Electricity generation from bundled wind energy project in Maharashtra aggregated by Resurge Energy Private Limited
Rehabilitation of Degraded Wastelands at Deramandi in Southern District of National Capital Territory of Delhi through Refore
Partial substitution of fossil fuels with biomass at “Les Ciments Artificiels Tunisiens” cement plant, Tunis.
Kaifeng Municipal Solid Waste Incineration for Power Generation Project
Baanrai 9.9 MW Biomass Power Plant in Uthaithani, Thailand
Wind Power Project in Tirupur District
Solar PV Power Plants by PESPL and SEPL
Teesta Stage-VI Hydro Electric Project
Guizhou Hongguo Coal Mine Methane Power Generation Project
2 MW Bundled Solar Power Project in Gujarat, India
Wind Power Project in Tamil Nadu by Savita Oil Technologies Ltd.
BRASILM 1 - AVOIDANCE OF METHANE EMISSIONS THROUGH COMPOSTING OF MANURE WASTE
Bundle Wind Power Project-EnKing International (CDM.SEP-09-01)
Waste Management Project at Al Amerat
N2O Abatement at Austin Bacis Mexico Nitric Acid Plant
Rural Electrification by Mujila Falls Lower Zambia Mini-hydropower station
Biogas Recovery and Utilization project in Tay Ninh Province, Vietnam
Grid Connected Solar Power Project in Bikaner
Los Cocos II Wind Farm Project
Fujian Air Separation Project utilizing Cryogenic Energy of LNG
Nekkiladi Hydro Power Project
Bonyic Hydroelectric Project
Improved Woodstoves in Udaipur - Helping Women and Environment
Wind energy based power generation project by Nakoda Limited at Madhya Pradesh, India
5MW Solar PV Power Plant by GMPL
Afforestation of Degraded Shengle Ecological Zone in Helinge'er of Inner Mongolia, China
Nam Sim Hydropower Project, Huapanh Province, Lao PDR
Biomass based power project at Ambala, India
Sao Thian-A Oil Field Flare Gas Recovery and Utilization Project, Sukhothai, Thailand
Advance Agro Power Plant AAPP 2 Biomass Power Generation
Electric Power Generation from Renewable Sources – Barra da Paciência, Ninho da Águia, Corrente Grande, Paiol, São Gonçalo
MCC Meili Pulp and Paper Co., Ltd Methane Utilization and Power Generation Project
Bundled project of 3.6 MW wind based power generation in Rajasthan
5 MW Solar PV Power Project at Port Blair (A & N)
18 MW Wind Power Project in Kutch (Gujarat in India) managed by Aarvee Denims & Exports Ltd.
Shaanxi Fengxian Matoutan Wind Power Project
Waste Water and Root Cake to Energy at P.V.D.
CDM Project of Fuel Switch from Heavy Fuel Oil (HFO) to Liquefied Natural Gas (LNG) in DG Sets
Sichuan Liangshan Huidong Yanba Bundled Hydro Power Project
Fiji Nadarivatu Hydropower Project
Methane Recovery and Utilization Project of Chabei Modern Farming
San Carlos 18 MW Biopower Power Plant
Jamanwada wind power project in Gujarat
Wind Power Project in Rajasthan by RSPL Limited
10 MW Manjanadka Hydro project, Karnataka, India
Power Generation through Wind Energy at Metro Power Company Limited
Subei County First Cascade Hydropower Station Project in upstream of Danghe River
Subei County Second Cascade Hydropower Station Project in upstream of Danghe River
Chifeng Wengniuteqi Wind Farm Project
Cristal, Primavera and São Judas Wind Farms
Xiong County Geothermal Space Heating Project
Integrated biomass power project at Perundurai, Erode district, Tamil Nadu, India
Distribution of Improved cook stove - Phase 17
Distribution of Improved cook stove - Phase 19
Cristal, Primavera and São Judas Wind Farms
Xiong County Geothermal Space Heating Project
Integrated biomass power project at Perundurai, Erode district, Tamil Nadu, India
Distribution of Improved cook stove - Phase 17
Distribution of Improved cook stove - Phase 19
Distribution of Improved cook stove - Phase 21
Methane Recovery from Advanced Wastewater Treatment System in an Ethanol Plant
9MW Biomass Power Project at Yedlapur Village in Raichur District, Karnataka, India
El Modelo Wind Farms
Power Generation through Wind Energy at Gul Ahmed Wind Power Limited
Partial Fuel Switching to Agricultural Wastes, Sewage Sludge & Refuse Derived Fuel (RDF) at Arabian cement plant
GHG abatement through solar power generation in Bikaner, Rajasthan, India
Sinter Waste Heat Recovery for Power Generation in Hunan VALIN Xiangtan Iron & Steel Co., Ltd.
10 MW Solar Photovoltaic Power Plant in Rajkot, Gujarat (India)
Biomass based thermal energy generation at Pashupati Polytex, Uttarakhand, India
30 MW Lagunas Solar Farm
Wind Power Project in Kutch, Gujarat by SDL
SABANILLA HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT (SHP)
Foundation Wind Energy-I Limited 50 MW Wind Farm Project
Biogas Project, Olmeca I, Santa Rosa
Methane recovery in wastewater treatment system at Yurimaguas industrial plant, Peru.
Golden Sugar 30MW High Energy Efficient Combined Heat and Power (CHP) System in Apapa, Lagos, Nigeria
Weyerhaeuser Productos S.A. biomass-based CHP
Waste Heat Recovery and Utilization for Power Generation at Maple Leaf Cement Factory Limited, Iskanderabad, Pakistan
Biomass Fuel Switch Project at Sapphire Finishing Mills Ltd. Pakistan
Gangani Small Hydro Electric Project
Kaladonger wind power project in Rajasthan
Chakala wind power project in Maharashtra
Solar Thermal Power project at Kutcch District in Gujarat
Biomass based thermal energy in Uttar Pradesh, India
Biomass based thermal energy in Uttar Pradesh, India
Xinrong Phase II Wind Power Generation Project in Shanxi Province
Grid Connected Wind Power Generation in Tamil Nadu, India
TWE Golden Valley Wind Power Project
Biogas and Bagasse based Co-generation project activity in Aurangabad
Liaoning Tai'an Weihua Biomass Power Plant Project
7.5 MW Lubuk Gadang Small Hydropower Plant at West Sumatera, Indonesia
Bundled Wind Power Project by Gangamai Industries and Construction Limited
4.80 MWrenewable energy project by Aleo Manali Hydropower Pvt. Ltd.
Parque Talinay Oriente
Fujian Zhenghe County Longtanxi 1st, 2nd and 3rd Cascade Bundled Small Hydropower Project
5 MW Solar PV Power Project by Azure Power
FELDA Biogas Plant (Methane Recovery and Utilisation) at Sungai Tengi Palm Oil Mill, Malaysia
Phu Quy Wind Power Project
Solutions heating up by the implementation of a solar thermal plant
Amakhala Emoyeni Grid Connected 138.6 MW Wind Farm, Phase 1, South Africa
The Fuyang Sludge Incineration Generation Project 30MW, People´s Republic of China
Biogas from Wastewater Management by Palm Power Green Co., Ltd
Chenzhou Guiyang Qiaoshi Wind Farm Project
Suzhou Xiaoxian Xiehe Guanshan Wind Farm Project
4.00 MW Bundled Wind Power Project at Rajasthan & Maharashtra, India
Cristal II Wind Farms
Buasommai I biomass power plant at Muang Roi Et district.
Associated Gas Recovery and Utilization at Block 9
3 MW grid connected wind power project by M/s Geetarani Mohanty
Las Camelias Biogas Energy Project from Wastewater Treatment.
Buasommai II biomass power plant at Suvarnabhum district, Roi-Et Province.
Baoding 2*12MW Waste to Energy Project
Ubhara Hydel Power Project, Chamba, Himachal Pradesh
Biogas recovery and utilization at Tung Lam Ethanol Factory
Ubhara Hydel Power Project, Chamba, Himachal Pradesh
Biogas recovery and utilization at Tung Lam Ethanol Factory
Serra Azul Wind Farms
Fontes dos Ventos Wind Farms
Generation of electricity from 4x1.5 MW capacity Wind Mills by KRBL Ltd. at Ratan Ka Bas site, Jodhpur district, Rajasthan, Ind
Rice Husk Based Cogeneration project in Haryana, India by Goel International Pvt. Ltd
Wind Power Project at Tadas, Karnataka
Jinjie Damao Wind Farm Project
Chew's biogas plant for treatment of poultry waste and recovery of biogas for electricity generation in Singapore
Rice Husk based Co-generation Power Project at Usher Eco Power Limited, Chhata, Uttar Pradesh, India
100MW Yunnan Fenghuanggu Hydropower Project
Catalytic abatement of N2O in Nitric Acid Plant of Shiraz Petrochemical Company
Inner Mongolia Baotou Huiquan Baiyunebo Wind Farm Project
LFG management project for second phase of Liulitun landfill in Haidian District
Biomass Power Project in Haveri District of Karnataka State, India
Core CarbonX Bundled Wind Power Project
Alibunar Biogas Plant Construction Project
Qinhuangdao 2*9MW Waste to Energy Project
Wind power project by Riddhi Siddhi Gluco Biols Limited (RSGBL)
Dos Mares Hydroelectric Project
Solar PV power project based on polycrystalline technology by Aravali Infrapower Limited
Hunan Chuangyuan Primary Aluminium Smelter System Renovation Project
Sinner wind power project in Maharashtra
Grid connected solar PV project by VIL and CPPL
Double A Ethanol wastewater treatment plant
Ethanol Wastewater Treatment at Ekarat Pattana Co., Ltd. in Nakhon Sawan, Thailand
Tidong Hydropower Project
Emission reduction through change in smelter technology at BALCO, India
Fujian Zhenghe County Fantunyang Small Hydropower Project
OCAÑA Hydropower Project
SA Calcium Carbide Furnace Waste Gas to Electricity CDM Project
UNOSUGEN Natural gas based grid connected Combined cycle power generation project
CCX Bundled Wind Power Project
Curva dos Ventos Wind Farms
Tangshan Yandong 12MW Cement Waste Heat Recovery Power Generation Project
Distribution of Improved cook stove - Phase 23
Distribution of Improved cook stove - Phase 25
Priyadarshini - Pertinent Wind Power Project in Maharashtra
Zhejiang Zheneng Xiaoshan Natural Gas Cogeneration Project
Tarim oil wells associated gas recovery and utilization project (CNG)
Thai Solar Energy Solar Thermal Power Plant Project
Corredor dos Senandes CDM Project
Wind Power Project by Rajasthan Gum Private Limited (EKI.CDM.Mar-11-03)
Distribution of Improved cook stove - Phase 18
Distribution of Improved cook stove - Phase 16
Lotte World Tower CDM Project(Photovoltaic & Wind Power)
Power generation from biogas in Windhoek, Namibia
INTERASEO LANDFILL GAS MITIGATION PROJECT
Wind Power Project by EON Electric limited in Rajasthan
Distribution of Improved cook stove - Phase 22
Bundled Wind Project in TKM
Cerro del Aguila Hydroelectric Project
Xinjiang Dahuangshan Coalmine Methane Utilisation Project
3 MW bundled wind power project in Tamil Nadu
Wind Power Project activity by HRG
Distribution of Improved cook stove - Phase 24
Distribution of Improved cook stove - Phase 20
La Isabela- Heat & Electricity generation from biomass residues
4.25 MW Wind Power Project in Tamilnadu by Amarjothi Spinning Mills Ltd
Distribution of Improved cook stove - Phase I
5 MW Solar Photovoltaic at Rapar Khokhara, Anjar, District Kutch of Gujarat
Wind Power Project by Tirupati Microtech Pvt. Ltd. (EKI-CDM.June-11-02)
Methane recovery and utilization from industrial wastewater Project of Lianyungang Yida Alcohol Co., Ltd.
SDIC Xindeng Zhengzhou Cement Waste Heat Recovery Project
3 MW Wind power project in Madhyapradesh
ECIL Bundled Wind Energy Project in India
Macedonian SHPP Bundle III
5 MW Solar PV Power Project at NTPC-Dadri, a Business unit of NTPC limited
1 MW Hydro Power Project by M/s Oreva Energy Pvt. Ltd. at Wanakbori, Kheda, Gujarat
2 MW Gogripur Hydro Power Project at Village Gogripur, District Karnal of State Haryana (India)
Wind power project of KSPL in Karnataka
Bundled Wind Power Project in Barmer and Jaisalmer, Rajasthan
Solar Power Project by M AND B Switchgears Limited
5MW Solar PV Power Project in Jodhpur District, Rajasthan
DGEN Natural gas based grid connected Combined cycle power generation project
Flare gas reduction through spiking compressor at Shah
1.5 MW Wind Power CDM Project by M/s.Kilburn Chemicals Limited, Tamilnadu, India (Renewable Energy Wind)
Reducing gas leakages within ‘Tiraspoltransgaz-Pridnestrivie’ LLC gas distribution network, Transnistria/Republic of Moldova
Trigeneration at Mobile Telephone Networks (MTN), 14th Avenue Commercial Site South Africa
Integrated Solid Waste Management Project at Mathura, Uttar Pradesh
Hebei Handan Waste Gas Recovery for Electricity Generation Project
PT Karya Mas Energi Biogas Bundled Project 3
1.35MW Captive Power Generation Plant
PT Karya Mas Energi Biogas Bundled Project 2
San Nicolas CDM Reforestation Project
4.5MW Bundled Wind Power Project in Tirunelveli, Tamilnadu, India
1.8 MW Wind Power Project in Tamil Nadu, India
Market Coke Waste Heat Recovery Project
Khe Bo Hydropower Project
Biomass based power generation by Haveri Bioenergy Private Limited
Khe Bo Hydropower Project
Biomass based power generation by Haveri Bioenergy Private Limited
Heilongjiang Fujin 48MW Wind Power Project
Heilongjiang Fujin Phase II 18MW Wind Power Project
Atacama Solar Photovoltaic Power Plant Project
Xia County Sijiao Town Phase I 49.5MW Wind Power Project
Olkaria IV Geothermal Project
24.75MW Basavanna hydro project in Karnataka, India
Hutama Green Energy Methane Capture and Utilization Project at Starch Tapioca Bandar Mataram, Central Lampung, Indones
Coal to Biomass Residues Fuel Switch Project in Qing’an Cogeneration Plant
Zhaotong Niulanjiang Huangjiaoshu Hydropower Project
Riachão III and V Wind Power Plants CDM Project Activity
Boiler retrofits to utilize semi-coke oven gas in Yulin Jitai Sunshine power generation company
Ningde Municipal Solid Waste Incineration and Power Generation Project
Llay Llay Wind Farm Project
Bundled Wind Power Project in Satara district, Maharashtra and Tirunelveli district, Tamil Nadu India
Shandong Ningyang Biomass Generation Project
Xinjiang Balikun County Fengyuan Santanghu 49.5MW Wind Power Project
CDQ Waste Heat Recovery Project of Hunan VALIN Xiangtan Iron & Steel Co., Ltd.
Sapthip Wastewater Management and Methane Capturing for Heating and Electricity generation
Xitieshan 10MW Grid-connected Solar Power Generation Project
Xinjiang Fuyun Tianrun Qiakuertu Phase I 49.5MW Wind Power Project
Shaanxi Tongchuan Jiaoping Mining Area VAM Destruction Project
Tianrun Hami Shisanjianfang Wind Farm Phase III 49.5MW Wind Power Project
Installation of Top-Pressure Recovery Turbine at Blast Furnace -4
San Juan Hydroelectric Project
15 MW bundled grid connected wind energy project in Gujarat, India
Grid connected solar photovoltaic power plant in Bikaner, Rajasthan, India
Hanergy Pizhou Solar PV Power Co., Ltd 30MW PV Power Station Project
Heilongjiang Mingshui Biomass Cogeneration Project
Grid connected solar photovoltaic power plant in Bikaner, Rajasthan, India
Hanergy Pizhou Solar PV Power Co., Ltd 30MW PV Power Station Project
Heilongjiang Mingshui Biomass Cogeneration Project
Use of Charcoal from Renewable Biomass Plantations as Reducing Agent in Pig Iron Mill in Brazil
30 MW Pica Solar Farm
Xinjiang Haba River Jilebulake Hydro Power Project
Gasification Project ARIDEMA
Ningwu Pandaoliang Wind Power Generation Project in Shanxi Province
Bundled Grid connected 2.9 MW Wind Power Project in INDIA by KAMAL ENGINEERING CORPORATION [UNIT OF KEC INDUSTR
Cañada Honda 1, 2 and 3 Solar Photovoltaic power plants
Taurichuco Hydropower Project
Ventika Wind Farm
Chimbera 1, 2 and 3 Solar Photovoltaic Power Plant Project
Boiler retrofits to utilize semi-coke oven gas in Shaanxi Hengyuan Power Generation Company
Binwa-IV Hydro Electric Project
Olkaria I Units 4&5 Geothermal Project
Torito Hydroelectric Power Plant
Yongcheng Xuehu Coal Mine Ventilation Air Methane Recovery and Utilization Project
Wind Power Project in Gujarat by Sadbhav Engineering Limited
Choloma Hydroelectric Project
Yufeng Baihubao 49.5MW Wind Power Generation Project in Shanxi Province
Chonggang New Site Coke Dry Quenching (CDQ) Waste Heat Recovery for Power Generation Project
Cebu CTRADE Biogas to Energy Project
Xinjiang Hami Southeast Wind Zone Yandun 2nd Wind Power Project
IOI Sandakan Biomass Power Plant
The Colomba Guabal Landfill Gas Project
Alcoholes Del Istmo – Biomass energy plant
Xinjiang Kaidu River Xiaoshankou 2nd Cascade Hydropower Project
Qingyuan Dayankeng 36MW Hydropower Project in Zhejiang Province
Huineng Low Concentration Coal Mine Methane Utilization Project
Qingyuan Dayankeng 36MW Hydropower Project in Zhejiang Province
Huineng Low Concentration Coal Mine Methane Utilization Project
Palmares Wind Power Plant Project (PWPPP)
Biomass based cogeneration project at Bhagwati Vintrade, Ramgarh, Jharkhand, India
Guohua Lijin (Phase III) Wind Farm Project
Peralta I Wind Power Project
Tongaat Hulett Sugar Refinery Steam Optimisation Project
Ya’an City Xi River Chujugou Hydropower Project
Xinjiang Kaidu River Xiaoshankou 3rd Cascade Hydropower Project
Using off gas cogeneration project in PT KPP
Kainji Hydropower Rehabilitation Project, Nigeria
EPACEM POME Co-composting Project
Santa Marta de Liray indoor mechanized composting project
30 MW Pintados Solar Farm
Zone 3 Landfill Gas Project
Baihubao Expansion 15MW Wind Power Generation Project in Shanxi Province
Santo Antonio Hydropower Project
Flores I Wind Farm
2.8 MW Wind power project in Tamil Nadu & Rajasthan
Myagri Bio-organic Plant at TDM Kemaman Palm Oil Mill
Proactiva Nuevo Laredo landfill-gas-to-energy project
Xiehe Suzhou Yongqiao Fuli Wind Farm Project
Guizhou Sandu County Baiziqiao Hydropower Project
Biomass based power generation by Dharwad Bioenergy Private Limited
Teles Pires Hydropower Plant Project Activity
Ventika II Wind Farm
Sichuan Huzhu Hydropower Project
Zhougong River Cascade Hydropower Project of Capacity Addition in Yaan City
Xinjiang Burqin Tianrun Tuohongtai 49.5MW Wind Power Project
Natural gas based electricity generation project at Plaza Indonesia
Zhougong River Cascade Hydropower Project of Capacity Addition in Yaan City
Xinjiang Burqin Tianrun Tuohongtai 49.5MW Wind Power Project
Natural gas based electricity generation project at Plaza Indonesia
Mozura Wind Farm
Papaloate Hydroelectric
Dunas de Paracuru Wind Farm
Kilang Minyak Sawit Tg. Tualang Mill Wastewater Biogas Recovery and Utilisation Project
Yongren Ganbala Grid-connected Photovoltaic Power Project
Pelado Wind Farm.
Sichuan Kangding County JinYuan Hydropower Station Project
Shandong Linyi Biomass Generation Project
30 MW Salar de Huasco Solar Farm
Gansu Huangshui River Ping’an 10MW Small Hydro Power Project
Guangdong Yudean Leizhou Hongxinlou 49.5MW Wind Power Project
Paute - Sopladora Hydroelectric Project
98.7 MW wind power project at Ratlam in Madhya Pradesh by DJ Energy Private Limited
Autoclaved Aerated Concrete blocks/panel manufacturing unit based on an energy efficient brick manufacturing tec
GHG abatement from distillery wastewater treatment project
Gansu Jinta Solar Power Generation Project
Sichuan Xinjihong Soda Recovery Project
Bac Me Hydropower Project
Jbel Sendouq-Khalladi (“Khalladi”) wind farm project in Morocco
Ganzi Prefecture Wandong River Wandong Hydropower Project
Chao Phraya Hydropower Project
Zhejiang Zhenhai Fuel Switching Project for Cleaner Power Generation
Roblería Small Hydro
Ganzi Prefecture Huoqu River Da’aguo Hydropower Project
Myagri Bio-Organic Plant at Ketengah Palm Oil Mill, Kemaman
Aba District Fubianhe Yangjiawan Hydropower Project
CGN Aletai Qinghe Phase I 20MWp Grid-connected PV Power Plant Project
Myagri Bio-Organic Plant at Ketengah Palm Oil Mill, Kemaman
Aba District Fubianhe Yangjiawan Hydropower Project
CGN Aletai Qinghe Phase I 20MWp Grid-connected PV Power Plant Project
CGN Kashi Yingjisha Phase I 20MWp Grid-connected PV Power Plant Project
Shaoguan City Shaoneng Biomass Power Generation Project
Bac-Man 3 Geothermal Power Project
Wind Power Project by Gomathy Power Company (EKIESL.CDM.September-11-02)
Shanshan Feichuang Jingxi Waste Heat Recovery Company Waste Heat Utilization for Power Generation Project
CEMEX Mexico: Alternative fuels and biomass project at kiln # 2 of Yaqui’s Cement Plant.
15 MW Solar Photovoltaic Power Project at Gujarat
Hebei Qiuxian Biomass Power Plant Project
Gansu Hekou Hydropower Project
Distributed Energy Generation’s Waste Heat to Power Project at XAWO
Bundled Wind Power Project activity by Muthoot Fincorp Limited
25.5 MW Wind Energy Farm at Nandurbar Maharashtra by HZL
Chucás Hydroelectric Project
Jiangxi Xiajiang Hydropower Project
Small Hydro Power Plants Quartel I, II and III CDM Project
Karai 13 Hydroelectric Power Plant
Use of charcoal from renewable biomass originated from forest plantations for the production of primary iron in Vallourec & M
Broadlands Hydropower Project
Aba District Wori River Chuntangba Hydropower Project
China National Offshore Oil Corporation (CNOOC) Gas & Power Group Zhuhai Gaolan Port Economic Zone Natural Gas Cogene
Ajinomoto Waste Water Treatment and Biogas Utilization Project
Ganluo County Jinaiwoga Hydropower Project
Solar power project at Jodhpur, Rajasthan
Methane Recovery Project in Manure Waste Treatment
Providencia III: 9.11MW Small Hydro Power Generation Plant
25.5 MW Wind farm Aracati, Brazil
Solar PV Power project at Jaisalmer District in Rajasthan
Providencia III: 9.11MW Small Hydro Power Generation Plant
25.5 MW Wind farm Aracati, Brazil
Solar PV Power project at Jaisalmer District in Rajasthan
Yanyuan County Heishuihe II Stage Hydropower Project in Liangshan Prefecture
Langao Donghe Longbanying Hydropower Project
Cartagena Landfill Gas Capture and Usage Project
Huaneng Beijing Natural Gas CCGT Project (Upgraded)
Myagri Bio-organic Plant at Pantai Remis, Perak
2*0.8 MW Wind Power CDM Project by Siddaganga Oil Extractions Pvt. Ltd., Andhra Pradesh, India
ITVR Sao Leopoldo landfill gas project
Yunnan Dayao County Duodihe Hydro Power Project
Karai 7 Hydroelectric Power Plant
PT Medco Ethanol Lampung wastewater treatment and biogas utilization project
Grid connected electricity generation from renewable source: Windfarm Complex Santana do Livramento
31.5 MW grid connected wind power project in Rajasthan
Greenhouse Gas Emission Reductions Through Wind Energy Technology - Reliance Clean Power Pvt. Ltd.
7.5MW Biomass based power project by Circars Power Industries Ltd.
Datang Hami 20MW Solar PV Grid-Connected Power Generation Phase One Project
Hangzhou Huadian Xiasha Natural Gas-fired Cogeneration Project
Huachuan (daqingbeishan) Phase II Wind Power Project
Muli County Xiaogou Hydropower Project
Renewable Energy Project at Amravathi
Wind Power Project in Gujarat
8.4 MW (0.6 MW X 14 Nos) Wind Power Project by Sri Padmabalaji Steels Pvt Ltd, Coimbatore, Tamil Nadu, India
4.5 MW Sechi grid-connected hydro electric project in Himachal Pradesh.
Partial Fuel Switching to Agricultural Wastes, Sewage Sludge & Refuse Derived Fuel (RDF) at Helwan cement plant
Ningxia Taiyangshan Phase II Grid-connected 20MW Solar Power Generation Project
Gansu Jinchuan 50MW Solar Photovoltaic Power Generation Project
Sichuan Heishui County Liwei Hydro Power Project
Mazongshan No.2 Wind Farm Area A Project
Fuel Switching from Mazout to Natural Gas in Quena Paper Industry Co. (QPIC)
Xiaojin County Hanniuhe Hydropower Project
2×200MW Class Natural Gas based CHP Project of Jiangsu Huadian Qishuyan Thermal Power Co., Ltd.
Wind Power Project at Jath, Maharashtra
Pedra do Reino III Wind Farm
Yunnan Diaojiangyan 30MW Hydropower Project
Guangxi Rongan Hydropower Project
China Resources Guangling Yuemingshan Phase I 49.5MW Wind Power Project
Santanghu Phase I 49.5MW Wind Power Project
Yunnan Yongsheng County Shuanghe Hydropower Project
Jirau Hydro Power Plant
Dingbian Fengdikeng Wind Farm Phase I Project of Ningxia Electric Power Group Co., Ltd.
Soderal Biogas Project (SBP)
Muli County Kazhuo Hydropower Project
Solar PV power project by Roha Dyechem Pvt. Ltd. (EKIESL.CDM.Aug-11-02)
Himaxen/Hudigm/IK bundled Photovoltaic Power Plant Project
Pintado II Wind Farm
Reforestation of Abandoned Dairy Cattle Grazing Grasslands in Korea
8.0 MW Wind Power Project activity by Sree Iswarya Textiles Private Limited
1.65 MW Wind Power Project by G. R. Engineering Pvt. Ltd.
Sichuan Dadu River Angu Hydropower Project
Sichuan Baishuijiang Duonuo Hydropower Project
Capture and processing low pressure associated gas from the Neft Dashlari and Palchiq Pilpilassi oil fields of SOCAR
Xinjiang Hami Yandun I Wind Farm Project
Biomass Based Thermal Energy Generation Project in Palm Oil Refinery
Yunnan Yuanyang Fengchunling 2nd Level Small Hydropower Project
Taebaek Wind Park (Hasami Samcheok) CDM Project
ESTRE Piratininga Landfill Gas Project
Sichuan Dadu River Zhentouba Stage-I Hydropower Project
13.75 MW wind power project at Bellary & Davangere district in the state Karnataka, India
Liaoning Haocheng Biogas Power Generation Project
Thailand AEP Livestock Waste Management Project
Datang Bazhou Bohu 20MW Solar Power Plant Phase I Project
Muli County Chenchanggou Second and Third Cascade Bundled Small Hydropower Project
Maibarara Geothermal Power Project
Natural gas based combined cycle power plant in Tripura, India
Mianyang Fujiang Main stream Gucheng Hydropower Project
Gramacho Landfill Gas Project
Fuel Switching from Mazout to Natural Gas in Misr Edfu Pulp, Writing & Printing Paper Co. (MEPPCO)
10.2 MW grid connected wind energy project in Gujarat, India
Hagita POME Methane Avoidance project_NBPOL-P2
Methane Recovery and Utilization at Prosper Palm Oil Mill, Malaysia.
Bundled project on distribution of solar energy lamps and replacement of Incandescent Light Bulbs (ICLs) with Compact Fluore
Hami Shichengzi 20MWp Photovoltaic Power Project
Hangtian Wanyuan Gaizhou Xutun Wind Farm Project
Heat recovery and fuel switch from natural gas to biomass residues implemented at Renault Tanger Méditerranée (RTM) plan
Solar Photovoltaic Based Power Plant, India
Solar Photovoltaic Power project at Jaisalmer District in Rajasthan.
KL Rathi Steels 4.5 MW Wind Power Project at Jaisalmer District, Rajasthan
Solar Photovoltaic Power project at Askandra Village, Jaisalmer District in Rajasthan
Shandong Shiheng Power Plant Energy Efficiency Improvement Project
3 MW Grid connected Wind Electricity Generation at Gadag District, Karnataka
San Pedro Wind Farm Project
Jiangsu Pizhou Biomass Power Generation Project
20 MW Roura- II Hydro Electric Project by Roura Non Conventional Energy Pvt Ltd
The Biomass Cogeneration Project of Anqiu Shengyuan Biomass Cogeneration Co., Ltd
Wind based renewable energy project by CLP Wind Farms India Private Limited in Gujarat
Nalcas Small Hydroelectric Run-of-River Power Plant
Rio Picoiquen run off river power station
7 MW Bundled Hydro power project at Himachal Pradesh of Raajratna Energy Holdings Pvt. Ltd
7 MW Bundled Hydro power project at Himachal Pradesh of Raajratna Energy Holdings Pvt. Ltd
Yanchi Mahuang Mountain Wind Farm (Niumaojing) Wuhan Kaidi Phase I 49.5MW Project
Patrind Hydropower Project
10.5 MW wind power project in Ossiya, Rajasthan by Gujarat Fluorochemicals Limited (GFL)
Cabeço Preto IV Wind Farm
Partial Fuel Switching to Agricultural Wastes & Refuse Derived Fuel (RDF) at Kattameya cement plant
Waste Water (black liquor) Treatment and Comprehensive Utilization Project in Paper Manufacturing of Hebei Hangyu Group
Shanxi Linfen 2×6MW Coke Oven Gas Power Generation Project
Xinjiang Huoerguosi gas pipeline compressor station waste heat recovery and utilization for power generation project
Guohua Bayannaoer Wulate Houqi Wuliji Phase II 49.5MW Wind Farm Project
Recovery and Utilization of Associated Gas from the Obodugwa and neighbouring oil fields in Nigeria
XuZhou Yifeng Sanpu Environmental Heat and Power Co., Ltd Biomass Power Plant Project
Pedra do Reino Wind Farm
Gas Flaring Reduction at Neelam & Heera Asset
8 MW Biomass based Power Plant at Kishanganj, Baran District, Rajasthan
Large scale wind farm project "Melowind"
Ningxia Electric Power Group Co., Ltd. Touying 10MWp Solar PV Project
Yaan City Baoxing River Minzhi Hydropower Project
Hydro Electric Plant - Hidro Pantasma
Xifeng and Xiuwen Rural Biogas Methane Project in Guizhou Province
Sukowati-Mudi (Tuban) LPG Associated Gas Recovery and Utilization Project
San Andrés Hydropower Project, Chile
Biomass based thermal energy generation at Swastik Refinery, West Bengal, India
Sichuan Batang Langda River Hydropower Project
Yunnan Diqing State Deqin County Shibahe Second Level Hydropower Project
Wulanhua Wind-farm Phase II 49.5 MW Wind Power Project
Luz de Mar – Pintado Wind Farm
Sichuan Nanbu Biomass Power Generation Project
Yunnan Yuanyang Fengchunling 1st Level Small Hydropower Project
PT Karya Mas Energi Biogas Bundled Project
Sichuan Nanbu Biomass Power Generation Project
Yunnan Yuanyang Fengchunling 1st Level Small Hydropower Project
PT Karya Mas Energi Biogas Bundled Project
Yunnan Hongtutian 18MW Hydroelectric Project
Small Hydro Power Plants Santa Gabriela and Planalto
Yunnan Jiehua Clean Energy Development Co., Ltd. Jiehua Chemical Branch Nitric Acid Project
Methane recovery and utilisation project at Nateechai Co., Ltd., Surat Thani, Thailand
Sichuan Beichuan Kaiping Hydropower Project
Ningxia Jingneng Lingwu Xinhuo Wind Farm Project
N2O and NOX Abatement Project at Delta-ASMEDA Fertilizer Plant in Al Mansoura (Egypt)
Longjiashan 12.5MW Hydropower Project
Solar PV Power Project by MMPL in Fatepur, Gujarat
Heilongjiang Bayan Biomass Cogeneration Project
Cookhouse Wind Farm in South Africa
Liaoning Guoli Fuxin Wangsiyingzi Wind Power Project
9.9 MW Bundled Wind Power Project in Madhya Pradesh, India.
Coega IDZ Windfarm
3.2 MW Wind Power Project in Gujarat by Rajlakshmi Minerals
MAJES SOLAR 20T: 20 MW Solar Photovoltaic Power Plant
Stabilised Biomass (EFB Pellet) Production from Palm Empty Fruit Bunches (EFBs) at QL Palm Oil Mill 1 at Tawau, Sabah
Palm Oil Mill Effluent Methane Recovery & Utilisation System at QL Palm Oil Mill 1 at Tawau, Sabah
Methane recovery and utilisation project at Fuengfuanant Co., Ltd., Prachinburi, Thailand
Jhalakoti Hydro Electric Power, Uttarkhand, India
Hailin Dayangmu Hydropower Project
Heishan LN1 Household Biogas Project in Jinzhou, Liaoning Province
Ningxia Datang International Qingtongxia Solar PV Grid-Connected Power Station Stage II 20MWp Project
Matlacobatl Hydropower project
Yunnan Xinzhuang and Mingzhuang 24.5MW Hydropower Generation Project
Tadas wind farm in Karnataka
Jiangsu Hongdong Biomass Cogeneration Project
Solar PV Power Project by DMPL in Fatepur, Gujarat
Yunus Energy Limited 50 MW Wind Farm Project
Zhongdiantou Tacheng Mayitasi Phase II 49.5MW Wind Power Project
REPARTICION SOLAR 20T: 20 MW Solar Photovoltaic Power Plant
Nour 1 PV Project
Naliu Hydropower Station in Xiyang River, Funing County, Yunnan Province
Methane Recovery and Utilisation Bundled Project GL1 for Mukah Kilang Kelapa Sawit and Sawira Palm Oil Mill.
Construction of “Janub” Combined Cycle Power Plant in Azerbaijan
“Flare gas recovery unit 105" project in MAA refinery, KNPC
Los Humeros II Phase A+B Geothermal Project
Solar PV Power project at Nachna, Jaisalmer District in Rajasthan
7.45 MW Bundled Wind Power Generation in India
Greenhouse Gas Emission Reductions through Wind Energy Generation Technology – Bundle - I
Grid connected 3MWp Solar PV power plant at Raichur District of Karnataka State, India
2×15MW Biomass Cogeneration Project
Nam Ngum 5 Hydropower Project
39 MW Wind farm Acaraú II, Brazil
Khau Chu Hydropower Project
Recovery of residual energy project at VF2
Solar Power Project in Jaisalmer District in Rajasthan
Energy efficiency programme in electricity distribution network in Tirupati and Puttur operational division of Andhra Pradesh
Energy efficiency programme in electricity distribution network in Chittoor and Madanapalle operational division of Andhra Pr
Inner Mongolia Daxipo 49.5MW Wind Power Project
CTGNE Pishan Phase I 20 MWp Solar PV Power Project
Hun 14 MW Photovoltaic Power Plant by REAOL, Libya
Loma Blanca I Wind Farm CDM Project Activity.
Ningxia Electric Power Group Co., Ltd. Taiyangshan Phase III 30MWp Solar PV Project
Grid-connected electricity generation from renewable source: Sete Lagoas Solar Power Plant
Mampuri Wind Power Project
Las Perlas Norte Hydroelectric Plant Project
2.10 MW Wind Project in Rajasthan
Solar PV Power project at Nachna-2, Jaisalmer District in Rajasthan
Loma Blanca II Wind Farm CDM Project Activity.
CEMEX Mexico: Alternative fuels and biomass project at CEMEX Valles Cement Plant.
CTGNE Shanshan Phase I 20 MWp Solar PV Power Project
Lingyuan LN2 Household Biogas Project in Lingyuan, Liaoning Province
Green power Landfill Gas Project
Hepu GX3 Household Biogas Project in Beihai City, Guangxi Zhuang Autonomous Region
Seo Chong Ho Hydropower Project
Gansu Boyu 4th Level Hydropower Project
Wastewater Treatment Project at Thaindo Palm Oil Factory, Lam Thap, Krabi Province,Thailand.
Xinjiang Akeyazi River Simutasi Hydropower Station Project
Zhongshan Jiaming Power Co., Ltd. Natural Gas Cogeneration Project
Renova 2010 Wind Parks.
Loma Blanca IV Wind Farm CDM Project Activity.
Gudauri Small Hydropower Project
Heilongjiang Dadingzi Wind Power Project
Sichuan Guangjinba Hydropower Project
Bundled Solar Photovoltic Power project at Chadiyana, Patan District in Gujarat
Solar PV Power project by Sovox Renewables Pvt. Ltd.
Ramanagara Biogas Project, version 02; 10th November 2010
Ningxia Zhongwei (Xuanhe) Guodian Phase I 20 MWp Solar Photovoltaic Power Project
Patuha Geothermal Project
Cerro Pabellon Geothermal Project (Apacheta)
Guangxi Laokou Hydropower Project
Gansu Daxia River Diwuer, Kajiaman and Fuhuang Secondary bundle Small Hydropower Project
Ganzi Prefecture Shuoqu River Dongsong Hydropower Project
Ganzi Prefecture Shuoqu River Xiangcheng Hydropower Project
Pingshan-Xingtang HB4 Household Biogas Project in Shijiazhuang, Hebei Province
Ningxia Electric Power Group Co., Ltd. Taiyangshan Phase II 10 MWp Solar Photovoltaic Power Project
Geermu Solar PV Power Generation Project
Cerro Patacón Landfill Gas Utilization Project
111 MW Sawra Kuddu Hydro Electric Power Project in Himachal Pradesh
Mianning Sange Hydropower Project
Bundled Wind Project-I of Shivashri in Sadawaghapur Maharashtra
Wind energy based electricity generation project located at Chavaneswar, Satara district, Maharashtra, India
Loma Blanca III Wind Farm CDM Project Activity.
Sichuan Xiashimen small hydropower project
Methane Recovery and Utilization Project of Petrovietnam Biofuels Joint Stock Company
PhilNewEnergy PV Solar Power Plant Project
Three Gorges New Energy Lichuan Wangying Wind Power Project
Huadian Xinjiang Hami Kushui Second Wind Farm Project
Energy Efficiency Improvement Measures in a commercial building facility
Beijing Huadian Changping 12.8 MWp Photovoltaic Power Project
Datang Tulufan 20MW Solar Power Plant Phase I Project
CTGNE Golmud phase II 20 MWp Solar PV Power Project
Yueshuidian Buerjin Chengnan 49.5MW Phase I Wind Farm Project
3.70 MW Grid Connected Wind Power Project in Madhya Pradesh
75MW Yunnan Nuozu Hydropower Project
Zhenkang Ma’anshan 40MW Hydropower Project
Ouarzazate I Concentrated Solar Power Project
Xuyong County Haiyazhai Hydropower Project
SPUL small scale Biomass based cogeneration project
Zunhua-Luannan HB3 Household Biogas Project in Tangshan, Hebei Province
Guodian Zhongshan Minzhong Natural Gas Power Cogeneration Project
GHG abatement through wind power generation in Tamil Nadu, India
Fujian Yunxiao Qingjing Wind Farm Project
Electricity generation from renewable sources – Salto Góes Small Hydro Power Plant
Kitchen Waste Treatment Project in Lanzhou City of Gansu Province
Platanares geothermal project
Guizhou Beipanjiang Mamaya 1st Stage Hydro Power Project
30 MW Altos de Pica Solar Farm
Gong County Shibeikou Hydropower Project
Methane recovery from Palm Oil Mill Effluent at PT. Suryabumi Agrolanggeng.
Tepetate Wind Farm
Carabina II Wind Farm
Carabina I Wind Farm
Advance Asia Power Plant ASPP 1 Biomass Power Generation
Methane recovery from Palm Oil Mill Effluent at PT.Golden Blossom Sumatra.
Wind Power Project at Tamil Nadu, India
Bundled Wind Power Project in Tamil Nadu
Jilin Tongyu Wulanhua E Wind Farm Project
Advance Agro Power Plant AAPP 1 Biomass Power Generation
Maple Bagasse Cogeneration Plant
Fuyu Changshoushan Wind Farm Phase I Project
Ning’an Jingbo Erdaoling Wind Farm Project
CGN Damao Bailingmiao Photovoltaic Farm 20MWp Phase I Project
Guizhou Nayong Hydropower Project
Sichuan Liangshan Yuexi Mantan Hydro Power
Henan Taikang Longyuan Methane Recovery Project in new paper-production line
Las Perlas Sur Hydroelectric Plant Project
Fuel Switch Project at Chittoor by Jain Irrigation Systems Limited
Proactiva CGA Iperó Landfill Gas to Energy Project
Huadian Haiyuan Wuyuan Second Phase 49.5MW Wind Power Project
Chieng Ngam Thuong hydro-power
4 MW Solar Energy based Power Plant
Yandun 5th Wind Power Project
Grid Connected Wind Power Generation Project by Ruchi Soya Industries Limited in Madhya Pradesh
N2O and NOX Abatement Project at KIMA Fertilizer Plant in Aswan (Egypt)
El Callao Small Hydroelectric Run-of-River Power Plant
Hubei Loushui Jiangpinghe Hydropower Project
Lijiaba Wind Farm Project in Dechang County, Liangshan Prefecture, Sichuan Province
Generation of Electricity from 2.50 MW wind turbine in Tirunelveli District, Tamilnadu, India by M/s. Woodbriar Estate Ltd
Wudang and Huaxi Rural Biogas Methane Project in Guizhou Province
Xinjiang Hami Southeast Wind Zone 2000MW Wind Farm Kushui First Wind Power Project
Lomati Biomass Power Generation Project in Mpumalanga Province
Shandong Laizhou Yidao Wind Power Project
Rongnichu Hydroelectric Project (RHEP), India
Suoi Choang Hydro Power Project
Ma’erkang County Sha’er Hydropower Project
Peralta G.C.E.E. Wind Power Plant
Lvchun County Mengman River Mengman 2nd Level Hydropower Station Project
Energy Efficiency Improvement of Mae Moh Power Plant Through Retrofitting Turbines
Sichuan Jiajiang County Maotan Hydropower Project
Jubilee Oil Field Associated Gas Recovery & Utilization Project
Wulan 20MW Solar PV Power Generation Project
Fuel switch measures at Owens Corning (India) Limited
Shehong County Dagutan Navigation and Hydropower Project
Muli County Saduo Hydropower Project
Guodian Barkol Santanghu Wind Farm Phase I 49.5MW Wind Project
Xinjiang Wushi County Hekou Hydropower Project
Hadebute Hydropower Project in Fuyun County Xinjiang Uygur Autonomous Region, China
Distribution of Improved cook stove - Phase 14
Wind Power Project by RKLPL (EKIESL-CDM.September -11-01)
Sichuan Danba County Guanzhou Hydropower Project
Guodian Tulufan Daheyan River Qushou and downstream Cascaded Hydropower Project
Mianyang Pingwu County Si’erhe 3rd stage Hydropower Project
Distribution of Improved cook stove- Phase 15
Guangxi Shangsi Biomass Power Generation Project
Yunnan Yongde Damengtong Hydropower Station
Guangxi Shangsi Biomass Power Generation Project
Yunnan Yongde Damengtong Hydropower Station
Sichuan Danba Donggu Hydropower Station Project
Huaneng Gansu Jinchang 20MWp Gridconnected Solar PV Power Generation Project
Bonito Hydroelectric Project
Montecristo Hydroelectric Project
Cambodia Stung Atay Hydropower Project
Dahua GX1 Household Biogas Project in Hechi, Guangxi Province
Sichuan Danba County Jiniu Hydropower Project
GHG emission reductions through methane avoidance in North Bengal
Hebei Weichang Yudaokou Pasture Northwest 200MW Wind Farm Project
CDM Project of Fuel Switch from Heavy Fuel Oil (HFO) to Liquefied Natural Gas (LNG) in Boiler
Bundled Wind Power Project by Peethambra Granites Pvt Ltd (EKIESL-CDM. November -11-01)
LRT System in Tunis
Hydropower Plant Otilovici
Shandong Yantai Haiyang Duoshan 49.5MW Wind Farm Project
Grid connected bundled wind power project in Maharashtra aggregated by Resurge Energy Private Limited
Maerkang County Longtoutan Hydropower Project
Sichuan Province Ganzi Prefecture Yajiang County Geda Hydropower Project
PCC Hydro Climate Conservation Macedonia
Huaneng Lijin Phase I Wind Farm Project
Inner Mongolia Urad ZhongQi Phase II 49.5MW Wind Farm Project
Bundled Wind Power Project- EnKing International (CDM.March-11-02)
Deepak WNA 4 N2O Abatement Project
Yandun Fourth Wind Power Farm Project of 2000MW Wind Power Project in Southeast Wind Zone of Hami City, Xinjiang Uygu
2 x 1.5MW Wind Power Projects by Idupulapadu Cotton Mills Private Limited
Song Cho 2 Hydro Power Project
Nam Na 3 Hydropower Project
Thermal Solar Plant Project at Zeenni Trading Agency; Bsarma El Koura, Lebanon
Guohua Yulin Jingbian 20MWp Solar PV grid connected power generation project
Thermal Solar Plant Project at Zeenni Trading Agency; Bsarma El Koura, Lebanon
Guohua Yulin Jingbian 20MWp Solar PV grid connected power generation project
Nam Pung Hydropower Project
Micro Scale Biogas CDM Project of BEST
Inner Mongolia Dun’an Photovoltaic Power Co., Ltd. Wulatehouqi Bayin Baolige 10MWp PV Grid-connected Power Generation
Huaneng Tongyu Tuanjie Phase E Wind Farm Project
Energy Efficiency at Malvinas gas plant
Fugong County Lamujia river Hydropower Project
BIOVEA Renewable Biomass-to-energy project at Aboisso
Distribution of Improved cook stove - Phase 11
Kushui No. 4 Wind Power Project
Suzhou Phase III Municipal Solid Waste Incineration for Power Generation Project
Distribution of Improved cook stove - Phase 12
Distribution of Improved cook stove - Phase 13
Kipeto Wind Energy Project
Sichuan Aba Anqiang Expansion Hydro Power Project
Bundled Wind Project Activity by M/S Intex Industries Ltd and M/S Intex Technologies (India) Limited
Guangkong Huidong Dongshanhai Huangbu Wind Power Generation Project
Guizhou Wujiang Siling Hydropower Project
Jilin Zhenlai Heiyupao Phase II Wind Farm Project
Deepak WNA 2 N2O Abatement Project
7.5 MW wind power project by Dhanji Developers at Nashik, Maharashtra, India
Use of waste gas at Namakwa Sands in South Africa
Sichuan Tongjiang Shidongkou and Bixi bundled Hydropower Project
Wulate Zhongqi 49.5MW Phase III Wind Farm Project
Se San 4A Hydropower Project
Tianrun Hami 20MW Solar Power Generation Project
Qingzhen Rural Biogas Methane Project in Guizhou Province
Nam He Hydropower Project
Shangyi Huaertai 48MW Wind Farm Project
Shangyi Huaertai 48MW Wind Farm Project
Micro Scale Biogas CDM Project of SACRED
Huaneng Tongyu Tuanjie Phase D Wind Farm Project
Lafarge WAPCO Partial Substitution of Alternative Fuels in Cement Facilities Project in Nigeria
Pinglu Fengkou Wind Farm Phase II 49.5MW Power Project
Reducing gas leakages within the Moldovagaz distribution network, Republic of Moldova
Grid connected clean energy project in Jamnagar, Gujarat
4.2 MW Wind Power CDM Project by Shri Tradco India Pvt. Ltd., Rajasthan, India
3 MW Wind Power Project by Fashion Suitings (P) Ltd
Yunnan Diqing Luoma Hydroelectric Project
Sir Bani Yas Wind Farm Project
La Gloria EFB + POME Co-composting Project
Huaneng Fanshi Xiaozhuang (Shahe Phase II) 49.5MW Wind Power Project
Inner Mongolia Qahar Youyi Houqi Huitengxile Wind Farm No.5-Hongmunaobao Wind Farm Phase I 49.5MW Wind Power Pro
14.70 MW Wind Power Project at Jath, Maharashtra
50 MW Wind Farm Florida
Recovery and Utilization of Associated Gas at Pondok Tengah LPG Plant – PT. Yudistira Energy
Dala River Goujiesi Hydropower Project in Diebu County of Gansu Province
Nam Hoa 2 Hydro Power Project
Sichuan niba and relong bundle small hydropower project
Renewable Wind Power Project by Ratnagiri Wind Power Projects Private Limited
Jilin Zhenlai Phase II Wind Farm Project
San Bartolo Hydroelectric Project (SBHP)
Construction and operation of the Hydraulic Power Plant Chicoasén II
Guohua Binzhou Zhanhua Phase II 49.5 MW Wind Farm Project
Hutaraja Minihydro Power Plant
Dongjia low temperature waste heat recovery project
Sichuan Kangding County Xiaogou Hydropower Project
Distribution of Improved cook stove - Phase 9
Yunnan Honghe Luxi County Yongsan Wind Power Project
Guohua Shenmu Dunliang Wind Farm Project
SDIC Dunhuang First Phase and Second Phase Bundled Grid-connected Photovoltaic Power Generation Project
Huaneng Maoming Phase II Wind Farm Project
Distribution of Improved cook stove - Phase 10
Distribution of Improved cook stove - Phase 8
Distribution of Improved cook stove - Phase VI
147 MW wind farm Acaraú I, Brazil
Sichuan Kangding County Seyu Hydropower Project
Solar Photovoltaic based Power Plant, India 2
Yinxing Zhongning Dazhanchang Phase I Windfarm Project
Wind Power Project at Tirupur District, Tamilnadu,India
Ningxia Power Investment Lingwu Wind-farm Phase I 49.5MW Project
Xim Vang 2 Hydroelectric Power Plant
Jiulong County Wanba Ertaizi Hydropower Project
Grid connected solar PV based power generation at Shivlakha, Kutch, India
Jilin Tongyu Wulanhua D Wind Farm Project
8.45 MW bundled wind energy project in Gujarat
LFG Recovery and Electricity Production at the Bubanj Landfill Site, Nis, Serbia
Thai Roong Ruang Energy Wastewater Treatment and Biogas Utilization Project
7.2 MW Bundled Wind Power Project by TCP Limited. In Tamilnadu, India.
Corner Baridi Wind Farm
Wind Power Project by Astra Lifecare (India) Private Limited at Gujarat, India
Grid connected Wind Power Project by M/s Geetarani Mohanty at Tamil Nadu, India
Qitaihe Qianfeng Wind Farm Project
Stung Tatay Hydroelectric Project
SDIC Qinghai Dulan Lunancun Wind farm 49.5MW project
Fujian Xiamen Dongbu Gas-fired Power Plant Project
Lebong Hydroelectric Power Plant
Run of River Hydroelectric Project on Alaknanda River in Uttarakhand
Bundled Wind Power Project by EnKing International (EKIESL-CDM.July-11-02)
Fang County Wafangping 2nd Level Hydropower Project
CDQ Waste Heat Recovery for Power Generation Project in Hunan, China
Rheboksfontein Wind Energy Facility
Ahebulong 1st Level Hydro Power Project
Dali Julongshan Wind Farm Project
Providencia I: 1.8MW Small Hydro Power Generation Plant
AWMS Methane capture and electricity generation project in PROAN farms, Jalisco
Distribution of Improved cook stove - Phase 7
Fuel oil to vegetable biomass switching at Lesieur Cristal Limited Corporation
3.3 MW Wind power project at Theni by FFF-Site SF158 & SF317
West Coast 1 Wind Farm in South Africa
35.10 MW Wind Energy Project by Ruchi Soya Industries Limited, India
Xianyou Caoshan Wind Power Project
Jiyu Hydropower Project in Aba
NEPG Helanshan Phase VI 49.5MW Wind Farm Project
15 MW Biomass Power Project by Shalivahana Green Energy Limited
Valle de los Vientos Wind Farm
Wind power project in Rajasthan
Huaneng Dingbian Langergou Wind Farm Project
Waste Heat Recovery and Utilisation for Power Generation Project of Jiande Conch Cement Company Limited (Phase II)
Distribution of Improved cook stove - Phase V
Qinghai Chaqia 49.5MW Phase I Wind Farm Project
EGAT Irrigation Valve Based Micro Hydro Project
Guodian Wuqi zhouwan 2nd 49.5MW Wind Power Project
Guodian Wuqi zhouwan 1st 49.5MW Wind Power Project
Kathu Grid Connected 100 MW Solar Park, South Africa
Micro scale Improved Cook stove Project of Bagepalli Coolie Sangha
Qiaojia County Hongshan Baoping Hydropower Project of Yunnan Province
Huaneng Guangdong Raoping Dacheng Wind Farm Project
Wind Power Project at Vaspet, Maharashtra
TBEA Hami 20MW Solar PV Power Generation Project
Huishui Longtangshan Phase I Wind Farm Project
Biomass based power project by Shri Shyam Warehousing and Power Pvt. Ltd.
Bundle Wind Power Project- EnKing International (EKIESL.CDM-Aug.11-03)
Kim Hock Biomass Energy and Wood Recycling Plant
Dali Prefecture Xiangyun County Baihechang Wind Power Project
Dongying Photovoltaic 7MWp Grid-Connected Power Plant Project
Jingneng Wujiaqu 20MWp Photovoltaic Power Plant Phase I Project
Jingneng Wujiaqu 20MWp Photovoltaic Power Plant Phase II Project
Tongxin (Weizhou) Tianjie Phase I 49.5MW Wind Farm Project
Yunnan Danzhuhe Hydropower Project
Qitaihe Qiligashan Wind Farm Project
Samancor Chrome Witbank Electricity from Waste Gas
Solar Project in Rajasthan by Sunborne Energy Rajasthan Solar Private Limited
Luancheng-Gaocheng HB6 Household Biogas Project in Shijiazhuang, Hebei Province
Henan Suixian Longyuan Methane Recovery Project
GuoDian Ningxia Pingluo Phase II Solar Photovoltaic Power Project
Samancor Chrome Middelburg Electricity from Waste Gas
Bundled Wind Project Activity in Tamil Nadu by MMP
Waste Water and Root Cake to Energy Project at K.S. Chanthaburi
Leting-Luannan HB1 Household Biogas Project in Tangshan, Hebei Province
Solar Power Company 94 MW Solar PV Project
Biogas Project at Anson Oil Mill
Shanxi Huaneng Yuanping Duanjiapu Wind Farm Phase II 49.5 MW Project
Kakkayam Small Hydroelectric Project
Sichuan Jiangyou Longfeng Hydropower Station
A project of biogas production from waste water of tapioca starch plant to substitute the use of bunker oil at Udornthani Prov
Quang Tin Hydropower Project, Vietnam
Ningxia Gaoshawo Phase I 20MWp PV (photovoltaic) Power Plant Project
Solar Farm
Biomass based heat and power generation plant, Sonepat
Kangding Huodi Hydropower Station Project
Dongning Ruixin Wind Farm Project
Huaneng Wulatehou Qi Wuliji Wind Farm Phase I 49.5MW Project
Huaneng Weining County Xueshan Zhuopu Wind Farm Project
Guodian Shuozhou Pinglu Hutoushan Wind Farm 249MW Project
Guodian Shuozhou Haifeng Hutoushan Phase I 49.5MW Windfarm Project
Solar Farm at Lampang, Thailand
CEMEX Mexico Alternative fuels and biomass project at Atotonilco Cement Plant.
Constroeste Landfill Gas to Energy Project
Shandong Huimin Biomass Utilization Project
Distribution of Improved cook stove - Phase IV
Installation of Waste Heat Recovery Steam Boiler at Wirajaya Packindo
Marrakesh Wastewater Treatment Plant (WWTP) with biogas recovery for cogeneration
Sichuan Jiuzhaigou County Shunhe Hydropower Station Project
Guodian Youyu Gaojiapu Phase III 49.5MW Windfarm Project
Xinjiang Tuoshenganhe River Biedieli Hydropower Project
Weichang Shanyuan 49.5MW Wind Farm Project
Yulong County Gezihe 1st Level and Gezihe 2nd Level Bundle Hydropower Project
SPP5 Solar Power Project
Solar Farm at Phitsanulok, Thailand
Río Luis
Yanyuan County Baji River Phase III Hydropower Project
North West, KwaZulu-Natal & Eastern Cape CFL Replacement Project (2) in South Africa
Huaneng Dingbian Lang’ergou Distributed Wind Farm Project
Solar Farm at Nakhonsawan, Thailand
Ning’an Jingbo Toudaoling Wind Farm Project
Guodian Shuozhou Haifeng Hutoushan Phase II 49.5MW Wind farm Project
13.3 MW grid connected bundled wind electricity generation project at Rajasthan and Karnataka, India
Leye, Longlin and Tianlin GX2 Household Biogas Project in Baise, Guangxi Province
Wind power project in Rajasthan, India
Songpan County Zhenjiangguan Hydropower Project
Songpan County Hongtu Hydropower Project
Xinjiang Hami Southeast Wind Zone Yandun Third Wind Farm Project
SPP4 Solar Power Project
SPP2 Solar Power Project
Bundled project activity in the state of Tamil Nadu by GRT group
China Power Investment Corporation Taiyangshan PV Power Plant Phase I 30MWp Project
Deepak WNA 5 N2O Abatement Project
Guyuan Shandianhe Wind Farm Phase I Project
Distribution of Improved cook stove - Phase III
Grid connected electricity generation from renewable source: Windfarm Bons Ventos da Serra I
Guodian Shanxi Clean Energy Company Limited Ningwu Xiejiaping 49.5MW Wind Power Project
150 MW Wind Power Project of NuPower Renewables Limited
Body Coal and Clamp Kiln Fuel Switch at Allbrick, South Africa
Wind farm extension project for Lafarge’s cement plant in Tétouan
Qinghai Henan 20MW Solar Power Project
6.5 MW Bundled Small Hydro Electric Project in Maharashtra State, India
Ningxia Zhongwei Xiangshan Wind-farm Guodian Zhuanwazitang 49.5MW Project
Wind Power Project in Karnataka India
2 MWp grid connected bundled solar power project in Orissa
Solar Power Project at North Park Building
Complexo Toropi Small Hydropower Plants CDM Project Activity
Daqing Xianfeng Wind Farm Project
Shandong Tianhe Paper Co., Ltd Waste Water Treatment and Waste Residue Utilization Project
Daqing Yinguang Wind Farm Project
Maracanã Small Hydropower Project
Xinjiang Jinshangfengxiang Dabancheng Phase I 49.5MW Wind Power Project
Alu Kerqin Qi Balaqirude Wind Farm 45MW Wind Power Project
Nanhun River Stage 4 Yang Street Hydro Power Project
Advance Clean Power (ACP 1) Biomass Power Generation
Sheyang Lingang Industrial Area Ground Tidal Flat 20MW Solar Power Project
Jinping County Kesikou Phase I Hydropower Project
Nanba Associated Gas Processing Plant and the Auxiliary Engineering
PER 1 and PER 2 Wind Power Plants (Umbrella Project)
C on Top PV Solar Farm Project
Wind Power Project by MGM Minerals Limited
Gansu waste heat generation project of Lantian float-glass
Energía Renovable Tacuarembó 10 MW Biomass Power Generation
Rakit Hydro Power Project in Indonesia
Hebei Shangyi Chaoligai 49.5MW Wind Farm Project
Hebei Shangyi Moshishan 49.5MW Wind Farm Project
Huadian Yiwu Naomaohu Phase I 49.5MW Wind Farm Project
Youyu Yangqianhe Tieshanbao 49.5 MW Wind Power Project
El Arrayán Wind Farm Project
SPP3 Solar Power Project
Hubei Sanxia New Building Materials Co., Ltd. 9MW Glass WHR Power Generation Project
Dominica Wind Farm Project
Huaneng Xinjiang Balikun Santanghu Second Wind Farm Phase I 49.5MW Project
Guangxi Heng County Methane Recovery Project
Tata Power - Wind power project at Samana in Jamnagar district, Gujarat
Clean Energy Project in the State of Tamil Nadu
The Lebanese CFL Replacement CDM Project – South Lebanon
Grid Connected Wind Power Generation by Devendran Coal International Private Limited.
Anhui Susong Xihuwei Huagang Wind Farm Project
El Carmelo Hydroelectric Project
Guohua Dongying Lijin Phase II 49.5 MW Wind farm Project
Renewable energy use for process steam generation at tyre manufacturing units in India
Datang Dabancheng Chaiwobao Wind Power 49.5MW Phase I Project
Pipoca Small Hydropower Plant Project Activity
Guizhou Panjiang Low Concentration Coal Mine Methane Power Generation Project Phase 3
Inner Mongolia Electric Power Transmission and Transformation Chayouzhongqi Wind Farm 49.5MW Project
Wind Energy Project in Gujarat by Enn Enn Corp Limited.
Hebei Weichang Miaozigou 49.5MW Wind Farm Project
Yunnan Qiubei Ganmalu Wind Power Project
The Lebanese CFL Replacement CDM Project - North and Bekaa
Methane Recovery and Power generation at the Kupferberg Landfill in Namibia
Huaneng Tianzhen Wujiashan Phase II 49.5 MW Wind Power Project
Huadian Ningxia Ningdong Phase VI Wind Farm Project
The Lebanese CFL Replacement CDM Project – Mount Lebanon
Huadian Tieling Xintianbao Wind Farm Project
Prieska Grid Connected 20 MW Solar Park, South Africa
Guizhou Panjiang Low Concentration Coal Mine Methane Power Generation Project Phase 2
Gongshan Shuanglahe Hydropower Project
The Lebanese CFL Replacement CDM Project – in and around Beirut Southern Suburbs
Anhui Longyuan Chuzhou Mingguang Lushan Wind Power Project
Energeo Los Molinos Wind Project
15 MW Solar Power Project in Gujarat
Liangshan Prefecture Yanyuan County Yongninghe Fourth Stage Hydropower Station Project
The Lebanese CFL Replacement CDM Project – in and around Beirut Central, Northern and Eastern Suburbs
Biomass based cogeneration in Engro foods Supply Chain (Pvt.) Ltd. IRPC (Integrated Rice Processing Complex), Muridke, Pakis
Wind power project in Maharashtra by TVS Energy Limited
ERH – Biogas recovery, heat and electricity generation from effluents ponds in Honduras
Greenhouse emission reductions on swine production by means the installation of composting systems
Sinohydro Inner Mongolia Ximeng Honggeer II Wind Power Project
Ningxia Guyuan Wind Power Dunan Zhaike 48 MW Project
Lalpur wind farm in Gujarat
Wind based power generation by Panama Wind Energy Private Limited in Maharashtra, India
6 MW Wind Power Project (WPP) at Davangere, Karnataka, India.
DONGO Hydroelectric Project
WAMS Wind Project
Huaneng Weining County Xueshan Xianshuipo Wind Farm Project
Huaneng Pianguan Heijiazhuang Phase II 49.5MW Wind Power Project
Biomass based Power project in Lopburi, Thailand
Inner Mongolia Damo Hangjinqi Wujier Phase I Wind Power Project
Low Temperature Waste Heat Power Generation Project in Pingyin Sunnsy Cement Corporation Limited
Anning River Canyon Ayue Wind Farm Project in Dechang County Sichuan Province
Mezquite Wind Farm
Renewable Energy Bundled Wind Project in India
Luoze River Yunguiqiao Hydropower Project
Chiripa Wind Project
60MW Solar PV - Monte Plata
Xinjiang Longyuan Balikun Santanghu Phase II 49.5MW Wind Power Project
Renewable wind energy project by Frost International Limited
Tunggang Hydroelectric Power Plant
Solar Thermal Power Plant by Godawari Green Energy Limited
Distribution of Improved cook stove - Phase II
Xiaojin County Jiesigou 2nd Stage Hydropower Project
Xinle-gaocheng HB5 Household Biogas Project in Shijiazhuang, Hebei Province
Waste Heat Recovery and Utilisation for Power Generation Project of Chongqing Conch Cement Company Limited (Phase I)
EVCSA Wind Power Project
Lagoa de Touros Wind Power Plants CDM Project Activity.
Huaneng Hezhang Wuli Wind Farm Project
Huaneng Hezhang County Shitouzhai Wind Farm Project
Sichuan Jinyangcangfang Hydropower Project
Qingtongxia (Shashidunliang) Wind Farm Ningxia Datang International 48MW Wind Farm Project
10 MW Biomass based renewable energy generation for the grid by Bhavnagar Biomass Power Projects Pvt Ltd
Huaneng Yunlong bailongmiao Wind Power Project
2.1 MW Wind Power Project in Rajasthan
Yingjiang County Mengnaihe new 2nd level hydro power project
Huaneng Weining Gaofeng Wind Farm Project
Fujian Ningde Sanjianxi Hydropower Project
Grid connected combined cycle power plant project in Qadirpur utilizing permeate gas, previously flared
Tingminghe Hydropower Station in Nujiang Prefecture
SHP ITAGUACU CDM PROJECT (JUN 1146), BRAZIL
Methane Recovery and Utilisation at PT. Unggul Lestari Palm Oil Mill at Central Kalimantan, Indonesia.
Potrero Hydropower Plant, Peru
Hebei Wuqiao Biomass Generation Project
Wind Power Project at Tamil Nadu, India by Nippo
Datang 8.9MW Rooftop Photovoltaic Power Project
Ningxia Jinyang 30MWp Solar Photovoltaic Power Project
Wind Power Project in Rajasthan & Maharashtra by Sterling Agro Industries Ltd
Jilin Dehui Biomass Generation Project
Co-composting of Palm Oil Mill Waste at Keratong
Datang Tuquan Laoyeling Wind Farm Phase II Project
Zhenxiong County Zhaishang Hydropower Project
Use of Charcoal from Renewable Biomass Plantations as Reducing Agent in Pig Iron Mill of ArcelorMittal Juiz de Fora, Brazil
‘Ladaner Peralta’ Wind Farm
Mendre Hydroelectric Power Plant Project
Nargund Wind Power Project in Karnataka (India)
Recovery and Utilization of Associated Gas at Tugu Barat Plant
Avoid methane emission through aerobic composting at Tan Thanh solid waste treatment plant
Huaneng Fanshi Shanglangjian (Shahe Phase I) 49.5 MW Wind Power Project
Zibo Xingang CDQ Technology-Reform Project
Natural gas based cogeneration plant at IRPC Public Co. Ltd. Thailand
CIL SOLAR CDM Project
Wind Power Project at Bhachau by Powerica Limited
Hebei Fengning Wanshengyong Wind Power Project
Guizhou Panjiang Coal Mine Methane Power Generation Project
Huaneng Guangdong Raoping Suocheng Wind Farm Project
GD Power Dongyuan Chanziding Wind Power Project
Datang Balikun Santanghu Wind Power 49.5MW Phase I Project
GD Power Taishan Ziluoshan Wind Power Project
Reduction of methane emissions in the gas distribution network of Armenia Republic
Solar Photovoltaic Power Project at Jalgaon, Maharashtra
Kangding Longtou Hydro Power Project
Azito Energie, Phase 3 Expansion from Single Cycle to Combined
Shanxi Huadian Guangling Diandingshan Phase III 49.5MW Wind Farm Project
IOT Mabagas Limited power plant, Pudhuchatram
Xinjiang Wuqia County Zongheng Small Hydropower Project
Project Kamojang Unit 5 PT. Pertamina Geothermal Energy
Xinjiang Longyuan Balikun Santanghu Phase III 49.5MW Wind Power Project
Sichuan Luding County Xiasong Hydro Project
Los Hierros Hydroelectric Power Plant
Yunnan Fugong County Yamuhe 3rd Cascade Hydropower Project
Sichuan Beichuan Gansongba Hydropower Project
Wind power project at Jaibhim by SIIL
Bundled Street Lighting Energy Efficiency Projects implemented by AEL in India
Sichuan Luding County Mehegou Bundled Hydro Project
Jingtai Machangshan Phase II 49.5 MW Wind Power Project
Daan Laifu Wind Farm Phase IV Project
Fujian Gaosa Hydropower Project
Gansu Wuwei Grid-connected 10MW Solar Power Generation Project
Renewable Biomass based Energy Generation project in a Distillery at Uttar Pradesh
Kentilux Wind Farm
Jiangsu Huadian Shangde Dongtai Coastal 20MW Solar Power Project
Kangding Lianghekou Hydro Power Project
Wind Power Project by Rajasthan Gum Private Limited (EKI.CDM.July-11-01)
Datang Renewable Power Chuzhou Nanqiao Shahe Wind Power Project
Yueneng Shishou Biomass Power Generation Project in Hubei Province, China
Chifeng City KeshiKetengqi Laohudong 49.5MW Wind Farm Project
Sichuan Songpan Daxing Hydropower Project
Project Karaha Unit 1 PT. Pertamina Geothermal Energy
Dong Nai 4 Hydropower Project
Sichuan Jiulong Sanyahe 1st Cascade Hydropower Station Project
Lindian Hongqi Wind Farm Project
PEM SUR - Wind Power plant project
Dongfang Minsheng Balikun Santanghu Phase I 49.5 MW Wind Power Project
Fengnan-Luannan HB2 Household Biogas Project in Tangshan, Hebei Province
Fuchuan, Zhaoping GX4 Household Biogas Project in Hezhou City, Guangxi Zhuang Autonomous Region
Yueneng Fangxian Biomass Power Generation Project in Hubei Province, China
Wanbang Dabancheng Wind Farm 49.5MW Project
Shanxi Fenxi Coal Mine Methane Utilization Project
Ta Loi 2 Hydro Power Project
Sichuan Jiulong Sanyahe Stage-II 24MW Hydropower Project
Shuanghekou 120MW Hydro Power Project in Guizhou Province China
Chifeng Huanggangliang 49.5MW Wind Farm Project
Huaneng Yi County Houjianshan Wind Farm Project
Huaneng Tongyu Tuanjie Phase A Wind Farm Project
Dongfang Minsheng Balikun Santanghu Phase II 49.5 MW Wind Power Project
Nyanza Bottling Company Clean Drinks CDM Project
Yiliang Yujing Cascade II Hydropower Project
Daqing Erlian Wind Farm Project
Inner Mongolia Keqi Luotuotaizi 300MW Wind Power Project
Electricity generation from renewable sources (wind) - Windfarm Morro dos Ventos phase 2
Ningxia Lingwu Jingneng Phase I Wind Farm Project
Nam Si Luong 4 Hydropower Project
Gansu Huadian Yumen Heiyazi West 48MW Wind Power Project
Huadian Akesai Dangjinshan Second Phase 49.5MW Wind Power Project
Pure Low Temperature Waste Heat Generating Project of Changle Sunnsy Cement Corporation Limited
Shaqian Hydropower Project in Guizhou Province
PANNA 1 N2O Abatement Project
Beipiao Xiaotazi Wind Farm Project
San Lorenzo Guimaras 54 MW Wind Power Project
Huaneng Ningxia Qingtongxia solar PV Power Plant
Generation of electricity from 3.0MW capacity wind turbines by Avon Cycles Limited
Grid connected Wind Power Generation Project by Premier Mills Private Limited
Bundled Wind Energy Project at Tamil Nadu, India by EAIPL
CGN Zhaoyuan Zhangxing Wind Power Project
Jeori Hydro-Electric Project
Yunnan Province Fuchuan Hydro Power Project
Piedra Larga Phase II Wind Farm
Huadian Da’an Fengshuishan Phase III Wind Farm Project
Huadian Guyuan Phase II 100.5MW Wind Farm Project
Sinan and Shiqian Rural Methane Digesters Project in Guizhou Province, China
SHPPs Jorge Dreher and Henrique Kotzian CDM Project
Zhejiang Longyou Biomass Cogeneration Project
15 MW Wind energy farm at Gopalpura, Karnataka by HZL
Yanhe, Dejiang, and Yinjiang Rural Methane Digesters Project in Guizhou Province, China
Songtao, Tongren, Wanshan and Yuping Rural Methane Digesters Project in Guizhou Province, China
Waste Heat Recovery CDM Project at Attock Cement Pakistan Ltd.
Coal Mine Methane (CMM) and Ventilation Air Methane (VAM) Comprehensive Utilization Project of Taiyuan, Shanxi Province
Grid connected renewable power generation at Tamil Nadu, India
Dak Mi 1-1A Hydroelectric Power Project
Bundled Wind Power Project at Tamil Nadu & Karnataka, India
Boiler retrofits to utilize semi-coke oven gas in Shenmu Zhugaita power generation Co., Ltd.
Guangxi Daxin Xialei Small Hydropower Project
Hebei Shangyi CGN Dongshan Wind Power Project
Duojiashan Expansion Small Hydropower Project in Gansu Province
Dongfang Minsheng Balikun Santanghu Phase IV 49.5 MW Wind Power Project
Ningxia Haiyuan Wind Farm (Tuoliebao) Huadian 49.5MW Wind Power Project
Huadian Hami 40 MWp Grid-connected Photovoltaic Power Project
Jinhua Wan Hydropower Project in Shaanxi
Ningxia Haiyuan Wind Farm (Songjiayao) Huadian 49.5MW Wind Power Project
7.5 MW Poultry litter based grid connected power plant in Andhra Pradesh , India
Solar Power project at Jaisalmer District in Rajasthan
Yueliang Wan Hydropower Project in Shaanxi
CGN Dabancheng Phase I 49.5MW Wind Power Project
Inner Mongolia Datang Xianghuangqi Wind Farm 49.5MW Project
Arauco Wind Farm
Nam Cong 3 Hydropower Project
Yiliang Yujing Cascade I Hydropower Project
Toabré Wind Farm
Wangzishan Wind Power Project of Sinohydro in Beipiao
Dassieklip Wind Energy Facility in South Africa
24 MW wind power project in Tamil Nadu, India
Renewable Wind Energy Project
Shanshan Phase I 20MW Grid-connected Solar PV Power Project of Huadian in Turpan
China Resources Yanggao Changcheng 49.5MW Wind Power Project
Wind power project in Jamnagar District, Gujarat, India
Dongfang Minsheng Balikun Santanghu Phase III 49.5 MW Wind Power Project
Kangding county Qianxi Hydropower Project
Mode-shift of passengers from private vehicles to MRTS for Gurgaon metro
CGN Dunhuang Phase II 9MW Grid-connected PV Power Generation Project
Wind Energy Project at Jaisalmer district, Rajasthan by Enn Enn Corp Limited
Ningxia Angli Lingwu Photovoltaic Grid Connected Power Plant Project
Mahkota Andalan Sawit Composting Project
Jilin Gongzhuling Longshan Phase I Wind Power Project
Shandong Pingdu Wind Farm Project
Yunnan Jianchuan County Xuebangshan Wind Power Project
Micro Scale Biogas CDM Project of WORD
Beijing Tianrun Yi County Liulonggou Wind Power Generation Project
Delta do Parnaíba Wind Power Plant Complex CDM Project Activity.
Rantau Dedap Geothermal Power Plant
Faísas Wind Energy Complexes CDM Project Activity.
Datang Renewable Power Changle Qiaoguan Wind Farm Project
Jiangsu Rudong Chaojiandai Shifan Expansion Wind Power Project
Huadian Hami Shisanjianfang Phase II 49.5MW Wind Farm Project
Huaneng Wutai Eling 49.5MW Wind Power Project
10 MW Biomass based renewable energy generation for the grid by Junagadh Power Projects (P) Ltd in Junagadh District, Guja
Waste Heat Recovery and Utilisation for Power Generation Project of Yiyang Conch Cement Company Limited
Grid connected electricity generation project activity
Biogas Project Florindo, Tanjung Bintang
Jiangxi Hekengkou Hydropower Project
Baihubao Phase II 49.5MW Wind Power Generation Project in Shanxi Province
Jilin Qianguo Qingshantou Wind Farm Project
Huadian Weihai Rushan Yazizhen Wind Farm Project
Sichuan Jiami Hydropower Project
Jilin Qianguo Chaganhu Wind Farm Project
Suizhou Sister Mountain Wind Power Project
Olmos 1 Hydroelectric Power Plant
Jilin Fuyu Sanjingzi Phase I Wind Farm Project
Reduction of Heavy Fuel Oil usage for Power Generation at Lucky Cement, Pezu, Pakistan
Mampuri Wind Power Project 2
9.9 MW Wind power Project by Texmo Industries at A.P. and Gujarat, India
A Luoi Hydro Power Project
North Longyuan Wulatehouqi Wuliji Wind Farm 49.5MW Project
Photovoltaic Power Generation Project at Tumbol Cham Phak Phaeo, Thailand
Datang Renewable Power Changle Beiyan Wind Farm Project
Wind power project at Gadag district, Karnataka
Biogas Project Florindo, Rumbia
Nam Si Luong 3 Hydropower Project
8 de Agosto
33 MW Wind Power Project of GSFC Ltd.
Datang Renewable Power Changle Tangwu Wind Farm Project
6 MW Eatul 4 Hydro Power Project
COPASA MG Small Thermoelectric Plant at ETE Arrudas Project
Grid Connected Solar Photovoltaic Power Project by M/s. Mono Steel (India) Ltd. in Gujarat
Huaning County Sanjia 13.5MW Hydropower Station Project
Shanxi LuAn Group Gaohe Mine VAM Destruction and Utilization Project
Barueri Energy CDM Project Activity
Biogas Project BLCT
Shanyin Zhinvquan Wind Farm Phase I 49.5MW Wind Power Generation Project
Weidi Grid-connected Solar PV Power Project in Yongren County
Xundian County Qingshuihai Wind Power Project
GD Power Ninghai Chashan Wind Power Project
Agro-forestry Interventions in Koraput district of Orissa
Sanxia New Energy Kaiyuan Weiyuan Wind Farm Project
PEM 1 - Wind Power Plant Project
Shenzhen Baoan Laohukeng Stage II Municipal Solid Waste Incineration Project
Shanghai Jinshan municipal solid waste incineration for Power Generation Project
Xinjiang Huadian Sha'erbulake Hydropower Project
Avoidance of methane emission from the wastewater treatment facility in K.S. Bio-Plus Co., Ltd., Thailand
K. N. RAM WIND POWER CDM PROJECT
CGN Tongyu Xinfa C wind farm project
Chongqing Fufeng Cement 9MW Waste Heat Recovery for Power Generation Project
LFG flaring project at Dubai, UAE
Jilin Changling Biomass Utilization Project
Ningxia Guodian Dawukou Phase I 10MWp Solar Photovoltaic Power Project
Inner Mongolia Huadian Zhengxiang Baiqi Wuningbatu Phase I 49.5MW Wind Farm Project
Jilin Gongzhuling Biomass Generation Project
21 MW Wind energy farm at Palladam, TamilNadu by HZL
5X0.8 MW Wind Power Project by Texmo Industries
Inner Mongolia Daladqi and Wushenqi Bundled Solar Cooker Project
GGP Biogas Project
Ninglang County Huomuliang Wind Power Project
Song Luy Hydropower Project
Lichonggou Landfill Gas Recovery and Utilization Project in Liuzhou City
Tin Thanh Biomass Boiler Project No. 5
Yiyang-Luoning HN3 Household Biogas Project in Luoyang, Henan Province
CGN Jinta Hongliuwa 9MW Grid-connected PV Power Generation Project
TBEC LIG Biogas Project
Diebu County Axia Nagai Hydropower Project
Golden Jumping Group 12MWp Solar Power Project
Northern Yiyang HN2 Household Biogas Project in Luoyang, Henan Province
Biomass based power project by Harinagar Sugar Mills Ltd
Partial substitution of coal with alternate fuels at DG Cement, Khofli Sattai Dera Ghazi Khan Plant
Datang Chuzhou Lai’an Longshan Wind Farm Project
Gansu Hanjiagou and Gupinggou bundle small hydropower project
Gonal Small Hydro Project by South West Hydro
Shandong Dongping Guangyuan Biomass Power and Heat Project
Guohua Guyuan Bayuan 100MW Wind Farm Project
Dong Ngai Hydropower Project
Sichuan Kangding County Lajiaogou First Stage Hydropower Station Project
TBEA Awati 20MW Solar PV Power Generation Project
13.2 MW Wind Mill Power Project in Theni district of Tamil Nadu, by JISL-India
Piran Small Hydropower Plant CDM Project
Korindo Biomass Power Plant, Indonesia
Dundee Biogas Power (Pty) Ltd
1.5 MW Wind Power Plant of Zenith Silk Mills at Kosha Village, in Kutch district of Gujarat state, India
Moldova Community Forestry Development Project
DaKrong 2 Hydropower Project
China Yongzhou Xiangqi Hydropower Project
Sichuan Laoyingyan Hydropower Project
Dunan Yiwu Naomaohu Phase I 48MW Wind Farm Project
Karoo Renewable Energy Facility (Nobelsfontein Wind)
Sapphire 49.5 MW Wind Farm Project
Waste Heat Recovery for Power Generation Project in HuaiNing Shangfeng Cement Co., Ltd.
Guizhou Jianhe County Chengjing Hydropower Project
DEWA Chiller Station L
Inner Mongolia Shangdu 49.5MW Wind Power Project
Da’an Haituo Wind Farm Phase IV Project
Anhui Longyuan Chuzhou Dingyuan Dajinshan Wind Power Project
La Fe Wind Farm Project
Fugu County Moyuan Magnesium & Coal Industry Co., Ltd. Semi-coke Waste Gas Power Generation Project
Fugu County Yabo 30MW Semi-coke Waste Gas Power Generation Project
Sichuan Puge Xiaoxingchang Second Stage Small Hydropower Project
Datang Zhaoyuan Biguo Fushan Phase I Wind Farm Project
Hopefield wind energy facility in South Africa
Photovoltaic Power Generation Project at Tumbol HuaiHaeng, Thailand
Huaneng Yunlong County Caojian Liangzi Wind Farm Project
Karoo Renewable Energy Facility (Nobelsfontein Solar PV)
Xieshui River Stage III Hydropower Project of Shimen County, Hunan Province
Lianghui Tuo 20MW Hydropower Project in Chongqing City
QingHai Hainan Prefecture Shazhuyu Wind Power Project of Period I
WISCO 1234# Coke Dry Quenching (CDQ) Waste Heat Recovery for Cogeneration Project in Hubei Province
Da’an Haituo Wind Farm Phase III Project
Yunnan Jianchuan County Jingongshan Wind Power Project
Clean Energy One Biomass Power Plant Project
Xiangtan Jiuhua Photovoltaic Power Generation Project
Cabo Negro Wind Farm Project, Phase 1
Gongcheng Xiling Wind Power Project
Wind Project Activity by PPS Enviro Power Pvt. Limited
Sunan County Xiyinghe I and II Bundled Hydropower Project
Inner Mongolia Alashan 20 MWp Solar Power Project
Huaneng Jimo Fengcheng Phase I Wind Farm Project
Paudital Lassa SHEP by M/s. Greenko Hatkoti Energy Private Limited
Rishiganga Hydroelectric Project (RGHEP), India
Bogdanci Wind Park 36.8 MW
Yongshun Kaidi Biomass Power Project
Lafarge Ecuador Biomass Project
Qinghai Yuhui New Energy Co., Ltd. Wulan 20MW Grid-connected Solar Generation Project
SDIC Barkol Santanghu Wind Farm First Phase 49.5 MW Wind Power Project
Luquan County Tiesuoqiao Hydropower Project
Shandong Pingyuan 30MW Biomass Cogeneration Project
Gansu Diebu Sangba third cascade small hydropower project
Tin Thanh Biomass Boiler Project No. 8
Bundled Wind Power Project- Parikh Gp (EKI CDM.Sept-10-01)
Qinghai Jingneng Ge'ermu Solar PV Power Project
Butuo County Datianba Hydropower Project
Mel 2 Wind Farm CDM Project Activity
Ningxia Hongsipu Shibanquan Windpower Guodian Phase II 49.5MW Project
Ningxia Guyuan Wind Farm Tianrun Sanying 49.5MW Project
Joburg Landfill Gas to Energy Project
Proactiva Presidente landfill gas to energy project
Suoi Lum 1 hydroelectric power plant
DSK Composting Project
Grid Connected Solar Power Project by M/s. GSPC Pipavav Power Company Ltd. in Gujarat
2.10 MW Bundled Wind Power Generation in Tamil Nadu and Madhya Pradesh
Sap Viet Hydropower Plant, Vietnam
Balakhani Landfill Project
Dam spillage based small hydro power project in Maharashtra, India
Solar Photovoltaic based Power Plant, India 3
Gongshan County Qiqi hydropower project
Biogas Project Florindo, Sukaraja
Son Tay Hydropower Project
Huadian Shangyi Wangyueliang Phase I Wind Farm Project
52.50 MW Wind energy farm at Mokla Rajasthan by HZL
Huadian Inner Mongolia Tongliao Fuyu 49.5MW Wind Farm Project
Baimayu River Liziba, Xigoushengtai and Zhimashan Bundled Small Hydropower Project in Gansu Province
CEMEX Colombia: Alternative fuels and biomass project at Cucuta cement plant
CGN Yunnan Mouding Dajianfeng Wind Power Project
TBEA Turpan Wind and PV Hybrid Power Project
Guodian Shaoyang Xinning Fengyudian Wind Power Project
Biogas Project Florindo, SB7
Mithapur Solar Power Project
Zhenlai Heiyupao Windfarm Project (Phase IV)
Sichuan Shichuang Yangba 22 MW Hydropower Project
Grid connected electricity generation from renewable source: Windfarm Complex Santa Vitória do Palmar and Chuí
Guohua Guyuan Xiyingzi 49.5MW Wind Farm Project
ENGEP & BEGREEN CDM Project at UTGR – Jambeiro Landfill
Shangyi Wanshigou 49.5MW Wind Farm Project
Thai Agro Energy Wastewater Treatment and Biogas Utilization Project
Nuru Lighting Project - Rwanda
Chuanjing Phase IV 49.5MW Wind Farm Project
1×15 MW Biomass Electric Power Generation Project of Zibo Tengfei Biomass Cogeneration Co., Ltd.
Ningxia Yanchi Mahuangshan Wind Farm (Wanglejing) Master Phase I Project
Srepok 4A Hydropower project, Vietnam
8 MW Bundled Wind Power Project at Jaisalmer, Rajasthan
Wind Power Project at Rajkot, Gujarat
Yunnan Mangtie River Second Stage Hydropower Project
Arizona 1 Wind Power Plant CDM Project Activity
Electricity generation from renewable sources – Windfarms Macacos, Juremas, Pedra Preta and Costa Branca
Wudu Dayuanba Hydroelectric project in Gansu province.
9 MW Wind Energy Farm at Jodhpur Rajasthan by HZL
Sichuan Emeishan Jinding Special Cement Waste Heat Recovery Power Generation (12MW) Project
Huaneng Dalian Wafangdian Zhaotun Wind Farm Project
Sichuan Jiulong County Sansigou Hydropower Project
Xinjiang Hetian Yulongkashi River Dakequke Hydropower Project
Kangbao Majiaying Wind Farm Project
Magenko IYO Alam Sekitar Bercham Landfill Gas to Energy Project in Ipoh, Malaysia
2 MW Bundled Solar Power Project Orissa
Pastorale
Jeddah Old Landfill (JOLF) and Jeddah New Landfill (JNLF) Landfill Gas Recovery Bundled Project
Jingneng Saihan Wind Farm Phase III 49.5MW Project
Bangchak Solar Farm at Bangpa-In
Sichuan Tongjiang Hongkou Hydro Power Project
Kangbao Haojiaying Wind Farm Project
18 MW Wind Mill Project of GSFC Ltd
PHUONG MAI 3 WIND POWER PROJECT
THUAN NHIEN PHONG WIND POWER PROJECT
Nam Dong 4 Hydro Power Project
Combined cycle electricity generation activity at Gurgaon, India
Xilinguolemeng Huitengliang Guohua Wind Farm Project
Waste Heat Recovery and Utilization for Power Generation at Cherat Cement Company Limited, Nowshera, Pakistan
1.25 MW Wind Power Project in Gujarat
Anhui Guzhen Biomass Generation Project
Wind Project by VBM
Zaoyang Biomass Power Generation Project
CECEP QingHai Dachaidan Solar Power Generation Co., Ltd. Xitieshan 2nd Stage 20MWp PV Power Generation Project
Yongping County Dawantang 1st Level Hydropower Project
Shanyang County Kuanping 1st and Kuanping 2nd Level Bundle Small Hydropower Project
Fusong county Dougouzi, Qingchuan 2nd and Jingyu County Fusheng Bundled Hydropower Station Project
Ban Nhung Small Hydropower Project
Installation of 240 MW Hydroelectric Project at Kutehr in the Chamba district of Himachal Pradesh by JSW Energy
Kangding county Loushanggou Hydropower Project
Sichuan Golden-Elephant Sincerity Line 4 N2O Abatement Project
Sichuan Golden-Elephant Sincerity Line 3 N2O Abatement Project
Yunnan Lvzhijiang River Yuguo Hydropower Project
Tehri Biomass co-gen CDM Project
Jiangxi Daling Kuojian Wind Farm Project
Methane Recovery in Wastewater Treatment and its utilization for Thermal Energy at PT Indah Kiat Pulp & Paper, Serang
Kalansa Biomass Renewable Energy Project
CGN Tuokexun Phase I 49.5MW Wind Power Project
Gansu Jingyuan Coal Mine Group Jieneng Thermoelectricity Company CMM Power Generation Project
Sichuan Province Luding County Gonghe Hydropower Project
Waste Heat Recovery and Utilization for Power Generation at Lucky Cement Limited, Karachi Plant
Yongping County Dawantang 2nd Level Hydropower Project
Yeongam F1 Circuit Photovoltaic Power Plant CDM project
Dak Srong 3A Hydropower Project
Inner Mongolia Wulanchabu Siziwangqi Phase II 60MWp Solar Power Project
Guohua Zhucheng Wind Power Project Phase III
Guizhou Weining County Longhe Wind Power Project
Guizhou Weining County Guijiaying Wind Power Project
BRASCARBON Methane Recovery Project BCA-BRA-06A.
Yanyuan County Majingzi Hydropower Project
Huaneng Hebei Huailai 49.5MW Wind Farm Project
Substitution of coal with alternate fuels at DG Khan Cement Company Limited, Khairpur Plant
Eco Energy Beer Tuvya - Animal manure anaerobic treatment facility
8 MW bundled wind power project by Bannari Amman Spinning Mills Limited in Tamil Nadu, India
Guohua Zhucheng Wind Power Project Phase IV
Jiangsu Xuyi Difengsu Phase I 49.5MW Wind Power Project
Tianrun Laixi Nanshu Wind Farm Project
Guizhou Weining County Mawoshan Wind Power Project
Jinfeng Tianyi Dabancheng 49.5MW Shiyan Wind Farm Project
BRASCARBON Methane Recovery Project BCA-BRA-04A.
Shandong Longyuan Binzhou Zhanhua Wujibu Wind Power Project
Renewable Wind Energy by Rayala Wind Power Company Private Limited
Renewable Wind Energy by Fortune Five Hydel Projects (P) Limited
Burgos Wind Project
Alashan Ayouqi 49.5MW Wind Farm
Gansu Bazang 51MW Hydropower Project
Neusberg Grid Connected Hydroelectric Power Plant, South Africa
BRASCARBON Methane Recovery Project BCA-BRA-10.
Huaneng Yunnan Eryuan Guanyinshan Wind Farm Project
2.4 MW Wind Power Project in Rajasthan State
Sunite Phase IV 49.5 MW Wind Power Project
Guodian Xinjiang Tacheng Mayitasi Phase I 49.5 MW Wind Power Project
Electricity generation from renewable sources – Windfarm Campo dos Ventos II
Yanchi Wind Farm (Wanglejing Niujijuan) Master 49.98 MW Project
Yanchi Wind Farm (Mahuangshan Shijiawan) Master 49.4 MW Project
Jaroensompong Corporation Panomsarakham Landfill Gas to Energy Project
Jeju Special Self-Governing Province’s 4.1 MW bundled CDM project
CEMEX Mexico: Biomass project at Huichapan cement plant
Sichuan Jiulong County Mawogou Second Stage Hydropower Station Project
Yanchi Wind Farm (Mahuangshan Shijiawan) Hanas 49.4 MW Project
Semarang MSW Composting Project
Bundled Wind Power Project by EnKing International (EKIESL-CDM.August-11-02)
Anneng (Anlu) Biomass Power Generation Project in Hubei Province, China
Chint Qinghai Golmud 20MWp Solar PV Power Generation Project
Yanchi Wind Farm (Wanglejing Sunjialou) Master 49.4 MW Project
Emissions free electricity generation using wind energy
Huaneng Shenchi Taipingzhuang 49.5MW Wind Power Project
Lebu II Wind Farm Project
Qinghai Golmud 20MWp Grid-Connected Photovoltaic Power Generation Project
Cuel Wind Farm Project
SHP São Sebastião CDM Project.
Shuangyang Waste Heat Recovery and Power Generation Project in Jilin Yatai Cement Co., Ltd.
Proactiva Tlalnepantla Landfill Gas to Energy project
Wind power project by UPL, India
Gansu Kuangqu Sanshilijingzi 49.5MW Wind Power Project
Improving energy efficiency in a new Gas Plant in Gibraltar-Colombia
Heilongjiang Wuding Mountain Wind Power Project
Hebei Jiheng Sairui Line 2 N2O Abatement Project
Qinghai Delingha Xiehe Solar PV Power Generation Project
Ta Co hydroelectric power plant
Huadian Ningxia Ningdong Phase V Wind Farm Project
Liaoning Heishan Biomass Cogeneration Project
Jinsheng Huyang Line 2 N2O Abatement Project
Inner Mongolia Xinghe Guancun 49.5MW Wind Power Project
Grid connected natural gas based electricity generation power plant at Vemagiri, Andhra Pradesh, India
Inner Mongolia Jinzhou Bailingmiao Wind Power Project
Lohia Auto Industries Electric Vehicles, India
Jinsheng Huyang Line 3 N2O Abatement Project
Jinsheng Huyang Line 1 N2O Abatement Project
49.8MW China Resources Wind Power (Qingdao) Longxin Wind Farm Project Phase II
Electrotherm Electric Vehicles, India
Dak Me 1 Hydropower Project in Vietnam
Ningxia Shizuishan Phase II 10MWp Solar PV Power Generation Project
Daban small Hydropower Project in Gansu province
Buguanhe River-I 15MW Hydropower Project
27.3 MW Wind energy farm at Mokla Rajasthan by HZL
Gansu Pingshanhu 49.5MW Wind Power Project
Adjaristsqali Hydro Project
Xinjiang Longyuan Balikun Santanghu Phase IV 49.5MW Wind Power Project
Inner Mongolia Alashanzuoqi Bayanhaote 20MWp Solar Power Project
CECEP Wuzhong Taiyangshan PV Power Generation Co., Ltd. Taiyangshan 3rd Stage 50 MWp PV Power Project
Inner Mongolia Wulatehouqi Huhewenduer 40MWp Solar Power Project
Fujian Yong’an Ximen Hydropower Project
Solar power project in Gujarat, India
Guodian Weichang wind and photovoltaic power project
Jianping Wanjiayingzi Wind Farm Project
Huaneng Gaizhou Qingshiling Wind Farm Project
Hami Tianrun Shisanjianfang I 49.5MW Wind Power Project
Shanxi Hongxiang Coal Mine Methane Power Generation Project
Qinghai Longyuan Golmud Phase III 20MW Solar Power Project
Jin River Cascade II Hydropower Project in Mabian Yi Autonomous County
Animal manure anaerobic treatment facility – Ein Hahoresh
China Resources Huilai Sanqingshan Wind Power Project
Fujian Zhaoan Meiling Wind Farm Project
BRASCARBON Methane Recovery Project BCA-BRA-09.
Huaneng Zhaojue Tekoujiagu Wind Power Project
Waste heat recovery and utilization for power generation at DG Cement Khairpur Plant
6 MW bundled Wind Power Project in Rajkot and Kutch districts of Gujarat
Alwar CFL Distribution Project, Rajasthan, India
Bharatpur CFL Distribution Project, Rajasthan, India
Tin Thanh Biomass Boiler Project No. 7
Biogas Project BAJ, Menggala
Huadian Xiaocaohu Second Wind Farm Phase II 49.5MW Project
Yunnan Damengtong River Dazhaizi Hydropower Station Project
Liki Pinangawan Muaralaboh Geothermal Power Plant
Eastern Yiyang HN1 Household Biogas Project in Luoyang, Henan Province
Phata Byung Hydro Electric Project (76MW)
Chongqing Pingxiang CMM Utilization Project, China
Ningxia Yanchi Mahuangshan Wind Farm (Wanglejing) Hanas Phase I Project
Wenjiahe Second Small Hydropower Project in Zhaotong of Yunnan
Aeolis Beberibe Wind Park
Aeolis 2011 Wind Parks
Grid connected solar PV based power generation at Naini, Allahabad, India
Zhengyuan Hydropower Project in Jiulong County
223 MWel Combined Cycle Power Plant (CCPP) Skopje
Shenergy Damao Banner Bailingmiao Wind Power Phase I Project
6.6 MW bundled wind based project activity in Karnataka, India
HTW 20MW PV Power Generation Project
Bontang N2O Abatement Project
CECEP Dongtai Solar Power Generation Co., Ltd. 1st and 2nd Stage Bundled PV Tidal Flat Ground Power Projects
Stivo wind park on Cyprus
CECEP Gansu Wuwei Solar Power Co., Ltd. Liangzhou District Nandatan 20 MWp PV Power Project
Kattepura Mini Hydel Scheme at Karnataka, India
Huaneng Tieling Daxing Wind Farm Project
Osório Wind Power Plant Project 2 (OWPPP2)
Kretam Wastewater Biogas Recovery and Utilisation Project, in Sandakan, Sabah Malaysia
Passos Maia CDM Project
Wind power project in Tamil Nadu by SWPPL
Pantabangan Hydro Electric Power Plant Refurbishment and Upgrade Project in Nueva Ecija, Philippines
Marañon Hydroelectric Project
Yunnan Yingjiang Gunpengyang Pre-First Level Hydropower Project
CGN Gaizhou Shagangzi Wind Power Project
Yelisirur wind power project, India
West Huaybong 3 wind farm project
Land Filling and Processing Services for Southern Zone in Cairo
Tonk CFL Distribution Project, Rajasthan, India
Qinghai Ge'ermu Xiaozaohuo Phase I 49.5MW Wind Power Project
Zhenlai Heiyupao Windfarm Project (Phase III)
Thien Nam Hydropower Project
Shanxi Limin Phase II Wind Farm Project
Amitea Small Hydro Project
Afam Combined Cycle Gas Turbine Power Project
Baran CFL Distribution Project, Rajasthan, India
Kota CFL Distribution Project, Rajasthan, India
Anhui Shouxian Biomass Utilization Project
Granadillos Wind Farm
Dong Chum 2 Hydro Power Project
Huangshi MSW Incineration Project
Xinjiang Gonggeer Hydropower Project
Tacotan and Trigomil Small Scale Hydroelectric Power Plants Project
Canbalam I Hydroelectric Project
Fujian Shanghang Huilong 9.9 MW hydropower Station Project
Recovery and Utilization of Associated Gas to Optimize Power Generation at PETROAMAZONAS Block 15 Facilities
Xinjiang Hami Shichengzi Cascade I and II Hydro Power Bundle Project
Biogas production from sugar beet press pulp Südzucker Moldova sugar plant
Bokpoort CSP (Concentrating Solar Power) Project, South Africa
Nueva Esperanza
Huining County Solar Cooker Project
Huaneng Changtu Taiping Wind Farm Project
Sichuan Province Nianke Hydropower Project
CGN Mishan Panjiadian Wind Power Project
CGN Mishan Linhe Wind Power Project
Heilongjiang Kedong Aihua Wind Power Project
K-water hydropower VI
Jinkai Group Dual Pressure Line 4 N2O Abatement Project
Guangxi Hechi City Ganlao Hydropower Project
Srinivasa Hatcheries Limited 3MW Wind Project 2010
Drolia Energy from Waste Heat - CDM Project
Datang Erdos Hangjinqi Photovoltaic Grid Connected Power Project
Hebei Jiheng Sairui Line 1 N2O Abatement Project
30MW Puyo Hydropower Project
Guohua Hulunbeier Chenbaerhuqi Huhenuoer 49.5MW wind farm project
Dunhuang 9MW solar power project
Danba County Yanwogou 5MW Hydropower Station Project
Huaneng Gansu Huajialing 49.5MW Wind Power Project
23MW Bubunawan 2 Hydropower Project
China resources wind power Inner Mongolia Bayinxile Phase II 49.5MW Wind Power Project
Jinkai Group Dual Pressure Line 3 N2O Abatement Project
Datang Wulan Renewable Power Co., Ltd. Chaka Xiaoshuiqiao 49.5MW Wind Farm Project
Guohua Hulunbeier Xinbaerhuzuoqi Bayanchagan 49.5MW Wind Farm Project
Lican Hydroelectric Plant
Ningxia Ningdong Wind Farm (Lingwu Changliushui) Datang Angli 49.5MW Project
Da’an Anbai Expressway Xinaili Wind Farm Project(Phase I)
Optimisation of Kiambere Hydro Power Project
Grid connected bundled wind projects in Gujarat and Tamil Nadu
Shaanxi Xinghua Chemistry Co., Ltd. Nitric Acid Line 5 Project
Sichuan Luding Feishuigou 8MW Hydropower Project
Yunnan Luliang County Matang Wind Power Project
Xitieshan Phase III 60MWp Grid-connected Solar PV Power Generation Project
Yunnan Lufeng Xianrendong Wind Farm Project
Datang Renewable Power Suzhou District Dongdongtan Grid-connected PV Power Project
Dong Nai 2 Hydropower Project
Northwestern Ruyang HN6 Household Biogas Project in Luoyang, Henan Province
Wu’an Ruikang 48MW Biomass Power Generation Project
Heilongjiang Halahai Wind Farm Project
Jieneng Phase II 100MW Semi-coke Waste Gas Power Generation Project
Palor II SHP Project
Inner Mongolia Goldwind Damao Wind Farm Phase III Project
Electricity generation from renewable sources (wind) – Windfarm Complex Morro dos Ventos
Guangxi Wacun Hydropower Project
Rural Eco-energy Project of Henan Hengyou Husbandry Development Co., Ltd
Power generation through MSW at Karimnagar, Andhra Pradesh
Song Tranh 4 Hydropower Project, Vietnam
Grid-connected renewable energy project in Maharashtra, India
Fuel Switch at Corobrik’s Driefontein Brick Factory in South Africa
Grid Connected Solar Photovoltaic Power Project by M/s. ZF Steering Gear (India) Ltd
Guohua Dongying Hekou Wind Farm Phase VI Project
Ziqiang 18MW Hydropower Project in Guizhou Province China
Yumen Shulehe Yueliangwan First Cascade Hydropower Project
Ningxia Helanshan Wind-farm (Touguan) Dalisi 49.5MW Wind Power Project
5.30 MW Bundled Wind Power Project in India
Guohua Dongying Hekou Wind Farm Phase V Project
Hon Chong Waste Heat Recovery Power Plant
Projeto de Gás de Aterro TECIPAR – PROGAT
Biogas Project BAJ, Buyut Ilir
Penonome Wind Farm
Ryesonggang Hydropower Plant No.3, DPR Korea
Guangxi Tianlin County Naxin Hydroelectric Project
Renewable Wind Power Project in Maharashtra
Grid Connected Solar Power Project in Gujarat by GHI Energy Private Limited
Complexo Carreiro II CDM Project.
Wind energy project in Theni, Tamil Nadu
PT Mitra Energi Batam CCGT Conversion Project
Magenko Renewables (Penang) Wastewater Methane Avoidance and Energy Generation Project, Malaysia
Hebei Chengde Weichang Wuxiangliang Wind Power Project
Chengnan Phase II 49.5MW Wind Power Project of Huadian in Burqin
4.2 MW Renewable Energy-WIND
Shuanghekou 16.6MW Hydropower Project in Chongqing City, P.R. China
Heilongjiang Wuerguli Wind Power Project
Junma N2O Abatement Project from Nitric Acid Production
Grid Connected Solar Photovoltaic Power Project by M/s EMCO Limited
Huaneng Dali Qingshuigou Wind Farm Project
Huaneng Dali Qimashan Wind Farm Project
Quebra Dentes Small Hydropower Plant CDM Project Activity
Lushui County Gejiehe Hydropower Project
Xuanen County Shuangxi Hydropower Project
40.5 MW Wind Power Project by GMDC
Green Energy Project at Kutch by Powerica Limited
De Aar Grid Connected 10 MW Solar Park, South Africa
Bundled Wind Power Project in South India
Huaneng Hezhang Dajiucaiping Wind Farm Project
Inner Mongolia Keshiketeng County Wutaohai South Wind Farm 49.5 MW Project
1.6 MW Wind Power Project by M/s. Prachar Energy in Rajasthan, India
Punta Pereira biomass power plant.
Guohua Zhucheng Wind Farm Project (Phase I)
10 MWp Grid Interactive Solar Power Project in Gujarat Solar Park, India
Tin Thanh Biomass Boiler Project No. 4
Las Pizarras Project
Clean Energy Generation in Gujarat, India
“6.65 MW Wind Energy Generation by M/s GTN Enterprises Limited” at Ganapathypalayam in Coimbatore, Radhapuram, Kvala
Xinjiang Guodian Alashankou Phase III 49.5MW Wind Power Project
Xinjiang Kaidu River Liushugou Hydropower Project
Tunisia: Sidi Daoud Wind Farm Project
Jiulong County Sezhe Hydropower Project
Methane Recovery and Utilization Project of Petrovietnam Central Biofuels Joint Stock Company
Southern Luoning HN5 Household Biogas Project in Luoyang, Henan Province
Guohua Zhucheng Wind Farm Project (Phase II)
PTPN VI Bunut Mill POME Biogas Project in Jambi Province, Sumatera in Indonesia
Daqing Jiujianfang Wind Power Project
Suzlon 8.40 MW Wind Power Project
7.2 MW grid connected wind electricity generation project in Tamil Nadu, India
Dam B’ri 1 Hydropower Project
6 MW wind power project of Asian Star Company Limited at Tamil Nadu, India
Anhui Fengyang Caodian Wind Power Project
Rio Grande do Norte and Ceará Wind Energy Complex Project Activity.
Angel I, Angel II and Angel III Hydroelectric Power Plants
Huaneng Haiyang Guocheng Phase I Wind Farm Project
Hydraulic coupling torque converter Electricity excitation synchronous Wind Turbine Generator Minqin County Hongshagang 4
15 MW Small Hydro Electric Project in State of Orissa
Thuong Kon Tum Hydropower Project
74 MW wind energy project in Tamilnadu, India
Ningxia Taiyangshan Windfarm Shenpeng 49.5MW Project
Ban Ra Hydropower Project
Dak Glun Hydro Power Project
Baishuijiang Qujiahekou Hydro Power Project
Ziyuan Jinzishan Wind Farm II Project
Yunnan Danzhuhe 2nd Level Hydropower Project
Reduction of N2O emissions from the new nitric acid plant of Egypt Hydrocarbon Corporation at Ain Sokhna
Inner Mongolia Zhaoxin Energy Group Biomass Cogeneration Project
Guangxi Napo County Shanggai Hydroelectric Project
SHPP Serra Cavalinhos I – Project Activity
Mabian Yi Autonomous County Sanhekou Hydropower Project
Chulonggou River Hydroelectric Power Station in Jiulong County
Renova Area 6-8 Wind Power Project
Sapi Palm Oil Mill Effluent Methane Recovery Project
China Resources Linghai Shuangjing Wind Power Project
Tin Thanh Biomass Boiler Project No. 3
Tin Thanh Biomass Boiler Project No. 2
Solar PV Project in Dominican Republic
Jangi 91.8 MW wind farm in Gujarat
Zhejiang Shangfeng Cement 4.5MW WHR Project
Ningxia Tongxin (Zhangjiayuan Sutai) Huifeng Wind Power Project
Samsung Electronics energy efficient domestic refrigerators manufacturing project in India
Daqing Fengyun Wind Power Project
Yunnan Zhaotong Wenjiahe Fourth Cascade Small Hydropower Project
Boiler Fuel Conversion from Fuel Oil to Biomass Briquette at Viet Nam Paiho. Ltd, Ho Chi Minh city, Vietnam
Co-composting of POME Sludge and Empty Fruit Bunches
China Resources Linghai Baitaizi Wind Power Project
AWMS METHANE RECOVERY PROJECT K1
Danba County Yanwogou 12MW Hydropower Station Project
Biogas Project Florindo, Tulung Buyut
100 MW Malana – II, Hydro – Electric Power Project (Malana – II HEP)” at Kullu district of Himachal Pradesh State, India, by M/
REB Cassino Wind Energy Complex CDM Project Activity.
Natal Landfill Gas to Energy Project
Ningxia Tongxin (Zhangjiayuan Haitanghu) Huifeng Wind Farm Project
Tin Thanh Biomass Boiler Project No. 1
Baotou Damao Wulan Aobao Tianrun 49.5MW Wind Farm Project
Georgia: Refurbishment of Enguri Hydro Power Plant
Biomass based co-generation project by ACJKEL
Guodian Jiaonan Ziluo Wind Farm Project
Guangxi Chongzuo 2×15 MW Biomass Power Generation Project
Zhangye City Sidalong II&III Bundled Hydropower Project
Wind Farm Kladovo 1
Guodian Wendeng Zijinshan Wind Farm Project
Jizhong Energy Zhangjiakou Mining Group Co., Ltd. Xuandong Coalmine VAM Oxidation and Utilization Project
8MW Cirompang Mini Hydro Power Plants at Bungbulang, Garut, Indonesia.
Sichuan Huadian Xixi River Hydro-electricity Development Co., Ltd. Qingsong Hydroelectric Project
HPPCL Integrated Kashang Hydro Electric Project
Yunnan Luliang County Longtan Wind Power Project
Bundled clean energy project in jamnagar, Gujarat
Wushan Houxihe Hydropower Station Project
Guizhou Pan County Sige Phase I Wind Farm Project
Renewable power for sustainable development
CGN Gaozhou Zhongjiankeng Wind Farm Project
CGN Gaozhou Gaopo Wind Farm Project
Grid Connected wind power generation project by GSPL in Gujarat
Sichuan Songpan County Long’antang Small Hydropower Project
Ulu Jelai Hydropower Plant Project
Xinjiang Dabancheng Grid-connected Solar PV Power Generation Project
Solar Power Project by Bangkok Solar Power Co., Ltd.
RenovAndes H1, Small Hydropower Project
Laja Hydroelectric Project
Suqian Municipal Solid Waste Incineration for Power Generation Project
Qinghai Province Xinghai County Moduo Hydropower Project
Orosi Wind Power Project
Loma Negra vertical roller mill project
Tian Siang Oil Mill (Perak) Biogas Project
3.0 MW Wind Power Project Activity by BVSR Constructions Private Limited
Gansu Subei Mazongshan Gongpoquan 49.5MW Shiyan Wind Power Project
Hainan Nanzhonghe IV Small-Scale Hydropower Project
Yiliang Baishuijiang Wenjiao Hydropower Project
Yiliang Baishuijiang Shangbaishui Hydropower Project
Trung Son Hydro Power Project, Vietnam
Qirehata’er Hydropower Project, Xinjiang, China
Gansu Huadian Huanxian Nanqiu 49.5MW Wind Farm Project
Hebei Chengde Weichang Yudaokou Ruyihe Wind Power Project
Sonawade Small Hydro Power Project
Yiliang Baishuijiang Niulu Hydropower Project
West Huaybong 2 wind farm project
Palomino Hydropower Project in the Province of San Juan de la Maguana in the Dominican Republic
Xinjiang Tailanhe Phase I Hydropower Project
Hebei Weichang Chaoshuihai 49.5MW Wind Power Project
10.4 MW wind power project at Tiwari site of Jodhpur district in the state of Rajasthan, India
Pezzi Small Hydro Power Plant – Project Activity.
Bundled Wind Project by Sahyadri Industries Limited
Weihai Dingneng Zeku Phase I 49.5MW Wind Farm Project
Sichuan Danba County Kuiyonggou 1st Cascade Hydropower Project
Sichuan Baoxing Mahuanggou 1st Cascade Hydropower Project
Shanshuping Hydropower Project in Jiulong County
Gansu Dangshang V Hydropower Project
Grid Connected Rangit IV Hydro Power Project
Grid connected wind power project in Maharashtra, India by Bhilwara
Wind Energy Project in Tamilnadu, India – structured by Sri Shanmugavel Group
Yunnan Jianchuan County Diannan Wind Power Project
Yunnan Yuanjiang County Qinggui Small Hydropower Project
Northern Luoning HN4 Household Biogas Project in Luoyang, Henan Province
Huadian Hebei Yuzhou Zhenjiawan 49.5MW Wind Power Project
Inner Mongolia Huade Sansheng 49.5 MW Wind Farm Phase I Project
Hunan Lanshan County Zhongye and Yongzhou City Lingling Bundled Small Hydropower Project
Da’an Haituo Wind Farm Phase II Project
Hunan Guiyang County Datan Hydropower Project
CGN Tongyu Xinfa B wind farm project
Datang Qixia Sujiadian Wind Farm Phase I Project
Datang Haiyang Xujiadian Wind Farm Phase I Project
Jiangsu Dafeng Wind Power Project
Gauteng, Free State, Mpumalanga, Limpopo & Northern Cape CFL Replacement Project (1) in South Africa
Nam Khoa 1&2 Hydropower Project
Heilongjiang Daqing Lvsecaoyuan Wind Power Project
Yunnan E'shan County Tukufang & Chenghua and Yuanjiang County Manlai & Decong Bundled Small Hydropower Project
Huadian Yunnan Mengzi Duogu Phase I Wind Farm Project
Baku Waste to Energy Project
Sichuan Danba County Dulanggou 1st and 2nd Cascade Bundled Small Hydropower Project
State Grid Renewable Energy Dabancheng Wind Farm Phase I 49.5MW Wind Project
Leak Reduction in Above Ground Gas Distribution Equipment in ‘Socar Georgia Gas’ gas distribution system, Georgia
Hunan Xinning County Daxing 1st and 2nd Cascade Bundled Small Hydropower Project
Red Cap Kouga Wind Farm
Jilin Da-an Lesheng Wind Farm Project
Guohua Inner Mongolia Suniteyouqi Phase I Wind Farm Project
Jiangxi Ganxian Biomass Generation Project
Huadian Jilin Shuangliao Namusi 49.5MW Wind Power Project
Li County Suoluogou 1st Stage Hydropower Project
San Dionisio Wind Farm
7.5 MW Poultry Litter Project by Redan Infrastructure Private limited
Huaneng Dongying Hekou Phase V Wind Farm Project
San Rafael Hydro Power Project
Shenmu County Derun Carbonaceous Reductant Co., Ltd. Semi-coke Waste Gas Power Generation Project
Grid connected hydro power project in Sri Lanka
Anhui Shucheng Biomass Power Generation Project
Sichuan Luoergou I and Luoergou II Bundled Hydropower Project
Fuerza Eólica del Istmo – Phase II Wind Farm
Datang Wendeng Phase II Wind Power Project
Lushui County Lamenga 2nd level hydro power project
Fugu County Jingfu Coal Chemical Co., Ltd. 30MW Semi-coke Waste Gas Power Generation
Methane Recovery and Utilisation at PT. Sukajadi Sawit Mekar Palm Oil Mill 2, Central Kalimantan Indonesia
Bundled Wind Project Activity by M/s Bhagyanagar India Limited and M/s Surana Telecom and Power Limited
Gansu Dunhuang 50MWp Solar PV Power Station Project
18 MW Pure Low Temperature Waste Heat Recovery and Utilisation for Power Generation Project of Qingxin Conch Cement C
Binxian Dadingshan Wind Farm Project
Green Building at Dehradun
Gansu Baishuijiang Hengdan Hydropower Station Project
Datang Guangyuan Fangdiping Wind Farm 30MW Project
GHG mitigation through wind energy program in India
Datang Pingyin Phase I Wind Power Project
Guizhou Tongren Lujiadong Hydropower Project
Bundled wind power project in Western India
Wind Power Project activity by ACCPL
Minas I
Biomass based power plant in Batu Pahat in Johor state, Malaysia
12 MW biomass based renewable power generation in Rajasthan, India
Wind Energy Project in Dewas, Madhya Pradesh (India)
Xinjiang A’letai Hua’ning Hydropower Project
Wind Power Project in Gujarat, India
16.5 MW Grid-connected, Bundled Wind Power Project, Jodhpur, Rajasthan, India
Jilin Tongyu Zhanyu F Wind Farm Project
Tuokexun Wind Farm Phase II Project
Huaneng Dongying Hekou Phase VI Wind Farm Project
Energy Efficient Green Building at Mumbai by ONGC Limited
Wind Electricity Generation in Rajasthan and Tamil Nadu, India
Grid Connected Wind Energy Project in Tamil Nadu
3 MW bundled wind Power Project in Tamil Nadu
Guodian Weifang Binhai Wind Farm Phase II Project
Grid Connected Wind Power Project in Tamil Nadu
Thac Xang Hydropower Project
GHG abatement through Solar Power Generation at Jaisalmer, Rajasthan, India
Song Bung 4A Hydro Power Project
Small hydro power project by PHPPL, India
Leibo County Mala Hydropower Station Project
1.5 MW Wind Energy Project by M/s. Allum Veerabhadrappa in Chitradurga district, Karnataka.
Wind power project in Maharashtra, India – Andhra Lake Phase - II
Hoa Tham Hydropower Project
Biogas and electricity generation in Kuala Sungai Baru, Malaysia
Hydro power project by Sneha Kinetic Power Projects Private Limited
Xilinguolemeng Zhenglanqi Daaobao 49.5MW Phase I Wind Power Project
Electricity generation using renewable wind energy
18.9MW Wind Power Project at Tamil Nadu, India
Jiami Phase II Hydropower Project in Yanyuan County of Sichuan Province
Carbon Sequestration in Small and Medium Farms in the Brunca Region, Costa Rica (COOPEAGRI Project)
Qinghai Maqin Gequ Level 2 Hydropower Station
Xidahe Hydropower Project in Gansu Province
Renewable biomass based power generation project in Uthaithani, Thailand
Nam Xa Hydropower Project
25 MW Solar PV Project in Gujarat
Tianrong Binzhou Zhanhua Phase I Wind Farm Project
Linxiang Langyahe Hydropower Station
Rasi Seeds Pvt. Ltd. 2Nos x 1.5 MW Wind Project 2011 Akal, Rajasthan
Gansu Tianrun Guazhou Liuyuan Phase II 49.5MW Wind Farm Project
Gansu Yemu River Lianzhuqiao and Xiaohekou Bundled Small Hydropower Project
Thai Sritong Biomass Energy
Methane Capture and Utilization Project at Carotino Palm Oil Mill, Malaysia
Ia H’Rung and Chu Prong Hydropower Project
Methane Capture and Utilization Project at Melewar Palm Oil Mill, Malaysia
Methane capture for onsite utilization at Kim Loong Sabah Mills Sdn. Bhd.
Huangshui Huanghui Hydropower Project
Nam Can 2 Hydropower Project
Methane Capture and Utilization Project at Asia Palm Oil Mill, Malaysia
Pinglu Tianrun Zhangdianzhen 49.5MW Phase I Wind Farm Project
14.7 MW Bundled Wind Power Project in the state of Maharashtra and Rajasthan, India
Hubei Chibi Lushuihe Jiedi Small Hydropower Project
Henan Lankao Biomass Cogeneration Project
Shaanxi Songjiayan, Youshuijie and Heixiazi bundled hydro project
Manta Hydroelectric Power Plant
China Resources Beipiao Xiangyang Wind Farm 49.5 MW Project
Guodian Jingbian Jishanliang Phase III 49.5MW Wind Farm Project
Guodian Shaanxi Jingbian Jishanliang 49.5MW Wind Farm Project
Guodian Jingbian Jishanliang Phase II 49.5MW Wind Farm Project
Hunan Linwu Sanshiliuwan 48MW Wind Power Project
CECEP (Jiuquan) Power Co., Ltd. Yumen Changma 9MWp Wind-Solar Hybrid Power Project
Jiewei Hydropower Project
Yili Kukesu River Kushitayi Hydropower Project
Huadian Xinjiang Dabancheng First Phase 49.5MW Wind Power Project
Marcona Wind Farm
Rongge Hydro Power Project in Guizhou Province China.
4×200 MW Level Natural-gas-fired Combined Cycle Power Plant of Ningxia East Thermal Power Co., Ltd.
Gansu Guazhou Ganhekou South 48MW Wind Farm Project
Shangjianpo Hydro Power Project in Guizhou Province, China.
Xundian Gaobenshan Wind Farm Project
Shaanxi Jingbian 20MW Grid-connected Photovoltaic Power Generation Project
Songzi Kaidi Biomass Power Project
Longsheng Nanshan Wind Farm Phase II Project
Nittsu Fuel Efficiency Improvement with Digital Tachograph Systems on Road Freight Transportation CDM Project in
Huadian Sichuan Shangtongba Hydropower Project
Kangbao Tunken Wind Farm Project
Qingdao Longxin Wind Power Project Phase I
Huadian Haiyuan Wuyuan First Phase 49.5MW Wind Power Project
Chiem Hoa Hydropower Project
Heilongjiang Renhe Biomass Cogeneration Project
Biogas Power Generation Project in Longganhu, Huanggang city, Hubei Province
Gansu Guazhou Ganhekou North 48MW Wind Farm Project
Korea South-East Power Co. Renewable Energy Bundling Project
Huadian Erlianhaote Wind and Photovoltaic Power Generation Project
Luanjingtan Eco-immigrant Demonstration Area 10MW Grid-connected Solar Power Generation Project in Alashan of Inner Mo
Grid-connected electricity generation from 39 MW wind energy by GACL in Gujarat
Qinghai Huadian Geermu Solar Power Project
Diebu Lazikou III 5.7MW Hydropower Project in Gansu Province
Qian’an Tengzi B Wind farm Project
Qian’an Tengzi wind farm 2nd phase project
Jilin NonganYongan Wind Power Project
Hero Electric Vehicles, India
Ningxia Tongxin (Zhangjiayuan Xianyazi) Datang Wind Farm Project
Gansu Yumen Sanshilijingzi North No.2 48 MW Wind Power Project
Grid Interactive Solar Photovoltaic Power Project in Gujarat
EKO electric vehicles, India
Grid-connected electricity generation from 21 MW wind energy by GACL in Gujarat
Ningxia Tongxin (Magaozhuang Laijiawa) Datang Wind Farm Project
Pingwu County Si’erhe 1st Stage Hydropower Project
Datang Jingbian Renewable Power Co., Ltd. Yuanliangshan Wind Farm Project
Wind Energy Based Electricity Generation Project in Rajasthan
CECEP Zhangbei Danjinghe Phase II Wind Farm Project
Yunnan Funing County Langheng First Cascade Hydro Power Project
Hydro-based power generation project by New Asian Infrastructure Development Private Limited in Maharashtra, India
Qingcaosha Wind Power Project
Utilization of waste heat from Sulphur Recovery Unit to generate electricity
Fuerza y Energía Bii Hioxo Wind Farm
The Fourth Cascade Hydropower Project of Buguanhe River
Liaoning Xianrendao Wind Power Project
Bundled Wind Power Project in Tamil Nadu by KTV Power and Logistics Private Limited
Zhangbei Dahulun Wind Farm Phase I Project
Zhuzhou Cemented Carbide Factory Boiler System Retrofitting Project
Hengshui TEDA Gucheng Biomass-based Power Generation Project
Fujian Nanping Xiayang Hydropower Project
Waste Heat Recovery and Utilisation for Power Generation Project of Chizhou Conch Cement Company Limited
Inner Mongolia Hulunbeier Eerguna Hulutou 49.5MW Wind Power Project
Fujian Putian Nanridao Phase IV Wind Power Project
Jilin Tongyu Xinglongshan 1F Wind Power Project
Waste Coke Oven Gas Recovery and Reconstruction of Kilns in Loudi WUJO Industrial Co., Ltd
Golmud 200MW Grid-connected Solar Power Generation Project
Huong Son Hydropower Project
Guilin Chongkou Landfill Gas Recovery and Utilization Project
Aba Minjiang river Jiangseba Hydropower Project
Sichuan Wenchuan County Sanping Hydropower Project
Power generation from renewable sources – Arvoredo and Varginha Small Hydropower Plants
CGN Boshan Yueyangshan Wind Power Project
Dak Mi 3 Hydropower Project, Vietnam
El Guanaco Landfill Gas Utilization Project
Hami Tianrun Shisanjianfang Wind Farm Phase II 49.5MW Wind Project
Datang Changqing Phase II Wind Power Project
El Retamo Landfill Gas Utilization Project
Ba Thuoc 1 Hydropower Project
Daocheng County Jia Yi Long Ba Hydropower Project and Daocheng County Wang Zi Gou Hydroper Project Bundled Hydropow
Datang New Energy Lingao Offshore 6MW Experimental Wind Farm Project
EL PORVENIR I Wind Farm
Sichuan Tangbahe Hydropower Project
Karan Biofuel CDM project – Bioresidues briquettes supply for industrial steam production in Kenya
Kiran Energy Solar PV Project
Hunan Zhuzhou Sinoma Cement 9MW Waste heat Recovery Project
2 x 1.5 MW Wind Power Project by Alagar Jewellers
Wind Project in Gujarat by Surajbari Windfarm Development Pvt. Ltd
Wutuhe 25MW First-Level Hydropower Project in Guizhou Province China
BRT Metrobus 2-13, Mexico
Pure Low Temperature Waste Heat Power Generation Project of Weifang Sunnsy Cement Corporation Limited
Fujian JinJiang Jinjing Wind Power Project
Xinjiang Kumalake Xiaoshixia Hydropower Project
Huadian Xinjiang Hami Shisanjianfang First Phase 49.5MW Wind Power Project
Biomass based power project at Jammala Madugu, Andhra Pradesh
Wind Project by WFL in Tirunelvelli, Tamil Nadu
Ningxia JingnengTaiyangshan Grid-connected 10MWp Solar PV Power Generation Phase I Project
Kaixian Shengshan Small Hydro Power Project
Hunan Yuanling Yixi River Hydropower project
UCC RAK Waste Heat Recovery
Xixiang County Qujiangdong Hydropower Project
Shuozhou Tianhui Pinglu District Dashantai Phase II 49.5MW Wind Power Project
Huadian Sichuan E'gongbao Hydropower Project
Hubei Tianzhaihe Hydropower Project
Henan Nanzhao Solar Cooker Project
Grid connected renewable electricity generation project by SCCPL in Tamil Nadu, India
Maoming Dianbai Lingmen Wind Farm Project
Grid connected, combined cycle power project of capacity 374.57 MW at Gujarat, India
Hubei Longtanzui Hydropower Project
Fujian Yong’an Fenghai Hydropower Project
2.85 MW Bundled Wind Power Project by Manjeet Cotton, India
Xinjiang Hami Shisanjianfang Wind Farm Phase I 49.5MW Project
Inner Mongolia Tongliao Naimanqi Dongxing Fengying Yongxing Phase One Wind Farm 49.6MW Wind Power Generation Proje
Yunnan Pazhanghe phase I and Pazhanghe phase II Hydropower bundled project
Pingquan Biomass-based Power Generation Project
1.2 MW Biomass Gasification Power Generation Project in Vadodara District of Gujarat, India
Xinjiang Luneng Xiaocaohu Wind Farm Phase I 49.5MW Project
Yunnan Shilin County Zhiguoshan Wind Power Project
Avoidance of methane emissions from the wastewater treatment facility and renewable energy generation at Eiam E-San Ren
Shanxi Yanmenguan Wind Power Generation Technical Co. Ltd Dai County Wind Farm Project
K-water hydropower VIII
Chu Linh and Coc San Hydropower Project
Hebei Shangyi Longyuan Qilinshan Phase II Wind Power Project
K-water hydropower IX
Shanxi Shuozhou Pinglu Tianrui 199.5 MW Wind Power Project
Wujia coalmine power generation project
Yunnan Nanlonghe Hydropower Station Bundled Project (0 Stage and 2nd Stage Hydropower station)
Yunan Fumin Baihuashan Wind Power Project
Jiaohe Kaidi Biomass Power Project
Waste Heat Recovery and Utilisation for Power Generation Project of Guiding Conch Panjiang Cement Company Limited (Phas
Hunan Gaojiaba Hydropower Project
Jiangxi Le’an County Dong’an Small Hydropower Project
Sichuan Emeishan Foguang Cement Waste Heat Recovery Power Generation (12MW) Project
Project Lumut Balai Unit 3 – 4 PT. Pertamina Geothermal Energy
Daan Laifu Wind Farm Phase III Project
Daan Laifu Wind Farm Phase II Project
Gansu Jinchang Xitan Wind Farm Project
Gansu Yongchang Shuiquanzi Wind Farm Project
Shanxi Pinglu Baiyushan Wind Farm Project
Longli Wind Farm Phase I (Caoyuan) Project
Jiangxi Yudu Xiashan 35.1MW Hydropower Project
Saraff Biogas Wastewater Treatment and Biogas Utilisation Project
Bundled Grid Connected Wind power project by Maris Group
Sangara POME Methane Avoidance project_NBPOL-P2
1.65 MW Wind Power Project for the grid by SVS Projects Private Limited
Minqin Hongshagang Xianshuijing West 49.5MW Wind Power Project
Xinjiang Ye’er Qiang He Kaqun III Hydropower Station Project
Maoming Zhong’ao First Phase Wind Power Project
Fujian Xietan Hydropower Project
Huan County Nanqiu second phase 49.5MW wind farm project
Fujian Pingnan Yuanping 16MW Hydropower Expansion Project
Gunung Rajabasa Geothermal Power Plant
Huaneng Yumen Qiaowan NO.3 North Phase I 48 MW Wind Power Project
Guodian Weihai Shanmayu Wind Farm Project
CO2 Removal and Liquefaction from the H2 Production Plant in Campana, Argentina
Nam Hong Biogas Power Plant Project
Bundled Yeonggwang(II)-Yecheon PV (Photovoltaic) Power Plant Project in KHNP
Waste Heat Recovery and Utilisation for Power Generation Project of Guiyang Conch Panjiang Cement Company Limited (Phas
Sichuan Basigou 1st Level Hydropower Station
Sichuan Gaozhuoying Hydro Station
CGN Xiangshan Tuci Wind Power Project
Hubei Donggou Hydropower Project
Grid connected electricity generation from renewable source: Windfarm Complex União dos Ventos, Serveng Civilsan S.A.
Yunnan Diqing State Deqin County Xiangduohe First level Hydropower Project
Seoul PV (photovoltaic) Power Plant Project
Datang Zhaoyuan Jinling Wind Farm Phase I Project
Huaneng Zhenlai Mali Wind Farm Phase II Project
Song Bung 2 Hydropower project, Vietnam
Steam Generation Using Biomass
Guodian Huachuan Zhongfu Wind Farm Project
Changli Datan 48MW Wind Power Project
Grid connected solar PV power plant in Jodhpur, Rajasthan
Energy efficiency improvement of gas fired ceramic production kiln in Mexico
Datang Yan’an Renewable Power Co., Ltd. Ansai Wangjiawan Wind Farm Project
Yuecheng Coal Mine Methane Power Generation Project
Hui’an MSW Incineration Project
Xintian Hydropower Project
Bac Lieu Province Wind Power Plant
Yunnan Eryuan Fengle Wind Power Project
CGN Shagou Phase I Wind Power Project
Regenerative Burners for Melting Furnaces
Huadian Sichuan Mulihe Kajiwa Hydropower Project
Hanergy Ningxia Taiyangshan Phase I 20MWp Solar PV Power Generation Project
Fuan Hydropower Station
Hainan Dongfang Gaopai Phase I Wind Power Project
Yunnan Lishe River Dawan Hydropower Station
Huadian Sichuan Mulihe Lizhou Hydropower Project
Metro Line 12, Mexico City
N2O reduction project at Fertial’s nitric acid plant No. 2 at Annaba, Algeria
Guodian Zhaoyuan Xiadian Wind Farm Phase I Project
Shantou Chenghai Jieyuan Municipal Solid Waste Power Plant Project
Vale Florestar. Reforestation of degraded tropical land in Brazilian Amazon
Huadian Hebei Yuzhou Huanghualiang 49.5MW Wind Power Project
Huadian Guyuan Phase III 49.5MW Wind Farm Project
Zhenjiang Municipal Solid Waste Incineration for Power Generation project
Bundled Fly Ash Bricks Manufacturing Project
Longhui Kaidi Biomass Power Project
Querétaro landfill-gas-to-energy project
Guangxi Liuzhou Luzhai County Luoqingjiang Xi’an Hydropower Project
Dak Mek 3 Hydropower Project
Yunnan Jianchuan County Baishanmu Wind Power Project
Hancheng VAM Destruction Project
Sichuan Aba Municipality Wenchuan Caopo Hekou Hydro Project
N2O reduction project at Fertial’s nitric acid plant No. 1 at Annaba, Algeria
K-water hydropower VII
Chiang Rai solar PV project
Gansu Huadian Minqin 10MWp Solar PV Power Station Project
Beizhen Jiazishan Wind Power Project
Ta Thang Hydropower Project
Wind Energy Project in Gujarat
Zhongdiantou Tacheng Mayitasi Phase I 49.5MW Wind Power Project
GD Power & Shenzhou PV 10MW Bundled Solar PV Power Project
Danghe Upstream 3rd Cascade Hydropower Station Project
Zhongning Changshantou Wind Farm Tianrun Phase One 49.5MW Project
Yunnan Yongde County Manghaihe 6th and 7th Cascade Bundled Small Hydropower Project
Yunnan Yongde County Dedanghe 3rd Cascade Hydropower Project
Yunnan Wanjiakouzi Hydro Power Project
Huaneng Kangbao 49.5MW Wind Power Phase I Project
Wind power project in Madhya Pradesh, India
Inner Mongolia Tianrun Danaobao Wind Farm 49.5MW Project
Korea South-East Power Co. Yeongheung Wind Farm Project 22MW
Hangjin Yihewusu Phase I 49.5MW Wind Power Project
Shandong Dezhou Grid-connected 10MW Solar Power Generation Project
Yunnan Yongde County Manglinghe 2nd and 3rd Cascade Bundled Small Hydropower Project
Zhangbei Dahulun Phase II Wind Farm Project
Yunnan Dehong Yingjiang Nabang Hydropower Station
Leibo County Changhe Hydropower Station Project
Sichuan Da County Jiujietan Hydropower Project
Yuanmou Heimajing Wind Farm Project
SDIC Shizuishan Second Phase 20MWp Photovoltaic Power Generation Project
Baños V Hydroelectric Power Plant (BVHPPP)
Heilongjiang Dailingdongshan Wind Power Project
Fujian Putian Zhongmen Wind Power Project
Yunnan Jianchuan County Jinhua Wind Power Project
China Power Investment Corporation Ningxia Zhongwei Xiangshan Phase III Wind-farm Project
CEMEX Mexico: Biomass project at Tamuín cement plant
Southwestern Ruyang HN7 Household Biogas Project in Luoyang, Henan Province
Western Luanchuan HN8 Household Biogas Project in Luoyang, Henan Province
Sichuan Ganluo Lamodai Bundled Small Hydropower Project
Sichuan Ganluo Longgangzi Small Hydropower Project
Hubei Shiyan Longbeiwan Hydropower Station
Yiliang Baishuijiang Liuxi Hydropower Project
Bundled 9.00 MW wind power Generation project in Rajasthan, India by M/s. Gangadhar Narsingdas Agrawal Group
Xinjiang Longyuan Balikun Santanghu Wind Farm Phase I 49.5MW Windfarm Project
Datang Yumen Changma First (north) 48MW Wind Farm Project
Yingjiang County Mangmianhe Hydropower Project
Grid connected electricity generation using natural gas by Lanco Kondapalli Power Private Limited
10 MW solar power project by NKG Infrastructure Limited
Inner Mongolia Erdos 50MWp Groove Type Solar Thermal Project
19.5 MW Wind Power Project of NuPower Renewables Limited
Improvement in Energy Efficiency through Micro-Irrigation Systems (MIS) in cultivation of Banana Crop in Jalgaon, Dhule Nadu
Longli Wind Farm Phase II (Pingzi) Project
Yunnan Diqing State Deqin County Shibahe First level Hydropower Project
Raoping Haishan Wind Power Project
Sumber Jaya Indahnusa Coy Co-composting Project
Bagasse cogeneration project at Lam Son Sugar JSC
Jingneng Beijing Badaling Solar Power Pilot Project
Huaneng Tongjiang Jiangsheng Wind Farm Project
Huadian Ningxia Haiyuan Danangou 49.5MW Wind Power Project
Inner Mongolia Shangdu Phase I 49.5MW Wind Power Project
Heilongjiang Laobaishan Wind Power Project
Grid Connected Renewable Energy Generation by Asian Fabricx Private Limited
Xinjiang Longyuan Tacheng Laofengkou Wind Farm Phase I 49.5 MW Wind Power Project
Xinjiang Tongli Tagelake Stage I & II 17MW Hydropower Bundled Project
Yingjiang County Gulikahe Hydropower Project
Inner Mongolia Chifeng Anqing Biomass Cogeneration Project
Deqin County Cizhong River Hydropower Project
Three Gorges New Energy Geermu Power Generation CO., Ltd. Geermu 10MW Grid-connected Photovoltaic Power Generation
Uberlândia landfills I and II
Sichuan Xiaogouhe Shanping, Shuitanggou and Hongshuigou Bundled Hydropower Project
Yuqiaonanli and Zhumuchang District Heating Project
Wind Power Plants Seabra, Novo Horizonte and Macaúbas CDM Project
Wind Power Project Activity by Hindusthan Vidyut Products Limited
Renewable Energy Project in Mahuriya
Heilongjiang Huanan Changshoushan 49.5 MW Wind Power Project
Hunan Dongtan Hydropower Project
Waste water treatment and biogas recovery project
Guohua Dalaidong 49.5MW Wind Farm Project in Hulunbeier City
MOQUEGUA FV: 16 MW Solar Photovoltaic Power Plant
Bundled wind Project by Premier Mills, Pushpathur, Dindugal, Tamil Nadu
Hebei Zhangjiakou Kangbao Tunken 2nd Phase Wind Farm Project
Methane Recovery in Wastewater Treatment and Utilization for Electricity Generation at Saremas 1 Palm Oil Mill, Sarawak, M
Phase 1 Gunkul Powergen Solar Power Plant at Baan-Kluai
Biogas based power generation project at Jeongeup-si
Biomass based Co-generation plant at Birlagram, Nagda, Madhya Pradesh, India.
Saraff Energy EFB to electricity project
San Martin Hydroelectric Project
Zunhua Straw Power Generation Project
Tarabintang 2 x 5 MW Minihydro Power Plant
Lebu 1 Wind Farm Project
Kuitun River Stage VI Hydropower Station Project
Waste Heat Recovery for Power Generation Project in Tongling Shangfeng Cement Co., Ltd. (Phase II)
Calango and Caetité Wind Farms Complexes CDM Project Activity
Serra das Agulhas Small Hydropower Plant Project Activity
Grid connected 25 MW P V solar power project at Charanka in Gujarat
Luquan County Baishui River III Hydroelectric Project
Gongshan County Pula hydro power project
Advanced Wastewater Management at Rajburi Ethanol Plant
Jinghong Mengsong Hydropower Project
Jiangxi Xinfeng County Wuyang Hydropower Station
Shikun & Binui Renewable Energy PV Power Plants I
Xiwuqi Gaolihan 49.5MW Wind Power Project
Solar PV power project at Patan, India
Ningxia Zhongwei Xiangshan Wind-farm China Power Investment Corporation Fanjiazhai 49.5MW Project
Shankou Hydro Power Project
AWMS Methane Recovery Project in Tlaquiltenango Morelos
Sichuan Xuecheng Hydropower Project
A Roang Hydropower Project
Shikun & Binui Renewable Energy PV Power Plants II
Nakhon Ratchasima solar PV project
Waste Heat Recovery and Utilisation for Power Generation Project of Zongyang Conch Cement Company Limited
Pamona 2 Hydroelectric Power Plant Project
Guizhou Dushan Heishen River Cascade Hydropower Project
Pakthongchai Solar Project
Greenhouse Gas Emission Reductions Through Photovoltaic Technology - Dahanu Solar Power Pvt. Ltd.
Ningxia Tongxin (Magaozhuang Lixian Yazi) Datang Wind Farm Project
India-FaL-G Brick and Blocks Project No.4.
Sanhe Energy One Environmental Technology Co., Ltd Biogas Recovery and Utilization Project, Sanhe City, Hebei Province
Efficient Wood Fuel Stove-Cooking-Sets, Lesotho
Gucheng Heibaishuihe Tianshengqiao Hydro Project
Guizhou Yinlu First Stage (Yinwang) Hydropower Project
Longsheng Nanshan Wind Farm Phase I Project
HPP Ashta
Ngoi Hut 2 Hydro Power Project
Chang Raek Biomass Power Plant
Public buildings CDM bundling project in MAC
Methane Recovery and Utilization Project in Wastewater Treatment of Tangshan Sanyou Group Dongguang Pulp Co., Ltd.
Xueshangou Hydro Power Project
Da’an Haituo Wind Farm Phase I Project
Huadian 202.5MW Wind Power Project in Huitengxile, Inner Mongolia, P.R. China
Gansu Jingtai Shatangzi Wind Power Project
Ningxia Qingtongxia Jinggou Grid-connected Solar PV Power Generation Project
Hongxingqiao Hydropower Project in Yongsheng County
Guohua Rongcheng Phase V Wind Farm Project
Guodian Beipiao Taojiagou Wind Power Project
Guodian Laoting Daqinghe Wind Power Project
Shaanxi Baituling 49MW Hydropower Project
Wind Power Project in Lalpur, Gujarat
Beipiao Beisijiazi Wind Power Project
Jiulong Xigu Hydropower Project in Sichuan Province
Waste Heat Recovery and Utilisation for Power Generation Project of Fenyi Conch Cement Company Limited
Huadian Da’an Fengshuishan Phase II Wind Farm Project
Guohua Hekou (Phase II) Wind Farm Project
Los Cocos Wind Farm Project
Project of treatment and swine’s manure utilization at Ecobio Carbon – Swine Culture Nº 1
Shuangliao Lianhuashan Wind Farm First Phase
Guohua Shuangliao Lianhuashan Wind Farm Second Phase Project
Guajiru Wind Power Plant CDM Project
Fleixeiras I Wind Power Plant CDM Project
Trairi Wind Power Plant CDM Project
Natural Gas based grid connected power plant
Pengshui Kaidi Biomass Power Project
Sichuan Leibo Ledu Yiji Hydropower Project
San Antonio El Sitio Wind Power Project
Kaidi De’an Biomass Power Project
Qinghai Golmud Yixiantian 8MW Small Scale Hydropower Project
Gansu Yumen Sanshilijingzi South 32.5MW Large-scale Wind Turbine Shifan Wind Farm Project
Sichuan Ebian Bundled Small Hydropower Project
Porto do Delta Wind Power Plant CDM Project
Inner Mongolia Longyuan Manzhouli Gaoerzhen 49.5MW Wind Power Project
Luoyang Zhangluoping MSW Landfill Site LFG Recovery to Power Project
Mundaú Wind Power Plant CDM Project
SFPL Solar Power CDM Project
Kaidi Yongxin Biomass Power Project
Kailu Taipingzhao Wind Farm Project
Henan Fangcheng Wind Farm Project
HMIPL WIND POWER CDM PROJECT
Biomass based power generation project by Maharashtra Vidhyut Nigam Limited
Huadian Ningxia Haiyuan Daju 49.5MW Wind Power Project
Biopower Climate Care POME Biogas Capture and Utilization Project in Palong, Malaysia
Inner Mongolia Erdos Metallurgy Co., Ltd Electric Furnaces Waste Energy Utilization for Power Generation Project (Phase One)
Sichuan Province Li County Luganqiao Hydropower Project
Waste Heat Recovery and Utilisation for Power Generation Project of Shuangfeng Conch Cement Company Limited
K-water Water Pumping System Energy Efficiency Project
Yanchi Wind Farm (Da’Shui’Keng) Hanas Phase II Project
Ningxia Zhongwei Xiangshan Wind-farm China Power Investment Corporation Liujiashan 49.5MW Project
Jiangsu Haifeng Cattle Farm Biogas Utilization Project
Song Bung 4 Hydropower Project
Jilin Tongyu Xinglongshan 1B Wind Power Project
Yanchi Wind Farm (Ma’Huang’Shan) Master Phase II Project
Ryesonggang Hydropower Plant No.5, DPR Korea
Khanh Khe Hydro Power Project
12 MW Wind Mill Project of GSFC Ltd
Shaanxi Fengxian Guanritai Wind Power Project
Gansu Bailong River Suoertou Hydroelectric Project
Green Power Generation Project
Yunnan Daping Hydropower Project
Zhongdiantou Hami 20MW Grid-connected Solar Power Generation Project
Hubei Longganhu Wind Farm Project
Ckani Wind Farm Project
Lower Stung Russei Chrum Hydro-Electric Project
Qiqihaer Nianzishan Wind Power Project
Sichuan Kangding County Xiejiagou Hydro Project
Anhui Huaihua Co., Ltd. Nitric Acid (270 ktHNO3) Project
Datang Jixian Taiping Wind Power Project
Grid Connected Wind Power Project by M/s Giriraj Enterprises in Madhya Pradesh
Neixiang Baotianman Cement WHR project
1.6 MW Wind Power CDM Project by Protectron Electromech Pvt. Ltd
Huadian Beijing Miyun 20 MWp Photovoltaic Power Project
Nam Na 2 Hydropower Project
Xinjiang Dabancheng Phase I Wind Farm Project of Tianshan Electric Power Co., Ltd
Guodian Power Youyu Gaojiapu Phase II 49.5MW Windfarm Project
AzDRES Energy Efficiency Improvement
Guodian Shuozhou Haifeng Liujiayao 49.5MW Wind farm Project
Modelo del Callao Landfill Gas Capture and Flaring System
5.5MW Bundled Photovoltaic power generation project in KOWEPO
Tawau Geothermal Power Project
Energisa Rio Grande SHPPs
Shandong Yizhao 10MW Grid-connected Solar Power Generation Project
Zhejiang Lanxi Biomass Boilers Retrofit Project
Hoi Xuan Hydropower Plant, Vietnam
Avoidance of methane emissions by installing a Composting Facility at Madurai, India
Yanyuan County Taerdi Hydropower Project
Nanyang Danjiang River Solar Cooker Project Phase II
Huaneng Taobei Phase IV Wind Power Project
Anhui Longyuan Dagang Wind Power Project
Minqin Hongshagang Chenjiaqianjing Nanjing 49.5MW Wind Power Project
Gansu Jingtai Qianfeng Wind Power Project
Zhejiang Zhoushan Jintang Phase I Wind Power Project
Huadian Ningxia Haiyuan Xiajiayao 49.5MW Wind Power Project
Huaneng Tongjiang Linjiang Wind Farm Project
Qinghai Minhe Huangshuihe Xiakou Small Hydropower Project
Wind power project by iEnergy Wind Farms (Theni) Private Limited, Tamilnadu
Renewable Energy Project in the state of Madhya Pradesh
Shanxi Huadian Yanggao Nandingshan Windfarm 48MW Wind Power Project
Rajasthan Lighting Energy Efficiency Project (RLEEP) in 10 sub divisions of Jaipur City Circle of JVVNL, Rajasthan, Rajasthan, Ind
Liaoning Changtu Tianqiaoshan Wind Farm Project
Grid connected Wind Power Generation Project by PSW
Generation of Electrical Energy in SOL Coqueria by Process Heat Recovery
Yunnan Yingjiang Sashuihe Erji and Funing Qinghuadong Bundled Small Hydropower Project
Anning River Wa'nao Hydropower Station in Xichang City Liangshan Prefecture
1.65 MW wind energy project by M/s. Dollar Apparels
Yunnan Province Deqin County Chunduole Hydropower Station
Uttar Pradesh Lighting Energy Efficiency Project (ULEEP) in EDDI Bareilly, EDDII Bareilly, EDDI Badaun & EDD II Badaun Division
Jinju Landfill Gas Recovery and Power Generation CDM Project
Huaneng Shaanxi Jingbian Longzhou Phase II Wind Farm Project
Industrial Wastewater Methane Recovery Project of Bengbu Tushan Thermoelectricity Co., Ltd.
Liaoning Longyuan Kangping Shajintai Wind Power Project
Qinghai Gonghe 30MW Solar Power Project
Mohu 17MW Hydropower Project in Huaiji County Guangdong Province, China
Heilongjiang Jixian Taiyangshan Wind Power Project
Youyu and Pinglu Bundled Solar Power Project in Shanxi Province
Datang New Energy Wangtuan Phase One Wind Power Project
Ningxia Hongsipu Shibanquan Wind Power Guodian Phase I 49.5MW Project
Youyang Longjiaba Small Hydropower Project
Datang Tuquan Laoyeling Phase I Wind Farm Project
Guiyang County Tiantang Mountain 49.9 MW Wind Farm Project
Hebei Chongli Changchengling Wind Farm Project
Coke oven gas comprehensive utilization for co-generation project in Shandong Jikuang Morningsun Thermal Power Co., Ltd
Anhui Chizhou 25 MW Biomass Power Generation Project
Inner Mongolia Ximeng Huitengliang Area B Phase III Wind Power Project
Xinjiang Xinhua Buerqin Wind Farm Project
Gansu Dunhuang Energy saving modification Project from surplus heat utilization of sodium sulfide furnace of Xiyu mining che
Guangdong Xinyi Qianpai Wind Power Project
Yuxian Dongxinghe 49.5MW Wind Power Project
Waste Heat Recovery and Utilisation for Power Generation Project of Shimen Conch Cement Company Limited
Shuangliao Xiushui Phase I Wind Farm Project
Datang Kezuohouqi Hariwusu 49.5MW Wind Farm Project
Santa Cruz III Hydroelectric Power Plant
Sichuan Shanhugou 6.4MW Small Hydropower Project
Henan Fugo Biomass Cogeneration Project
Sichuan Huaneng Feixianguan Hydropower Project
Genaohe Hydropower Project
Hunan Huitong Changzhai Hydropower Project
Heilongjiang Yilan Jiguanlazishan Wind Farm Project
CANELA II WIND FARM PROJECT
Bin County Ventilation Air Methane Project
Sichuan Ningnan 16MW Yibu River Stage V Hydropower Project
Solar Power Project by Clover Solar Private Limited
Qianshan Jiujinggang 20MW Hydropower Project
Hubei Fang County Sanliping Hydropower Project
CGN Menghai Padingliangzi Wind Farm Project
Putian Houhai Wind Power Phase II Project
Yunnan Lincang Nanpeng River Dayakou Hydropower Project
Anhui Guozhen Pacific Power Co. Ltd. Biomass Power and Heat Retrofit Project
Inner Mongolia Tuquan Tianyuan Phase I Wind Farm Project
Bundled Grid Connected Zero Emission Wind Power Generation in Tamilnadu
Panzhihua CDQ waste heat recovery project at Panzhihua Panmei Combined Coking Co., Ltd
MEGABUS, Pereira, Colombia
Kuitun River Stage 10 Hydropower Project & Kuitun River 2# Hydropower Project Bundled Project
10MW Photovoltaic Plant in Dubai, UAE
Wind power project in Maharashtra, India – Andhra Lake Phase - I
1.5 MW Wind Power Project in Rajasthan
Bionersis LFG Project Chile 4 (Los Angeles)
Tough Stuff Solar Panel and Lamp Sales Madagascar Project
Methane Recovery and Utilization Project in Liaoyuan City Jufeng Biochemistry Science and Technology Co., Ltd.
Yuxian Lihuajian 49.5MW Wind Power Project
Tianmen Kaidi Biomass Power Project
Mao County Mutuo Hydropower Project
Huadian Ningxia Haiyuan Ganganliang 49.5MW Wind Power Project
Guohua Rongcheng Phase IV Wind Farm Project
Yiliang County Xionggou Small Hydropower Project
Wind energy based electricity generation project located at Manur and Vakaikulam, Tirunelveli district, Tamilnadu, India
CGN Ningan Laoyeling Wind Power Project
La Ngau Hydropower Project
Huaneng Yunnan Eryuan Dalongtan Wind Farm Project
CGN Linkou Qingshan Wind Power Project
Shanxi Guangling Diandingshan Phase II Wind Farm Project
Ningxia Ningdong Wind Farm (Lingwu Shagou) Datang Angli 49.5 MW Project
Huadian Heilongjiang Tangyuan Qushou Wind Farm Project
Jilin Qian’an Shuizi Wind Farm Phase I Project
Liaoning Longyuan Kangping Xiguan Wind Power Project
Ningxia Tongxin Datang New Energy Phase I Wind Farm Project
Jilin Meihekou Biomass Cogeneration Project
Guohua Jiaonan Wind Power Generation First Phase Project
Ningxia Tongxin (Zhangjiayuan) Wind Farm Project
Textile Offshore Site Dominicana Biomass Residues Cogeneration Project (TOS-2RIOS)
Yunnan Shuijing Hydropower Project
Hebei Cangzhou Municipal Solid Waste Incineration Project
Grid connected wind Power Project in Jodhpur, Rajasthan
Sambalpur CFL distribution project, Orissa, India
5 MWp bundled solar power project in Gujarat
Wind based power generation by ZF Steering Gear (India) Limited in Maharashtra, India
Siping Shanmen Phase II Wind Power Project
Guazhou Daliang North 47.5 MW large scale wind turbine wind farm project
Datang Yumen Changma First (east) 48MW Wind Farm Project
Dubai CFL Project
Methane Recovery and Utilisation at PT. Agrowiratama Palm Oil Mill, Pasaman Barat, Padang, West Sumatra, Indonesia
Methane Recovery and Utilisation at Batang Kulim Palm Oil Mill at Sorek, Riau, Sumatra, Indonesia.
Jilin Tongyu Xinglongshan 1C Wind Power Project
Fuchuan Longtou Wind Farm Phase I Project
Jinping County Qiaocaiping 2nd and 3rd Cascade Hydropower Station Bundled Project
Huadian Xuwen Huangtang Wind Power Project
Sichuan Jiuzhaigou County Majia Hydropower Station Project
Wulatehouqi Huogeqi Windfarm First Stage 49.5MW Project
Sichuan Jiuzhaigou County Songbai Hydropower Station Project
Vinh Son 3 Hydro Power Project
Wind Energy Project in Saundatti, Karnataka
Macedonian Small Hydro Power Plants bundle
Bizerte Wind Farm Project
Improving Kiln Efficiency in the Brick Making Industry in Bangladesh (Bundle-2)
Guazhou Daliang East 47.5 MW large scale wind turbine wind farm project
Nam Toong Hydro Power Project
8.25 MW Wind Power Project in Revangaon, Maharashtra
Guangxi Jindong Hydropower Project
Zhaoyuan Xinlong Shunde Wind Farm Project
Shangyi Hanjiazhuang Wind Power project phase I
Ningxia Zhongwei 30MW grid-connected photovoltaic power generation Project
Yunnan Puer Mengyejiang Hydro Power Project
14.4 MW Grid Connected Wind Power Project of Vaibhavlaxmi Clean Energy in Madhya Pradesh and Tamil Nadu, India
Methane Recovery and Utilisation at PT. Sukajadi Sawit Mekar Palm Oil Mill, Kalimantan Tengah,Indonesia
Huadian Yunnan Lijiang Ninglang Maoniuping 49.5 MW Wind Power Project
Xinjiang Huaneng Toksun Baiyanghe Phase II Wind Power Project
Yunnan Dandahe Hydro-electricity Project
Linkou Shengli Wind Farm Project
Heilongjiang Yilan Jiguanshan Phase II Wind Farm Project
Dak Glun 2 and 3 Hydropower Plants, Vietnam
Compost from Municipal Solid Waste in Peshawar, Pakistan
Hunan Huashun Wind Farm Project
Huaneng Tongliao Nugusitai Jingguan Wind Farm Project
Diadema Wind Farm project
Shangqiu MSW Landfill site LFG Recovery to power project
Huaneng Tongliao Kezuohouqi Halunhuduga Wind Farm Project
Guohua Shangyi Kangleng Phase I Wind Farm Project
Yichang Huangjiawan MSW Landfill site LFG Recovery to power project
Huaneng Yunnan Eryuan Ganhaizi Wind Farm Project
Jiangxi Laoyemiao Wind Farm Project
Ezhou MSW Landfill site LFG Recovery to power project
Huadian Inner Mongolia Meiguiying Phase II 200MW Wind Farm Project
Linli Kaidi Biomass Power Project
Datang Jia County Yunyang Wind Farm Project
Pao Cu Sang Hydropower Plant, Vietnam
Bao Nhai Hydropower Project, Vietnam
Nam Tha 3 Hydropower Project
Huadian Xuwen Qianshan Wind Power Project
Chifeng Ongniud Banner Wufendi Wind Power Project
Yanchi Dashuikeng Wind-farm Yinyi Phase II 49.5MW Project
Yuhuan MSW Incineration for Power Project
Yinxing Zhongning Dazhanchang Phase II Windfarm Project
Ningxia Hongsipu Wind Farm Jiaze Phase II Project
NEPG Qingtongxia Niushoushan Phase I Windfarm Project
Grid Connected Solar PV Plant in Rajasthan
Yanchi Dashuikeng Wind-farm Yinyi Phase I 49.5MW Project
Huadian Hebei Kangbao Chuzhangdi First Phase 49.5MW Wind Power Project
Chaoyang Hydropower Project in Yongsheng County
Methane Recovery and Utilisation at PT. Maju Aneka Sawit Palm Oil Mill, Kalimantan Tengah,
Perdana Methane Capture Project
Zhongdiantou Hetian 20MW Grid-connected Solar Power Generation Project
NEPG Qingtongxia Niushoushan Phase II Windfarm Project
China Resources New Energy Lianzhou Yanxi 49.8MW Wind Power Project
Sichuan Niangyong Hydropower Project
Zhongdiantou Tulufan 20MW Grid-connected Solar Power Generation Project
Henan Tanghe Solar Cooker Project
Combined cycle natural gas based grid connected power plant at Jegurupadu, India
Chacayes Hydroelectric Project, Chile
4.2 MW Wind Bundled Power Project in Rajasthan
To Buong Hydropower Plant, Vietnam
Nuevo Imperial Hydropower Plant
Luoning Biomass Cogeneration Project
Qingshui River Dahuashui Hydropower Station
Grid connected solar PV power plant in Kutchh district of Gujarat
Sichuan Leibo Weiziping-Sanwangpo Hydropower Project
Dak Mi 2 Hydropower Project
Guangdong Xuwen Dengloujiao 49.5MW Wind Farm Project
Gansu Zhangye 10MW Solar Power Project
Huaneng Shanxi Yuanping Duanjiapu Wind Farm Project
Huadian Inner Mongolia Keqi Wutaohai Phase I Wind farm Project
Ahome Landfill Gas Project.
Xinyang Dabie Mountain Wind Power Project
Ningxia Taiyangshan Wind Farm Jingneng Second Phase 49.5MW Project
Inner-Mongolia Xingan League Keyouzhongqi Emuting Gaole 49.5MW Wind Farm Phase I
10 MW Biomass based Power plant in Punjab, India
Cakra Methane Capture Project
Coke Dry Quenching Waste Heat Recovery for 50MW Power Generation Project in Guangxi Liuzhou Iron and Steel (Group) Com
Jingneng Inner Mongolia Keyou Zhongqi First Phase 49.5MW Wind Power Project
Ibirama Small Hydropower Plant – a Brennand CDM Project Activity.
Ouro Small Hydropower Plant – Brennand CDM Project Activity
Huadian Laizhou Jincheng First Phase 48 MW Wind Power Project
Solar Photovoltaic Power Plant in Andhra Pradesh
Taijiying Wind Farm Project
Sichuan Muchuan County Huogu Hydropower Project
Huaneng Shandong Yishui Mazhan Phase I Wind Power Project
Longhai Longjiao Wind Farm Project
Bundled Landfill Gas Recovery Project in Indonesia
Xinyang Tianmu Mountain Wind Power Project
Wind power project at Landewadi by SIIL
Henan Jiaozuo Yanxin Cement 4.5+7.5MW WHR Project
Chengdu Xiangfu Municipal Solid Waste Incineration for Power Generation Project
Hunan Chenzhou Xiangdian Luhejin 48MW Wind Power Project
Sichuan Mianning Damawu Hydropower Project
Wind Power Project in Tinwari, Rajasthan
Henan Sheqi Solar Cooker Project
Daegu Metro 3th Urban Railroad
Runatullo III Hydroelectric Power Plant
Incheon Metro Line 2
Intermunicipal Matamoros-Torreón Landfill Gas Project
Fujian Jinniu Waste Heat Recovery Project
Yuanyang County Yangxi River 3rd Cascade Hydropower Station Project
Xuan'en County Guanyinping Hydropower Project
García Landfill Gas Project
Busan Metro Line 1 Dadae
Huaneng Guizhou Hezhang Jiucaiping Phase II Wind Farm Project
CGN Anqiu Chengdingshan Wind Farm Project
Huaneng Tongliao Kezuozhongqi Dagula Wind Farm Project
LCC Cement Blending CDM Project
Huaneng Gansu Qiaowan Sanbei Wind Farm Project
Inner Mongolia Wuliji Phase II Wind Power Project
Changshan Nanfang Cement 18MW Waste Heat Recovery Project
Xiamen Western Municipal Solid Waste Incineration Project
Runatullo II Hydroelectric Power Plant
Wantian Coal Mine CMM and VAM Utilization Project
Shandong Kaitai Biomass Cogeneration Project
Bionersis LFG Project Malaysia (Penang)
Huaneng Fubei Liangguanyingzi Wind Farm Project
Huaneng Daqing Xinli Wind Farm Project
Ningxia Ningdong Lingwu Phase II Wind Power Project
Ningbo Yinzhou Landfill Gas Recovery and Utilization Project
Jilin Tongyu Xinfa A Wind Power Project
Shaanxi Fanshigou Phase II Wind Power Project
Huaneng Daqing Wukeshu Wind Farm Project
Lanzhou Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) Project
Huaneng Daqing Aobao Wind Farm Project
Huaneng Daqing Heping Wind Farm Project
Madinah Landfill Gas Capture Project
Yilan Jiaxinshan Wind Power Project
Wang Phloeng Solar Power Plant Project
6 MW wind power project in Gujarat by GPCL
Jilin Tongyu Xinglongshan 1A Wind Power Project
Hebei Lingda Municipal Solid Waste Incineration Project
Sichuan Shuoquhe Quxue Hydropower Project
Methane Recovery and Utilisation at Musim Mas Group Palm Oil Mill at PT. Berkat Sawit Sejati, Musi Banyuasin, Palembang, S
Nam Cau 1,2 Hydropower Project
Inner Mongolia Chifeng Changhangou Wind Power Project
Hainan Nansheng Bundled Small Hydropower Project
Fujian Hui’an Xiaozuo Wind Power Project
Gansu Guazhou Qiaowan Second Phase Wind Farm Project
Chancay Hydroelectric Power Plant
Huaneng Tieling Pingdingpu Wind Farm Project
Ryesonggang Hydropower Plant No.4, DPR Korea
Anyang Guangyuan Energy Biomass Power Generation Project
Tashiding Hydroelectric Project
Fujian Lianjiang Beijiao Wind Power Project
Solar Power Project by SunBorne Energy Gujarat One Private Limited
Guohua Rongcheng Phase III Wind Farm Project
Yanchi Wind Farm (Hui’an’pu) Hanas Phase II Project
Manzhouli Shenneng North Lingquan Windfarm Project
PT Fajar Surya Wisesa Tbk Waste Incineration Plant
Jiangsu Dafeng 20MW Solar Power Project
Liangshan Paomaping Hydropower Project
Hebei Bodeyulong Phase Three 49.5 MW Wind Farm
Hebei Bodeyulong Phase Four 49.5MW Wind Farm
Datang Dongping Wind Power Project
Guohua Guangrao Wind Farm Project (phase I)
6 MW bundled grid connected Solar Power project at Katol and Bareilly, India
Datang Pingdu Xinhe Wind Farm Project
Guohua Dongying Guangrao Wind Farm Second Phase Project
CGR Guatapara Landfill Project
20 MW Capacity Biomass based Power Project of M/s. SHALIVAHANA GREEN ENERGY LIMITED
Cu Chi Municipal Solid Waste (MSW) Treatment Plant in Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam Project
Sichuan Luxihe Hydropower Project
Kaiyang 15100 Rural Methane Digesters Project in Guizhou Province, China
Wind Power Project of Hindustan Platinum in Maharashtra
Maju Intan Biomass Energy Power Plant Project
Korat S.W. Group 2007 Wastewater Treatment and Biogas Utilization Project
Yunnan Leiyingshan Wind Power Project
Sichuan Mianning Tuoluohe I and Tuoluohe II Bundled Hydropower Project
Guodian Shanxi Jingle Suopo Wind Power Project
32 MW Baishui River Shiji Hydropower Station Project
CECEP Gansu Yumen Changma Daba North Wind Farm Project
„Reduction of N2O emissions from the new nitric acid plant #5 of Hu-Chems Fine Chemical Corp.“
Dawalong Hydropower Project
CECEP Gansu Yumen Changma Daba South Wind Farm Project
Zhengdou Hydropower Project
Yunnan Tengchong Xiaotianhe Small Hydropower Project
Yunnan Puxiqiao Hydropower Project
Datang Delingha Renewable Power Co., Ltd. Delingha 10MW Grid-connected Photovoltaic Power Project
Heilongjiang Heihe Daheishan Wind Power Project
Nam Non Hydropower Project
Ningxia Jingneng Lingwu Baitugang Wind Farm Project
7.5 MW Wind Project by ACC Limited in Rajasthan
Inner Mongolia Damao Banner Mandula Nuoer Wind Power Project
Ganluo Aga Hydropower Project
Huaneng Shuangyang Biomass Power Plant Project
Yunnan Eryuan Qilongshan Wind Power Project
Installation of solar projects totalling 31.25MW Suphanburi and Nakhonpatom Provinces, Thailand
Linhai MSW Incineration for Power Project
Jiangsu Guoxin Dongling 48MW Windfarm Phase II Project
Paekdusan Songun Youth 14 MW Hydropower Project No.2
Huaneng Yunnan Eryuan Huangcaopo Wind Farm Project
Inner Mongolia Jingneng Wengongwula Wind Farm Project
Kumya Hydropower Plant
Jinxing 24MW Hydropower Project in Minhe County of Qinghai Province, China
Jeram landfill gas recovery project
Shuangfeng Kaidi Biomass Power Project
Chayuan First Cascade Hydroelectric Project
Fengdu Kaidi Biomass Power Project
Tongliao Jianhua Erhao 300MW Wind Farm Project
Sichuan Da County Mutou Hydropower Project
Laifeng Kaidi Biomass Power Project
Yanchi Wind Farm (Hui’an’pu) Master Phase II Project
Clean energy generation from wind energy in the state of Rajasthan.
Hebei Huafeng Coking Gas Recovery for Power Generation Project
LFG project in Nigeria
3 MW (2* 1.5 MW) Bundled Wind Power Project at Rajasthan
Xinjiang Dabancheng Wind Farm Phase I Project
CECEP Urumqi Tuoli200MW Wind Farm Phase II 49.5 MW Wind Power Project
10 MW Biomass based Power Plant at Narsimhapur, Madhya Pradesh
Jinkai Group Dual Pressure Line 1 N2O Abatement Project
Ningbo Wanhua Nitric Acid Unit Phase I Project
Qinghai Delingha Gahai Wind Power phase I Project
Sichuan Zhaojue County Bundled Hydro Project
Waste Heat Recovery Power Plant in PT. Semen Padang, Indonesia
Jinkai Group Dual Pressure Line 2 N2O Abatement Project
Providencia Hydroelectric Plant
Solar PV Power Project in Kutch District of Gujarat
Xinjiang Kashi River Taledesayi Hydropower Project
Xinjiang Kashi River Salikete Hydropower Project
Hunan Sangzhi Mishuihe Hydropower Project
10 MW Solar PV Power Project by Azure Power
Xinjiang Kashi River Nileke First Stage Hydropower Project
Song Giang 2 Hydro Power Project
Electricity generation through wind power project at Jaora-MP & Tenkasi-TN
60 MW Kinangop Wind Park Project
Chongyang Kaidi Biomass Power Project
Muong Sang, Thu Cuc, Tat Ngoang Hydropower Project
Wind Power Project at Satara in Maharashtra, India
Gu’ertu River Cascade Stage IV 20MW Hydropower Project
Youyang Xishakou Small Hydropower Project
Heilongjiang Keshanshuguang Wind Power Project
Dahe Solar Power Project
Huaneng Tongliao Kailu Jianhua Wind Farm Project
Solar power project in Gujarat by APCA Power
Huaneng Wujiangyuan Baicaoping Wind Farm Project
Lu-ding Hydroelectric Project
Yunnan Kunming Shilin Solar Photovoltaic Power Generation Project
Dongduguo'er Hydropower Project
Xinjiang Ili Yamadu Hydropower Station
Masan Biomass Boiler Project
MSW Incineration for 24MW Energy Generation Project in Anqing City, Anhui Province
Wind Project Activity by Cape Electric Corporation
Korea Midland Power Co. Photovoltaic power generation Bundling Project
Dak Lo Hydropower Project
Huadian Inner Mongolia Guyang Hongnijing Phase II Wind Farm Project
Sai Sulphonates Wind Mill Project in Tamil Nadu
Zagunao River Shiziping 195MW Hydropower Project in Sichuan Province
Bundled Wind Power Project at Theni
01 million Compact Fluorescent Lamps (EVN-2010) Project in Vietnam
Xining Aiyuan Landfill Gas Recovery and Power Generation Project
Inner Mongolia China Water Group Huade Sitaifangzi Wind Farm 49.5MW Project
Huaneng Dali Wuzipo Phase I Wind Power Project
Bantargebang Landfill Gas Management & Power Generation
Huaneng Wujiangyuan Haizhu Wind Farm Project
Fuxin Shijingao Wind Farm Project
Youyang Xiaoxianjing Small Hydropower Project
3.6 MW renewable energy based power generation in Rajasthan, India
1.50 MW Wind Power Project by JC Retail India Pvt. Ltd. Pune Maharashtra, India
GD Power Chuanshan 45MW Wind Power Project
4.275MW Small Scale Bundle Wind Energy Project by M/s Biotech Vision Care Pvt.Ltd. & Dr. Arun Mehra in Tamilnadu, India
Nam Mo Hydropower Project
Wind Power Project- Enking International (CDM.DEC-09-01)
Liaoning Faku 2nd Phase Wind Power Project
Tongliao Zhaluteqi Arikunduleng 49.5 MW Wind Farm Project
Inner Mongolia Zhaluteqi Arikunduleng 49.5MW Wind Farm Project
Pine Ridge Landfill Gas to Energy Project
Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) in Guatemala City
Sichuan Leibo Ledu Erji Hydropower Project
Xiaodongliang Wind Farm Project
Mengjialiang Wind Farm Project
SHPs Albano Machado and Rio dos Índios CDM Project (JUN1115)
Hubei Duhe Pankou Hydropower Plant
Trung Ho & Van Ho Hydropower Project
Mengkete Hydropower Project
Xinyang Jigong Mountain Wind Power Project
Guodian Weifang Binhai Wind Farm Phase I Project
Xinyang Huangbai Mountain Wind Power Project
Yunnan Binchuan County Qinshui River Xintian Hydropower Project
Lushi Yajiuhe 4.8MW Hydropower Project
Huadian Guyuan Yueliangshan 49.5MW Wind Power Project Phase I
Hubei Province Fang County Fanjiaya Hydropower Project
Xiahe Anshun 15MW Hydropower Project
Datang Jilin Datong 49.5 MW Windfarm Project
CGN Shangchuandao Fenshuiling Wind Power Project
Nairobi River Basin Biogas Project
Liuzhi 3.2MW Hydro Power Project in Guizhou Province, China
Installation of Natural gas based combined cooling heating and power (CCHP) systems in DLF Silokhera in Gurgaon, India
Wind power project by Sterling Agro Industries Ltd.
Biomass based Steam Generation at Machhar Polymer Pvt. Limited, Dist-Baroda, (Gujarat), India
Yunnan Province Yao’an County Meijiashan Wind Farm Project
Ningxia Tongxin Windfarm Jiaze Tianjialing 49.5MW Wind Power Project
Baner Sangam small hydro power project
Gansu Shulehe Qingyanggou Hydropower Station Project
Grid connected wind power project in India by SRB Consultancy Pvt. Ltd
Huaneng Zhanjiang Nansan (Haifeng) Wind Power Project
Shannipo Hydropower Project on Beipan River in Guizhou Province
Guizhou Zunyi Landfill Gas Recovery and Utilization Project
Inner Mongolia Kezuohouqi Huadeng 49.5MW Wind Farm Project
Sable Chemicals Tertiary N2O Abatement Project in Zimbabwe
Wind power project by HIL at Gujarat, India
Municipal Solid Waste Anaerobic Digestion with Gas Collection and Power Generation Project in Jiaonan City, P.R. China
SDIC Baiyin Jiancaitang Second Phase 49.5MW Wind Power Project
Huaneng Inner Mongolia Chenbaerhuqi Daliang Wind Farm Project
REFORESTATION OF DEGRADED/DEGRADING LAND IN THE CARIBBEAN SAVANNAH OF COLOMBIA
Biomass Energy Plant at Prolific Yield
Nam Luc Hydro Power project
Liaoning Datang International Wafangdian Antai Wind Farm Project
Ha Tay Hydropower Project
3.3 MW Bundled Wind power project at Theni, Tamilnadu
BIPPL small scale renewable energy project
Liaoning Datang International Changtu Hongshan Wind Farm Project
Heishan Yangtun Wind Power Project
Heishan Fangshan Wind Power Project
Huaneng Yangjiang Dongping Wind Power Project
Wind Energy Project in Harapanahalli, Karnataka
Huaneng Yangjiang Xinzhou Wind Power Project
8 MW OGPL Chipa power plant
Huaneng Yi County Laolongkou Wind Power Project
Huaneng Tongliao Baolongshan Phase IV Wind Farm Project
Ganluo County Dazi Hydropower Station Project
Sichuan Ya'an Dajinping Hydro Project
Hunan Huitong Gaoyi Hydropower Project
Huaneng Wuchuan Houwantu Wind Farm Project
Sichuan Niri River Yutian Hydropower Project
Jiepaihe Cascade I and Yaocun Cascade I Bundled Small Hydropower Project
Shuangyashan Laopinggang Wind Power Project
Zhejiang Tangcun 32MW Hydropower Project
Ningxia Hongsipu Wind Power Plant Jiaze Fourth Phase 49.5MW Project
Shuangyashan Guokuishan Wind Power Project
Inner Mongolia Chifeng Yangshugou Wind Power Project
Shuangyashan Yangmugang Wind Power Project
CGN Beipiao Changgao Wind Power Project
Meigu County Silipin Hydropower Project
Yanwa 24MW Hydropower Project, Yunnan Province, China
Ningxia Hongsipu Wind Power Plant Jiaze Third Phase 49.5MW Project
Huaneng Geermu Phase II Solar Power Generation Project
Biomass based Power Project in West Bengal
3.3 MW Wind Power Project in India
GHG abatement project through wind based energy generation, in Kutch, Gujarat
EOLO Wind Power Project
BRASCARBON Methane Recovery Project BCA-BRA-15.
Yunnan Gongguoqiao Hydropower Project
Gansu Yumen Yueliangwan Second Cascade Hydropower Station Project
Datang Ningxia Ningdong (Baitugang Town Changliushui) Wind Farm Project
Guohua Dongying Hekou Phase IV Wind Farm Project
Yunnan Honghe County Yongxing II 5MW Hydro Power Project
Linjiang Erqi MSW Incineration for Power Project
Datang Ningxia Ningdong (Baitugang Town Leshuigou) Wind Farm Project
Grid Connected Wind Power Project by M/s. D. J. Malpani at Ratan Ka Bas (RKB), Rajasthan
Yunnan Wanmahe River First Cascade Hydropower Project
Yunnan Province Yao’an County Jianshanliangzi Wind Farm Project
Qinghai Golmud Phase II Solar Power Project
Ningxia Tongxin Windfarm Jiaze Kangjiawan 49.5MW Wind power Project
La Arena Small Hydro, Chile
Fujian Zhaokou Hydropower Project
Guodian Penglai Hushan Phase I Wind Farm Project
China Resources Juxian Donghong Phase I Wind Power Project
Ulan Tsab Siziwang Banner 40MWp PV Generation CDM Project
Wind Power Project Activity by M/s Orient Abrasives Ltd
Huadian Zhoushan Xiaosha 30MW Wind Farm Project
Dingbian Zhangjiashan Wind Farm Phase I Project
Tuokexun Wind Farm Phase I Project
Gansu Jingtai Xingquan Localization Wind Power Project
Shanxi Shenchi Huanghuamu Wind Power Project
Heilongjiang Heihe Xiaoheishan Wind Power Project
Laogang Landfill Gas Recovery and Utilization Project
Leizhou Dongli 49.5MW Wind Power Project
Methane Recovery and Utilization Project of Liaoning Mingsheng Paper Co., Ltd.
BRASCARBON Methane Recovery Project BCA-BRA-14.
BRASCARBON Methane Recovery Project BCA-BRA-13
Shaanxi Chenggu Shuangxi Small Hydropower Project
1.5 MW Dharampal Satyapal Sons Pvt. Ltd. Wind Project at Jaisalmer, Rajasthan 2010
Anhui Huangshan Lishiting Landfill Gas Collection and Utilization Project
Sungai Rek Mini Hydro, Kuala Krai, Kelantan, Malaysia
Yunnan Langgeluohe Hydropower Project
Ningxia Diantou Taiyangshan Phase I 10MWp Solar Photovoltaic Power Project
Xoong Con Hydropower Project
20.8 MW Grid connected wind electricity generation project at Dhule, Maharashtra
Fuqing MSW Incineration Project
Shenzhen Nantian LNG Power Generation Project
Nam La Hydro Electric Power Project, Vietnam
Sichuan Huadian Xixi River Hydro-electricity Development Co.,Ltd. Lianbu Hydroelectric Project
Inner Mongolia Bayanur Wuliji 49.5MW Wind Power Project Phase II
Ningxia Hongsibao Windfarm Jiaze Qingshan 49.5MW Wind Power Project
Los Santos Wind Power Project
Huaneng Fuxi Zhalanshan Wind Farm Project
Alin B1 Hydropower Project
Guodian Wulian Yuli Wind Power Phase I Project
Huaneng Inner Mongolia Manzhouli Donghu Wind Farm Project
Ishasha 6.6 MW Small Hydropower Project
Jiangsu Kunshan Phase II Municipal Solid Waste Incineration for Power Generation Project
Guodian Juxian Wind Power Phase I Project
Jilin Tongyu Xinglongshan 2C Wind Power Project
Ningxia Zhongning Changshantou Wind Farm CGN Dazhanchang 49.5MW Wind Power Project
Hainan Lingao Solar Project
Shanxi Tianzhen Daliangshan Wind Farm Phase I Project
Huadian Tieling Lijiatun Wind Farm Project
Puebla Landfill Gas to Energy Project
Yantai Runfeng Zhuangzi Wind Farm Project
Sichuan Ya’an Shuijinguan Hydropower Station Project
Anren Kaidi Biomass Power Project
Datang Changqing Phase I Wind Power Project
Guohua Chicheng Mayinggushan Wind Farm Project
Abag banner Huiteng Liang Wind Farm Phase I 49.5MW CDM Project
15 MW Solar Photovoltaic Power Plant in Gujarat
Solar Power Project in Gujarat, India by Waa Solar Private Limited
Shaanxi Huaneng Jingbian Wind Power Project
Avoided methane emission through aerobic composting at Vietstar municipal solid waste treatment facility
Datang Pingyin Phase II Wind Power Project
Yangchun City Fengyuan Starch Factory Methane Recovery Project
Xinping County Yaweihe Hydropower Project
Methane Recovery and Utilization Project of Meihekou City Haishan Paper Industry Co., Ltd.
Kapiura POME methane capture project
Farm Household Biogas Project Contributing to Rural Development in Can Tho City
Dingbian Zhangjiashan Wind Farm Phase II Project
Sichuan Aba Heishui Bundled Hydropower Station Project
Funing County District Heating Project
Norte III.C landfill – Methane recovery and power generation project
Ganluo Wagujiao Hydropower Project
Huaneng Shanghai Chongming Qianwei Phase II Wind Farm Project
Datang Changyi Phase I Wind Farm Project
Solar Photovoltaic based Power Plant, India
CEMEX Dominicana: Alternative fuels and biomass project at San Pedro Cement Plant
Beizhen City Wufeng Rice Trade Processing Co., Ltd. 10MW Biomass (Rice Husk) Power Plant Project
Gansu Taolaihe Sandaowan Hydropower Project
NMDC wind power project
Solar Power project by Sai Sudhir Energy Limited
CGN Luoding Yapoji Wind Power Project
Guohua Dongying Hekou Phase III Wind Farm Project
Tra Xom Hydropower Project
CGN Xinxing Wind Power Project
Dong Nai 5 Hydropower Project
Guohua Shangyi Beishileng Phase I Wind Farm Project
Gansu Dunhuang 10MWP Photovoltaic Power Generation Project
Datang Kazuo Gongyingzi Wind Power Project
Uttar Pradesh Lighting Energy Efficiency Project (ULEEP) in EDDI Raibareili, EDDII Raibareili Divisions, Lucknow Zone, Uttar Prad
N2O reduction project at the nitric acid plant of Global Ispat Koksna Industrija d.o.o. Lukavac (“Gikil”), Bosnia.
Huaneng Shanxi Ningwu Dongmafang Phase II Wind Farm Project
Xeset II Hydropower Project
Israel Ports Landfill Project
12 MW Wind Electricity Generation Farm at Radhapuram by M/s Surana Industries Limited
Xinjiang Longyuan Habahe Sa'ertamu Phase I 49.5MW Wind Power Project
Heilongjiang Xiaobaishan Wind Power Project
Inner Mongolia Chifeng Gangzi Wind Power Project
Proposed 4.2 MW wind power project
Ningxia Tongxin Magaozhuang Wind Power Project
Huaneng Tongyu Xinhua 1D Wind Farm Project
Huaneng Tongyu Xinhua 1E Wind Farm Project
Huaneng Tongyu Xinhua 1F Wind Farm Project
Municipal Solid Waste Incineration Project in Jingzhou City
Heilongjiang Huangtuanling Wind Power Project
UTE 10 MW Grid Connected Wind Power Farm at Caracoles Hill
Henan Nanjie Biomass Cogeneration Project
KSEPA 2.6MW PV power plants bundle CDM project
Hulunbuir City Zhaluomude Wind Farm Datang 49.5 MW Wind Power Project
Zhangbei Wudengshan Wind Farm Phase II Project
Xiwu Banner Bayanwula 49.5MW Wind Power Project
Datang Qiubei Yangxiongshan Wind Power Project
Shanghai Chongming Beiyan Wind Power Project
Henan Yuxi Yanshan Wind Power Project
Nelson Mandela Bay Metropolitan’s Landfill Gas Project
PTT Green Energy Waste Water Treatment System Project
Baiyang Hydropower Project in Songpan, Sichuan
Shanxi Shuocheng Limin First Phase Wind Power Project
Shanxi Lingqiu Baicaowan 49.5 MW Wind Power Project
Fuel Switch, process improvement and energy efficiency initiatives at brick manufacturing plant in Golan, Gujarat, India
Project Lumut Balai Unit 1 – 2 PT. Pertamina Geothermal Energy
La Glorita Landfill Gas Project
Biomass based Cogeneration unit at Co-operative Sugar mills in Fazilka, Punjab, India
Huasahuasi I and II Hydroelectric Power Plant
Sichuan Province Yingxiongpo 56MW Hydropower Project
Sichuan Wusheng County Xiuguan Hydropower Project
Nam An Hydropower Project
Biomass based Cogeneration unit at Co-operative Sugar mills in Morinda, Punjab, India
Ningxia Tongxin Wind Power Project
Da M’Bri Hydropower Project
Buseruka Mini Hydro Power Plant
Song Mien 5 Hydropower Project
Beas Mini Hydroelectric Project
4 MW Wind Power Project by Varun Industries Ltd. in Tamil Nadu, India
Dashiqiao Central Heating Project
Nanling Kaidi Biomass Power Project
1.50 MW Wind Power Project at Mahuriya, Madhya Pradesh, India
12.0 MW Biomass based power plant project at Baghaura, Punjab, India.
Heilongjiang Xingkaihu Fengmishan Wind Farm Project
Ningxia Hongsipu Wind Farm Jiaze Phase I Project
Heilongjiang Yunwushan Wind Power Project
Tianchang Gaoyouhu Wind Farm Project
Tianjin Dagang Wind Farm Phase 2 49.5MW Project
Huaneng Siping Xinfeng Phase II Wind Farm Project
Huaneng Siping Xinfeng Phase IV Wind Farm Project
Huaneng Wujiangyuan Dafa Wind Farm Project
Hamhung Hydropower Plant No.1
Chongqing Qijiang Zhutan Hydropower Project
Shandong Qixia Tangshan Wind Farm Project
8.4 MW Wind Power Project in Rajasthan, India
Heilongjiang Mishan Linchang Liumao Wind Farm Project
Guodian Tulufan Daheyan Wind Farm Phase I 49.5 MW Wind Power Project
Electricity generation from renewable sources - Windfarms Santa Clara I, Santa Clara II, Santa Clara III, Santa Clara IV, Santa Cla
Oaxaca IV Wind Energy Project
Project Ulubelu Unit 3 – 4 PT. Pertamina Geothermal Energy
Datang Ningxia Taiyangshan Phase III Wind Farm Project
Wind power project in Tirunelveli, Tamil Nadu by TVS Energy Limited
Sichuan Ningnan 6.4MW Yibu River Stage IV Small-scale Hydropower Project
Wind Power Project by Ushdev International Limited in Tamil Nadu
Yesanhe Hydropower Project of Jianshi County, Hubei Province
Liaoning Fuxin Houzhatai Wind Farm Project
Luopoba 30MW Hydropower Project in Hubei Province
Dalian Tuoshan Wind Power Project
Amman Ghabawi Landfill Gas to Energy Project
Inner Mongolia Chifeng Xidaliang Wind Power Project
Wuhan Jiangbei West (Xingou) Municipal Solid Waste (MSW) Power Generation Project
Guizhou Weining Mabaidashan Wind Power Project
AWMS METHANE RECOVERY PROJECT C5 – RECOVERY, CAPTURE AND FLARING OF METHANE FROM MANURE TREATMENT
India-FaL-G Brick and Blocks Project No.3
Jilin Taonan Xinli 49.5MW Wind Power Project Phase II
Yunnan Zhenyuan County Yuhe Hydropower Project
Yongkang MSW Incineration for Power Project
Henan Province Ye County Matoushan Wind Power Plant
Inner Mongolia Donghao Wind Farm Phase I Project
Dakdrinh Hydropower Project
Yunnan Luosongchang Class-I Small Hydropower Project
Tianjin Longyuan Dagang Phase II Wind Power Project
Technological Renovation Project to Utilize the Waste Resources from the Waste Water Treatment Facilities in Ningbo Wanlon
Inner Mongolia Jingneng Huitengxile Wind Farm Phase II Project
Jianping Shiyingzi Wind Power Project
Yunnan Youfanggou Hydropower Project
Sichuan Jiulong County Taka Hydropower Project
Sichuan Xiaojin Mupo Hydropower Project
Mabian County Heizu Hydropower Project
Yunnan Luxi Donghua Wind Power Project
Yunnan Luxi Dongshan Wind Power Project
CTL Landfill Gas Project
3 MW Grid connected Wind Electricity Generation at Tirunelveli District, Tamil Nadu, India
Huadian Gansu Akesai Dangjinshan First Phase 49.5MW Wind Power Project
Henan Taiyangshi 5MW Cement Waste Heat Recovery Project
Zhongyu Fangzheng County Gaoleng Wind Power Project
CGN Minqin Hongshagang Xianshuijing Wind Power Project
Yingkou EDZ District Heating Project
Chenergy Fangzheng County Hutieling Wind Power Project
SAMS Wind Project
Shaanxi Fanshigou Wind Power Project
Zhenxiong County Tongping Hydropower Project
Liaoning Guben Wind Power Project
Nam Lik 1-2 Hydropower Project
Ningxia Ningdong Lingwu Wind Power Project
Fumin Mayingshan 40.5MW Wind Power Project
Sichuan Jiulong County Longxigou Second Stage Hydropower Station Project
Sichuan Mabian Small-scale Hydropower Bundled Project
Changbai County Baoquan Small-scale Hydro Power Project of Jilin Province
Sichuan Yuexi Wayan I 5MW & Wayan II 3.2 MW Small-scale Hydro Power Bundled Project
La Mora Hydroelectric Project
Fuqing Jiaru Wind Power Phase II Project
Heilongjiang Dongning Dajiazishan and Xidagang Wind Farm Project
Nanyang Danjiang River Solar Cooker Project Phase I
SDIC Qinghai Golmud 30MWP (Phase II) Photovoltaic Power Generation Project
Sichuan Huadian Xixi River Hydro-electricity Development Co., Ltd. Luogu Hydroelectric Project
Yangang Hydropower Station Project in Muli County
Nam Chim Hydro Power Project
Suoi Trang Hydropower Plant, Vietnam
Renewable wind energy generation in Maharashtra by EMCO Limited
Eiamrungruang Waste Water Treatment and Biogas Utilization Project
Huaneng Wujiangyuan Zu ''anshan Wind Farm Project
Nho Que 3 Hydropower Project
Yunnan Province Deqin County Sancha River Phase I Hydropower Project
Huachuan (daqingbeishan) Wind Power Project
K-water small hydro power plant project (V)
Yunnan Province Deqin County Sancha River Phase II Hydropower Project
Omnia N2O Abatement Project II
Small Hydro Power Project by Kurmi Energy Private Limited
Solar PV power project at Bikaner, India
Shanxi Shenchi Nanhuashan Wind Power Project
EA Solar Farm at Lopburi, Thailand
Fujian Wutong Hydropower Project
Heilongjiang Yilan Hezuolinchang Phase II Wind Power Project
Fujian Qingfeng Wind Power Project
Jiangsu Dafeng Wind Power Project
Jilin Tumen Mopanshan 16 MW Hydro Power Project
Zagunao River Gucheng Hydropower Project in Sichuan Province
Hunan Yuanshui Taoyuan Hydropower Station
Guohua Fuyu Youyi North Wind Farm Project
Jiangxi Yudu Yuezhou Hydropower Project
Datang Ningxia Taiyangshan Phase II Wind Farm Project
China Resources Weichang Yudaokou Baihuapo 49.5 MW Wind Power Project
Caquende and Juliões Small Hydroelectric Power Plants
Yunnan Dali Tiechuanqiao Hydro Power Project
Baishi Wind-farm Project
Shaanxi Didonghe 8MW Hydro Power Project
Huadian Inner Mongolia Naiman Banner First Phase 49.5MW Wind Power Project
Datang New Energy Chayouhouqi Hanwula Wind Farm Project
Shandong Taipingshan Wind Farm Project
Cerro de Hula Wind Project
Guizhou Weining Xiliangshan Wind Power Project
Datang Kazuo Shuangmiao Wind Farm Project
5 MW Dunali Run-of-the-river, Small Hydro Electric Project”, Chamba district, Himachal Pradesh by M/s Jala Shakti Limited (JSL
Fujian Fuqing Gaoshan Phase II Wind Power Project
Xinjiang Awati Biomass Power Generation Project
Shandong Yangxin Jinyuan Biomass Cogeneration Project
Inner Mongolia Huitong Energy Zhuozi Bayinxile Wind Farm Project
Qian’an Wangxin Caizi Town Windfarm Project Phase I
Bajo Frío Hydro Power Project
Zhongdiantou Dalian Tuoshan Wind Farm Project
Lintao County Anjiaju Hydroelectric Project
Guohua Tongliao Kezuozhongqi Housijing Wind Farm Project
Huadian Ningxia Ningdong Phase 4 49.5MW Wind Farm Project
Hubei Enshi Baoshan Hydropower Plant and Hetaowan Hydropower Plant Bundled Hydropower Project
1.5 MW wind power project of Nirmal B. Thakkar H.U.F. at Rajasthan, India
Suibin Jicheng Wind Farm Project
Longxin Yiji and Erji Bundled Hydropower Project in Shaanxi Province
Yunnan Chahe 3rd Level Hydropower Project
Henan Biyang Zhongtian Wind Power Project
Sichuan Keguang 2nd Level Small Hydropower Project
Fuxin Kaidi Tailama Dongshan Wind Power Project
Power generation from bundled wind energy project in Gujarat, India
Grid connected 3MWp Solar PV power plant in Belgum District of Karnataka State, India
9.75 MW wind power project in Southern India
Datang Jiaonan Liuwang Phase I Wind Farm Project
Datang Huayin Nanshan Wind Power Project
Datang Jiaonan Liuwang Phase II Wind Power Project
Rukti-II (5 MW) Small Hydro Electric Project
Huachuan (Baoshan) Wind Power Project
Guohua Chicheng Motianling Wind Farm Project
Guodian Shanxi Pinglubeishan Phase I Wind Power Project
Leluasa Biomas Steam Plant in Lahad Datu, Sabah, Malaysia
Wind power project in Jaisalmer, Rajasthan by Centaur Mercantile Pvt. Ltd.
Guodian Shanxi Youyu Caojiashan Phase II Wind Power Project
Waste Energy Recovery Project at PEMEX TMDB
Dakrong 3 Hydropower Project
Zhangjiakou City Qiaoxi District Heating Project
Sichuan Toudaoqiao 10MW Hydropower Project of China
Huaneng Erwenkeqi Huihe Wind Farm Project
Heilongjiang Yilan Fuqiang Wind Power Project
CDM Project SHP Santa Carolina
Guohua Guyuan Xiaoerhao Wind Farm Project
Nam Cat Hydropower Plant, Vietnam
Sichuan Sanchahe River First Cascade & Second Cascade Bundled Hydropower Project of China
CGN Qinghai Xitieshan Phase II 30MWp Grid-connected Solar PV Power Generation Project
Anhui Zhongguangyuan Cement 9MW Waste Heat Recovery Project
Ningxia Yanchi Qingshan Wind power Guodian Phase I 49.5MW Project
Lang Bang Hydropower Project
Cepco Wind Power Project in Gujarat
Yunnan Fengchunling 3rd Level Small Hydropower Project
Liaoning Fuxin Qianzhatai Wind Farm Project
Nam Mo 3 Hydro Power Project, Vietnam
Huaneng Erwenkeqi Yiminsumu Wind Farm Project
Biomass based Cogeneration unit at Co-operative Sugar mills in Nakodar, Punjab, India
Sichuan Leshan Ebian Jinyan Hydro Power Project
Jiyuan MSW Landfill Site LFG Recovery to Power Project
China Resources Haiyang Dongfang Phase I Wind Power Project
Hydroelectric Project in Kinnaur District in Himachal Pradesh
Shandong Longjoin Zhaoyuan Wind Farm Phase I Project
Inner Mongolia China Water Group Huade Niujiafangzi Wind Farm 49.5MW Project
China Resources New Energy Lufeng Chengmei Wind Farm Project
Inner Mongolia Erenhot 49.5MW Wind Farm Phase I Project
Shanxi Hunyuan Mimazongliang Phase II Wind Power Project
Kalasin Wastewater Treatment to Energy Project
Shanxi Hunyuan Mimazongliang Phase I Wind Power Project
Baltra Wind Project in the Galapagos
Ferrosilicon waste heat power generation project
Anning River Canyon Wind Farm (Phase I) Project in Dechang County Sichuan Province
VG Energy's Waste to Power at Vichitbhan Palmoil Co., Ltd.
Xiamen Eastern Municipal Solid Waste Incineration Project
Datang Qingyuan Phase II Wind Power Project
Inner Mongolia Xing’an League KeyouqianQi Wind Power Project
Kulun Banner Eleshun Nanliangshaoruo Wind Power Project
Jiangxi Leping Mining Administration Low Concentration CMM Utilization Project
CGN Jilin Daan Laifu Wind Farm Phase I Project
13.75 MW Grid connected “Wind Electricity generation Project by Tamilnadu Newsprints and Papers Limited”
Luni, Iqu and Neogal Small Hydro Power Projects in Kangra District of Himachal Pradesh, India
Rubberflex Biogas Plant, Pahang
Rhodia Nuoc Trong Biogas Capture & Utilization Project, Vietnam
Sunan bundled small hydropower project in Gansu Province
Chengbu County Laozhai Hydropower Project
MASISA Biomass Power Project
Heilongjiang Wanyuan Biomass Cogeneration Project
Pampeana and Terra Santa Small Hydropower Plants Project Activity
Palo Viejo Hydroelectric Project
Pure-low Temperature Waste Heat Recovery for Power Generation (4.5MW) in Zhejiang Yunshi Cement Co., Ltd. of Zhaoshan
Yunnan Zhilehe the 2nd and 3rd cascade Hydro Power Bundle Project
Fatima N2O Abatement Project
Putian Shijing Phase II Wind Farm Project
Thai Sritong Power Generation Project
Sichuan Heishui Deshiwo Erji 20.6MW Hydro Power Project
CGN Yunnan Mouding Wind Power Project
Salkhit Wind Farm
Jiada Coal Mine CMM and VAM Utilization Project
Mare Chicose Landfill Gas Project
Inner Mongolia Ximeng Huitengliang Area A Phase II Wind Power Project
Inner Mongolia Ximeng Huitengliang Area A Phase I Wind Power Project
Nam Cat Hydropower Project
Grid Connected Wind Energy Generation at Andhra Pradesh.
Quilvio Cabrera Wind Farm Project
Dak Srong 3B Hydropower Project.
Malong River 3# Hydropower Project
Guohua Guyuan Pandaogou Wind Farm Project
Shandong Zhaoyuan Xiadian First Phase Wind Power Project
Mengyin County Solar Cooker Project
Oaxaca II Wind Energy Project
Shandong Muping Wind Farm Phase I Project
Switch from Single Cycle to Combined Cycle (CC) CDM Project at Jahrom Power Plant
Zhangbei Wudengshan Wind Farm Phase I Project
Huaneng Shandong Penglai Daliuhang Wind Power Phase I Project
2 * 1.5 MW + 0.60 MW Bundled Wind Power CDM Project in Tamil Nadu, India
Huaneng Shandong Rushan Wind Farm Phase II and Phase III bundle Project
Sichuan Dafan Hydropower Project
Switch from Single Cycle to Combined Cycle (CC) CDM Project at Shirvan Power Plant
El General Hydroelectric Project
Switch from Single Cycle to Combined Cycle (CC) CDM Project at Sanandaj Power Plant
Zhangjiakou Qiaodong District Heating Project
Dakrosa2 Hydropower Project
Qingyuan County Longjing Hydroelectric Power Plant Project
PT Dalle Energy Batam CCGT conversion project, Indonesia
Hangzhou II Landfill Gas Power Generation Project
Tuppadahalli Wind Energy Project
Jiangsu Dongtai Phase II Wind Power Project
Everbright Zhenjiang Bundled Solar PV Power Generation Project
Istmeño Wind Farm
Heilongjiang Jiamusi Jianshan Wind Farm Project
Adani Enterprises Limited Solar PV Power Project in Gujarat, India
ZOOMLION GHANA LTD Composting of Municipal Solid Waste in Accra area
Wind Power Project in Rajasthan, India by M/s Devki Builders Pvt. Ltd.
Baoji Lingyuan Landfill Gas Recovery and Utilization Project
Heilongjiang Yilan Chenguang Wind Power Project
Huolinhe Dongshan Wind Farm Project
Inner Mongolia Hohhot Dayuanshan Wind Power Project
Luquan County Jiangbian Hydropower Project
Inner Mongolia China Water Group Huade Cheliwusu Wind Farm 49.5MW Project
Inner Mongolia China Water Group Huade Erligetu Wind Farm 49.5MW Project
Methane Recovery and Utilization Project of Shandong Richeast Biotechnology Co., Ltd. in Wastewater Treatment
Sichuan Mianning Changxing Hydropower Station Project
Oceanium mangrove restoration project
Yichun xiaochengshan wind power Project
Datang Haipai Donggang Wind Power Project
Datang Keyouzhongqi Naimanpu and Haoyao Wind Farm Project
Dinh Hai rice husk cogeneration project
Zhuzhou Landfill Site LFG to Power Generation Project
Everbright Suqian & Huaining Bundled Solar PV Power Generation Project
Sichuan Xiangcheng Mayi River Second Dieshui Hydropower Project
Grid-connected Electricity Generation from Biomass at Buayai Bio Power.
Inner Mongolia China Water Group Huade Niujiacun Wind Farm 49.5MW Project
Jinhanlazha hydropower station (58MW) of Niru River, Yunnan Province, P.R.China
Zhoushan MSW Incineration Power Generation Project
3MWp Grid Connected Solar Power Project at Yalesandra Village, Kolar District, Karnataka, India
Song Bung 5 Hydropower Project
Wastewater Treatment and Methane Recovery at Green Field Joint Stock Company
Inner Mongolia China Water Group Huade Heping Wind Farm 49.5MW Project
Guoshuitou Diaobingshan Quanyangou Wind Power Project
Yugong River 24MW Hydropower Project
Renewable Wind Power generation for promoting energy security
Hebei Zhangbei Xishungou Wind Farm Project
Shanxi Wulushan 3rd phase Wind Power Project
CGN Xinjiang Tacheng Mayitasi Phase I Wind Farm Project
Emission reductions through partial substitution of fossil fuels with alternative fuels at PT Semen Tonasa
Henan Dengzhou Biomass cogeneration Project
Beiliu Kaidi Biomass Power Project
Heilongjiang Mudanjiang Xiaoguokui Wind Power Project
Da Dang 2 Hydropower Project
Shanghai Lingang New City Wind Power Project
BRT Metroplus Medellin, Columbia
Taohe Shangchuan Hydropower Project
PANAMERICANA SOLAR 20 TS: 20 MW Solar Photovoltaic Power Plant
MIO Cali, Colombia
Fumeng Gulibengao Wind Farm Project
Fumin Dafengyakou 33MW Wind Power Project
Huadian Inner Mongolia Tongliao Kailu Jieji Wind Farm Project
Jiexiu City Guotai Green Energy Co., Ltd Biomass Power Generation Project in Shanxi Province
Huadian Guyuan Yueliangshan Second Phase 49.5MW Wind Power Project
Oaxaca III Wind Energy Project
Orissa Lighting Energy Efficiency Project (OLEEP) in Nuapada & Kalahandi District Orissa, India
Wind power project by TVS Energy Limited in Theni, Tamil Nadu
Datang Qixia Zangjiazhuang Garden Wind Farm Project
Methane Recovery Project of Tiancheng Corn Development Co., Ltd.
CGN Inner Mongolia Wuliji Phase II Wind Farm Project
China Resources Weichang Yudaokou Yangbaishun 49.5 MW Wind Power Project
CGN Liaoning Paoya Dabeishan Wind Power Project
2.75 MW Wind Power Project at Marudhar Fashions.
Leak reduction in above ground gas distribution system in the gas distribution networks in Khorezm region and the Republic o
CGN Inner Mongolia Suniteyouqi Phase 3 Windfarm Project
3 MW wind project by Shah Foils
Hunan Daxing Small Hydropower Project
Sichuan Keguang 1st Level Hydropower Project
Ningxia Taiyangshan Phase I Wind Farm Project
Utilization of LCV (Low Calorific Value) waste gas for energy generation project at Chanderiya, Rajasthan
Aberdare Range/ Mt. Kenya Small Scale Reforestation Initiative Kibaranyeki Small Scale A/R Project
Biogas y Energía - Methane recovery & power generation from oil mill plant effluents
Heilongjiang Hailin Weihushan Wind Power Project
Guizhou Pan County Yingwudashan Small-scale Hydro Power Project
Heilongjiang Huanan Hengdaishan East (II) Wind Power Project
Gas-Steam Combined Cycle Power Plant (CCPP) Project of Laiwu Iron & Steel Group Corp.
20 MW Xuzhou Xiexin Photovoltaic Solar Power Plant
Hubei Shiyan Zhuxi Baishahe Hydropower Station
Ningxia Shizuishan 10MW PV (Photovoltaic) Plant Project
Ningxia Power Investment Group Taiyangshan Phase I Wind-farm Project
Yunnan Langmushan Phase I Wind Power Project
Ziyang county Bamiaoliang and Xiaguantian Bundle small hydropower project in Shaanxi Province
Taiba N’diaye Wind Energy project, Senegal
Fujian Zhangping Huakou Hydropower Plant
Lintan Qingshishan Hydropower Station Expansion Project
CGN Dunhuang 10MW Grid-connected Solar PV Power Generation Project
Grid Connected Wind Power Project by M/s. Giriraj Enterprises at Tejuva, Rajasthan
Renewable Energy Wind Power Project in Rajasthan
Shanxi Shuozhou Pinglu Dashantai Wind Farm Project (Phase I)
Jiangsu Huadian Guanyun Wind Farm Project
AES Saurashtra Windfarms
Nanhai MSW Incineration II Project
Xieka Hydropower Project in Jiulong County
Low Temperature Waste Heat Generating Project of Zaozhuang Sunnsy Cement Corporation Limited
Use of agricultural waste instead of coal in our proposed boiler in Narol – Vatva Road, Ahmedabad, Gujarat, India
Yunnan Lincang Qianxin Small Hydropower Project
Hunan Changsha Qiaoyi Landfill Gas Recovery and Electricity Generation Project
Global Sun Israel Solar PV Power Plant in Ketura
Purmacana Hydroelectric Power Plant
Huaneng Tuokexun Baiyanghe Third Stage 49.5MW Wind Farm
Sichuan Yuexi County Tuanjie Hydropower Project
Guohua Wulate Houqi Saiwusu Phase I Wind Farm Project
10 MW Biomass Power Project by Shalivahana (Biomass) Power Projects Limited
Kangbao Zhaoyanghe Wind Farm Project
Sichuan Langzhong City Baoning Hydropower Project
Gansu Jinta Photovoltaic Power Project
Inner Mongolia Datang International Hongmu Phase II Wind Farm Project
Ayer Hitam landfill gas recovery project
Orissa Lighting Energy Efficiency Project (OLEEP) in Bolangir & Titilagarh Divisions,Orissa, India
CGN Ningxia Qingtongxia Phase I 10MWp Grid-connected Solar PV Power Generation Project
Shenneng North Keyouqianqi Phase I Wind Farm Project
Chongqing Wuxi Yushan 4.8MW Hydro Power Project
Clean Energy generation from wind energy in the state of Andhra Pradesh.
1 MW Sirindhorn Solar Cell, Thailand
Laiyuan Huanghualiang Windpower Project
Hunan Taojiang Baizhuzhou Hydroelectric Project
Ia Grai 1 Hydropower Project
Eshan Wind Power Project in Haiyang city Shandong province, China
Sunan Baiquanmen I&II Bundle Small Hydropower Project in Gansu Province
Laiyuan Dongtuanbao Windpower Project
CGN Jilin Sipingshanmen Wind Farm Phase I Project
23.1 MW Wind power project in Telagi, Karnataka
Hunan Xupu Zhuxijiang 10 MW Hydro Power Project
Malong River 2# Hydropower Project
Guohua Tongliao Kezuozhongqi Qiansijing Wind Farm Project
4.95 MW Bundled Wind Power Project in Theni, Tamilnadu, India
Sihui Junma Cement Waste Heat Recovery Project
8.3 MW Wind Electricity Generation Project by Parakh Agro Industries Limited in Dhule, Maharashtra
Guangxi Yulin Darongshan 25.5MW Wind Power Project
Zhenxiong County Pingzi Hydropower Project
Bundled Wind Project Activity by Sri Venkateswara Pipes Limited and Sri KPR Infra and Projects Limited
Fil-Am Foods Inc. (FFI) Methane Recovery and Electricity Generation Project
Ta Loi 3 Hydropower Project
Yunxi Cascade Hydropower Project in Chun’an
Beizhen Yangjiadian Wind Power Project
Liaoning Tieling Taizishan Wind Power Project
Biogas Project at MH Bio-Ethanol Distillery, Cambodia
Advanced swine manure treatment for the Huasco Valley Agroindustry
Tianshui Kaidi Biomass Power Project
Mashan Wastewater Treatment Project
Inner Mongolia China Water Group Huade Sandaogou Wind Farm 49.5MW Project
Heilongjiang Dabaishan Wind Power Project
Yunnan Jiduhe Cascade IV Hydropower Project
Inner Mongolia Chifeng Wenggenshan 49.5MW Wind Farm Project
Ningxia Shizuishan 10MWP Photovoltaic Power Generation Project
7 MW Hydel Based Power Unit on River Jatashankari, Chhattisgarh
Gansu Heihe Baopinghe Hydropower Project
1.6 MW Bundled Rice Husk Based Cogeneration Plant by M/s Milkfood Limited in Patiala (Punjab) & Moradabad (U.P) Districts
Grid Connected Wind Power Project by M/s. D. J. Malpani in Rajasthan
Galiuhe Yiji and Erji Bundled Hydropower Project in Sichuan Province
10 MW Biomass based Power Plant by Sanjog Sugars & Eco-Power Private Limited
Nhan Hac and Sao Va Hydropower Project
Mianning County Longjiagou Hydropower Project
Al-Sindian 13 MW Natural Gas based Cogeneration Package Project.
Ninglang County Shenjiacun Hydro Power Project
Datang Anzishan Wind Power Project
BRT Macrobus Guadalajara, Mexico
Ningxia Qingshan Windpower Guodian Phase II 49.5MW Project
Shanxi Huairen Chaigou Coal Mine Ventilation Air Methane Destruction Project
Inner Mongolia Helin 49.5 MW Wind Power Project
Anyang Tanggou MSW landfill site LFG recovery to power project
Jiaozuo Zhouliu MSW Landfill site LFG Recovery to power project
Shandong Wulian Dongfeng Phase I Wind Power Project
Khao Kor wind farm project
Shandong Dongxing Wind Farm Phase II Project
CGN Qinghai Xitieshan Phase I 10MW Grid-connected Solar PV Power Generation Project
Fujian Shanghang Jiantou 9.8 MW hydropower Station Project
Mashad landfill gas to energy project
Manzhouli Shenneng North Windfarm Project
Dongkeng Bundled Small Hydropower Project in Longquan
Cachoeirao CDM Project (JUN1092)
The Colomba-Guabal Landfill Gas Project
Guizhou Jinqiao Coal Mine CMM Utilization Project
Inner Mongolia Datang International Zhuozi phase IV wind farm project
Shaanxi Caoshanliang Wind Power Project
Guizhou Huidong Hydropower Project
Manzhouli Shennengyuan Windfarm Project
7.5 MW Biomass Based Power Plant
3 MW Hydro Power Project by Oreva Energy Pvt. Ltd
Yunnan Yingjiang Xiangbai River Lushan Hydropower Station
Guangdong Yudean Xuwen Yongshi 49.5MW Wind Power Project in Zhanjiang City, Guangdong Province
10 MW Biomass based power Plant at Pollachi,Coimbatore district, Tamil Nadu
Sunan Baiquanmen III&IV Bundle Small Hydropower Project in Gansu Province
Heilongjiang Wangyunfeng Wind Power Project
Wulate Zhongqi Chuanjing Wind Farm Project
Yunnan Baoshan Baihuashu Hydropower Bundled Project
Wind Farm Kosava I+II
Heilongjiang Huachuan Sujiadian Wind Power Project
TACNA SOLAR 20 TS: 20 MW Solar Photovoltaic Power Plant
Song Bung 6 Hydropower Project
Yunnan Baoshan Dengke Hydropower Project
Liaoning Jianping Longgang Wind Power Project
China Power Investment Corporation Ningxia Zhongwei Xiangshan Phase II Wind-farm Project
Wind Farm Plandiste 1
TV Daklak Wastewater Treatment and Methane Recovery Project
Yunnan Shidi River 1st Level 30MW Hydropower Project
Shandong Yishui Tangwangshan Wind Farm Project
CDM Project of Pig-Raising Base Methane Recovery and Utilization in Jinxian of Jiangxi Province
Gansu Mingjiazhuang Hydropower Project of China
Inner Mongolia Wutaohai South Phase II Wind Power Project
Wind based power project in Maharashtra by Siddhayu Ayurvedic Research Foundation Pvt. Ltd.
Sichuan Jinchuan Taiyang River 21MW Hydropower Project
Jilin Daan Honggangzi Wind Power Project
Mpererwe Landfill Gas Project
Guodian UPC Kangping Haoguan 49.5 MW Wind Farm Liaoning
Waste Heat Recovery and Utilization for Power Generation at Lucky Cement Limited Pezu Plant
Accion Fraterna Biogas CDM project for rural communities in Anantapur, Andhra Pradesh
Jilin Da'an Dagangzi Wind Power Project Phase V
Changge Hengguang Biomass Power Generation Project
China Resources Penglai Daxindian Wind Power Project Phase I
Sichuan Hongqiba Small Hydropower Project
Dak Sin 1 Hydropower Project
Grid Connected Bundled Wind Power Project in Jaisalmer, Rajasthan, India
Guangxi Changtang Hydropower Project
Reduction of Methane Leakages in the Gas Distribution Networks operated by the company JP Serbiagas
Ordos Future Resource Biomass Cogeneration Project
Shandong Wendeng Zhangjiachan Wind Farm Project
Sichuan Keguang 3rd Level Hydropower Project
CLP Penglai Wind Power Phase I Project
Huaneng Geermu Solar Power Generation Project
Wind Power Project by National Enterprises at Tamil Nadu, India
Huaneng International Huade Daditaihong Wind Power Farm Phase II 49.5 MW Project
CECIC Inner Mongolia Wulanchabu Xinghe Phase I Wind Farm Project
Anhui Laian Longtougang Wind Power Project
Huadian Gansu Jiayuguan 10MWp Grid-connected Photovoltaic Power Project
15 MW Wind Power Project by Shriram Leitwind Ltd
Malong River 1# Hydropower Project
Anhui Laian Baoshan Wind Power Project
Bundled 9.00 MW Wind Power Generation Project by Gangadhar Narsingdas Agrawal Group
Gansu Yongdeng Longlin Hydro Power Project
Huaneng Wuchuan Shilatu Wind Farm Project
Jilin Yanbian Helong Zhenfeng Wind Power Project
Methane recovery in wastewater treatment in Famailla fruit processing plant, Tucuman, Argentina
Nam Nua Hydropower Project
Gansu Machangshan 49.5MW Wind Power Project
Huzhu Tu Autonomous County Solar Cooker Project
Shaanxi Juting 40MW Hydropower Project
Bundled Grid Connected Wind Power Project in Tamilnadu by Shri Ramalinga Mills Limited
GHG emissions reductions from improved industrial wastewater treatment in Embaré – Lagoa da Prata, Minas Gerais, Brazil
China Hunan Shanyangxi Small Hydropower Project
Huaneng Keyouzhongqi Haoli Wind Farm Project
Guodian Ningxia Qingtongxia Niushoushan Phase III 49.5MW Wind-farm project
Hebei Huadian Shangyi Ergongdi Wind Farm Project
Guodian Ningxia Qingtongxia Niushoushan Phase I 49.5MW Wind-farm project
Guodian Ningxia Qingtongxia Niushoushan Phase II 49.5MW Wind-farm project
Installation of wind power project in Rajasthan and Tamil Nadu
Waste to Energy Project of SURE VN in Binh Duong Province, Viet Nam
Huaneng Keyouzhongqi Denggao Wind Farm Project
Huaneng Shanghai Chongming Qianwei Wind Farm Project
Sunan Longchanghe I 5 MW Small Hydro Power Project
Inner Mongolia Beijing Energy Shangdu Jiqingliang Wind Farm II
Shanghai Fengxian Bay Wind Farm Capacity Expansion Project
Guizhou Qingshuihe Maojiahe Hydropower Project
SECURITIZATION AND CARBON SINKS PROJECT
Use of renewable energy at fruit processing plant in Andori, Khandala
6.25 MW wind power project by VELATAL SPINNING MILLS PVT LTD
Chi Khe Hydropower Project
Kollam Solid Waste Composting Project
Partial Substitution of Coal by Jatropha Fruits and Biomass Residues in the Production of Portland Cement
Alto Tuluá Minor Hydroelectric Power Plant
Fumeng Maniuhu Wind Farm Project
Fuel Switch from Fossil Fuel to Renewable Biomass
Awa and Binwa Small Hydro Power Projects in Kangra District of Himachal Pradesh, India
Qinghai Nazixia 87MW Hydropower Project
China Lincang Mangnuohe Small Hydropower Project
CGN Dalian Xizhongdao Wind Farm Project
Anhui Laian Dongsigang Wind Power Project
Abohar Branch Canal Based Small Hydro Project in Punjab, India
Wuwei Fengle Solar PV Power Project (Phase I) in Gansu Province
Yunnan Kunsteel Coking Co., Ltd. CDQ Project
Gansu Province Yangtian and Hanjiashan Bundled 4.89MW Small Hydropower Project
Hebei Yuxian Yongshengzhuang 49.5 MW Wind Power Project
Grid-connected Electricity Generation from Biomass at Advance Biopower
Hongyan 8MW Hydropower Project in Luoping County
Grid Connected Biomass Based Power Plant at Merta, Dist. Nagaur, Rajasthan, India
Putian Dongqiao Wind Farm Project
Diaobingshan Wind Power Project
Liaoning Kangping Fangjia Wind Power Project
Rice husk based Cogeneration Projects at a cluster of rice mills, India
Shanghai Changxing Island Wind Power Project
Ningxia Taiyangshan Wind Farm Jingneng First Phase 49.5MW Project
Ho Nui Coc Hydropower Project, Vietnam
Jiangsu Qidong Donghai Wind Power Project
Hebei Yuxian Chashan 49.5 MW Wind Power Project
19.5 MW Wind project by GMDC
Changning Kawan 18.9MW Hydroelectric Project
Boxing Biogas Recovery and Utilization Project in Shandong Province
Xekaman 3 Hydropower Project, Lao PDR
Shankouyan 12MW Small Hydropower Project in Pingxiang City, Jiangxi Province, China
Wigton Windfarm II
Devoll Hydropower (DHP), Albania
Blue Sky Energy PV Solar Power Plants
Electricity generation using renewable wind energy by Nakoda Limited
Chengzigou Hydro Power Plant
Nam Pong Hydropower Project
Pengtong 1×15MW Coking Gas Comprehensive Utilization for Power Generation Project
Shaanxi Dongling Smelting Waste Heat Recovery Project.
Minh Luong Hydro Power Project
Heilongjiang Bianfushan Wind Power Project
Bundled Wind Power Project in Tamil Nadu, India, co-ordinated by Tamil Nadu Spinning Mills Association (TASMA-II)
7.5 MW wind power project at Jaisalmer, India
Geothermal District Heating Project in Xianyang City, Shaanxi Province
Heilongjiang Fuyuan Wind Power Project
Liaoning Jianping Yangshuling Wind Power Project
Low Temperature Waste Heat Power Generation Project in Anqiu Sunnsy Cement Corporation Limited
Green House Gas Abatement through installation of a wind power project for export to the Grid.
Tsiazompaniry Hydropower Project in Madagascar
Tieling Biogas Recovery and Utilization Project in Liaoning Province
24 MW Kut Hydro Power Project
BRT Transmetro Barranquilla, Colombia
Inner Mongolia Chifeng Songshanqu Sandaogou Wind Farm Project
Taiyangshan Phase IV 49.5MW Wind-farm Project of Ningxia Electric Power Group Co., Ltd.
Installation of a high-pressure/high-efficiency bagasse boiler to cogenerate heat and power
Pure-low Temperature Waste Heat Recovery for Power Generation in Sichuan Tianquan Cement Co., Ltd. of Zhaoshan Xinxing
Xinjiang Xinneng Daqiao Small-Scale Hydropower Project
Zhanjiang Biomass Power Generation Project in Guangdong Province
Bundled Wind Power generation project by Savita Oil Technologies Ltd., India
Recovery and utilization of flare waste gases at the Industrial Complex of Luján de Cuyo
Biogas Support Program - Nepal Activity-4
Biogas Support Program - Nepal Activity-3
Ranhill Powertron II 190 MW Gas Fired CCPP Project
Hebei Huafeng 1×30MW COG Power Generation Project
2 MW Kalm Small Hydro Electric Project in Himachal Pradesh, India
Za Hung Hydropower Project
Bundled Grid Connected Wind Power Generation –Abi Energy Bundle 3
Song Nhiem 3 Hydropower Project
16.5 MW Wind Power Project in Surajbari, Gujarat
Yunnan Tengchong County Hehua Bundled Hydropower Project (Ganzhezhai Project and Yinhe Project)
Fang County Jimingkou Hydropower Project
Guangdong Yunfu Sinoma Tianshan Cement 9 MW Waste heat Recovery Project
Wind power project by Weizmann Forex Limited
Taiyangshan Phase III 49.5MW Wind-farm Project of Ningxia Electric Power Group Co., Ltd.
Heilongjiang Yilan Hezuolinchang Wind Power Project
Wind Power Project by NACL in Tamil Nadu
Pias I Hydroelectric Power Plant
Gansu Province Qingshuihe and Wangmo Bundled 3.99MW Small Hydropower Project
Qiaohe Second Hydropower Project
Catalytic N2O destruction project at the new nitric acid plant PANNA 4 of Enaex S.A.
Shaanxi Haiyan Coke Making Group 24MW Waste Coke Oven Gas (COG) Based Electricity Generation Plant
Tongdao County Laorongtan Hydropower Station Project
Anhui Panjing Cement 18MW Waste Heat Recovery for Power Generation Project
Jilin Qianguo Fuhui 49.5MW Wind Farm Project
Generation of electricity from bundled 25 MW wind energy project aggregated by Resurge Energy Private Limited
Matafongo Wind Farm
Song Chay 5 Hydropower project
Rajasthan Lighting Energy Efficiency Project (RLEEP) in Jaipur District Circle of JVVNL, Rajasthan, India
Wind Farm Cibuk 1
Wind Power project by GPL in Theni.
Ningxia Shizuishan District Heating System Project
Methane Recovery and Use of the Biogas in Son Hai - Son Ha and Dong Xuan Tapioca Starch Making Plants of APFCO, Vietnam
Putian Shicheng Phase II Wind Power Project
Yichun Xinqing Laobaishan Windpark First Stage 30MW Wind Power Project
Kolar Biogas Project
Fujian Niutoushan Hydropower Project
Wind Power Project in Maharashtra by M/s Air Control (India) Pvt. Ltd.
Hainan Nanzhonghe II & III Bundled Hydropower Project
Ningxia Guodian Yanchi Mahuangshan Wind-farm Phase I 49.5MW Project
Inner Mongolia Huadian Meiguiying Wind Farm Project
Sichuan Zidazhai Hydropower Project
Yangzhou City MSW Incineration Power Generation Project
Guizhou Tongzihe Yangjiayuan Hydropower Project
Duerping Middle Station Ventilation Air Methane Destruction Project
#2 Steam Turbine Retrofit Project of Tianjin Guohua Panshan Power Plant Co., Ltd.
Inner Mongolia Chifeng Mazongshan 49.5MW Wind Power Project
Gansu Anxi Xiangyang Wind Power Project
Van Chan Hydropower Project.
Hunan Tongxi Small Hydropower Project
Hebei Wuji biomass combined stoves and heaters (BCSH) Project 1
Zhejiang Jiaxing Ultra-supercritical Power Generation Project
The Second Hydropower Project in Hetao Irrigation District of Inner Mongolia
SB Chemical Zinc Plant Fuel Switching Project
Hebei Zhangbei Lijiaying Wind Farm Project
Nam Xay Noi 2 Hydropower Project
Khe Giong Hydropower Plant, Vietnam
CGN Guangdong Guanghai Wind Power Project
Generation of electricity from 4.8MW capacity wind mills by Sun-n-Sand Hotels Private Limited at Maharashtra
Inner Mongolia Damao Banner Mandula Wind Power Project
Dehe Zhangbei Phase II Wind Farm Project
Yunnan Niulangou Hydropower Project
Shenmu County Xiangrong Coal Chemical Industry Co., Ltd. 25 MW Semi-coke Waste Gas Power Generation Project
Numundo POME methane capture project
Hebei Xinji biomass combined stoves and heaters (BCSH) Project 1
Song Con 2 Hydro Power Project
Gansu Yumen Daba Wind Power Project
N2O abatement project of Nitric Acid Plant of PetroChina Company Limited Liaoyang Petrochemical Company
N2O abatement project of Nylon Plant of PetroChina Company Limited Liaoyang Petrochemical Company
Inner Mongolia Linxi Dashuiboluo Wind Farm Phase I Project
DGKCC Waste Heat Recovery and Utilization for 10.4 MW Power Generation at Dera Ghazi Khan Plant
Ayun Thuong 1A Hydropower Project
Hebei Shangyi Dongshan Wind Farm Project
Duanwang CMM Power Generation Project
Inner Mongolia Shangdu Changshengliang Wind Farm Project
Qinghai Golmud Solar Power Project
7.5 MW Grid connected renewable electricity generation in Tiruvannamalai District, India
Hebei Zhangbei Baimiaotan Wind Power Project Phase II
Dak Psi 3 and 4 Hydropower Project
Liaoning Chaoyang Lishugou Wind Power Project
Paysandú Clean Energy
Biomass based Co-generation project by Sterling Agro Industries Ltd
CECIC Wuhan 2.2 MW Grid-connected Solar PV Power Generation Project
Muong Hum 32 MW Hydropower Project in Lao Cai Province, Viet Nam
Hunan Chenzhou Yangtianhu 36.3MW Wind Power Project
Gangwon+Inje+Ansan Renewable Energy Bundling Project
Yunnan Pingbian Baifu Hydropower Project
Windu Nabatindo Lestari Co-Composting Project
Dala River Estuary Hydropower Plant, Diebu County, Gansu Province
Wampu Hydro Electric Power Project
Waste Heat Recovery and Utilisation for Power Generation Project of Wuhu Conch Cement Company Limited
Gansu Province Yangtian 3.2MW Small-Scale Hydropower Project
Song Tranh 3 Hydropower Project
Xinjiang Jimunai CGN Phase I Wind Farm Project
Diqing Prefecture Niru River Muxingtu Hydropower Station Project
Refurbishment of Enguri Hydro Power Plant, Georgia
Huaneng Changyi Phase II Wind Farm Project
Guodian Ningxia Zhongwei 10MWp Solar Photovoltaic Power Project
The Chengdu Jiujiang Municipal Solid Waste Incineration Power Plant Project
Lao Cai-Yen Bai Bundled Hydropower Project
Jilin Baicheng ChaganHot Wind Farm Phase II Project
Shandong Laizhou phase II Wind Power Project
VG Energy's Waste to Power at Vichitbhan Plantation Co., Ltd.
CEMEX Mexico: Alternative fuels and biomass project at Merida cement plant
CEMEX Mexico: Alternative fuels and biomass project at Tepeaca cement plant
Maesod Wastewater Treatment and Biogas Utilisation Project
Zhurihe Phase I 49.5MW Wind Farm Project in Xilingol League, Inner Mongolia
Inner Mongolia Tongliao Kezuohouqi Xin'aili Wind Power Project
Hebei Chongli Honghualiang 49.5MW Wind Farm Project
Waste heat recovery at blast furnace of IISCO, SAIL
Huadian Inner Mongolia Guyang Hongnijing Wind Farm Project
Gansu Guazhou East Beidaqiao Wind Power Phase II Project
2.1 MW wind power project of Jose Thomas Pattara at Tamil Nadu, India
UPC Linghai Xibaqian 49.5 MW Wind Farm Liaoning
ROHIT SURFACTANTS PVT.LTD- 10.5 MW Wind Project, Tamil Nadu
Grid connected 156.1 MW Combined Cycle Power plant at Hazira, Gujarat
Jilin Changling 174 Wind Farm Phase I Project
Dak Mi 4 Hydropower Project, Vietnam
Tianjin Dashentang Wind Farm Power Generation Project
Guodian Wuchuan Xiwulanbulang Hongshan Wind Farm Phase II Project
Guangxi Tianlin County Weimi Hydropower Station
Orissa Lighting Energy Efficiency Project (OLEEP) in Bhanjanagar Circle, Orissa, India
Lam Soon Wastewater Treatment for Energy Generation, Trang
UPOIC Wastewater Treatment for Energy Generation, Krabi
Wind Power Project at Maharashtra by AAA & Sons Enterprises Pvt. Ltd.
Fujian Shaowu Jintang Hydropower Project
Waste Heat Recovery and Utilisation for Power Generation Project of Chizhou Conch Cement Company Limited
Electricity Generation through Wind Power by SRHHL
Hunan Waste Gas Based Power Project in Liangang Group
Jilin Hunchun Coal Mine Methane (CMM) Power Generation Project
Inner Mongolia Wulatehouqi Chaoge Wind Farm Project
Methane Recovery and Utilization at PT. Musim Mas Palm Oil Mill in Pangkalan Lesung, Riau Indonesia
Hainan Danzhou Eman Phase II Wind Power Project
Liuyang Project of Fossil Fuel Switch to Biomass Residues in Boilers for Heat Generation
Chicheng Dananshan Wind Farm Project
Ea Kar Hydropower Plant, Vietnam
Dalian Xiajiahe Sludge Treatment Project in Dalian City, People’s Republic of China
Huaneng Shanxi Tianzhen Phase I Wind Power Project
Bundled Wind Energy Project in Indian States
Inner Mongolia Jinjie Baiyun Phase I Wind Farm project
Putian Houhai Wind Power Project
Huaneng Shanxi Pianguan Wind Farm Project
Redevelopment of Tana Hydro Power Station Project
Jilin Taonan Xinli 49.5MW Wind Power Project
Guodian Ningxia Pingluo 10MWp Solar Photovoltaic Power Project
Cogeneration of power and steam from Bioener S.A´s forestry waste
24 MW Dummagudem Hydel project by SLS Power Corporation Limited
Dasiat Hydropower Project
Guodian Xinjiang Alashankou Phase II Wind Power Project
Anhanguera Hydro Power Project
Anhui Yuelianghu and Liucunba Bundled Hydropower Project
Coke Dry Quenching (CDQ) Waste Heat Recovery for Power Generation Project of Shandong Shiheng Special Steel 960,000t/a
Sichuan Leshan Ebian Ejingxiang Hydro Power Project
Silau-2 small hydro power plant in North Sumatera Province, Indonesia
12.25 MW Bundled Wind Power Project in India
Luohe MSW Landfill Site LFG Recovery to Power Project
Sichuan Province Dayan River 4th Level Hydropower Project
Bujagali Hydropower Project
DAKFOCAM Wastewater project
Yunnan Mangli Hydropower Project
Power generation by utilizing Blast Furnace Gas at Mukand Limited, Ginigera, Karnataka
iHOT - IV water heating service
iHOT - III water heating service
iHOT - II water heating service
Aberdare Range / Mt. Kenya Small Scale Reforestation Initiative Kirimara-Kithithina Small Scale A/R Project
Wuhan Xinzhou Chenjiachong Sanitary Landfill LFG Power Generation Project
Huaneng Inner Mongolia Wuchuan Heishatu Wind Farm Project
Anjiang Hydropower Project in Hunan Province
Mumbai Metro One, India
Shuanghe Second Small Hydropower Project in Jilin Province
Waste Heat Recovery and Power Generation Project in Yatai Group Harbin Cement Co., Ltd.
Akhfennir Wind Farm Project
Nam Chanh Hydropower Project, Vietnam
Amayo Phase II Wind Power Project
650 KW Terkiana Mini Hydel Project on Holybein
Methane Recovery from waste water treatment in Seafood industry in Maharashtra
Mayang County Jiangkou Small-scale Hydropower Project
Guangdong Wenbiling Wind Power Project
Zhonglian 4.5MW Waste Heat Power Generation Project in Hebei Province
CTR Candeias Landfill Gas Project
Fuxin Fuel Switch from Coal to Biomass Residues Project in Jilin City, Jilin Province, P.R.China
Yuntianhua Furui Waste Heat Recovery and Utilization Project
Guazhou Beidaqiao No.1 Wind Farm Project in Gansu Province, China
Sichuan Luomu 2nd Level and Muguaping Bundled Small Hydropower Project
Huaneng Shandong Shouguang Phase II Wind Power Project
Huaneng Shandong Shouguang Phase III Wind Power Project
Huadian Gansu Yumen Heiyazi Second Phase 48MW Wind Power Project
Sichuan Lingguan 76MW Hydropower Project
Guangdong Taishan Xiachuandao Wind Farm Project
Wind Power Project in Tirunelveli district, Tamil Nadu, India by M/s Binaguri Tea Company Pvt. Ltd.
CECIC HKC Gansu Changma Wind Power project
Gansu Guazhou Ganhekou No.6 Wind Farm 200MW Project
Wind power project of 3 MW at Kottathara Village, Palakkad District, Kerala, India
Huaneng Siping Phase III Wind Farm Project
Gansu Guazhou Beidaqiao No.4 200MW Wind Farm Project
Hubei Lichuan Qiyueshan Wind Power Project
Shenzhen Energy Yihetala No.2 Wind Farm Project
Jiangsu Nantong Rudong Wind Power Project
18 MW Wind energy project by Indowind Energy Limited
Hebei Bode Shenlong Xiaoertai wind power project
Korea Land & Housing Corporation (LH Corporation)’s National Rental House PV power plant bundling CDM project
Guangxi Wuming Jiaolong Alcohol Production Wastewater Treatment Project
2.4 MW Wind Power Project at Tirunelveli Dist., Tamilnadu
Sichuan Tiejue 25MW Hydro Power Project
Duolangqu First and Second Cascade Bundled Project in Wensu County, Xinjiang Uygur Autonomous Region, China
MNI Renewable Energy Plant
San Clemente Hydroelectric Power Plant
16.875 MW Large Scale Grid Connected Wind Electricity Generation Project by Indian Renewable Energy Foundation
Zhejiang Huadian Zhoushan Dinghai Changbai Wind Farm Project
Huadian Shangde Dongtai 10MWp Solar PV Power Project
Fujian Changle Wushan Wind Power Project
Wind power project by Relaxo Footwears Limited in Rajasthan
4.5 MW wind power project of PCI Limited at Gujarat, India
Guangxi Dahua Hydropower Project
Samra 300 MW combined cycle project
Badyar Hydro (4.90 MW) Plant at Uttarakhand
Zhuxi County Chahe Hydro Power Project
Inner Mongolia North Long Yuan 100 MW Huitengxile Wind Farm
Vaayu India Wind Power Project in Jaisalmer, Rajasthan
Mosa POME methane capture project
1.85 MW Bundled Wind Power Generation in Tamil Nadu
Hubei Dangyang 25MW Biomass Power Project
CEMEX Panama: Bayano cement plant Alternative fuels project
Gansu Taohe Jili Hydropower Project
Hebei Guyuan County Dongxinying 199.5 MW Wind Power Project
Hebei Chengde Yudaokou Windfarm 48MW project
Jiangsu Rudong Chaojiandai Wind Power Project
Sichuan Leibo Dele Hydropower Project
5 MW Photovoltaic Power Generation Project at Saraburi province, Thailand
Huaneng Jilin Taobei Phase III Wind Farm Project
Kumbango POME methane capture project
Triplay Amazonico Methane Avoidance Project
Biogas Plant at United Plantations Berhad, ULU BASIR Palm Oil Mill
Plaine Des Roches Wind Farm
KDHC Daegu Biomass Cogeneration Project
3.0 MW BEL grid-connected wind power project at Somarigudda, Hassan district, Karnataka, India
18 MW Singatalur-Huligudda Mini Hydel Project, Karnataka, India
Dak Mi 4c Hydropower Project, Vietnam
Swine Farm Methane Capture and Combustion Project IDES20091
1.2 MW Wind Power Project in Tamil Nadu by RCR-Eco Power
Lopburi Solar Power Plant Project
Quanzhou Liupu Hydropower Project
Wastewater Treatment with Biogas System (UASB) in a Starch Plant for Energy & Environment Conservation at Nakorn Ratcha
Sungsan Wind Power Project
Baihugou Small Hydropower Project in Hubei Province
Shaanxi Waste Saturated Steam Recovery for Power Generation in Zinc-smelting Industry
“Usina Interlagos Cogeneration Project”
Natural Gas based grid connected power project at Peddapuram, A.P. by Gautami Power Limited
Inner Mongolia Jingneng Wengniuteqi Qigan Wind Farm Phase I Project
Liangfengke Hydropower Project in Gansu Province
CGN Guangdong Wencun Wind Power Project
Sanhe Power Generation Co., Ltd. No.1 & No.2 Power Unit Retrofit for District Heating Project
Reduction of gas leakages in low- and middle- pressure gas-distribution pipelines in Tashkent City and Tashkent Region
12.82 MW Bundled Small Hydropower Project in Qiandongnan Autonomous Region, Guizhou Province, P. R. China
Swine Farm Methane Capture and Combustion/ Utilization Project IDES20091
9.6 MW Wind Energy Project at Jamvadi & Navagam & Kalavad, Jamnagar, Gujarat, India of Rohit Surfactants Pvt. Ltd.
Sichuan Rongzehai Hydropower Project
Heilongjiang Yilan Yunling Wind Power Project
Yongchang Chemical N2O Abatement Project
Heilongjiang Huanan Yimashan Wind Power Project
7 MW Wind Power Project of Man Industries at Kutch, Gujarat
Yunnan Luliang Damogu Wind Power Project
CGN Guangdong Duanfen Wind Power Project
Tuobeiqu First and Second Cascade Bundled Project in Xinjiang Uygur Autonomous Region, China
Shenchi Phase II 49.5MW Wind Power Generation Project in Shanxi Province
CECIC Bundled Grid-connected Solar PV Power Generation Project
Shiyazi Hydro power Project in Guizhou Province China
Nam Khanh Hydropower Project
Shanxi Yulong Youyu Niuxinbao Wind Farm Project
Nam Hong Hydropower Project
Datang Wendeng Wind Power Project
MONTENEGRO LANDFILL GAS RECOVERY AND FLARING
Huadian Ningxia Ningdong Yangjiayao Wind Farm Expansion Project
Catalytic N2O abatement in the tail gas stream from the Nanjing Caprolactam production facility
Zhoutian 10.5MW Hydropower Project
Ningxia Taiyangshan Phase I 10MWp Solar Photovoltaic Power Project
Biogas Project at Prolific Yield Palm Oil Mill
Qinghai Golmud 20MWP (Phase I) Photovoltaic Power Generation Project
China Power Investment Corporation Ningxia Zhongwei Xiangshan Phase I Wind-farm Project
Huaneng Shandong Hekou Phase II Wind Farm Project
Hebei Zhangbei Batou Wind Farm Phase I
Sichuan Muli Ninglang Hydropower Station Project
Sichuan Guoru Hydropower Project
Waste Heat Recovery for Power Generation Project in SGIS Songshan Co., Ltd.
Uganda Nile Basin Reforestation Project No 4
Gansu Yumen Changma NO.2 Wind Farm 201MW Project
Liaoning Faku Woniushi Wind Power Project
Pure-low temperature Waste Heat Recovery Project for power generation (23MW) in Sichuan E'sheng Cement Holding Co., Ltd
Xinjiang Kalasuke 140MW Hydroelectric Project
Liaoning Zhangwu Pingandi Wind Farm Project
Haouma Wind Farm Project, developed by NAREVA HOLDING
MONTERIA LANDFILL GAS RECOVERY AND FLARING
Chifeng Ningcheng Majiazi Wind Power Project
Energy efficiency through heat recovery at Vadodara Manufacturing Complex of IPCL
Ganluo Camp Hydropower Project
Uganda Nile Basin Reforestation Project No 2
Huadian Gansu Yumen Heiyazi First Phase 48MW Wind Power Project
Sichuan Jinwa Hydropower Project
Solar Power Generation Project
Uganda Nile Basin Reforestation Project No 1
Los Caracoles Hydroelectric Project
Huangshi Landfill Gas Recovery for Power Generation Project
Srepok 4 Hydropower Project
Wind Power Project in Tirunelveli (Tamilnadu), India by M/s Nagarjuna Fertilizers and Chemicals Limited
Shandong Laiwu Landfill Gas Recovery and Power Generation Project
Leak Reduction in Above Ground Distribution Equipment in the Gas Distribution Network UzTransgaz- Garbgaz (GGT)
Gansu Guazhou East Beidaqiao Wind Power Project
Gansu Jiuquan Kaiyuan Cascade Hydropower Stations Bundle Project
Zouping Landfill Gas Recovery and Utilization Project
Sichuan Kangding Sandaoqiao Hydropower Station
Shandong Liuwangzhuang Wind Farm Project
Improving Kiln Efficiency in the Brick Making Industry in Bangla
1.5 MW Wind Power Project in Maharashtra by M/s. Allgrow ventures
La Vegona Hydroelectric Project
Jilin Longyuan Changling Shuanglong Phase II Wind Power Project
Chamelecón 280 Hydroelectric project
Jingneng Huolinhe Phase II Wind Farm Project
Heqing Solar Cooker Project I
Heqing Solar Cooker Project II
Huadian Ningxia Ningdong Yangjiayao Phase III Wind Farm Project
Liuyuan Hydropower Project in Gansu Province
Anhui Laian Longwosi Wind Power Project
Wind power project by PMPL in Maharashtra
Nam Trai 4 Hydropower Project
Huaneng Siping Phase I Wind Farm Project
Liaoning Chaoyang Kazuo Zhongsanjia Wind Power Project
Inner Mongolia Siziwangqi Bayin’aobao Wind Power Project
Hebei Xiqiaoliang Farm Phase I Project
Xinjiang Dabancheng Phase I Wind Power Project
Sichuan Shimian 7.2 MW Bundled Small Hydropower Project
Gansu Yumen Yuxin Wind Power Project
Waste Heat Recovery and Utilisation for Power Generation Project of Beiliu Conch Cement Company Limited
Huaneng Tongliao Kezuozhongqi Haorigetu Wind Farm Project
Itaoca Landfill Gas Project
Heilongjiang Hulin Shiqingshan 1st Phase Wind Farm Project
Wastewater Treatment with Biogas System in Palm Oil Mill at Sinpun, Surat Thani, Thailand
Shaanxi Province Zhenping County Anningdu Hydropower Project
Metro Group Energy WWT Project
Yunnan Lvzhijiang Longmen Hydropower Project
Tongliao Biogas Recovery and Utilization Project in Inner Mongolia Autonomous Region
Eecopalsa Biogas Expansion – Honduras project
BRT Metrobus Insurgentes, Mexico
Zhangbei Caoniangou 49.5MW Wind Power Project
Warastone POME methane capture project
Inner Mongolia Bayannur Wulanyiligeng 300MW Wind Power Project
Wastewater Treatment with Biogas System in Palm Oil Mill at Sikao, Trang, Thailand
Shaanxi Ningshan Luotuoya bundle small hydro project
Biomass Power Generation Project by Everbright Alternative Energy (Dangshan) Limited
Methane Emission Utilization for Power Generation from Ethanol wastewater treatment at PT. Indonesia Ethanol, La
Hunan Dongkou Small-scale Hydropower Bundled Project of China
Zafarana 85 MW Wind Power Plant Project
Hunan Shimen Zhongjundu Hydro Power Project
Wuhan Liufang Landfill Gas Recovery as Energy Project
Chifeng Ningcheng Dachengzi Wind Power Project
Guangxi Qiaogong Hydropower Project
Inner Mongolia Daiqintala Wind Power Project
Methane Recovery Project of Jilin Province Xintianlong Alcohol Co., Ltd.
Huadian Ningxia Ningdong 10MWp Solar PV Power Station Project
Grid Connected Wind Power Generation by Asian Fabricx Private Limited
Huaneng Tongyu Xinhua 1C Wind Farm Project
Xiapu Dajing Wind Power Project
Wuda Wuhushan Coal Mine Methane Power Generation Project
Yun’An County Gaoli Starch Factory Wastewater Treatment and Biogas Recovery Project
Waste Heat Recovery and Utilisation for Power Generation Project of Anhui Digang Conch Cement Company Limited
Shaanxi Tongchuan Huachen 7MW CMM Power Generation Project
Reforestation of degraded land by MTPL in India
Grid Connected Wind Power Project by M/s. Venkatrama Poultries Limited
Boiler Fuel Conversion from Fuel Oil to Briquettes Biomass Fuel at Saigon Ve Wong Co., Ltd, Ho Chi Minh city, Vietnam
Sarbari II Hydro Power Project by DSL Hydrowatt Limited in Kullu, Himachal Pradesh
Xiangshui Expansion Hydropower Project in Yunnan & Guizhou Province, China
Chantaburi Starch Wastewater Treatment and Biogas Utilization Project
Biogas Utilization Project in Zhejiang Jingxing Paper Joint Stock Co. Ltd.
Pitak Palm Wastewater Treatment and Biogas Utilization Project
Pirgua Landfill gas recovery and flaring
Shaanxi Baoji Yanjiahe Hydropower Project
Muong Kim Hydropower Project
Xiangcheng Mayi River 1st level Dieshui Hydropower Project
Changchun City Landfill Gas Power Generation Project
Bundled green power supply to grid
10.5 MW wind mill project of ICF in the state of Tamil Nadu
Liaoning Kangping Zhangjiayao Wind Power Project
Greenhouse Gas Emission Reductions Through Super Critical Technology - Jharkhand Integrated Power Ltd.
Liaoning Faku Yemaotai Wind Power Project
Waste Heat Recovery and Utilisation for Power Generation Project of Xingye Conch Cement Company Limited
Fuel Switching of Mirza Kuchak Khan Sugarcane Plant
Ecoelectric-Valdez bagasse cogeneration plant
Jiangsu Chaojiandai Wind Power Project
Hebei Weichang Dishuihu Wind Power Project
ECC methane capture and combustion from AWMS at dairy farms in Mexico – I
Shanxi Lingqiu Hanfengling 49.5 MW Wind Power Project
Vaayu India Wind Power Project in Tamilnadu
Grid connected electricity generation using natural gas by the Vemagiri Power Generation Ltd.
Guodian Shanxi Youyu Caojiashan Wind Power Project
1.8 MW Small Scale Wind Energy Project in Maharashtra-India by M/s Biotech Vision Care Pvt Ltd.
1.728 MW, Bundled Photovoltaic power plant in KOMIPO
Residual Organic Waste to Steam & Electricity Project in Nilai, Malaysia
Cepco Wind Power Project in Rajasthan
Bundled Wind Power Project in Jamnagar, Gujarat
Empowerment of residential house-holds for adoption of efficient house-hold lighting by distribution of CFL lamps at token Pri
Liaoning Faku Ma'anshan Wind Power Project
Hydro electric power project by SJVNL in Himachal Pradesh
19.8MW grid connected Wind farm project by K.P.R Mill Private Limited, Tamil Nadu, India at Villages: Keelaveeranam, Kuruch
Shandong Binzhou Zhanhua Tao’erhe Wind Power Project
Sichuan Kangding County Lajiaogou Second Stage Hydropower Station Project
1.65 MW Wind Power Project in Gujarat
Zhuhai Gaolan Island Windfarm Project
Guangdong Pinghai Power Plant Phase I Project
Sujiahekou Hydropower Station
Yunnan Luopingshan Phase I Wind Power Project
Henan Xinxiang 24MW Biomass based Cogeneration Project
CECIC Shizuishan Grid-connected Solar PV Power Generation Phase I project
Hebei Chongli Jiaocheshan 49.3MW Wind Farm Project
Tiantai County Chayuan 5.7MW Cascade Hydropower Project in Zhejiang Province
Energy efficiency and fuel switch in Hubei Dongsen Wood Industry Co., Ltd
Manaus Landfill Gas Project
Wind Power Project in Tirunelveli Tamilnadu
15.2 MW wind energy project in Madhya Pradesh by Manganese Ore (India) Limited.
Hebei Chongli County Qingsanying Second Phase 49.3 MW Wind Power Project
Hunan Jinqiao 7MW Cascade Small Hydropower Project
Shenmu County Tengyuan Coal Chemical Industry Co., Ltd. 60 MW Semi-coke Waste Gas for Power Generation Project
Gansu Guazhou Beidaqiao Second Wind Power Project
Inner Mongolia Tongliao Zhalute Qi Phase II North Wind Power Project
Yunnan Yun County Nan River Hydropower Project
Jiangsu Hantian Cement Waste Heat Recovery Power Generation Project
Xinjiang Urumqi Dabancheng Huaran Wind Farm Phase I Project
Inner Mongolia Xisu Zhurihe Wind Farm Project
Liaoning Qianfoshan Wind Farm Project
Gansu Guazhou Beidaqiao Wind Power Project
Renewable Energy Wind Power Project in Karnataka
Dak Srong 2A Hydropower Project
Zhejiang Jinyuan Cement 9MW Waste Heat Recovery Project
Metro Delhi, India
Yunnan Xinhe and Xingfu Expansion Hydropower Station Bundled Project
Bac Ha Hydropower Project, Vietnam
Monterrey I LFG to Energy Project
Huaneng Tongyu Xinhua 1B Wind Farm Project
Guangxi Ziyuan Jinzishan Wind Farm Project
Waste Heat Recovery and Utilisation for Power Generation Project of Baimashan Conch Cement Company Limited
Chongqing Chengkou Baiguoping 10MW Hydropower Station Project
Pindó Biomass Energy Generation from Forest Biomass
Ningxia Hongsipu 50MWp PV (photovoltaic) Power No.1 Plant Project
Lintao County Ruilong Hydropower Project
Keyouzhongqi Shenneng Hangali Wind Farm Project
Abedon Enviro Bio-Waste Composting Project, Malaysia
Guohua Rongcheng Phase II Wind Farm Project
4.5 MW Bundled Wind Power Project in Karnataka, India
Gu’ertu River Cascade Stage III 13.5MW Hydropower Project
Nam Soi & Nam Cong Hydropower Project
Utilisation of the thermal energy of clinker cooler waste gas and pre-heater flue gas for power generation at a cement plant in
Power Generation by Methane from Hoggery in Yun’nan Minhong Bio-tech Industry Co., Ltd.
Pure-low Temperature Waste Heat Recovery for Power Generation (10MW) in Hunan Liuyang Cement Co., Ltd. of Zhaoshan X
6.0 MW wind energy project in Karnataka, India
Ventanilla Conversion from Single-cycle to Combined-cycle Power Generation Project
India-FaL-G Brick and Blocks Project No.2.
Southern District Heating Network in Urumqi City
Guangxi Longsheng Furong River 25MW Hydropower Project
Shanxi Hongyi Glassware Co., Ltd. Small-scale Fuel Switching Project
Uganda Nile Basin Reforestation Project No.5
6.5 MW cogeneration project in Akbarpur, Punjab.
Quang Ngai APFCO Tapioca starch wastewater biogas extraction and utilization project, Quang Ngai Province, Socialist Republi
H’Mun Hydropower Project
BIOENERGY PLANT – SAWIT KINABALU
Yunnan Sayutuo 60MW Hydro Power Project
Zhangbei Daxishan Wind Farm Project
Coronado Hydroelectric Project
Bannari Amman Spinning Mills Wind Power Project managed by Enercon (India) Ltd.
Nanjiangkou Small Hydropower Project in Yu’nan County, Guangdong Province, China
Inner Mongolia Keyouqianqi Chaersen Wind Power Project
Klavdia Wind Farm Project
Ngoi Xan Hydropower Project
Jinxiu Fengmuao Hydro Power Project
Malagone SHP CDM Project, Minas Gerais, Brazil (JUN1122)
Fuqing Zeqi Wind Farm Project
Sichuan Huadian Xixi River Hydro-electricity Development Co., Ltd. Diluo Hydroelectric Project
Baiyun Ebo Wind Farm Inner Mongolia Luneng Phase II
Huaneng Tongyu Xinhua 1A Wind Farm Project
Hebei Shengyuan Xuandong Coal Mine Methane Utilization Project
5.35 MW Wind Power Project by GeeCee Ventures Ltd
Jiangxi Laohutou Hydropower Project
Tianjin Dagang Wind Farm Phase I 49.5MW Project
Aberdare Range/ Mt. Kenya Small Scale Reforestation Initiative Kamae-Kipipiri Small Scale A/R Project
Wastewater Treatment with Biogas System (AFFR) in a Starch Plant for Energy & Environment Conservation at Chachoengsao
Guizhou Louxiahe Small Hydropower Project
The Capture and Utilisation of Methane at the Sibanye Gold Owned Beatrix Mine in South Africa
CECIC Taiyangshan Grid-connected Solar PV Power Generation Phase 1 Project
Vinh Son 5 Hydropower Project
N2O Abatement Project of Capro Corporation
Inner Mongolia Jingneng Saihan Wind Farm Phase II Project
Run-of-the-river Hydroelectric Power Project in Uttarakhand by Alaknanda Hydro Power Company Limited.
Guangxi Guilin Dayun 11MW Small-Scale Hydropower Project
1.2 MW Wind Power Generation Project in Gujarat for Hotel Golden Emerald
Ningxia Qingtongxia 30MW Wind Farm Project
Methane Gas Capture and Fuel Switching at Compañía Argentina de Levaduras S.A.I.C. Plant Project
DakRTih Hydropower Project, Vietnam
Liangshan Lianghong Hydropower Project
Composting Project Activity for Biomass Residues Derived From Palm Oil Mill
Korea Hydro & Nuclear Power Co.(KHNP) Cheongpyeong Hydro Power Plant Unit 4 Project
Fuel switch from fossil fuel to biomass residues for cogeneration in integrated pulp and paper unit of ITC PSPD at Bhadrachala
Commercial reforestation on lands dedicated to extensive cattle grazing activities in the region of Magdalena Bajo Se
BRT Zhengzhou, China
Madushan Hydropower Project on Honghe River in Yunnan Province, China
Tanger wind power project
Xiangtang Erji 17MW Hydropower Project in Qinghai Province, China
Guangdong Longgaoshan Wind Power Project
Yunnan Dali Zhemoshan Wind Farm Phase II Project
Huaneng Shandong Hekou Phase IV Wind Farm Project
Factory energy efficiency improvement in deodorizer of ceramic kiln in Mexico
Exploitation of the biogas from Controlled Landfill in Solid Waste Management Central – CTRS / BR.040
Inner Mongolia Wuhai 30MW Waste Gas Power Generation Project
Ningxia Ningdong Shiyan 49.5MW Wind-farm Project
Avoided emissions from biomass wastes through use as feed stock in pulp and paper Kunak, Sabah production i.e. Eko Pulp an
Huaneng Shandong Hekou Phase III Wind Farm Project
Waste Heat Recovery and Power Generation Project in Jilin Yatai Group Mingcheng Cement Co., Ltd.
Guangdong Leiling Wind Power Project
Hebei Wuan Lancun Biogas Digester Project
Yunnan Longjiang 240MW Hydropower Project, in P.R. China
Dak Pone Hydropower Project
Yunnan Luliang Yangmeishan Daluwan Wind Power Project
Grid Connected Wind Power Project by Madurai Integrated Textile Park Limited
Hebei Yuxian Second Phase 49.5MW Wind Power Project
Tekmedic Biomass Fuel Switch Project
Liaoning Faku Ma'anshan North Wind Power Project
Yuxian Baiyantuo 49.3 MW Wind Power Project
Shanxi Shuangliang Cement Company LTD. 4.5MW Waste Heat for Power Generation Project
Yuxian Dongdianziliang 49.5 MW Wind Power Project (Stage 1)
Mini hydro power plant El Manzano
Sichuan Heishui Deshiwo Yiji 8MW hydro power project
Liaoning Dongfanghong Wind Farm Project
BRT Lines 1-5 EDOMEX, Mexico
3.2 MW wind power project of Agro Solvent Products Pvt. Ltd. at Jodha village of Jaisalmer district in Rajasthan state”
Wind power project by Patnaik Minerals Pvt. Ltd
Xinjiang Lasite Hydropower Project of China
Zhangjiakou Chabei Wind Farm Project
Bagepalli CDM Reforestation Programme
Liaoning Kangping Aoliyingzi Wind Power Project
Forestry Project in Strategic Ecological Areas of the Colombian Caribbean Savannas
Inner Mongolia Jiulong wind Power Project
Changshu Municipal Solid Waste Incineration Project
Jixi Coal Mine Methane Project
Jingshi Hydropower Project, Huili County, Sichuan Province
10 MW Biomass Power Project in Amreli District, Gujarat, India
Shanxi Herui Coal Mine Methane Power Generation Project
Hebei Weichang Yangshugou Wind Power Project
Ba Thuoc 2 Hydropower Project
CWI Shangyi Shijing Wind Farm Phase I Project
Yeni Yashma Wind Farm
21 MW Wind Power Project by Indian Oil Corporation Limited in Gujarat
Inner Mongolia Guyang Huaishuo I Wind Farm Project
Hubei Enshi Qinglonghu Hydropower Station Project
Rodeio Bonito Small Hydro Power Project
Inner Mongolia Urad Houqi Wuliji Wind Power Project
Energy Efficient Power Generation by Nabha Power Limited
Sichuan Shimian Songlinhe Hongyi Hydropower Project
Penglai Daliuhang Wind Farm Project Phase I
Yunnan Yingjiang Zhina River 1st Level Hydropower Station
Sichuan Heishui Zumu 21MW Hydropower Project
Sichuan Zhaojue Subagu 52MW Hydropower Project
Guodian Youyu Laoqianshan Wind Farm Phase I 49.5MW Project
Wind Park at the Orites Archimandritas, Cyprus
Wind Power Project by Bhabani Pigments Pvt. Ltd. at Tamilnadu, India
Bundled wind energy power projects (2003 policy) in Rajasthan
Huadian Kezuozhongqi Wind Power Phase I Project
LHSF RE Project
Santiago 2.8 MW Hydroelectric Project
Guangxi Nabi Hydropower Project
Huadian Fuqing Niutouwei Wind Power Project
Grid Connected Wind Electricity Generation Project in Karnataka
Gansu Province Taoping Hydropower Project
5 MW Solar PV Power Project in Sivagangai Village, Sivaganga District, Tamil Nadu
Rwanda Natural Energy Project: Water Treatment Systems for Rural Rwanda (Mugonero Esepan, Rwesero, Nyagasambu)
Fujian Kaisheng Biomass Residues-fired Cogeneration Project
Sichuan Shuanghekou 18MW Hydropower Project
Liaoning Kangping Dongsheng Wind Power Project
9.9 MW Bundled Wind Power Project in Maharashtra by REI Agro Limited
Burqin River Chonghuer Hydropower Project in Xinjiang Uygur Autonomous Region
Ia Puch 3 Hydropower Project
Hongkou 200MW Hydropower Project in Fujian Province
Shenchi 48MW Wind Power Generation Project in Shanxi Province
SDIC Xindeng Zhengzhou Cement Waste Heat Recovery Project
Monte Redondo Wind Farm Project
10MW biomass power plant at Sangli by Sinewave Power
Qinghai EBOTU Hydropower Station
Improved Cook Stoves CDM project of SAMUHA
Gansu Yongjing 24.9MW Fuchuan Hydropower Project
Methane Recovery and Utilization Project of Dai Viet Co. Ltd, Vietnam
SDIC Hebei Zhangjiakou Kangbao Pasture Wind Farm Project
Pure-low Temperature Waste Heat Recovery for Power Generation (12MW) in Hunan Cement Co., Ltd. of Zhaoshan Xinxing Gr
Qingyuan 44MW Hydropower Project
Hunan Xiaoshanyang Small Hydropower Project
Gansu Guazhou Ganhekou No.3 Wind Power Plant Project
Sichuan Ganzi Jiulong Wuyiqiao Hydropower Project
Vaayu India Wind Power Project in Gujarat.
Southern Nicaragua CDM Reforestation Project
Xiangtang xia 10 MW Hydropower Project in Qinghai Province, the People’s Republic of China
LA CALERA BIODIGESTERS PROJECT
Jilin Wangqing 2×25MW Biomass Cogeneration Project
Yunnan Er’yuan Misha River Longdi Hydropower Station
Niudu 20MW Hydropower Project on Furong River, Guizhou province
Hunan Wutong Small Hydropower Project
Shaanxi Luneng Jingbian Wind Farm Project
Rio Amoya Run-of-River Hydro Project
CLP Huanyu (Shandong) Biomass Heat and Power Generation Project
Liaoning Nuhetu Wind Power Project
Co-composting of EFB and POME – PT. Sandabi Indah Lestari
Chongqing Chengkou County Bashan Hydropower Station Project
Hunan Houpi Bundled Small Hydropower Project
Organic Waste Composting at CKT Palm Oil Mill, Indonesia
Biomass based Process Steam Generation Project
Hebei Shangyi Hanjiazhuang Phase II Wind Farm Project
Pure-low Temperature Waste Heat Recovery for Power Generation (9MW) in Changsha Pingtang Cement Co., Ltd.
Huaneng Gansu Guazhou Ganhekou No.2 Wind Farm Project
WIND PROJECT ACTIVITY BY IDEAL DETONATORS PVT LIMITED
Huaneng Panjin Dawa Wind Farm Project
Hunan Zhugaotan Hydropower Project
Kadamane Mini Hydel Scheme – 2
Energy Efficiency Improvement at Tamil Nadu Newsprint and Papers Limited
2.5 MW Wind Power Project by M/s Marudhar Fashions, India
Kinoya Sewerage Treatment Plant GHG Emission Reduction Project
Doc Cay Hydropower Project
Thanh Thuy Hydropower Project
Waste Heat Recovery and Utilisation for Power Generation Project of Xuancheng Conch Cement Company Limited
Energy efficiency improvements of Pucheng Power Plant through retrofitting turbines in China
3.375 MW Wind Power Project by AAA Corporation Pvt. Ltd.
Yunnan Wanmahe Third Cascade Hydropower project
Guayacán Hydroelectric Project
Mafrisur renewable thermal energy
Wind power project at Karnataka
Bundled Small Hydropower Project on Nameguo River of Yunnan
Fuel Switching of Hakim Farabi Sugarcane Plant
Ningxia Mahuangshan Phase II 49.5MW Wind-farm Project
Inner Mongolia Chifeng Yikesong Wind Power Project
CECIC Gansu Yumen Changma No.3 Wind Farm Project
Household biogas project in Xinhua County, Loudi City, Hunan Province
Sichuan Meigu Riha Hydro Power Project
Tabes Sdn Bhd Sibu Biomass Cogeneration Project
Hubei Macheng Rural Solar Cooker Utilization Project
Yunnan Luxi Liziqing Wind Power Project
Guangdong Shenzhen Laohukeng Landfill Gas Utilization Project
Recovery and Utilization of Associated Gas to Optimize Power Generation at PETROAMAZONAS Block 15 Facilities
Yunnan Yongsheng County Small Scale Hydropower Bundled Project
Fugu County Sanlian Coal-electricity Chemical Industry Co., Ltd. 21 MW Semi-coke Waste Gas for Power Generation Project
Vaayu India Wind Power Project in Andhra Pradesh
Kohinoor Wind Power Project in Rajasthan
Vedan Binh Phuoc Plant tapioca starch wastewater biogas extraction and utilization project, Binh Phuoc Province, Socialist Rep
Inner Mongolia Wulatezhongqi Chuanjing Phase V Wind Power Project
Gansu Zhouqu Lijie Hydropower Station Project
Sichuan Yanyuan Woluoqiao Hydropower Station Project
JR One Wastewater Biogas to Electricity Project
Hebei Shangyi Manjing North Wind Farm Project
Waste Heat Recovery and Utilisation for Power Generation Project of Fusui Xinning Conch Cement Company Limited
Huaneng Shandong Rongcheng Chudao Wind Power Project
Oaxaca I Wind Farm
4.75 MW Bundled Wind Power Project by Associated Stone Industries (Kotah) Ltd
Nam Phang hydropower project
Piedra Larga Wind Farm
Luoning Yumenhe Hydropower Project in Henan Province, P.R.China
Yanchuan Solar Cooker Project
DHCL Gas Turbine based Cogeneration Project
4.5MW Wind Power Project by Hira Group
Methane Recovery and Utilization CDM project in Zhongmou County Henan Province
Sichuan Shangluo Small Hydropower Project
Shaanxi Wenjing 48MW Hydropower Project
Shaanxi Shenmu Hengdong Waste Gas Based Electricity Generation Project
6 MW biomass based grid connected power generation by M/s Armstrong Energy Pvt. Ltd at Nashik
Utilisation of the thermal energy content of the waste gas of clinker cooler and pre-heater for power generation at a cement p
Biomass based co-generation project
Cebu City Landfill Gas and Waste to Energy Project.
2.10 MW Wind Power Project by M/s Chhotabhai Jethabhai Patel & Co. (CJP) at Belwa Ranaji Village, Shergarh Taluka, Jodhpur
Los Mangos landfill gas capture and flaring project
G.B. Industries Biomass Fuel Switch Project
Matang Manufacturing and GMP Medicare Bundled Fuel Switch Project
Samdal Wind Power project
Dak Psi 5 Hydropower Project
Huaneng Xinjiang Hami Santanghu Phase II Wind Farm Project
Fujian Shaowu Jinwei Hydropower Project
Biopower project at Charoensuk Starch Co. Ltd, Thailand
Biomass based power project of Rayapati Power Generation Private Limited
Dak Doa Hydropower Project
Greenhouse Gas Emission Reductions Through Super Critical Technology - Coastal Andhra Power Ltd
Liaoning Kangping Zhangqiang Wind Power Project
Household biogas project in Xintian, Ningyuan, Jianghua and Lanshan counties of Yongzhou City, Hunan Province
Blue Fire Bio wastewater treatment and biogas utilization project
Cabo Negro Wind Farm Project, Phase 1
T.H. Pellet Wastewater Treatment and Heat and Electricity Generation in Nakhon Ratchasima, Thailand
Fujian Muyangxi River Fengyuan Hydropower Project
Inner Mongolia Tongliao Zhalute Qi Phase I North Wind Power Project
Dalmia Chini Mills Nigohi Project
Weihai Jingqu 49.8 MW Wind Farm Project Phase I
Yunnan Yingjiang Zhina River 2nd Level Hydropower Station Phase 1 and Phase 2
Baoding Landfill Gas Recovery and Utilization Project in Hebei Province
Landfill Gas Recovery and Utilization Project in Linyi Municipal Waste Sanitary Landfill
W2E Siang Phong Biogas Project Cambodia
Shanxi Pinglu Kaidi Wind Power Project
The Converging World Renewable Energy India Wind Farm Phase 1
Maoyandong Stage IV Hydropower Project in Luxi County of Honghe Prefecture of Yunnan Province
SF6 Emission Reduction in LCD Manufacturing Operation in Tangjung, South Korea
SF6 Emission Reduction in LCD Manufacturing Operation in Cheonan, South Korea
Improved Cook Stoves CDM project of JSMBT
Methane Recovery Project of Lianyungang Jinchanglin Alcohol Co., Ltd.
Guangxi Liuzhou Iron and Steel (Group) Company Blast Furnace Gas Utilization for Power Generation Project
Baguari Hydropower Plant CDM Project Activity
Ji’an Kaidi Biomass Power Project
KS Oils Wind Power Project in Tamil Nadu
Guizhou Qingshuitang 9MW Hydro Project
Kachung Forest Project: Afforestation on Degraded Lands
Catalytic N2O abatement project in the tail gas of the nitric acid production plant in G.F.C, Syria
Inner-Mongolian Mengniu Aoya Biogas Power Project (1.36MW)
Methane Recovery from Wastewater Treatment Reactor at Linqing Galaxy Paper Mill
Fuel Switching of Imam Khomeini Sugarcane Plant
Fuel Switching of AmirKabir Sugarcane Plant
Fuel Switching of Debal Khazaei Sugarcane Plant
Fuel Switching of Salman Farsi Sugarcane Plant
Inner Mongolia Chifeng Chaganhada Wind Power Project
SF6 recovery and reclamation project, South Korea
Guohua Chicheng Dushikou West Wind Farm Project
Huaneng Laizhou Phase II Wind Farm Project
Musugou Yiji and Erji 12.4MW Bundled Hydropower Project in Sichuan Province
Qinghai Qingshizui 10.5MW Small Hydropower Station
Vanala Small Scale Hydropower Project
La La Hydropower Project, Vietnam
Green House Gas Abatement through installation of Biomass fired boiler at Limtex Tea and Industries Ltd
Wind Energy Project in Tamilnadu by M/s Advik Hi-tech Pvt. Ltd.
Luxi Nanmahe II 4MW Small Hydro Power Project
Inner Mongolia Chifeng Dayuying Wind Farm Project
Rwanda Natural Energy Project: Water Treatment Systems for Rural Rwanda (Shyira and Fawe)
Inner Mongolia Goldwind Damao Wind Farm Phase II Project
Xinjiang Alashankou Phase II Wind Power Project
Wastewater Treatment with Biogas System in Palm Oil Mill at Bangsawan, Surat Thani, Thailand
Hunan Lixian 15 MW Biomass Power Phase Two Project
50.4 MW wind power project by EN Renewable Energy Pvt. Ltd
Factory energy efficiency improvement in ceramic Kiln fuel usage in Indonesia
Binga Hydro Electrical Power Plant (BHEPP) rehabilitation project
Ambuklao Hydro Electric Power Plant (AHEPP) rehabilitation project
Shaanxi Methane Recovery and Electricity Generation Project in Xi’an Guowei Starch Co., Ltd
Wind Power Project in Porbandar district, Gujarat, India by M/s Venkatalaxmi Renewable Enegy Pvt. Ltd.
Inner Mongolia Zhengxiangbaiqi Zheligentu project I wind farm project
Wind power project at Theni by Powerica Limited
Kezuohou Banner Huadeng 49.5MW Wind Farm Project
Wuzhou Hydropower Project of Dao County, Yongzhou City, Hunan Province, P.R.China
Kinshasa Landfill gas recovery and flaring project
Dak Hnol Hydropower Project
Energy Efficiency measure at Grasim, Kotputli.
BAJ Tulang Bawang Factory tapioca starch wastewater biogas extraction and utilization project, Lampung Province, Republic o
Efficient Fuel Wood Cooking Stoves Project in Foothills and Plains of Central Region of Nepal
15 MW bundled grid connected renewable energy project in Maharashtra, India
GREEN ENERGY TO GRID at Dhule, Maharashtra
Sichuan Liangtan Hydropower Station Second Phase Project
Guizhou Xishui Jinyang Hydropower Station
Huaneng Weichang Yudaokou Phase I Wind Farm Project
Bataan 2020 12.5 MW Power Rice Hull Cogeneration Project
Dacaoba Hydropower Project in Mian County, Shaanxi Province, P.R.China
Ningxia Mahuangshan Phase I 49.5MW Wind-farm Project
Tianjin Dagang Mapengkou Wind power project
Lubasi Hydropower Project in Gansu Province
Line 5 & 6 - PFC emission reduction at DUBAL
Jiangxi Shihutang Hydropower Project
Guodian Wuchuan Xiwulanbulang Hongshan Wind Farm Phase I 49.5MW Wind Power Project
Shanxi Wangpo Low Concentration Coal Mine Methane Utilization Project
GEI Wind Power Project in Karnataka, India
Wind Power Project by ILC Industries Limited
Bajo Tuluá Minor Hydroelectric Power Plant
Mezapa Small-Scale Hydroelectric Project
Ha Nang Hydropower Project
Hunan Xiaohe Small Hydropower Project
Primary Heating Network in Hulan and Songbei Districts of Harbin City
Hekou 23MW Hydropower Project
Bundled Wind Power Project by DTC and VST
Putian Shicheng Wind Farm Project
MY08-WWP-30, Methane Recovery in Wastewater Treatment, Pahang, Malaysia
Inner Mongolia Chifeng Songshan Laoshuiquan Wind Power Project
Inner Mongolia Alashan Helanshan Yinxing Wind Farm Phase I Project
Inner Mongolia Wengniute Sunjiaying Shangchang Wind Power Project
1.5 MW Wind Power Project in Sinnar, Maharashtra
Nam Mu & Khuoi Luong Hydropower Bundled project
Inner Mongolia Wulanchabu Hongji Wind Farm Project
Alashan 9MW Hydropower Station
India: Himachal Pradesh Reforestation Project – Improving Livelihoods and Watersheds
(ABGSPL): Methane recovery in waste water treatment & Methane/Biomass Energy Generation Project
Gongba River Small Hydropower Project in Gansu Province
Jiutiaoling Small Hydropower Project, Gansu Province
Low Pressure Gas Recovery Project of Shandong Changyi Petrochemical Co., Ltd., China
Xinjiang Kashi River Wenquan Hydropower Project
Yunnan Tianhuaban Hydropower Project
Low Pressure Gas Recovery Project of Shandong Weifang Hongrun Petrochemical Auxiliary Co., Ltd., China
Anhua Bundled Small Hydropower Project
Low Temperature Waste Heat Power Generation Project in Zibo Sunnsy Cement Corporation Limited
Shneur Solar Thermal Grid-Connected Power Plant in Ze'elim
Asahan 1 Hydroelectric Power Plant 2 x 90 MW
Lincang County Meiziqing 3rd Level Hydropower Station
Handan Biomass Power generation Project
Beijing Guanting Wind Power Project Phase II and Phase II addition
Lake Turkana 310 MW Wind Power Project
Nongguan 2MW Hydro Power Project in Guizhou Province, China
Improving Rural Livelihoods Through Carbon Sequestration By Adopting Environment Friendly Technology based Agroforestry
Hebei Fengning Batou Wind Power Project
Gansu Shuigouping Small Hydropower Project
Jiangxi Nanfang Cement Low Temperature Waste Heat Power Generation Project
Batavo Cooperativa Agroindustrial: Greenhouse emission reductions on swine production by means the installation of better w
Homet Raya Sibu Biomass Cogeneration Power Plant Project
Inner Mongolia Wengniute Wudaogou Xigouli Wind Power Project
Methane Recovery Project of Meihekou City Fukang Alcohol Co., Ltd.
Sichuan Maoergai Hydropower Project
SF6 emission reductions in distribution part of Korea Electric Power Corporation
Partial substitution of fossil fuels with biomass at Semen Gresik cement plant in Tuban
Bundled Wind Power Project in Maharashtra
Dukouba 129MW Hydropower Project in Chongqing City
CECIC Urumqi Tuoli Phase I Wind Farm Project
Implementing energy efficient measures to reduce fuel gas consumption at GASCO
Inner Mongolia Bayannaoer Chuanjingsumu Wind Power Project
Qinghai Baokuhe III Hydropower Station Project
Chongqing Chengkou County Jianjiawan Hydropower Station Project
China Niaoerchao Hydropower Project
Zhangping Hongshi Cement Waste Heat Recovery Project
24MW Yunnan Deze Hydropower Project
Inner Mongolia Hulunbeier Yakeshi Xingan Wind Power Project
Guohua Tongliao Kezuo Zhongqi Phase I 49.5 MW Wind Farm Project
Hebei Guyuan Huanghualiang Windfarm Project
Huanza Hydroelectric Project
El Guacal Landfill Gas Flaring Project
Waste Heat Recovery and Utilisation for Power Generation Project of Xing’an Conch Cement Company Limited
Dak Srong 2 Hydropower Project
Gansu Guazhou Ganhekou Fourth Wind Farm Power Generation Project
Chengbu Miao Minority Autonomous County Liuma 6.4MW Hydro Power Station Project
Biomass based power generation plant at village Channu, Punjab
Yunnan Amojiang Sanjiangkou Hydropower Project
Hubei Laifeng Jinlongtan Hydropower Station
Gansu Taolai River 52.8MW Dongshuixia Hydropower Project
Ningxia Mahuang Mountain Wind Farm Huianpu Master Phase One Project
15 MW Neerukatte small hydroelectric project, Karnataka, India
Ho Bon Hydropower Project
Tailan River the 4th Hydropower Station Project in Wensu County, Aksu Area, Xinjiang Autonomous Region
Gansu Guazhou Ganhekou No.8 Wind Farm Project
Chongqing Shizhu County 48MW Yangdong River (Dukou) Hydropower Station
Ngoi Hut 1 Hydropower Project
Dak Rung 1 Hydropower Project
Liangshan Chunheweishui Small Hydropower Project
Ibi Batéké degraded savannah afforestation project for fuelwood production (Democratic Republic of Congo)
9 MW wind power project of M/s. L.S.Mills Limited in Tamilnadu
Qinyu small Hydropower Project in Gansu Province
Guizhou Beilei 8.4MW Hydro Power Project
8MW Bundled Hydropower Project in Hubei Province
Argos CO2 Offset Project, through reforestation activities for commercial use
Renewable Energy Based Power Generation
3 MW Wind Power Project by Jalaram Ceramics at Bhachau in Kutch, Gujarat
Sichuan Province Songpan County Muguadun Hydroelectric Project
Grid connected renewable energy project in India
Reducing gas leaks in low pressure and medium pressure gas distribution networks in Ferghana Valley
Gwangju metropolitan city sanitary landfill LFG power plant CDM project
Bagasse based Cogeneration Project - Satish Sugar Limited
Huaneng Guangdong Nan'ao East Island Wind Farm Project
Wastewater Treatment with Biogas System in Palm Oil Mill at Saikhueng, Surat Thani, Thailand
Chongqing Datong Coalmine VAM Destruction and Utilization Project
Liaoning Xidayingzi Wind Farm Project
Gansu Guazhou 300 MW Wind Power Project
S.K. Power Wastewater Project
Liaoning Julonghu Wind Farm Project
Hunan Longhui Yuanmushan Hydropower Project
Beiji River Bundled Small Hydropower Project in Mianning County, Sichuan Province
Xiangshui River First Stage 10MW Run-of-river Hydropower Project
Wind Energy Project in Maharashtra by M/s Shah Promoters & Developers
Inner Mongolia Wengniute Xiyangshugou Wind Power Project
Shangwulipu Hydro Power Project
Fujian Pingnan Lidaping 20MW Hydropower Expansion Project
Co-composting of EFB and POME at PT. Sabut Mas Abadi in Kumai
Longkou Hydropower Project
Rundi Hydropower Expansion Project
4MW AMDB Perting Mini Hydro Project
Evlayim Landfill Project
Parluasan Hydro Electric Power Plant
Landfill Gas Recovery and Flaring Project in Akouedo, Ivory Coast
Hubei Wufeng Shuijinsi, Zhuqiao and Zhifangtou Hydropower Stations Bundled Project
Guanacaste Wind Farm
Jiangxi Huichang Yingnaogang Hydropower Project
Reforestation of grazing Lands in Santo Domingo, Argentina
Heilongjiang Qinghequan Biomass Cogeneration Project in Hulin City, Heilongjiang Province
Hunan Shuangpai Wulipai 45MW Hydropower Project
Gansu Sunan Xiyinghe III 8.45MW Hydropower Project
CPPL Wind Energy Project
Installation of 12 TPH biomass based thermal energy generation unit at Dalkhola , West Bengal
Sichuan Li County Jiujiapeng Hydropower Project
Baiguoshu 6.4MW Hydropower Project in Guizhou Province, China
Ningxia Hongsipu Phase II 49.5MW Wind-farm Project
Carroll’s Foods do Brasil & LOGICarbon – GHG Emission Reductions from Swine Manure Management System, Diamantino, MT
Huaneng Tongliao Kezuozhongqi Dongbaiyin Wind Farm Project
Sichuan Fangdaping Hydropower Project
Xiyinghe Sangou Bundled Hydropower Project
Xiying River Shuangyaowan I 5.6MW Hydropower Project
Hubei Xuan’en Jintan Hydropower Station
Dayan River Stage I and Dayan River Stage II 17.6MW Bundled Hydropower Project
Inner Mongolia Zhalute Arikunduleng Wind Farm Project
Ningxia Mahuangshan Hanas Phase I Wind Farm Project
“Grid Connected Wind Power Project in Tamilnadu.”by Karur Textile Park Limited
Waste Gas for Power Generation in Fugu County Yuchao Coal Electricity Chemical Industry Co., Ltd.
6.15 MW wind power project in Rajasthan, India
Biogas use in Town Gas Factory in Santiago
Wastewater Treatment with Biogas System in Palm Oil Mill at Kanjanadij, Surat Thani, Thailand
Wind Power Project of SSGP
Sumilao SURE Eco Energy Philippines Inc. Biogas to Energy Project
Shenmu County Hengsheng Coal Chemical Co., Ltd. 30MW Semi-coke Waste Gas Power Generation Project
Commonal-Uddiawan Mini-Hydro Power Project
Biomass based steam generation for dyeing and/or bleaching unit at Exodus Knitwear Pvt. Ltd
Jilin Da’an Dagangzi Wind Power Project Phase IV
Bionersis LFG Project Indonesia 2: Batam
Huadian Hebei Guyuan 100.5MW Wind Farm Project
Methane Recovery Project of Jiangsu Lianhai Bioengineering Co., Ltd.
Pingtou 180MW Hydropower Project in Sichuan Province
10 MW Biomass based power generation project by Rake Power Limited at Ramtek, Nagpur
Ningxia Mahuangshan Master Phase I Wind Farm Project
Henan Yinge Industrial Investment Corporation Wastewater Treatment and Methane Recovery Project
Chongqing Liujiagou 20MW Hydro Power Project
5 MW Wind Power Project by Gokul Refoils and Solvent Limited
Inner Mongolia Wuchuan Yihemei Wind Farm 49.5 MW Project
Hainan Gezhen Hydropower Project
Wind based power generation by SRHHL
Wind Power based electricity generation project in India by DLF Home Developers Limited
Yunnan Lixianjiang Shimenkan Hydropower Project
Ningxia Dalisi 40.5MW Wind-farm Project
7.5 MW Grid connected biomass power project in Katni District, Madhya Pradesh.
Song Ong Hydropower Project
Dalian Tuchengzi Wind Power Project 30 MW
Gimhae PV(photovoltaic) Power Plant Project
Modal Shift from Road to Train for transportation of cars
Gansu Sunan 6.3MW Sidalong Stage I Hydropower Project
Avoidance of HFC-134a emissions in rigid Poly Urethane Foam (PUF)
Yunnan Maguan Huabazi Hydropower Station
Hunan Yaorenping Hydropower Project of China
Pingju 4MW Hydropower Project in Guizhou Province
Project for the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions of Hidroelectrica La Confluencia S.A.
Laoshizhai Hydropower Station
Hunan Tongba Small Hydropower Project
Shenzhen Dongbu LNG Power Generation Project
4.8 MW biomass based power plant at Shreyans Industries
Timbues cogeneration project
Eléctrica del Valle de México Wind Farm
Xinjiang Huadian Buerjin Chengnan Phase I Wind Farm Project
Galofer CHP with Rice Husks
1.5 MW wind power project.
Aguan biogas recovery from Palm Oil Mill Effluent (POME) ponds and biogas utilisation - Exportadora del Atlántico, Aguan/Hon
Yanbian County Yanshuihe Hydropower Station
3 MW Wind power project in Rajasthan
Shandong Penglai Wind Farm Phase II Project
Huadian Tieling Zhenxibao Wind Farm Project
Xinrong 49.5MW Wind Power Generation Project in Shanxi Province
Huaneng Guizhou Jiucaiping Phase I Wind Farm Project
Xinjiang Buerjin Tianrun Windpower Co., Ltd. Wind Farm 1st Stage Project
Nuevo Manantial and Agroland Wind Power Generation Project
Datang Duolun Daxishan Farm II
8.4 MW Wind Energy Project by Sanwaria Agro Oils Limited, India
Global Sun PV Solar Power Plants I
Global Sun PV Solar Power Plants II
Lianhua I and Lianhua II bundled Small Hydropower Project in Hezhou City, Guangxi Zhuang
Hebei Zhangbei Baimiaotan Wind Power Project Phase I
3 MW bundled Wind Power project at Ambaliyara and Jangi Villages, district Kutch, Gujarat, India, implemented by M/s Terap
Dongbaishan 15MW Wind Farm Project
Ningxia Mahuang Mountain Wind Farm Huianpu Hanas Phase One Project
Harapan Biogas Project
Yunnan Huize Niulanjiang River Xiaoyantou 130MW Hydropower
Sungai Kerling Hydropower Plant
Biomass based power generation project in Maharashtra, India
MMEPL Renewable Energy Generation at Tamil Nadu
Hebei Chengde Runfeng Wind Farm Project
Barro Blanco Hydroelectric Power Plant Project
Hunan Zishui First Cascade Hydropower Project
10 MW Tangka/Manipi Hydro Electric Power Plant
Biogas Plant at United Plantations Berhad, UIE Palm Oil Mill
Wind power project by ICSA India Ltd.
Sichuan Guang’an Caishandong Coal Mine CMM Power Generation Project
Felda Kalabakan and Jerangau Composting Project In Malaysia
Biogas Recovery at Ulu Kanchong Palm Oil Mill
Huaneng Tongliao Kezuozhongqi Xibaiyin Wind Farm Project
Beijing Yanqing Low Wind-speed Pilot Windpower Project
Bundled Wind Power Project in Maharashtra & Gujarat by WPPL
Kaiyuan Yemin 49.5 MW Wind Power Project
Ningxia Taiyangshan Wind Farm Second Phase 49.5MW Project
Goiandira, Pedra do Garrafão, Pirapetinga and Sítio Grande Small Hydropower Plants Project Activity
Ban Coc Hydropower Project
Massive introduction of Compact Fluorescent Lamps (CFLs) to households in Ecuador
Inner Mongolia Jingneng Zheligentu Wind Farm Phase II Project
Methane avoidance trough utilisation of anaerobic reactor for wastewater treatment at a tapioca starch factory in Ketapang, L
Datang Duolun Daxishan phase III Wind Farm project
Bangkok Kamphaeng Saen East: Landfill Gas to Electricity Project
Song Chung Hydropower Project
“Univanich Siam Biogas to Energy Project, Thailand”
Cleaner Technology in Electricity Production
Bangkok Kamphaeng Saen West: Landfill Gas to Electricity Proje
Nanyang Landfill Site LFG Recovery to Electricity Project
Huaneng Fuxin Zhangbei Wind Farm Project
Inner Mongolia Tongliao Zhalute Qi Beishala Wind Power Project
Douala Landfill gas recovery and flaring project
Gansu Guazhou Ganhekou No 1 Wind Farm Project
Qinglang Hydropower Project in Sichuan Province
Fuel Switching from Mazout to Natural Gas in Misr Fine Spinning & Weaving and Misr Beida Dyers at Kafr El Dawar
Florín Small Hydro.
Balsio Small Hydroelectric Project of Ginni Global Pvt. Ltd.
3.6MW Wind Power Project by M/s Hira Steels Ltd
30 MW wind power project at Surajbari, Gujarat in India
Hebei Chengde Weichang Yudaokou Pasture 150MW Wind Farm Project
Inner Mongolia Kezuohouqi Xihailasitai Wind Power Project
Inner Mongolia Kezuohouqi Baiyintala Wind Power Project
Caruquia 9.76 MW Hydroelectric project
Emissions reduction through partial substitution of fossil fuels with renewable plantation biomass and biomass resi
Liaoning Changtu Manjing Wind Power Project
Shawan Hydropower Station, Dadu River, Sichuan Province
Heilongjiang Qianjin Biomass Power Generation Project
Wuhe Kaidi Biomass Power Project
Hunan Qidong Kaidi Biomass Power Project
Biomass based thermal energy generation by M/s Priyadarshini Sahakari Soot Girni Ltd. at Shirpur in Maharashtra
3 MW renewable energy project by Gunsola Hydro Power Generation Pvt. Ltd.
Qichun Kaidi Biomass Power Project
Sichuan Lengshuikou 12.1 MW Small-Scale Bundled Hydropower Project
Jinping Maguo River Hydropower Station
Horcones biomass power plant expansion project
Gu’ertu River Stage VI and VII 17MW Bundled Hydropower Project
Heilongjiang Youyi Biomass Power Generation Project
Fujian Jianyang Huilong Hydropower Project
Lao Cai - Lai Chau - Kontum Bundled Hydropower Project
Inner Mongolia Tongliao Naiman Banner Baxiantong Chagantala Wind Power Project
Wanzai Kaidi Biomass Power Project
Wangjiang Kaidi Biomass Power Project
10 MW Biomass based renewable energy generation for the grid at Sri Panchajanya Power Pvt. Limited in Hingoli District, Mah
Shanxi Yuncheng 25MW Biomass Power Plant Project
CDM Project Paragominas
Trueno River Hydroelectric Power Plant
Gansu Wuwei 23MW Zamusi Hydropower Project
Republic Cement Corporation – Teresa Plant Waste Heat Recovery Project
Dalmia Chini Mills Jawaharpur Project
Chongqing Wulong Quantang Hydropower Station
Suqian Kaidi Biomass Co-generation Project
70MW Yunnan Dayingjiang 2nd Tier Hydropower Project
Guangxi Liuzhou Iron and Steel (Group) Company 3# Coke Dry Quenching and Waste Heat Utilization for Power Generation Pr
“Cooperativa Lar Wastewater Treatment and Energy Generation Project”
iHOT - I water heating service
22.5 MW Wind Power Project by Ruchi Soya Industries Limited at Palsodi, District-Ratlam, Madhya Pradesh
Gansu Tianrun Liuyuan 1st Stage 49.5MW Wind Park Project
Wind energy based eco friendly electricity generation project located at Theni district, Tamil Nadu, India
CECIC Zhangbei Gaojialiang Wind farm Project
Inner Mongolia Zhalute Qi Wulijimuren Phase I Wind Farm Project
Huadian Xinjiang Xiaocaohu Second Wind Farm Phase I Project
9 MW Beas Kund Hydel Power Project
Huaneng Eryuan Ma’anshan Wind Farm Project
ANAEROBIC DIGESTION SWINE WASTEWATER TREATMENT WITH ON-SITE POWER PROJECT (ADSW RP3002)
Da Den Hydropower Project
Landfill biogas extraction and combustion plant in El Inga I and II landfill (Quito, Ecuador)
Viñales biomass power plant
Huaneng Tuokexun Baiyanghe First Stage 49.5MW wind farm project
AES Tietê Afforestation/Reforestation Project in the State of São Paulo, Brazil
13.75 MW wind power project in Davangere, Karnataka, India.
Gansu Liujialang Hydropower Expanded Project of China
ANAEROBIC DIGESTION SWINE WASTEWATER TREATMENT WITH ON-SITE POWER PROJECT (ADSW RP2024)
Gansu Zhangye 7.2MW Yingke Hydropower Project
Hanyang Municipal Solid Waste Incineration for Energy Generation Project in Haining City
Huaneng Xinbaerhuzuo Qi Wind Farm Phase I Project
Tongcheng Kaidi Biomass Power Project
Lingyun County Haokun Hydropower Project
Poyang Kaidi Biomass Power Project
Jiangxi Xiuhe River Xiafang 36MW Hydropower Project in China
Waste heat utilization for charge pre-heating in a sponge iron manufacturing process of HKMPL,India
7.5 MW Wind Power project in Jodhpur, Rajasthan
Beijing Deqingyuan Chicken Farm 2.4MW Biogas Power Project
Liaoning Linghai Shengli Wind Farm Project
Dehe Zhangbei Phase I Wind Farm Project
Kunming Shilin Grid-connected Solar Power Generation Project
Huaneng Keyouzhongqi Baiyinnula Wind Farm Project
Guohua Wulate Zhongqi Chuanjing Phase II Wind Farm Project
Shanxi Guangling Diandingshan Phase I Wind Farm Project
Liaoning Linghai Nanxiaoliu Wind Farm Project
Jiulong County Rekuhe Stage II Hydropower Project, Sichuan Province
Relleno Norte Landfill Gas Project
Jiulong County Rekuhe Stage III Hydropower Project, Sichuan Province
Yunnan Luquan Hayi River 4th and 5th Level Hydropower Stations
16.45 MW bundled grid connected renewable energy project in Tamil Nadu, India
Guanhães Energia CDM Project, Minas Gerais, Brazil (JUN1123)
N2O Abatement Project of Nitric Acid Plant of Henan Shenma Nylon Chemical Co., Ltd.
Bugoye 13.0 MW Run-of-River Hydropower Project
Xinjiang Hetian Bobona Hydropower Project
Musa River 1st Level Small Hydropower Project
Shaanxi Langao Xiangziba Hydropower Project
Anhui Suzhou 2×12.5MW Biomass Power Generation Project
Mungcharoen Green Power - 9.9 MW Rice Husk Fired Power Plant Project
Orissa Lighting Energy Efficiency Project (OLEEP) in Bargarh & Bargarh West Divisions, Orissa, India
1.5 MW Grid connected Wind Electricity Generation at Tirunelveli District, Tamil Nadu, India.
Gansu Huangshui Baichuan Hydropower Project
ANAEROBIC DIGESTION SWINE WASTEWATER TREATMENT WITH ON-SITE POWER PROJECT (ADSW RP 3003)
Hunan Yueyang Kaidi Biomass Power Project
Yunnan Baoshan Songshanhekou Hydropower Station
Methane Recovery Project of Linqu Qinchi Biological Co., Ltd.
Hunan Mayang Jinjiang Small Hydropower Project
ANAEROBIC DIGESTION SWINE WASTEWATER TREATMENT WITH ON-SITE POWER PROJECT (ADSW RP3001)
8 MW wind power plant by K.S Oils Limited
Hunan Taoshui 69MW Hydro Power Generation Project
UB Tapioca Starch Wastewater Treatment Project
Shanxi Wutai Gengzhen Hydropower Station
Shanxi Dingxiang Lingzidi Hydropower Station
Shanxi Zezhou Caohe Hydropower Station
Shanxi Zezhou Dongjiaohe Hydropower Station
Shanxi Yu County Yanjiazhuang Hydropower Station
Shanxi Yu County Wangjiazhuang Hydropower Station
Shanxi Yangcheng Motan Hydropower Station
Sichuan Yinglin 15MW Hydropower Project
Putian Shijing Wind Farm Project
KDC MILL 1 AND MILL 2 BIOGAS PROJECT
Liaoning Qujiagou Wind Farm Project
Beiping Hydro Electric Project
Ningxia Wulan Coal Mine Methane Power Generation Project
Beixu Group Methane to Energy Project
Gansu Guazhou Qiaowan Wind Farm Project
Leak Reduction in Above Ground Distribution Equipment in the Gas Distribution Network UzTransgaz- Zhanubgaz (Zh
Houchang Small Hydropower Project in Shuicheng County, Guizhou Province, China
Energy efficiency improvement Project of CSS sugar mill
Gansu Miaojiaba Hydropower Project
Hunan Yiyang Kaidi Biomass Power Project
6 MW Wind Power Project in Tamil Nadu by REI Agro Limited
New England Landfill Gas to Energy Project
Xinjiang Bazhou Xiaoshankou Hydropower Project
Hubei Xishan & Fengjiawan 14.1MW Small-scale Hydro Power Bundle Project
Xinjiang Alashankou Wind Power Project
Whein Town Landfill Gas Recovery Project
China Dalinjiang Hydropower Project
Chongqing Wanzhou Xiangjiazui Hydropower Station
Environmental Friendly Power Generation
Bionersis LFG project Colombia 3 (Villavicencio)
Biogas production project from mixed manures and biomass in Quilpue, Chile
Baoshan Longling Gongyanghe 3rd 16MW Hydro Project
Fuel switch project on the Gluten 20 dryer of Tongaat Hulett Starch Pty (Ltd) Germiston Mill
1.2 MW wind power project of Matrix Clothing at Gujarat, India
CEMEX Mexico: Alternative fuels and biomass project at Zapotiltic cement plant
Chau Thon Hydropower Project
Biomass based steam generation project at Raichur, India
Gansu Longwangtai Hydropower Project
Fujian Jianyang Huangtangjia Hydropower Project
Gansu Lintan Shubu Small Hydropower Station Project
Shaanxi Majiagou 25 MW Hydropower Project
Bionersis LFG projects Colombia 4 (Cucuta & Manizales)
Waste gas recuperation for thermal energy generation at Tres Marias Plant – Votorantim Metais CDM Project Activity
Sichuan LiwanBusen Cement Waste Heat Recovery for Power Generation Project
“Biomass gasifier for thermal energy generation by Beach Minerals Company Private Ltd.”
Inner Mongolia Wudaogou III Wind Power Project
Jingshan Kaidi Biomass Power Project
Yuliang 60MW Hydropower Project on You River, Guangxi Zhuang Autonomous Region
Jeju special self-governing province Wind Power Project
SK E&S fuel switching CDM bundling project
Shanghai Waigaoqiao coal-fired power project using a less GHG intensive technology
Luogu 10MW Hydropower Station Project in Sichuan Province
Small Hydro Power Project at Jirah
Energy efficiency improvement in the Electric Arc Furnace
Gansu Zhangye Heihe Longhui Small Scale Hydropower Project
1.2 MW Wind Power Project in Maharashtra
Jilin Changling Wind Farm Phase II Project
1.25 MW Wind Power Project at Rajasthan, India
Qijiaping Hydropower Project in Gansu Province
Bazhuahe and Yingpanhe Bundled Small Hydropower Project
Liusha River First Cascade 12.6MW Hydropower Project
Biomass Generation Project in Xun county, Henan province, P.R. China
Fujian Putian Nanri Phase III Wind Power Project
Heiluohe Cascade Hydro Project
Karya Makmur Bahagia Co-composting Project
Hangzhou Huadian Banshan Power Generation Co., Ltd.’s Natural Gas Power Generation Project
Wugang Waste Gas Recovery and Power Generation Project
2 x 2.5MW Sainj Hydro Electric Project implemented in Shimla District of Himachal Pradesh
Huaneng Tongliao Kezuo Zhong Qi Nanhari Wind Farm Project
Energia Verde Carbonization Project - Mitigation of Methane Emissions in the Charcoal Production of Grupo Queiroz Galvão, M
Fujian Dongshan Damaoshan Wind Power Project
Baimianxia Hydropower Project in Shaanxi
Combined Cycle at Loma de la Lata Thermo Unit
Huizhou Landfill Gas Recovery and Utilization Project
Bumi Sawindo Permai Co-Composting Project
Queluz and Lavrinhas Renewable Energy Project
Hebei Fengning Dahexi Wind Power Project
Ganhekou V 201MW Wind Farm Project
Simeigou 10MW Hydropower Project in Sichuan Province
Datang Chifeng Danianzi Wind Power Project
Group of Nam Tha Hydropower Projects
Orissa Lighting Energy Efficiency Project (OLEEP) in Aska Division Ganjam District, Orissa, India
Funing County Gula Township Nalin Hydropower Station
Gansu Dunhuang Leidunzi-I Hydropower Station Project
Daode 49.5MW Wind Power Project
Mariposas Hydroelectric Project
Inner Mongolia Hailisu Phase I Wind Farm Project
Chongqing Youyang County Youchou Hydropower Station Project
Biomass power project by Sri Jyoti Renewable Energy Pvt Ltd
Huaneng Xinjiang Hami Santanghu Phase I Wind Farm Project
Liaoning Chaoyang Waste Gas Recovery for Electricity Generation
Yunnan Maguan Xiaobaihe 25MW Hydropower Project
15MW Waste Heat Recovery and Power Generation Project in Jiangsu Helin Cement Co., Ltd.
Lanhua Daning Coal Mine Methane Power Generation Project, Sha
Organoeste Dourados & Andradina Composting Project
Huaneng Wuchuan Lihanliang Phase II Wind Farm Project
Caishenliang 49.5MW Wind Power Generation Project in Inner Mongolia Autonomous Region
Waste Heat Recovery and Utilisation for Power Generation Project of Yingde Conch Cement Company Limited
Hainan Dongfang Sigeng Wind Farm Phase I Project(48MW)
Huadian Da’an Fengshuishan Phase I Wind Farm Project
Fujian Fuqing Gaoshan Phase I Wind Power Project
5.10 MW Bundled Wind Power Project in India
Fujian Shouning Pingfeng Hydropower Station Project
Huaneng Tongliao Zhurihe Phase II Wind Farm Project
Dak N'Teng Hydropower Project
Ngoi Phat Hydropower Project
Yanapampa Hydroelectric Power Plant
Bundled Hadong-Busan photovoltaic Power Project of The Korea Southern Power Corporation (1MW Hadong Photovoltaic Pow
Dak Nong 2 Hydropower Project
China Resources Huilai Xian’an Wind Power Project
Fujian Pucheng Taipingqiao Hydropower Project
Rice Husk based cogeneration plant
Tongliao Changxing Molimiao Wind Farm Changxing Wind Power Co., Ltd. 49.3MW Wind Power Generation Project
Orissa Lighting Energy Efficiency Project (OLEEP) in Digapahandi Division, Ganjam District, Orissa, India
Grid connected wind energy project in Tamil Nadu by Super Wind Project Private Ltd.
Recovery and utilization of flare waste gases at the Industrial Complex of La Plata Project
Inner Mongolia Hangjin Yihewusu Wind Power Project
Guodian Linghai Qingsong Wind Farm Project
Changzhai 15MW Hydro Power Project in Guizhou Province, China
4.8MW Qingfeng Small Hydropower Project, Shengzhou, China
Plant-Oil Production for Usage in Vehicles, Paraguay
Chengdu Luodai Municipal Solid Waste Incineration Project
Jiangxi Xingzi Daling Wind Farm Project
Jembo II 24 MW Gas Fired Project
China Changtanhe Hydropower Project
Jiangxi Jinjia Biomass Generation Project
Jiangxi Huichang Bai’e 21MW Hydro Power Project
Gansu Xinmintan 10MW Expanded Hydropower Project
Wugang Gas-Steam Combined Cycle Power Plant (CCPP) Project
Tunlan Coal Mine Methane Utilization Project, Shanxi Province,
Hunan Taizhou 25MW Hydropower Station Project
Jiangxi Donggu Hydropower Project
Dengxinqiao 5MW Hydropower Project in Shaanxi Province
Inner Mongolia Tongliao Zhalute Qi Dangxiaogou Wind Power Project
Belitung Energy Biomass Power Plant
Grid connected wind energy project in Tamil Nadu by Simran Wind Project Private Ltd.
Kamojang Geothermal
Ningxia Rujigou Coal Mine Methane Power Generation Project
Biomass based Cogeneration Project activity taken up by India Glycols Limited at Gorakhpur, U.P.
Yunnan Miaolin Hydropower Project
Municipal Solid Waste (MSW) Composting Project in Ikorodu, Lagos State
Orissa Lighting Energy Efficiency Project (OLEEP) in Bhadrak Circle, Bhadrak District, Orissa, India
Huaneng Wuchuan Lihanliang Phase I Wind Farm Project
Yunnan Sigangli 18.9MW Hydro Project
Hebei Shiren II Wind Power Project
Shuangpai County Yongjiang Cascade Hydropower Project, Hunan, P.R. China
Fujian Longyan Tingzhou Hydropower Station Project
20 MW Enercon Wind farms (SAI) Pvt. Limited in Maharashtra
Nam Ngan Hydropower Project
Yunnan Yanjin Hengjiang Wannianqiao Hydropower Station
Yunnan Province Yanjin County Hengjiang Yanzipo Hydropower Station
Qitaihe District Heating Project
Hebei Weichang Guangfayong Wind power project
Zhejiang Tonglu Bipu Hydropower Station
Inner Mongolia Chifeng Toudaogou Wind Power Project
“10.5 MW Wind Power Project” at Kutch district of Gujarat, India, by M/s Energy Infratech Private Limited” in Jangi village
Chongqing Siyanping 49.3MW Wind Power Project
Hongba Small Hydropower Project in Gansu Province
8 MW Cabulig River Mini-Hydroelectric Power Project
Natal Landfill Gas Recovery Project
10.8 MW Wind Power Project by Ruchi Infrastructure Ltd
Hunan Luxi County Nengtan 6.4MW Hydropower Project
Ranteballa Small-Scale Hydroelectric Power Project
37.95 MW Wind power project in Bharmasagar, Karnataka by BPEIPL
SDIC Xiyang Baiyangling CMM to power generation project
LG Solar Energy Taean Photovoltaic Power Plant Project
Samarco Mineração S/A fuel switch project
Mannapitlu Small Hydel Project
Huaneng Fuxin Phase III Wind Farm Project
Trang Palm Oil Wastewater Treatment Project in Trang Province, Thailand
Inner Mongolia Huade 49.5MW Wind Farm Phase I Project
Totoral Wind Farm Project
Inner Mongolia Tongliao Baolongshan 49.5MW Wind Power Project
Reduction in specific energy consumption ratio by installation of energy efficient direct melt technology in PET film manufactu
Thermal energy generation from renewable biomass by Amir Chand Jagdish Kumar Exports Ltd.
Yunnan Ma’er Hydro Power Project
Sigrun group bundled wind power Version 01 September 09, 2007 project
Hebei ChengAn Biomass Cogeneration Project
Inner Mongolia Bayinxile Wind Power Project
20MW Bagasse based Cogeneration power project at Bannari Amman Sugars Limited, Sathyamangalam, Tamil Nadu by Banna
Guangdong Hejiang 7.2MW Hydropower Project
Olkaria II Geothermal Expansion Project
Roaring 40s Wind Farms (Khandke) Private Limited - Phase II
Zhejiang Zhoushan Cengang Wind Power Project
Shandong Qingdao Xiaojianxi Landfill Gas Utilization Project
Bundled Microhydel Projects (3.115 MW) in Uttaranchal, India
Guangxi Baise Dongsun Hydropower Project
Guangdong Guanshan Wind Power Project
Jilintai Stage II Hydropower Project, Nileke County, Xinjiang Uyghur Autonomous Region
'Posco Uruguay' afforestation on degraded extensive grazing land
Malan Coal Mine Methane Utilisation Project
Thermal energy generation from renewable biomass by AIPL
Tra Linh 3 Hydropower Project
“Biogas-based Cogeneration Project at Shakarganj Mills Ltd., Jhang, Pakistan”
Wayang Windu Phase 2 Geothermal Power Project
Jincheng Chengzhuang 18 MW coal mine methane power generation project
Suzhou Landfill in Anhui Province Gas Utilization Project
Wind Power Project in Maharashtra by M/s L. B. Kunjir Engineers & Contractors
9 MW grid-connected wind electricity generation by GNFC
Yangxin Huaxin Cement 18MW Waste Heat Recovery as Power Project
Fundo Las Cruces Landfill Gas Recovery Project
Biogas recovery and Thermal Power production at CITRUSVIL Citric Plant in Tucumán, Argentina
Bundled Wind Power Project by Sheth Developers Private Limited
Sichuan Songxin 20MW Hydropower Project
Hubei Wangjiahe Hydropower Project
Hebei Weichang Zhangjiawan Wind Power Project
Energy efficient power generation in Tirora, India
SDIC Xiyang Huangyanhui CMM to Power Generation Project
Hebei Weichang Zhuzixia Wind Power Project
Yicheng Biomass Cogeneration Project in Hubei Province, China
Tianxin Waste Heat Recovery Project
Biomass based thermal energy generation at M/s. Ester Industries limited, Khatima, Uttarakhand, India
Sichuan Baoxing Dengchigou Second Level Hydropower Station
SF6 recycling project of North China Grid
Su Pan 2 Hydro Power Project
Waste gas for power generation in Shenmu County Tongdeli Coal Chemical Industry Co., Ltd
MRMPL Wind Power Project
Jilin Longyuan Tongyu Phase III Wind Power Project
Yunnan Province, Tengchong County, XiShanHe Hydropower Station Project
Inner Mongolia Shangdu Jiqingliang 49.5MW Wind Power Project
Leak Reduction in Above Ground Gas Distribution Equipment in the Gas Distribution Network UzTransgaz- Markazgaz
Liaoning Changtu Quantou Wind Power Project
Improving Energy Efficiency in Railways' Residential Quarters – Eastern Region
Improving Energy Efficiency in Railways' Residential Quarters – Western Region
Improving Energy Efficiency in Railways' Residential Quarters – Southern and North East Region
Yunnan Baoshan Tenglongqiao Stage II Hydropower Plant, China
Huadian Guangzhou Higher Education Mega Center LNG-fired Po
Xinjiang Dabancheng Sanchang Phase IV Wind Power Project
Hebei Kangbao Sanxiatian Wind Farm Project
Sichuan Jinyanxi 8MW Hydropower Project
Jilin Longyuan Changling Shuanglong Phase I Wind Power Project
Reduced gas leakage at compressor stations
Guangxi Longsheng Lejiang Hydropower Project
Yunnan Wenshan Yanlashan Hydropower Project
Inner Mongolia Saiwusu I Wind Power Project
Yunnan Kegonghe 10MW Hydropower Project
Inner Mongolia Yihewusu Phase II 49.5 MW Wind Power Project
Zhejiang Cangnan Huangdiping Wind Power Project
KOWEPO SMALL HYDROELECTRIC CDM PROJECT IN TAEAN
SANIA fuel switching from natural gas to renewable biomass Project
Dahao Wind Power Project
El Bote small hydroelectric plant
Jiangsu Rudong (II) Expansion Wind Power Project
Funing County Baida Hydropower Station
Yunnan Yongchanghe 9.6MW Hydropower Project
Shaanxi Tiefo Guanyuan 10.0MW Hydropower Project, P.R.China
Shandong Luli Blast Furnace Gas Cogeneration Project
Yunnan Province Yingjiang County Nandan River 3rd Level Hydropower Station
Bundled wind power project by Kalani Industries Pvt Ltd.
La Paloma Hydroelectric Power Plant, Chile
Wind Power Generation Project activity by Interocean Shipping India Private Limited
Xiangcheng County Maxionggou Hydropower Project
Ningxia Shizuishan 4.0 MW Coal Mine Methane Power Generation Project
Chifeng Sunjiaying Wind Power Project
Jiaoyuanba hydropower project in Gansu Province
Shaanxi Hanjiang Shuhe Hydropower Station
Hegang Coal Industry (Group) Co., Ltd. Coalmine Methane Utilization Project
Yangquan Nanmei (Group) Co., Ltd. Coalmine Methane Utilization Project
Xinjiang Uygur Autonomous Region Kashgar Tarim River Xiabandi Hydropower Station
Huaneng Shanxi Ningwu Dongmafang Phase I Wind Farm Project
Sichuan Pingwu County Sancha Hydropower Station Project
Project of Wastewater Treatment in Anning of Guangxi
Afcon E.B Wind Energy "Sirin" & "Gilboa" Grid Connected Wind Farms
Antu Gudonghe I Hydro Power Project
Proyecto Multiambiente del Plata Norte IIIa
Jiangxi Anfu Guanshan Small Bundling Hydropower Project
Bundled Solar Water Heater Project
Guangdong Jiahu Wind Farm Project
Gansu Longchanghe V&VI Bundled Hydro Power Project
Sichuan Baishuijiang Qinglong Hydropower Project
Sichuan Dechang Xinma Hydropower Project
Wind Power Project by Sargam Retails Pvt. Ltd. in Gujarat, India
Bundled Clean Energy Generation Project in Tirunelveli District, Tamilnadu
8.5 MW wind power based electricity generation in the Northern and Western region grids of India
Bundled Wind Power Project by M/s. D. J. Malpani
Improving Energy Efficiency in Railways' Residential Quarters –
Huadian Tongliao Beiqinghe 300 MW Wind Farm Project
CCIL - Waste Gas based Electricity Generation Project
Kuitun River Laolongkou Hydropower Project
Shenmu County Jieneng Multipurpose Use Power Co. Ltd. 100M
Hengmen NG-fired Power Generation Project
Sichuan Mabian River Zhouba Hydropower Station
18 MW Waste Heat Recovery for Power Generation Project in Tongling Shangfeng Cement Co., Ltd
11.4 MW Bundled Small Hydropower Project in Shanjunyan and Liaoli, Guizhou Province, P. R. China
Methane Recovery and Utilisation at PT Pinago Utama Sugihwaras Palm Oil Mill, Sumatera, Indonesia.
Gul Ahmed Combined Cycle Gas Turbine Project
Inner Mongolia Jingneng Jixiang Huaya Wind Farm Phase II Project
Hebei Shangyi Longyuan Wind Power Project
BRASCARBON Methane Recovery Project BCA-BRA-08, Brazil.
BRASCARBON Methane Recovery Project BCA-BRA-02, Brazil.
Sichuan Baoxing Liuheba Small Scale Hydropower Project
Jiangsu Guoxin Siyang Biomass Power Generation Project
Clean Energy Project at Karnataka
Family Choice and Golden Season 2MW Rice Husk Projects
Nam Tang and Na Hau Hydropower Bundled Projects
Hemagiri Mini Hydel Project in Karnataka State, India
Rincon Verde LFGTE Project
Sichuan Gongdefang 15MW Hydropower Project
Inner Mongolia Zhuozi II Wind Power Project
Changjiang Huasheng Tianya Cement Waste Heat Recovery Project
Bekasi Power CCPP project in Indonesia
SSL Wind Power Project
Zhuhai Hongwan Natural Gas Power Generation Project
Inner Mongolia Jingneng Shangdu Jiqingliang Wind Farm Phase I Project
Sichuan Hemu 6MW Hydropower Project
Inner Mongolia Jingneng Chayouzhong Wind Farm Phase II Project
Yunnan Gaohe River 4th level Hydropower Project
Song Quang hydropower project
Xinjiang Aksu Tumuxiuke Hydropower Project
Lubanshan North and South Coal Mine Methane Utilization Project
49 MW Wind Power Project in Western India
Bio-mass (Rice Husk) based Cogeneration project at M/s Rayana Paper Board Industries Ltd. (RPBIL), Vill: Dhaurahra, Post: Digh
Hebei Chicheng Stage I Windfarm Project
Huadian Kailu Yihetala Phase Two 49.5 MW Wind Farm Project in China
CGN Inner Mongolia Zhurihe Phase II Wind Farm Project
Thai An Hydropower Project
Rohul Sawit Industri Co-Composting Project
Orissa Lighting Energy Efficiency Project (OLEEP) in Baripada Circle, Mayurbhanj District Orissa, India
Shaqu Coal mine CMM to power generation Phase 2 Project
Yangquan Yinying Coal Mine Methane (CMM) Power Generation Project of Yangquan City, Shanxi Province, P.R.China
Hunan Xinhuang Shanmutang 8 MW Hydropower Project, China
CECIC HKE Zhangbei Lvnaobao Wind Power Project
Flare Gas Recovery and Utilization of Recovered Flare Gas for thermal requirements in IOCL, Guwahati Refinery
La Hieng 2 Hydropower Project
Wanzhou Kehua Cement WHR to 13.5MW Electricity Project in Wanzhou District
Landfill Gas Recovery and Flaring Project in the El Verde Landfill
Ekurhuleni Landfill Gas Recovery Project – South Africa
340 MW Gas based combined cycle power project expansion at Hazira
Sichuan Luding Moxi 20MW Hydropower Project
Eryuan Huian Hydropower Station
Datong River Tianwanggou Hydropower Station
Chongqing Longshui 8MW Hydro Power Project
Gutanhe 10 MW Hydropower Project in Yunnan Province
Inner Mongolia Chifeng Gaofeng Wind Power Project
Sichuan Neijiang Tiangongtang Hydropower Project
Shree Nakoda Ispat Ltd 12 MW Biomass power generation project
9.0 MW grid connected bundled wind electricity generation project at Tirunelveli, Tamilnadu
Sichuan Heishui Changde 20MW Hydropower Project
Palor Small Hydro Project
Inner Mongolia Chifeng Daheishan Wind Power Project
Sichuan Heishui County Reshuitang 2nd Cascade Hydropower Station Project
Wind power project at Tamilnadu by Powerica Limited
Greenhouse Gas Emission Reductions Through Super-Critical Technology - Sasan Power Ltd.
Sorang Hydro Electric Project
Yunnan Province Yingjiang County Nanpian River Hydropower Station
BRT Chongqing Lines 1-4, China
Sichuan Tiexi Hydro Project
Sichuan Jialingjiang River Fengyi Hydropower Project
Liaoning Xingcheng Liutaizi Wind Farm Project
Micro-hydro Promotion
14MW MIRAE ASSET PV(photovoltaic) power plant bundling project
Landfill gas recovery and utilization in Nam Son, Tay Mo landfills
Methane Recovery and Power Generation Project in High-concentrated Organic Wastewater Treatment in Hubei, China
Recovery and marketing of gas that would otherwise be flared at the Asuokpu/Umutu Marginal Field, Nigeria
K-water small hydroelectric power plant project (IV)
Roaring 40’s Wind Farms (Khandke) Private Limited
Yinqiao and Luojiaba 11.5 MW Bundled Hydropower Project in Guizhou Province
Yunnan Gengma Tiechang River 12.6MW Hydropower Project
Qinxin CMM Power Generation Project
Gansu Guazhou Xiangyang Phase II Wind Power Project
Rice husk based power generation project by MECBL at Raigarh
Santa Cruz II Hydroelectric Power Plant
Zhenkang Fengweihe Hydropower Project in Yunnan Province
Sichuan Longdong 30MW Hydropower Project of China
N2O reduction project at the WNA III nitric acid plant of Deepak Fertilisers & Petrochemicals Corporation Ltd. (“Deepak”), Indi
Nam Chien 2 Hydropower Project
Ningxia Taiyangshan 45MW Wind Farm Project
Expansion of Nature and Waste Bhalaswa Composting Plant at Delhi
China Wuyahe Small Hydropower Project
Gansu Zhangye 8.0MW Shimiao Stage II hydropower project
Sungei Kahang POME Biogas Recovery for Energy Project in Joho
Yunnan Hongta Cement Waste Heat Recovery Power Generation
Tian Siang Co- Composting Project
Shanxi Gaoping biomass combined stoves and heater (BCSH) Project 1
Inner Mongolia Saiwusu II Wind Power Project
Shandong Huaneng Hekou Phase I Wind Farm Project
Renewable biomass based thermal energy generation in Mangal Textile Mills (I) Pvt. Ltd.
Metro Clark Landfill Gas Capture System
Fuqing Jiaru Wind Farm Project
Wind power project by AL – Wind Energy in Tamilnadu
Hubei Baokang Siping Hydropower Station
Green to Energy Wastewater Treatment Project in Thailand
Hanpingzui Hydropower Project in Gansu Province
Sichuan Jialingjiang River Cangxi Hydropower Project
Shaqu 14 MW CMM Power Generation Project in Shanxi Province (Phase I)
Guizhou Qingshuihe Gelibridge Hydropower Project
Yunnan Maguan Tongguo Hydropower Station
Yunnan Yizi 19.2MW Hydropower Project
Yunnan Gaohe River 3rd level Hydropower Project
Xiaopengzu 44MW Hydropower Project, Luquan County, Yunnan Province
Jilin Songyuan Changling Yaojingzi Wind Farm Project
Waste Heat Recovery and Utilisation for Power Generation Project of Zhongguochang Conch Cement Company Limited
Biomass based thermal energy generation at Saber Papers Limited
Yunnan Luliang Yangmeishan Zijia Wind Power Project
Solids separation of POME and co-composting project, Sabah
Methane Reduction at the Taibe’e Landfill using In-situ Aeration
Jiaoziding Small Hydropower Project in Gulin County, Sichuan Province, China
Jilin Xiangyang 1st phase Wind Power Project
Shankou Hydropower Project on Ningjiahe River in Xinjiang Uygur Autonomous Region, China
Bundled fossil fuel switching to NG(natural gas) project in Gyeonggi-do, Republic of Korea
Inner Mongolia Bayannaoer Chuanjingsumu ( III ) Wind Power Project
TBEC Tha Chang Biogas Project
Huaneng Binhai Wind Farm Project
10.0 MW Biomass based power plant project at Bankura, India
24 MW Waste Heat Recovery for Power Generation Project at Ningxia Saima Industry Co., Ltd.
Gansu Datang Changma Wind Power Project
Guangxi Baise Tianlin Dongba Hydropower Station
Guangdong Chaonan Shalong Wind Power Project
Hubei Province Zigui County Guanyintang Hydropower Station
Nanlao Small Hydropower Project in Leishan County, Guizhou Province, China
Beijing Energy Huitengxile 49.5MW Wind Power Project
Liucheng Biomass Power Generation Project in Guangxi Zhuang Autonomous Region, China
4.85 MW Korea Rural Community Corporation (KRC) PV Power Plants bundling Project
Qiangling CFL Distribution Project
Waste Heat Recovery and Utilisation for Power Generation Project of Hunan Conch Cement Company Limited
Anhui Huaibei Qinan Coal Mine Methane Utilization Project
Zafarana 8 - Wind Power Plant Project, Arab Republic of Egypt
Zhejiang Wencheng Baiwanshan Small-Scale Hydropower Project
Caojie Hydropower Project on Jiangling River in Chongqing City
Yunnan Dali Dafengba 48MW Wind Power Project
Active Synergy Landfill Gas Power Generation Project Nakhon Pathom
Gancheng 1st Stage Wind Power Project in Dongfang City Hainan Province, China
Pingdingshan Coal (Group) Company Chaochuan Mine 6*2MW Coke Oven Gas Cogeneration Project
Xiaojin County Zhongmachang Hydropower Project
Wind power project at Gujarat by Powerica Limited
Roaring 40’s Wind Farms (Khandke) Private Limited – Phase III
Manglad Small Hydroelectric Project
Jilin Songyuan Changling Wind Farm project
Sichuan Jialingjiang Xinzheng Hydropower Project
Uttar Pradesh Lighting Energy Efficiency Project (ULEEP) in Cess Divisions of L.E.S.A. Lucknow Zone, Uttar Pradesh, India
Huaneng Changyi Phase I Wind Farm Project
Wind Power Project of CCL
Gansu Yumen Diwopu Phase II Wind Power Project
7.5 MW wind energy project by Taurian Iron and Steel in the State of Gujarat
Chuanjing Wind Farm Inner Mongolia Luneng Phase II
5 MW Wind power project by UIC Udyog Limited
Biogas Plant at United Plantations Berhad, ULU BASIR Palm Oil Mill
Wind Power Project by M/s Chhotabhai Jethabhai Patel & Co. (CJP) at Sinnar, Maharashtra
Federal Intertrade Haiyuan Solar Cooker Project
Reforestation on Degraded Lands in Northwest Guangxi
Dehydration and incineration of sewage sludge in Singapore
Liaoning Faku Ciensi Wind Power Project
Xianggelila Huajiaopo Hydropower Station
Suoi Sap 3 Hydro Power Project in Son La Province
Hunan Taoliao Small Hydropower Project
Fujian Datian Jianshe Hydropower Project
Siam Cement (Thung Song) Waste Heat Power Generation Project (TS46 Project)
Yantai Dongyuan 25.5 MW Wind Farm Project Phase I
Zhenkang Quanqiaohe Hydropower Project in Yunnan Province
Shandong Juye Biomass Power Generation Project
Huzhou Municipal Solid Waste Incineration for Power Generation Project
Jilin Nongan 50MW Biomass Power Plant Project
Jinping Maocaoping Hydropower Station
Social Education and Development Society (SEDS) Biogas CDM pro
Zhejiang Tiantaishan Wind Farm Project
7.5 MW wind energy project by Lal Mahal Limited in the State of Gujarat
Tao River Lianlu Cascade II (Xiacheng) 37.5MW Hydropower Project in Gansu Province, China
Papaloate Hydroelectric Project
1.25 MW Grid Connected Wind Electricity Generation at Tirunelveli District, Tamil Nadu
Hejiang County Yuanxing Hydro Project
13 MW Grid Connected Dandela Mini Hydel Scheme, Karnataka State, India.
Dak Rung Hydropower Project
Xinjiang Bazhou Haermodun 15MW Hydropower Project
Fujian Xiapu Baiyang 10MW Hydropower Project
Ruwu small hydropower project in Gansu Province
Hubei Hefeng Yuejia River 2nd level Hydropower Station
Hunan Xinhua Pingyouqiao 6 MW Hydropower Project
Ea Drang 2 Hydropower Project
12 MW Bundled Photovoltaic power plant in Jeollanam-Do
3.0 MW Wind energy project in Karnataka
Ninger Mengxian River Second Cascade Hydro Power Station Project
Hebei Chengde Peifeng Wind Farm Project
Dujiawan Small Hydropower Project in Gansu Province
6 MW Harangi Phase-II Hydro Power Project in Karnataka, India
Wind Power Project by KPR Fertilisers Limited
Enercon Wind Farms in Karnataka Bundled Project – 33 MW
Installation of Natural Gas based package cogeneration systems at industrial facilities in Gujarat by Gujarat Gas Company Limit
Huadian Laizhou Wind Farm Project
Waste Heat Recovery based 15 MW Power Generation Project at Bestway Cement Limited, Chakwal, Pakistan
Dak Ne Hydropower Project
Bundled Grid Connected Wind power project from Tamilnadu, India
Agroceres – Methane capture and combustion at Granja Paraiso
Small-Scale Hydropower Project Sahanivotry in Madagascar
Renewable energy project at Maharashtra
CrisToro - Lebu Wind Project
3.75 MW Bundled Wind Power Project in Maharashtra
9.75 MW Bundled wind power project in Kerala, India
Pa Khoang hydropower project
Electricity generation through wind power project at Jodhpur, Rajasthan
Huadian Kulun 201MW Wind Farm Project
Ebian Yi Autonomous County Shugujiao Hydropower Station
Taxi Second Cascade Hydropower Project
Adavikanda, Kuruwita Division Mini Hydro Power Project
North Longyuan Huitengliang Wind Power Project
Tarim Oilfield Associated Gas Recovery and Utilization Project
BRASCARBON Methane Recovery Project BCA-BRA-07, Brazil
BRASCARBON Methane Recovery Project BCA-BRA-05, Brazil
Chieng Cong Hydropower Project
Qinghai Jiading Hydropower Project
Lap Vo Rice Husk Biomass Power Plant
Hebei Baoding biomass combined stoves and heater (BCSH) Project 1
Gansu Tanchang County Shawan Hydropower Station Project
Sichuan Miyi Chengnan 15MW Hydropower Project
Inner Mongolia Mangniuhai II Wind Power Project
Heqing County Liuhe 30MW Hydropower Plant
Sichuan Fengyanbao 44MW Hydropower Project
Guangxi Xinglong Small Hydropower Project
Jianli Kaidi Biomass Power Project
LinCang Yun County, XinTangFang Hydropower Station Project
Xiangfan Huaxin Cement 7.5MW Waste Heat Recovery as Power Project
Xinjiang Alashankou Phase I Wind Power Project
Inner Mongolia Zhuozi III Wind Power Project
Jiangxi Shengta Cement 9MW Waste Heat Recovery Project
BRASCARBON Methane Recovery Project BCA-BRA-03
Monjolinho Energética S.A.’s CDM Project
8.053MW CHUNIL PV(photovoltaic) power plant bundling CDM Project
Nanjing Jinling Grid Connected Natural Gas Combined Cycle Power Plant Project
Bionersis LFG project Colombia 2
Hunan Qingxijiang Hydropower Project of China
Inner Mongolia Urad Middle Banner 45MW Wind-farm Project
Inner Mongolia Tongliao Wind Farm Project Phase III
Inner Mongolia Wengniute Banner Wudaogou Wind Power Project (II)
Yunnan Maguan Mihu River 3rd Level Hydropower Station
Hubei Lichuan Yunkou 30MW Hydropower Project
Reforestation as Renewable Source of Wood Supplies for Industrial Use in Brazil
Guangxi Yizhou Sancha 21MW Hydropower Project
Jilin Zhenlai Mali Wind Power Project
Jilin Da’an Dagangzi Wind Power Project Phase III
Shandong Huaneng Shouguang 49.5MW Wind Farm Project
Biogas from Ethanol Wastewater for Electricity Generation
Wind power generation by Shree Naman Developers Ltd.
Guodian Liaocheng Biomass Power Project
Samsung Electronics SF6 abatement project
3 MW wind farm project for Gupta Coalfields & Washeries Limited
Egyptian Brick Factory GHG Reduction Project
Almoiz Bagasse Cogeneration Project
Inner Mongolia Tongliao Wind Farm Project Phase IV
Liaoning Fuxin Gaoshanzi 100.5MW Wind Power Project
Xinjiang Qingsong Cement Low Temperature Waste Heat Power Generation Project
Guohua Xinbaerhu Zuoqi Phase I 49.5MW Wind Farm Project
Point of Use Abatement Device to Reduce SF6 emissions in LCD Manufacturing Operations in the Republic of Korea (
Tiantie Metallurgy Group CDQ Project
Culiacan Northern Landfill Gas Project
Yunnan Dali Wanhuaxi Small Hydro Power Plant
Tres Hermanos Oil Field Gas Recovery and Utilization Project
10 MW Wind Power Project at GSFC Limited
Hainan Chengpo Hydropower Project
Gansu Longchanghe IV 5.4MW Hydro Power Project
Yennehole - 1 Mini Hydel Scheme
Inner Mongolia Wujier Phase I Wind Power Project
Sichuan Pendaikou 18.9MW Hydropower Project
Inner Mongolia Bayanur Wuliji 49.5MW Wind Power Project
Inner Mongolia Siziwangqi Wulanhua Wind Farm Project
Guyuan Wuhuaping 49.5 MW Wind Power Project
Shanghai Laogang 19.5MW Wind Farm Project
Helanshan Phase V 40.5MW Wind-farm Project
Enercon Wind Farms in Karnataka Bundled Project - 73.60 MW
Bundled Waste Processing Facilities in India
Shilong 70MW Hydropower Project in Jilin Province, China
Tongliao Naiman Banner Baxiantong Haritang Wind Power Project
Jiangxi Longyuan 7MW Hydropower Project
Hunan Lengshuijiang Langshitan 36MW Hydropower Project
Beijing Energy Huolinhe B First Phase 49.5MW Wind Farm Project
Liaoning Province Zhangwu Mazongshan Wind Farm Project
Zilenghe 24MW Hydropower Project in Yunnan Province
24MW DONG YANG ENERGY PV(photovoltaic) power plant
Hunan Xiaotan Hydropower Project
“Power generation from flue gas waste heat, Tamil Nadu”
Tongren Jiangshijia 4.45MW Hydropower Project in Qinghai Province, the People’s Republic of China
Xinjiang Midong Tianshan Cement Co.Ltd’s 1600td Utilization Calcium Carbide for Cement Clinker Project
Fujian Shouning Liuchai 20MW Hydropower Project
Huaneng Jilin Tongyu Phase II Wind Farm Project
Sunquest Biomass Renewable Energy Project
Sichuan Jialingjiang River Shaxi Hydropower Project
CGN Inner Mongolia Huitengliang Phase I Wind Farm Project
Mengshan Xingupai Hydro Power Project
5.5 MW Bundled Wind Power Project by WMI Cranes Ltd.
Qianguangtan Small Hydropower Project in Gansu Province
Zhejiang Dachen Island Wind Power Phase I Project
Filmax Biomass Thermal Energy Project
Tongliao Kezuozhong Banner Dailiji Aorimu Wind Power Project
South West Solar Power Plant Project
Huaneng Hailar Xiaoliang Phase I Wind Farm Project
Majing'ao and Matou 15 MW Bundled Small Hydropower Project in Guizhou Province, China
ARS Small Hydroelectric Power Plant
SDIC Gansu Yellow River Wujinxia Hydropower Project
Wangyuan 20MW Hydropower Project in Minhou County Fujian Province, China
Yunnan Lufeng Tuo’an 10MW Hydropower Project
Biomass based power project in Punjab, India
Chongqing Jinjiaba HydroElectric Project
Shaanxi Wanjiabao Miaoliang Langhe Bundled Small Hydropower Project
Merbaujaya Co-composting Project
NHR Co-Composting Project
Uttar Pradesh Lighting Energy Efficiency Project (ULEEP) in Circles I & II of Varanasi, Zone, Uttar Pradesh, India
Gansu Datonghe Liancheng 2nd Stage Hydropower Station Project
Bagasse based cogeneration project of Nizam Deccan Sugars Limited (NDSL)
ICI Polyester Co-generation Project
Songya Hydropower Project
Shanghai Chongming Dongtan Wind Farm CDM Project
Yunlong 8MW Hydropower Project
PFC Emission Reductions at PT. Indonesia Asahan Aluminium (PT. INALUM) Kuala Tanjung
Bundled Estelar CDM Project
50.4 MW Tata Wind Farm - in Maharashtra
Jilin province Zhenlai Heiyupao 49.5MW the first phase wind farm project
Coc Dam Hydropower Project
Rwanda Electrogaz Compact Fluorescent Lamp (CFL) distribution project
Hebei Leting 49.5 MW Wind Farm Project Phase I
Yunnan Province Yingjiang County Nanlang River 2nd Level Hydropower Station
Huaneng Liaoning Fuxin Phase II Wind Farm Project
Nerquihue Small-Scale CDM Afforestation Project using Mycorrhizal Inoculation in Chile
Ha Rao Quan Hydropower Project
Huadian Gansu Guazhou Ganhekou No. 7 Wind Farm Project
Yunnan Youfanggou Hydropower Project
Antu 303 Hydropower Project
Zhejiang Cangnan Xiaguan Wind Power Project
Zhejiang Dongtou 13.5MW Wind Power Project
Guohua Hebei Huanghua (Phase II) 49.5MW Windfarm Project
Langao Niping hydropower project
Shandong Kenli Biomass Generation Project
Chongqing Zhongliang Hydroelectric Project
Sichuan Mabian Yi Minority Autonomous County Yonglexi Hydropower Station
65MW Dagushan hydropower Project in China
Liaoning Changtu Taiyangshan Phase One 49.5MW Wind Farm Project
Inner Mongolia Chayouhouqi Hongmu 48 MW Wind Power Project
Baiyun’ebo 45MW Wind farm Project
Wind energy based power project at Karnataka
Yan Tann Sien Hydropower Project
Yunnan Qianchang Hydropower Project
Biomass based Power Generation near Bargur, Tamil Nadu
Xiannvhu Hydropower Project of Enshi City, Hubei Province
Félou Regional Hydropower Project
17.6 MW captive grid connected electricity generation from wind energy project by Chennai Petroleum Corporation Limited.
Inner Mongolia Ximeng Zheligentu Wind Farm Phase I Project
Guizhou Tongzihe Yuanmanguan Hydropower Project
Sichuan Lushan Dachuan River Cascade Hydropower Bundle Project
Gansu Guazhou Daliangxi Wind Power Project
Dong River Dongyuan 20MW Hydropower Project in Guangdong Province
Inner Mongolia Chifeng Saihanba Tashanzi Wind Power Project
Xundian Jinfeng 12.6MW Hydropower Project
Inner Mongolia Taipusi Gongbaolage Wind Farm Project
Huaneng Tongliao Zhurihe Phase I Wind Farm Project
Yunnan Dali Zhemoshan Wind Power Project
Coyula Landfill Gas Project
Yunnan Kunming Dongchuan Xiaoqing River 7th Level Hydropower Station
Cable Cars Metro Medellín, Colombia
Diebu Lazikou II 5.1MW Hydro Power Project in Gansu Province
6 MW Biomass Based Power Project in Assam by BEPL
Huaneng Tongliao Baolongshan Phase III Wind Farm Project
Methane recovery from wastewater treatment at Dwarikesh Sugar Industries Limited (DSIL)
7.5 MW bundled small-scale wind project, Sangli District, Maharashtra, India
Tianlin Baxin Hydropower Station
20 MW biomass based power project in Maharashtra, India
GHG Emission Reductions through grid connected high efficiency power generation
São Domingos II Hydroelectric Project
Hunan Yongzhou Hydro Bundled Project
Shanxi Wulushan 2nd phase Wind Power Project
Huadian Kailu Yihetala Phase one 49.5 MW Wind Farm Project
Angang Coke Dry Quenching Project
Fenglin Hydropower Project
Sichuan Muli River Dashawan Hydropower Station
Jilin Zhenlai Wind Farm Project
3MW Shinan Wind power project
Yunnan Lujichang Hydropower Project
Forestry Project for the Basin of the Chinchiná River, an Environmental and Productive Alternative for the City and th
Inner Mongolia Chifeng Daguangdingzishan Wind Power Project
Fujian Wuyishan Kengkou Hydropower Project
Huadian Beijing Natural Gas based Power Generation Project
Sichuan Furong Coal Mine Methane Utilization Project
Sichuan Tianshengqiao 12MW Hydropower Project
Hainan Danzhou Eman Wind Power Project
Chongqing Pengshui Sanjiangkou Hydropower Station
Emission free electricity generation at Harihar, Karnataka
Conversion of existing open cycle gas turbine to combined cycle at Guaracachi power station, Santa Cruz, Bolivia
Huaneng Inner Mongolia Keyouzhongqi Gaoliban Wind Farm Project
Jilin Taobei Baoshan Wind Farm Project
Yunnan Saizhu Hydropower Project
Siam Cement (Kaeng Khoi) Waste Heat Power Generation Project, Thailand (KK6 Project)
Sichuan Kangding Huashangou 72MW Hydropower Project
China Sichuan Province Se’ergu Hydropower Project
N2O reduction project at the WNA I nitric acid plant of Deepak Fertilisers & Petrochemicals Corporation Ltd. (“Deepak
Biomass Gasification based Power Generation by Beach Minerals Company Private Limited in India.
Bionersis project on La Duquesa landfill, Dominican Republic
Lanxi Small Hydropower Project in Chengkou County, Chongqing City, China
Guangdong Chaonan Chengtian Wind Power Project
Yunnan Maguan Laqi Hydropower Project
Sichuan Shimian County Ximagu Hydropower Project
Chibi Huaxin Cement 7.5MW Waste Heat Recovery as Power Project
Wuxi Hydropower Project, Qiyang County, Hunan Province
Biomass based Power Plant in Polakpalli Village, Gulbarga District, Karnataka
Composting of Organic Content of Municipal Solid Waste in Lahore
Nam Khot Hydropower Project
Datang Chifeng Bolike II Wind Power Project
Liaoning Changtu Shihu Wind Power Project
Xincun and Wenzhu Bundled Small Hydropower Project in Zhaoping County, Guangxi Zhuang Autonomous Region, China
Hunan Zaoshi Hydropower Project
China Qinghai 42MW Jiangyuan hydropower project
Guangxi Baise Tianlin Baile Hydropower Station
China Sichuan Province Liuping Hydropower Project
Fujian Jianyang Longjiang Hydropower Project
Huaneng Jilin Taobei Phase II Wind Farm Project
Fujian Cement 4# and 5# kilns Waste Heat Recovery for Power Generation Project
Dalian Tuoshan Wafangdian Wind Farm Project
Project JBS S/A – Slaughterhouse Wastewater Aerobic Treatment – Barra do Garças Unit
Hydro Electric Power Project of Celerity Power Pvt. Ltd
Sidehe 24.8MW Hydropower Project in Yunnan Province
Yantai Dongyuan Laizhou 48.5 MW Wind Farm Project Phase I
Inner Mongolia Chifeng Yihegong Windfarm Project
Shandong Rushan Luneng Wind Farm
Sichuan Baixi 24MW Hydropower Project
Jiangsu Xiangshui 201MW Wind Power Project
Enercon Wind Farms in Karnataka Bundled Project – 30.40 MW
KUNAK BIO ENERGY PROJECT
20 MW Biomass Power Project in Tamilnadu
Saiwuduo Hydropower Project in Gansu Province
5 MW Debal Grid-connected Hydroelectric Project in Uttaranchal, India
Inner Mongolia Keyouqianqi Wind Farm Project
Inner Mongolia Wuliji Wind Farm Project
Hunan Sanjiangkou 50MW Hydropower Expansion Project
Enercon Wind Farm (Hindustan) Ltd in Rajasthan
14.1 MW grid connected wind energy project in Tamilnadu by ITC Limited
Reduction of energy consumption during the production of hydraulic lime for the construction industry through the a
Nam Khoa 3 hydropower project
Shandong Dongying 1st phase Wind Power Project
Xinjiang Dabancheng Sanchang Phase III Wind Power Project
Weiyuan River 72MW Hydropower Project in Jinggu County Simao District Yunnan Province, China
Hefei Longquanshan Landfill Gas Power Generation Project
Liaoning Faku 1st phase Wind Power Project
Jiangsu Dongling Wind Farm Project
Jilin Liaoyuan 50MW Level Biomass Cogeneration Project
Jilin Da’an Dagangzi Wind Power Project Phase II
The Bogeda 40.5 MW Wind-Farm Project in Urumqi, Xinjiang, China
2 X 3.5 MW Ullunkal Hydro Power Project in Kerala, India.
Guangxi Jingxi County Yuexu Hydropower Station
BFG-fired Power Generation Project in Baosteel Co Ltd., Shanghai, P. R. China.
Nam Gion Hydropower Project
Guangdong Zhanjiang Yangqian 49.5MW Wind Power Project
Wenshan Panlong River Weilong Hydropower Station
Olkaria III Phase 2 Geothermal Expansion Project in Kenya
Inner Mongolia Chifeng Saihanba Qingmachang Wind Power Project
Liaoning Faku Baijiagou Wind Power Project
Gansu Jingtai 45MW Wind Power Project
Jilin Shuangliao 2nd Phase Wind Power Project
24 MW Bhilangana - III Hydro Power Project
Hunan Laopokou Hydropower Project
Shenyang Faku Wanghaisi Wind Power Project
Gansu Min County Qingshui Hydropower Station Project
Zafarana KfW IV Wind Farm Project, Arab Republic of Egypt
Gochang Solapark 14.98MW Photovoltaic Power Plant Project
Hubei Shenhe 4MW Hydro Power Project
Hebei Fengning Luotuogou 1st Phase Wind Power Project
El Chaparral Hydroelectric Project (El Salvador)
Guohua Wulate Zhongqi Phase I 49.5 MW Wind farm Project
Secondary catalytic reduction of N2O emissions at ONPI nitric acid plant in Bacong, the Philippines
Liaoning Faku Heping Wind Power Project
Inner Mongolia Xinghe Hangtian Wind Farm Project
51 MW wind power project of ONGC at Surajbari, Gujarat in India
Inner Mongolia Jingneng Saihan Wind Farm Phase I Project
Project JBS S/A – Slaughterhouse Wastewater Aerobic Treatment – Vilhena Unit
Zequ River Gakong 30MW Hydropower Project in Henan County of Qinghai Province, China
AGA FANO Liquid CO2 production using CO2 from a fermentation plant at Ingenio Providencia
Dagachhu Hydropower Project, Bhutan
V.P. Farms Pig Manure Methanisation, Methane Recovery and Energy Production Project
Yunnan Yunpeng Hydropower Project
China Chalinhe Hydropower Project
Power Prospect 9.9MW Rice Husk Power Plant
Nkolfoulou Landfill Gas Recovery Project
Yunnan Sinanjiang Hydropower Project
Gansu Yumen Diwopu Wind Power Project
Liaoning Faku Wanghaisi East Wind Power Project
Liaoning Kangping Furaoshan Wind Power Project
Fujian Zhangpu Liuao 3rd phase Wind Power Project
BAJ Pakuan Agung Factory tapioca starch wastewater biogas extraction and utilization project, Lampung Province, Republic of
Cimentos do Mozambique – Matola Gas Company Fuel Switch Project
Energia Limpia Jaremar renewable thermal generation from biomass (EFB) Honduras
Sichuan Xiaohe 48MW Hydropower Project
Rakchad Small Hydro Electric Project
ID08-WWP-11, Methane Recovery in Wastewater Treatment, Jambi, Indonesia
Mokpo Landfill Gas Recovery Project for Electricity Generation
Decha Bio Green Rice Husk Power Generation 7.5MW
8MW biomass based power plant at Phagwara
Yunnan Diqing Jisha Hydropower Project
Wind based renewable energy project in Gujarat
Inner Mongolia Bayannaoer Chuanjingsumu (IV) Wind Power Project
Huaneng Damao Maoming Phase I Wind Farm Project
Guangdong Taishan Shangchuandao Island Phase II Wind Farm Project
Siam Cement (Thung Song) Waste Heat Power Generation Project, Thailand (TS5 Project)
Ningxia Federal Solar Cooker Project
Huade Daditaihong 49.5MW Wind Power Project
IMAR Debaotu Wind Farm Phase I 49.5MW Project
10 MW bundled Luni–III & Luni–II hydroelectric projects for a grid system at Sri Sai Krishna Hydro Energies Private Limited in K
“100 MW Malana – II, Hydro – Electric Power Project (Malana – II HEP)” at Kullu district of Himachal Pradesh State, India, by M
Siam Cement (Ta Luang) Waste Heat Power Generation Project, Thailand (TL5&6 Project)
Guangdong Taishan Shangchuandao Island Phase I Wind Farm Project
Gorai Landfill closure and Gas Capture Project, Mumbai, India
Kambi Wind Farm Project
Biomass based steam generation project by Sterling Agro Industries Ltd.
Gansu Yongchang County Donghewan Cascaded Hydropower Project
Inno-Kwants Mewah- Palm Oil Mill Waste Recycle Scheme, Malaysia
Hubei Yichang Qilinguan Shaguandou Hydropower Station
Tao River Lianlu Cascade I 66MW Hydropower Project in Gansu Province, China
Sichuan Baoxing Dongfeng Hydropower Project
Reduction in GHGs emission from primary aluminium smelter at Hindalco, Hirakud India
Taohe Yangjiahe Hydropower Project, Gansu Province, China
Tianjin TEDA Sewage Methane Recovery Project
Generation of electricity from 3.3 MW installed capacity wind mills by Mission Biofuels India Private Limited (MBIPL), in Sangli
Codana Biogas Project (CBP)
Installation of Bundled Composting Project in the state of Tamil Nadu
Xiangtan Shuangma Landfill Gas Recovery and Utilization Project in Hunan Province
Yunnan Province Luxi City Wanma River 2nd Level Hydropower Station
The International Small Group and Tree Planting Program (TIST), Tamil Nadu, India
Yunnan Dehong Nongling Hydropower Project
Chengkou County Huangan River Lijiaba Hydroelectric Project
Hubei Jiugongshan Wind Farm CDM Project
Methane Recovery Project of Fuyu Huihai Alcohol Co., Ltd.
15 MW Biomass Residue Based Power Project at Ghazipur, India
Shenyang Daxin Landfill Gas to Electricity Project
Hunan Tongdao Yaolaitan 5.55MW Hydro Power Project
CDM Project of Moinho and Barracão Small Hydropower Plant
Santana I SHP CDM Project (JUN 1118)
Henan Nanyang Fangcheng Wind Farm Project
Jidong Cement Jilin Co., Ltd 6 MW Cement Waste Heat Recovery Project
CDM LUSAKA SUSTAINABLE ENERGY PROJECT 1
The 2nd 45MW Wind-farm project of Huadian Ningxia Ningdong Yangjiayao
Hubei Wufeng Tangjia River Hydropower Bundled Project
Waste Heat Recovery Based Power generation at Vision Sponge Iron Private Ltd, West Bengal, India
CERTEL – Cooperativa Regional de Eletrificação Teutônia Ltda - Small Hydropower Plants
Golden Hope Composting Project - Pekaka.
Heilongjiang Fuyuan Wind Power Project
Assisted Natural Regeneration of Degraded Lands in Albania
Hubei Enshi Laodukou Hydropower Station
Heilongjiang Mudanjiang Xiaoguokui Wind Power Project
Piyungan Landfill Gas Capture Project in Yogyakarta
Sichuan Heishui Zhawo No.1 Hydropower Project
Hebei Chengde Yudaokou Windfarm 48MW project
Inner Mongolia Meiyaoshan Wind Farm Project
Hunan Loudi Miaopu Landfill Gas to Power Project
Heilongjiang Shaobaishan Wind Power Project
Dangshun 15.1 MW Hydropower Project in Qinghai Province
Tao River Haidianxia 60MW Hydropower Project in Gansu Province, China
Yueliangshan 49.5MW Wind Power Project in Weichang County Hebei Province
Yunnan Yingjiang Binglang River Mengnai Hydropower Station Project
Yunnan Yingjiang Binglangjiang Shizishan Hydropower Station Project
Piedade Small Hydro Power Plant CDM Project Activity
Taibai Guanyinxia Hydropower Station
Dongbaliang 49.5MW Wind Power Project in Weichang County Hebei Province
Sintex 7.5 MW Natural gas based package cogeneration project, Gujarat – India
CGN Inner Mongolia Zhurihe Phase I Wind Farm Project
Houpayan Hydropower Project in Qiubei County Yunnan Province, China
Fujian Pingnan Jinzaoqiao Hydropower Project
VN08-WWS-03, Methane Recovery and Biogas Utilization Project, Yen Bai Province, Vietnam
VN08-WWS-05, Methane Recovery and Biogas Utilization Project, Quang Tri Province, Vietnam
Longsheng County Silong Hydropower Project
Yunnan Yun County Pan River 3rd Level Hydropower Station
AVN08-S-01, Methane Recovery and Biogas Utilization Project, Nghe An Province, Vietnam
Pakarab Fertiliser Co-generation Power Project
AVN08-S-02, Methane Recovery and Biogas Utilization Project, Nghe An Province, Vietnam
Controlled combustion of municipal solid waste and sewage sludge and energy generation in Shaoxing City, People’s Republic
VN08-WWS-04, Methane Recovery and Biogas Utilization Project, Lao Cai Province, Vietnam
AMA08-W-10, Methane Recovery in Wastewater Treatment, Ked
Bailongjiang Shuiboxia Hydropower Station
Xile and Huangqing 6.15MW Bundled Hydropower Project in Jiangxi Province
Guangzhou Zhujiang Beer Methane Recovery Project
Changning Kawan 18.9MW Hydroelectric Project
Akhangaran Landfill Gas Capture Project in Tashkent
Huaneng Tongliao Baolongshan Phase II Wind Farm Project
Lahendong II-20 MW Geothermal Project
Sichuan Mabian Yi-Autonomous County Bajiaoxi Hydro Power Station
Inner Mongolia Tongliao Huolinhe Wind Power Project
Datong River Zhuchaxia Hydropower Station
Jiangxi Jiujiang Changling Wind Farm Project
Hebei Weichang Longyuan Construction Investment Shanwanzi Wind Power Project
Heilongjiang Dabaishan Wind Power Project
Jidong Cement Panshi Co., ltd. 15 MW Cement Waste heat Recovery Project
Eiamburapa Company Ltd. Tapioca starch wastewater biogas extraction and utilization project, Sakaeo Province, Kingdom of T
Grid connected energy efficient power generation
1.5 MW Grid connected Wind Electricity Generation at Tirunelveli District, Tamilnadu, India by Kallam Agro Products and Oils P
Sichuan Jiulong Pianqiao Hydropower Project
An Diem 2 Hydropower Project
Gansu Baiyin Pingchuan Jiancaitang 45MW Wind Farm Concession Project
Wuxue Huaxin Cement 18MW Waste Heat Recovery as Power Project
Jiangsu Qidong Dongyuan Wind Power Project
Chongqing Pengshui Longmenxia Hydropower Station Project
Hunan Shatian Hydroelectric Project
Shuanghekou 16.6MW Hydropower Project in Chongqing City, P.R. China
Shimian Haiyang Hydropower Project
Jinping Ladeng River Hydropower Station
Luodu Small Hydropower Project
Reduction of Methane Emissions from Ruseifeh Landfill
Yunnan Lincang City Nanlinghe 1st level Small-scale Hydropower Project
Humbo Ethiopia Assisted Natural Regeneration Project
Bailongjiang Dalijie Hydropower Station
Gansu Qilinsi 111MW Hydropower Project
Fugong Latudi River Hydropower Station
Biomass based power project at T-Kallupatti village, Madurai District, Tamil Nadu, India
Yunnan Yingjiang Mengyong River 1st Level Hydropower Station
Reduction in specific steam consumption ratio of Process Air Compressor of Ammonia plant at Indo Gulf Fertilisers, (A unit of A
Skopje Cogeneration Project
Shanxi Wulushan 1st phase Wind Power Project
NISCO Converter Gas Recovery and Utilization for Power Generation Project
Changzhou Panshi Cement Waste Heat Recovery for Power Generation Project
Utilization of waste gas heat for power generation
Hubei Yihua Fertilizers Company Waste Heat Recovery and Utilization Project
Bayi Steel CDQ (1#, 2#) and Waste Heat Utilization Project
Nanchang Maiyuan Landfill Gas Recovery and Utilisation Project
Fossil Fuel switch over project activity at Ammonia-IV plant of GSFC Ltd, Vadodara, India.
Landfill Gas Management Project Puerto Vallarta Landfill site, Mexico
N2O abatement in MP Nitric Acid plants at Rashtriya Chemicals & Fertilizers Limited, India
Liaoning Beipiao Beitazi I Wind Farm Project
K-water 0.96MW bundle small-scale hydroelectric power plants project
ID08-WWP-14, Methane Recovery in Wastewater Treatment, Riau Province, Indonesia
Phuoc Hiep I sanitary Landfill gas CDM project in Ho Chi Minh City
MY08-WWP-34, Methane Recovery in Wastewater Treatment, Pahang and Negeri Sembila, Malaysia
Zibo Hongda Coking Co. Ltd. Coke Dry Quenching and Waste Heat Utilization for Power Generation Project
Shanxi Changyuan 24MW waste heat recovery and utilization for electricity generation project
Hebei Shangyi Qijiashan Wind Farm Project
Miyi Wantan Hydroelectric Project
Yunnan Province Yingjiang County Zhanda River Hydropower Station
Tadi 16 MW Hydropower Project in Zhejiang Province
Biogas Project, Olmeca III, Tecún Uman
Soroosh & Nowrooz Early Gas Gathering and Utilization Project (S&N project)
31 MW Wind energy project in, India by Grace Infrastructure Pvt Ltd
Ta Niet Hydro Power Project
N2O abatement in HP Nitric Acid plants at Rashtriya Chemicals & Fertilizers Limited, India
3.00 MW bundled Wind Power Project by Shree Jai Ambe Associates at Brahmanvel, Dist. Dhule (Maharashtra), India
Henan Nanyang Zhenping Cement Waste Heat Recovery and Utilization for Power Generation Project
Jiangxi Gongge 15MW Hydropower Project, China
Shandong Laizhou phase II Wind Power Project
24 MW Shamburi Mini Hydel Project, Karnataka, India
Longtoutan 25MW Hydropower Project in Jiangxi Province, China
Tangshan Jidong Cement Fengrun District 12MW Cement Waste heat Recovery Project
“Reforestation, sustainable production and carbon sequestration project in José Ignacio Távara´s dry forest, Piura, Peru”
Afforestation and Reforestation on Degraded Lands in Northwest Sichuan, China
MY08-WWP-36, Methane Recovery in Wastewater Treatment, Pahang, Malaysia
Sichuan Xiba Small Hydro Power Project
Tangshan Jidong Cement Guye District 8 MW Cement Waste Heat Recovery Project
AIN08-W-07, Methane Recovery in Wastewater Treatment, Sumatera Utara, Indonesia
Yunnan Shangri-La Shiwang River Hydropower Station
AMA08-W-23, Methane Recovery in Wastewater Treatment, Sar
ID08-WWP-09, Methane Recovery in Wastewater Treatment, Aceh, Indonesia
Methane Recovery in Wastewater Treatment, Project AMA07-W-05, Pahang, Malaysia
MY08-WWP-26, Methane Recovery in Wastewater Treatment, P
Methane Recovery in Wastewater Treatment, Project AMA07-W-07, Kedah, Malaysia
AIN08-W-06, Methane Recovery in Wastewater Treatment, Sumatera Utara, Indonesia
AMA08-W-08, Methane Recovery in Wastewater Treatment, Sabah, Malaysia
Lushui Bajiaohe Small Hydropower Project
AMA08-W-25, Methane Recovery in Wastewater Treatment, Pahang, Malaysia
AMA08-W-24, Methane Recovery in Wastewater Treatment, Pahang, Malaysia
AMA08-W-21, Methane Recovery in Wastewater Treatment, Johor, Malaysia
ID08-WWP-10, Methane Recovery in Wastewater Treatment, West Sumatera, Indonesia
AIN08-W-03, Methane Recovery in Wastewater Treatment, Sumatera Utara, Indonesia
Methane Recovery in Wastewater Treatment, Project AIN07-W-05, Sumatera Utara, Indonesia
AMA08-W-22, Methane Recovery in Wastewater Treatment, Johor, Malaysia
Dalian Maoyingzi Landfill Gas Recovery for Power Generation Project
Bangna Starch Wastewater Treatment and Biogas Utilization Project
Jiangsu Wangting Natural Gas Based Power Generation Project
Jiangsu Qishuyan Natural Gas Based Power Generation Project
Avoidance of HFC-134a emissions in rigid Poly Urethane Foam (PUF) manufacturing by Acme TelePower Limited (ATPL)
Dasili 5 MW Hydropower Project in Jiangxi Province
Xinjiang Huadian Xiaocaohu the 2nd phase of No.1 Wind Farm project
Hunan Taoyuan Huirenxi Hydropower Project
Bionersis landfill project in Pasto, Colombia
12.5 MW Small Scale Grid Connected “Wind Electricity Generation Project” by KRBL Ltd., District Dhule, Maharashtra, India
Sichuan Xiaolongmen Hydropower Project
Heilongjiang Wangkui 50MW Level Biomass Cogeneration Project
Xilinguole Huitengliang Wind Power Project Guotai Phase I
Lixian Yikeyin Small Hydropower Project
AB Brasil Renewable Energy Project
Southern Palm Wastewater Treatment and Electricity Generation in Suratthani, Thailand
10 MW Bhavani Barrage-2 Small Hydroelectric Project for a Grid connected system, Tamil Nadu, India
D.light Rural Lighting Project
Flare Gas Recovery and Utilization of Recovered Flare Gas for process furnace and other heating applications
Gansu Luqu Duosongduo Hydropower Station Project
Amaime Minor Hydroelectric Power Plant
Utilization of the heat content of tail gas at PT Cabot Indonesia, Cilegon
Petrobras FAFEN-BA Nitrous Oxide Abatement Project
Gujarat Narmada Valley Fertilizer Company (GNFC) Nitrous Oxide Abatement Project
Community-Based Renewable Energy Development in the Northern Areas and Chitral (NAC), Pakistan
Dafosi Coal Mine Low Concentration Coal Mine Methane Power Generation Project
Fujian Pingnan Liyudang Hydropower Project
Inner Mongolia Huitengliang Phase II Wind Power Project
SeAH Besteel fuel switching project
5 MW Chirchind Grid-Connected SHP in Himachal Pradesh, India
10 MW Biomass Power Generation Project - Tokyo Cement, Trincomalee
Jiangxi Fengcheng CMM Distribution Project
Kitroongruang Biogas Energy Project
Guizhou Kaiyang Nanjiang Hydropower Station Project
Tianfu Coalmine Methane Project
Wastewater treatment with Anaerobic Digester at Truong Thinh starch processing plant in Tay Ninh, Vietnam.
Wastewater treatment with Anaerobic Digester at Viet Ma starch processing plant in Tay Ninh,Vietnam
Taean Solar Farm PV(photovoltaic) power plant project
Biogas project, BAJ Terbanggi
Avoidance of GHG emissions in rigid Poly Urethane Foam (PUF) manufacturing by LIL
Fertinal Nitrous Oxide Abatement Project
Ping An Yiji 6MW Hydropower Project in Chongqing City
Zhongliangshan Coal Mine Methane Project
Guohua Chenbaerhu Qi Phase I 49.5MW Wind Farm Project
Hebei Chengde Fengze Wind Farm Project
Srijaroen Palm Oil Wastewater Treatment Project in Krabi Province, Thailand
Shandong Laizhou phase I Wind Power Project
Shangri-La Xinglonghe Cascade Hydropower Project
Felda Maokil and Kemahang POME Biogas Project
Hubei Yichang Qilinguan Daquan River Hydropower Station
Chhattisgarh Lighting Improvement Project (CLIP) in Rajnandgaon Circle, Chhattisgarh , India
Efficient Fuel Wood Stoves for Nigeria
Longnan Shimen 12.6MW Hydro Power Project in Gansu Province, China
Yunnan Yingjiang Mangya River 2nd Hydropower Station
AANE Belitung biogas recovery from Palm Oil Mill Effluent (POME) ponds and biogas flaring / utilisation
100 MW Wind Power Project by RS India Wind Energy Pvt. Ltd. at Matrewadi & Varekrwadi, Satara district in Maharashtra
Tangshan Jidong Cement Guye District 12MW Cement Waste Heat Recovery Project
Low pressure steam generation by recovering waste heat using Heat Re-claimers at Emirates CMS Power
Baoshan Supahe Chaoyang Hydropower Station
Bethlehem Hydroelectric project
Anhui Huaibei Taoyuan Coal Mine Methane Utilization Project
El Panul – EcoMethane Landfill Gas Project
KL Rathi Steels 1.5 MW Wind Power Project at Kutch District, Gujarat
Jiangsu Longyuan Donghai Biomass Power Project
BAJ Gunung Agung Factory tapioca starch wastewater biogas extraction and utilization project, Lampung Province, Republic of
Heilongjiang Daqing Ruihao Wind Farm Project
Fugong Labuluo Hydropower Project
Guohua Hebei Huanghua 49.5 MW Wind Farm Project (Phase I)
Sichuan Yetang 24MW Hydro Power Project
Lixo Zero Composting Project
Tianquan Shiyang Hydro Power Project
Methane recovery from wastewater generated at Paper manufacturing unit of Sree Sakthi Paper Mills Ltd., Kerala
Fujian Pingnan Tingtougang Hydropower Project
Tangshan Jidong Cement Matoushan Matishan 25MW Cement Waste heat Recovery Project
Gimcheon PV Power Plant Site 2 CDM Project
Tal Dman Landfill Gas Capture Project in Aleppo
Shanghai Dong Hai Bridge Offshore Wind Farm Project
Methane capture and destruction on Las Heras landfill in Mendoza, Argentina
Bionersis Project Thailand 1
Guizhou Kaiyang Zijiang Hydropower Station Project
Amine Circulation Pumps Energy Efficiency at Hazira works of ONGC
Sonna mini hydel scheme in Karnataka State, India.
Leak Reduction in Above Ground Gas Distribution Equipment in the KazTransgaz-Tbilisi Gas Distribution System- Tbilisi, Georgi
Felda Chalok and Jerangau Barat Biogas Project
Bintulu Combined-Cycle Project STG Unit No.9, Tanjung Kiduron
Avelino Bragagnolo - Wastewater Treatment using Aerobic System
Yunnan Yingjiang Wakuhe Hydropower Station
Gimcheon PV Power Plant Site 1 CDM Project
Santa Cruz I Hydroelectric Power Plant
El Platanal Hydropower Plant
Biogas project, BAJ Way Jepara
Introduction of the recovery and combustion of methane in the existing sludge treatment system of the Cañaveralej
Xinjiang Kaiduhe River Chahan Wusu Hydropower Project
Hebei Shangyi Manjing North Wind Farm Project
Heilongjiang Fujin 48MW Wind Power Project
15MW Grid connected renewable energy generation by RSMML
Tianjin Zhenxing Cement Waste Heat Recovery for Power Generation Project
Sichuan Tiejue 25MW Hydro Power Project
Zhangjiagang Nature Gas Power Generation Project
Zhejiang Wenling Donghaitang Wind Power Project
Jilin Xijingou Hydropower Project
Displacement of the electricity of the national electric grid by the auto-generation of renewable energy in the Cañaveralejo W
Fujian Pingnan Jiufeng Hydropower Project
Wastewater Treatment with Biogas Technology in a Tapioca Processing Plant at P.V.D. International Company Limited, Thailan
Dona Juana landfill gas-to-energy project
Hebei Wanquan Yulong Wind Power Project
Biogas project, BAJ Unit 6
Gikoko-Makassar - LFG Flaring Project
Reforestation of croplands and grasslands in low income communities of Paraguarí Department, Paraguay
Nam Pia Hydropower Project
Biogas project, Cargill Siam Borabu
Wastewater Treatment with Biogas Technology in a Tapioca Processing Plant at Roi Et Flour Company Limited, Thailand
Methane Recovery Project of Huguan Yufeng Brewing Co., Ltd.
Anaerobic Digestion Swine Wastewater Treatment With On-Site Power Project (ADSW RP2007)
Felda Pancing and Pasoh Biogas Project
Taman Beringin Integrated Landfill Management Project, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia
9 MW Wind Power Project in Tamil Nadu by ACC Limited
Green Glory Wastewater Treatment and Electricity Generation in Suratthani, Thailand
8.85MW SECHAN POWER PV(photovoltaic) power plant(a bundling project which consists of 7different PV power plants)
Thachana Palm Oil Company Wastewater Treatment Project in Thailand
Gramacho Landfill Gas Project
Shimian Danihe Hydropower Project
Biogas CDM Project of Bagepalli Coolie Sangha
Landfill Gas Recovery and Utilization at Bukit Tagar Sanitary Landfill, Hulu Selangor in Malaysia
Jaguari Mirim River Hydroelectric Plants
Yuquan 16 MW Hydro-electric Power Station Project
Zhumadian Zhongyuan Gas-Steam Combined Cycle Power Projec
Sichuan Yonghe Yulong Hydropower Project
Univanich TOPI Biogas Project
Hunan Jinjiagou Small Hydropower Project
Alton Landfill Gas to Energy Project
7.5 MW Bundled Small Hydropower Project in Qiandongnan Autonomous Region, Guizhou Province, P.R. China
Uganda Nile Basin Reforestation Project No.3
Nanning Shizuo Non-Carbonated Raw Material for Cement Production Renovation Project
Pure-low Temperature Waste Heat Recovery for Power Generation (2×7MW) in Guangdong Tapai Cement Co., Ltd.
Anhui Anqing 30MW Biomass Power Generation Project
Composting of solid biomass waste separated from the Palm Oil Mill Effluent (POME) through the use of AVC Sludge Dewateri
So Lo hydropower project
New Energy and Hongik Energy & Research small-scale hydroelectric power plants project
Jiangxi Pinggang Group 20MW Waste Gas and Surplus Steam based Captive Power Plant
Yellow River Hydro Power Plant in Luoning County, Henan Province
Angang Waste Gas Recovery and Generation Project
The Waste Heat Recovery Based Coke Dry Quenching Power Generation Project of Xingang Company
Yunnan Lianghe Hulukou Hydropower Station
Title: 12 MW Grid connected Wind Power Project, Gujarat State, India.
Titi Glove Biomass Fuel Switch Project
Hebei Wasted Gas based Captive Power Plant Project in Longgang Group
Abu Dhabi solar thermal power project, Masdar
Longyou 18 MW Hydropower Project in Zhejiang Province
Rural Education for Development Society (REDS) CDM Photovoltaic Lighting Project
Bundled Wind Power Project in Tirunelveli, Tamil Nadu
Tao River Ewuduo 12 MW Hydropower Project in Gansu Province, the People’s Republic of China
Rialma Companhia Energética III S/A. – Santa Edwiges III Small Hydro Power Plant – Small Scale CDM Project
Sichuan Kangding Simaqiao 24MW Hydroelectric Project
Straw-fired Power Generation Project in Chuzhou District, Huaia
Korea East-West Power Dangjin small hydro power plant project (5MW)
Heilongjiang Wuerguli Wind Power Project
Guohua Tongliao Kezuo Zhongqi Phase II 49.5 MW Wind Farm Project
Qingxi 28MW Hydropower Project in Guizhou Province, China
Chile: Lircay Run-Of-River Project
Fuerza Eolica del Istmo Wind Farm
Furong-Hongguang Small Hydropower Project, Shaanxi Province, P.R. China
INPA Fuel Switch Project
Sichuan Jinxi Hydropower Project
Waste Gas based Power Generation Project at Ankit Metal & Power Limited
Shuangqiao, Banqiao and Longtoushan Bundled Small Hydropower Project in Heilongjiang Province
Xiaowutai 41.25MW Wind Power Generation Project in Shanxi Province
Heilongjiang Huanan Hengdaishan East (II) Wind Power Project
Shaanxi Provincial Yang County Kafang 12 MW Small-scale Hydro Power Project
Hubei Yunlonghe Hydropower Project of Enshi City, Enshi Prefecture, Hubei Province, P.R. China
Luoyang Landfill Site LFG Recovery to Electricity Project
CECIC Zhangbei Gaojialiang Wind farm Project
25.6 MW grid connected Wind Power based electricity generation
Sichuan Baishuijiang Shuanghe Hydro Power Project
Waixiong Hydropower plant project
Renkeng Hydropower Project, Longchuan County, Guangdong Province
Sarbari-I small hydro project of DSL Hydrowatt Limited (DSLHL), Himachal Pradesh, India
Suoi Tan hydropower project
Gikoko-Bekasi-LFG Flaring Project
Fujian Hua`an Mianliang Hydropower Project
Inner Mongolia Erlianhaote Phase I Wind Farm Project
Guangdong Liucheng 25.5MW Hydro Power Project
Pengkalan Chepa Renewable Energy Plant
Shandong Penglai Pingdingshan Wind Farm Project
Kabil II 11.4 MW Gas Fired Project
Hubei Dahebian Hydropower Project of China
Composting of solid biomass waste separated from the Palm Oil Mill Effluent (POME) through the use of AVC Sludge Dewateri
Upgradation and expansion of A.P.M.C compost plant at Tikri, D
FELDA Besout POME Biogas Project
Co-composting of EFB and POME project
Pune (India) OSRAM CFL distribution CDM Project
Yamunanagar & Sonipat (India) OSRAM CFL distribution CDM Project
Yunnan Yingjiang Mangya River 1st Hydropower Station
Shijiazhou 45MW Hydropower Project in Hunan Province, China
Ganey Hadas Landfill Gas to Renewable Electricity project
Composting of solid biomass waste separated from the Palm Oil Mill Effluent (POME) through the use of AVC Sludge Dewateri
Fujian Zhouning Qianping Hydropower Project
Guangxi Zhuang Autonomous Region Wuzhou Wangcun Hydropower Station
Jiema Hydro Power Project
Composting of solid biomass waste separated from the Palm Oil Mill Effluent (POME) through the use of AVC Sludge Dewateri
Biogas Technology Group Ras Al-Khaimah Landfill Gas to Energy Project
Jradzor Small Hydroelectric CDM project
Verde Valle Landfill Gas Project
Yunnan Jinping Miao-Yao-Dai Autonomous County Kesikou Hydropower Station
Guangdong Lankou 26MW Hydro Power Project
Composting of solid biomass waste separated from the Palm Oil Mill Effluent (POME) through the use of AVC Sludge Dewateri
Gikoko Palembang – LFG Flaring Project
Establishment of Compost Production Unit of 100 TPD at Lalganj
Bhushan Power and Steel Limited–Waste Heat Recovery based Captive Power Project
Guohua Dongying Hekou 49.5 MW Wind Farm Project (Phase 1)
Nanshankou Cascade I 12 MW Hydropower Project in Geermu City of Qinghai Province,People’s Republic of China
Forestal y Papelera Concepción Biomass Residues Cogeneration Plant in Chile
Waste Heat Recovery based Captive Power Project of Adhunik Metaliks Limited
Conversion of SF6 to the alternative cover gas SO2 at RIMA magnesium production
Thermal energy from biomass at Mohota Mills
Nubika Jaya Biogas Extraction for Bio-Hydrogen Production
Composting of solid biomass waste separated from the Palm Oil Mill Effluent (POME) through the use of AVC Sludge Dewateri
Anaerobic Digestion Swine Wastewater Treatment With On-Site Power Project (ADSW RP1008)
Anaerobic Digestion Swine Wastewater Treatment With On-Site Power Project (ADSW RP1006)
Anaerobic Digestion Swine Wastewater Treatment With On-Site Power Project (ADSW RP1004)
Jiangxi Luohongkou 8.25MW Hydropower Project, China
Heilongjiang Yilan Jiguanlazishan Wind Farm Project
Heilongjiang Dongning Dajiazishan and Xidagang Wind Farm Project
Heilongjiang Yilan Hezuolinchang Phase II Wind Power Project
Controlled combustion of municipal solid waste (MSW) and energy generation in Linyi City, Shandong, China
Composting of solid biomass waste separated from the Palm Oil Mill Effluent (POME) through the use of AVC Sludge Dewateri
Inno-Abedon - Palm Oil Mill Waste Recycle Scheme, Malaysia
AWMS Methane Recovery Project, Ampuero Dairy Farm
Anaerobic Digestion Swine Wastewater Treatment With On-Site Power Project (ADSW RP1007)
Taiyuan Shanzhuangtou Landfill Gas Recovery and Utilization Project
Taiyuan Xingou Landfill Gas Recovery and Utilization Project
5 MW Sahu Hydro Electric Project for a grid connected system in Himachal Pradesh, India
Abidjan Municipal Solid Waste-To-Energy Project
Upgradation, Operation and Maintenance of 200 TPD Composting facility at Okhla, Delhi
Surac Bagasse Plant Project
Anaerobic Digestion Swine Wastewater Treatment With On-Site Power Project (ADSW RP1005)
Anaerobic Digestion Swine Wastewater Treatment With On-Site Power Project (ADSW RP2008)
24.8 MW Wind power project by Belgaum Wind Farms Private Ltd. in Gadag, Karnataka
Sichuan Ya’an Shaping Hydropower Station Project
150 MW grid connected Wind Power based electricity generation project in Gujarat, India
Siliping Small-Scale Hydro Power Project
Anaerobic Digestion Swine Wastewater Treatment With On-Site Power Project (ADSW RP1003)
ANAEROBIC DIGESTION SWINE WASTEWATER TREATMENT WITH ON-SITE POWER PROJECT
Liaoning Landfill Gas Recovery and Utilization Project
5.1 MW bundled Wind Power Project in Tirunelveli (Tamil Nadu)
Catalytic N2O Abatement Project in the tail gas of the Caprolactam production plant in Thailand
10 MW Wind Power Project in Maharashtra by Deepak Fertilizers and Petrochemicals Corporation Limited
SF6 Switch at Dead Sea Magnesium
Co-composting with AVC POME Treatment System for Ban Dung Palm Oil Mill
Inner Mongolia Keshiketeng County Wutaohai South Wind Farm 49.5 MW Project
Wuchang Natural Gas Generation Project
Anaerobic Digestion Swine Wastewater Treatment With On-Site Power Project (ADSW RP1002)
ANAEROBIC DIGESTION SWINE WASTEWATER TREATMENT WITH ON-SITE POWER PROJECT (ADSW) RP2006
ANAEROBIC DIGESTION SWINE WASTEWATER TREATMENT WITH ON-SITE POWER PROJECT (ADSW RP2004)
ANAEROBIC DIGESTION SWINE WASTEWATER TREATMENT WITH ON-SITE POWER PROJECT (ADSW RP2003)
Guohua Dongying Lijin 49.5 MW Wind Farm Project (Phase 1)
Fujian Shouning Xiadongxi 25MW Hydropower Project
Lijiang Wulanghe Secondary Hydropower Project
Yaoping 10 MW Small Hydropower Project in Shaanxi Province, China
2.5 MW Bundled Wind Power Project in Maharashtra (India)
Anaerobic digestion at Armenis Farm Ltd., Cyprus
Factory energy efficiency improvement in compressed air demand in Mexico
CARBON SEQUESTRATION THROUGH REFORESTATION IN THE BOLIVIAN TROPICS BY SMALLHOLDERS OF “The Federación de C
Sichuan Xiaohegou 12.6 MW Small-scale Hydro Power Project
12 MW Wind Power Project in Kutch, Gujarat
Perdigão Sustainable Swine Production 01 – Methane capture and combustion
10 MW Bhavani Barrage-1 Small Hydroelectric Project for a Grid connected system, Tamil Nadu , India
ADFEC 10 MW Solar Power Plant.
14 MW Wind Power Project in Maharashtra
73 MW Tonghua Iron & Steel Waste Gas and Heat Power Generation Project
Reforestation of severely degraded landmass in Khammam District of Andhra Pradesh, India under ITC Social Forestry
Co-composting with AVC POME Treatment System for Haranky Palm Oil Mill
Muong Sang hydropower project
Phu Mau hydropower project
Guohua Binzhou Zhanhua 49.5MW Wind Farm Project (Phase 1)
FELDA Trolak and Sampadi Composting Plants
Co-composting with AVC POME Treatment System for Jugra Palm Oil Mill
LG Chem Naju plant fuel switching project
Jiangsu Rudong Biomass Power Generation Project
1.725 MW Mini Hydel Scheme on Nagavali River, Andhra Pradesh, India
Huadian Kulun 201MW Wind Farm Project
Sichuan Liangtan Hydropower Station Second Phase Project
Angelina Small Hydro Power Plant Project – A Brascan Energética S/A Project Activity.
Federal Intertrade Hong-Ru River Solar Cooker Project
Quimobásicos HFC Recovery and Destruction Project (plant 2)
Yunnan Xinya River 3rd Level Hydropower Project
Salto Small Hydro Power Plant Project – A Brascan Energética S/A Project Activity
Municipal Solid Waste (MSW) Composting Project in Urumqi, China
SF6 Switch at Ortal Diecasting 1993 Ltd.
Binglang River Tucang Hydropower station in Yunnan province, China
Yunnan Tengchong Longchuan River Stage I Hydropower Plant, China
FEDEPALMA SECTORAL CDM UMBRELLA PROJECT FOR METHANE CAPTURE, FOSSIL FUEL DISPLACEMENT AND COGENERATION
CGN Inner Mongolia Duerbote Wind farm Project
Integrated Municipal Waste Processing Complex at Ghazipur, Delhi
Jiangxi Duchang Jishanhu Wind Farm Project
Biomass gasification based electricity generation by M/s Obeetee Private Limited (OPL) at Sant Ravidas Nagar district, Uttar Pr
Composting of solid biomass waste separated from the Palm Oil Mill Effluent (POME) through the use of AVC Sludge Dewateri
Addition of a power generation micro unit at the 5 de Noviembre Power Plant
Pingwu Huangyanghe Stage I Small Hydropower Project, P.R.China
GHG emission reductions through waste gas based power generation at Visa Steel Limited
Taegisan Wind Power Project
Zhongfang County Pailou Hydro Project, China
48 MW Duduluo River Hydroelectric Power Plant
Inner Mongolia Baotou Bayin Wind Power Project
Sichuan Guohe 20MW Hydropower Project
24 MW Perla Mini Hydel Project, Karnataka, India
Zuo XI Hydropower power plant
China Guangdong Shenzhen Qianwan LNG generation project
Gansu Datonghe Tiecheng Hydropower Station Project
Ma Steel (new plant) CDQ and waste heat utilization project
Yiyang Xiushan Hydropower Project, P.R. China
Baishuiquan Hydropower Project, Guizhou Province, China
Heilongjiang Chemical N2O Abatement Project
Casa Armando Guillermo Prieto - Wastewater treatment facility for a Mezcal distillery
Budhil Hydro Electric Project, India (BHEP)
Jiangxi Taojiang Hydropower Project
Tianquan Xiacun Hydro Power Project
Avoidance of methane emissions from Municipal Solid Waste and Food Waste through Composting
Bionersis Project Peru 1
Ningxia Yinchuan No. 1 Natural Gas Cogeneration Project
Flare Gas Recovery system (FGRS) at Barauni Refinery of Indian Oil Corporation Limited
Monjolinho Energética S.A.’s CDM Project
Energy Efficiency Measures at Desalination Plant in Chennai
Construction of additional cooling tower cells at AES Lal Pir (Pvt
Fengguang 24.9MW Hydropower Project in Guangdong Province, China
Shaanxi Xinghua N2O Abatement Project
Jincheng Fengrun CMM Utilisation from Nine Mines in Jincheng
CGN Gansu Anxi Daliang 49.5MW Wind Power Project
Sichuan provincial Longchi & Caoyuan 9 MW Small-scale Hydro Power Bundle Project
Shunchang Yangkou Hydro Power Project, Fujian, China
Mengzhushan 15 MW Small Hydropower Project in Shaanxi Province, China
Cao Phong Reforestation Project
Animal Manure Management System (AMMS) GHG Mitigation Project , Shandong Minhe Livestock Co. Ltd., Penglai, Sh
The Blended Cement project utilizing the additives to decrease the clinker content in Shanxi Guashan Cement
Shanxi Datuhe Coal Mine Methane Utilization Project
Hubei Xuan’en Tongziying Hydropower Station
Jinan Chemical Fertilizer Plant Co., Ltd. N2O Abatement Project (Plant 1)
Guangdong Huizhou LNG Power Generation Project
Energy efficiency measures in "Technopolis".
Erbaqu Small Hydropower Project in Gansu Province
Jincheng Sihe Coal Mine CMM Generation Project
Tongren Tianshengqiao Hydropower Project, Guizhou Province, China
China Changtanghe Rundle Small Hydropower Project
Installation of Wind power project by Kilburn Chemicals Ltd
2*6MW Coke Oven Gas Power Generation Project in Xiangcheng County
Expansion Project of Sanjiangkou Hydro-electric Power Station in the reach of Supa River, Yunnan province, China
Sichuan Lutianhua N2O Abatement Project at nitric acid plant Line 2
Guizhou Xingyi Laojiangdi Hydropower Station
Rocky Farms, Inc. Methane Recovery and Electricity Generation Project
Yingpeng HFC23 Decomposition Project
Coke Dry Quenching (CDQ) Waste Heat Recovery for Power Generation Project of Wugang No. 9 and 10 Coke Ovens
Kampot Cement Waste Heat Power Generation Project (KCC-W
Lanatan Agro-Industrial Inc. Methane Recovery and Electricity Generation Project
Inner-Mongolia Ximeng Abag 49.5MW Wind Power Project
CGN Jilin Daan 49.5MW Wind Power Project
Jinan Chemical Fertilizer Plant Co., Ltd. N2O Abatement Project (Plant 2)
Zhoujiayuan Hydropower Project in Hubei Province
Shilong Small-Scale Hydro Power Project
Siam Quality Starch Wastewater Treatment and Energy Generation Project in Chaiyaphum, Thailand
Generation of power from process waste heat at Hi-Tech Carbon, Tamil Nadu
Yunnan Dayao County Yupao River 3rd Level Hydropower Station
Guizhou Taijiang Yanzhai Hydropower Station
Yichun xiaochengshan wind power Project
Multi Nitro Indonesia Nitrous Oxide Abatement Project
Amayo 40 MW Wind Power Project - Nicaragua
Reduction of N2O emissions at “Ferganaazot” plant
13.95 MW grid connected wind electricity generation by SRF Limited
Ceran's 14 de Julho Hydro Power Plant CDM Project Activity
Sichuan Lutianhua N2O Abatement Project at nitric acid plant Line 1
8.5 MW Wind Energy Project by KS Oils Limited, India
Gansu Zhouqu County Hujia’ai Hydropower Station Project
The Korea Hydro & Nuclear Power Co. Renewable Energy Project (3MW Yonggwang Photovoltaic Power + 0.75MW Kori Wind
Wind Power Plant No.1 - Binh Thuan 30MW
ANAEROBIC DIGESTION SWINE WASTEWATER TREATMENT WITH ON-SITE POWER PROJECT (ADSW RP2001)
Anhui Huainan Chemical N2O Abatement Project at Nitric Acid Plant Line4
Reduction of N2O emissions at "Maxam-Chirchik" plant
Canela Wind Farm Project
Methane extraction and energy generation project activity at Shirala, Maharasthra
YZICL 4.5MW Waste Heat Generation Project
Shaanxi Baiguoshu 13MW Hydropower Project
25MW Liangwan Hydropower Development Project
Chutak Hydroelectric Project
Valdivia biomass power plant
Municipal Solid Waste based Composting at Kolhapur, Maharashtra
Bioenergia Anaerobic Digestion and Biogas Generation Project
Zhejiang Quzhou Jutai clinker production project by using calcium carbide residue in the raw mix
Yinshan Profiled Iron Co., Ltd. 25 MW Waste Gas Power Generation Project of Laiwu Iron & Steel Group Corp.
China Hunan Yuzitang Small Hydropower Project
Anaerobic digestion of animal manure at Farma Andreou & Costi Ltd., Cyprus
Mujiajia Yiji 18.9MW Hydropower Project in Yunnan Province
Nimoo-Bazgo Hydroelectric Project
Cangxi Donghe Dongxi Hydropower Station
Cangxi Donghe Beituo Hydropower Station
Reduction of N2O emissions at shop#25, production line #1 at “
Xinjiang Uygur Autonomous Region Tekesi River Shankou Hydropower Station
Cangxi Donghe Yangmousi Hydropower Station
Cangxi Liyuan Hydropower Station
“Coconut shell charcoaling and power generation at Badalgama, Sri Lanka”
3.66 MW poultry litter based power generation project by Raus Power in India
Reduction of N2O emissions at shop#25, production line #4 at ”“Navoiazot”” plant
Shanxi Carbide Calcium Residues Based Cement Plant Project in Linfen City
Xiamen Dongfu Landfill Gas-to-Energy Project
Yunnan Yingjiang Yinhe Hydropower Station
Durban Landfill-Gas Bisasar Road
Energía Ecológica de Palcasa S.A. EECOPALSA Biomass Project
Yunnan Guangnan Duimen River Hydropower Station
2.25 MW Rice Husk based cogeneration plant at Siddeshwari Industries Pvt Ltd
SHYAM DRI WHR CPP
13.25 MW Wind Power Generation by RMTL, in Kutch, Gujarat
Amigo Farm Methane Recovery and Electricity Generation Project
Federal Intertrade Pengyang Solar Cooker Project
SEPL CDM CPP
CYY Biopower Wastewater treatment plant including biogas reuse for thermal oil replacement and electricity generati
Sichuan Carbide Calcium Residues Based Cement Plant Project in Leshan City
Guangdong Shaoguan Yizhou Hydro Power Station
Yunnan Yingjiang Zuanshui River Hydropower Station Project
Laowuhe Erji 10 MW Hydropower Project in Yunnan Province
Yunnan Yingjiang County Binglang River Mangkang Hydropower Station
Small Scale Cooperative Afforestation CDM Pilot Project Activity on Private Lands Affected by Shifting Sand Dunes in Sirsa, Har
Puping Hydro Power Project
Shaanxi Shenyang 10MW Hydropower Project
42.5 MW Wind Power Project by VRL Logistics Ltd in Karnataka State (India)
Piabanha River Hydroelectric Plants
El Empalme Landfill Gas Recovery Project
Fosfertil Cubatão NAP4 Nitrous Oxide Abatement Project
Tecamac – EcoMethane Landfill Gas to Energy Project
Methane recovery and utilisation project at TSH Lahad Datu Palm Oil Mill, Sabah, Malaysia
Composting of solid biomass waste separated from the Palm Oil Mill Effluent (POME) through the use of AVC Sludge Dewateri
Switching Fossil Fuel In An Industrial Facility
Methane recovery and utilisation project at TSH Sabahan Palm Oil Mill, Sabah, Malaysia
Modification and retrofitting of the existing 34 MW hydropower plant at Bhandardara -2 (project activity) in Maharashtra stat
Shaanxi Shiba 14MW Hydropower Project
Reduction of N2O emissions at shop#25, production line #2 at “Navoiazot” plant
25.3MW WHR Project of Zhejiang Leomax Group
BRASCARBON Methane Recovery Project BCA-BRA-01
Jinling Coal Mine Methane (CMM) Power Generation Project of Dengfeng City, Henan Province
Ramirana Emission Reduction Project of Agrícola Super Limitada
Energy efficiency improvement of the existing Frame V Gas Turbine by steam injection and change of drive (from steam to ele
Liyujiang Small Hydroelectric Project (LSHP), Hunan Province, China
Jiratpattana Biogas Energy Project
Salta Landfill Gas Capture Project
Saldanha Small Hydroelectric Project
Dir Baalbeh Landfill Gas Capture Project in Homs
Shaanxi Hongchun and Shangba 11.4MW Hydropower Project Bundle
Henan Sanmenxia 25.5MW Wind Power Project
Cangxi Donghe Likou Hydroelectric Power Station
Biomass boiler project in the Philippines
FELDA Serting Hilir Biogas Power Plant Project
Cangxi Donghe Fengziyan Hydroelectric Power Station
Reduction of N2O emissions at shop#25, production line #3 at ”
Santa Rosa Hydropower Plant Project
Montalban Landfill Methane Recovery and Power Generation Project
Fujian Pingnan Daixi 50MW Hydropower Project
Hunan Chenxi Dafutan Hydropower Station
Hubei Yuquanhe 25.2MW Hydropower Project
Amazon Carbon Swine Waste Management System Project 02
Amazon Carbon Swine Waste Management System Project 03
Excel Farm Methane Recovery and Electricity Generation Project
Hubei Laifeng Najitan Hydropower Station
Chao Khun Agro Biogas Energy Project
Jiadu River Zhentong Power Plant Project
Xinning County Dalong Small-scale Hydropower Bundled Project
Hebei Haixing 49.5MW Wind Farm Project
Sichuan Wanyuan Baiyangxi Hydropower Station
Inner Mongolia Bayannaoer Chuanjingsumu 49.3MW Wind Power Project
Longwangtan 15MW Hydro Power Project in Guizhou Province
Sichuan Miyaluo Hydroelectric Station
Sichuan Pingshan Pingbian&Guanyintuo Hydropower Station
Nantong Coalmine Methane
Duerping Coal Mine Methane Utilization Project
Inner Mongolia Elion Jidong clinker production project by using calcium carbide residue in the raw mix
PANITAO Biomass Thermal Energy Project
Optimisation of steam generation and distribution systems through various energy efficiency measures at Anil Products Limite
Yuhe Tongli WHR Project
Lijiang Yulong County Longbahe River Hydropower Project
Ninglang County Mudiqing Secondary Hydropower Plant
Sichuan Balangkou 96MW Hydropower Project
3.76 MW Electricity Generation project from Poultry Litter in Tamil Nadu
Fugong Mukeji Hydropower Project
Lufeng 36MW Hydropower Project in Yunnan Province
Tianquan Qieshan Hydro Power Project
Guangdong Mafang Hydropower Project
China Hunan Gaoyongdong Small Hydropower Project
Guangxi Youjiang Naji Navigation and Power Generation Project
4.5 MW Grid connected Wind Electricity Generation at Tirunelveli District, Tamil Nadu
China Shaibeitan Hydropower Project
Guangnan Shangshilong Hydro Project
Dongshan Hydro Power Project in Guangdong Province China
12.82 MW Bundled Small Hydropower Project in Qiandongnan Autonomous Region, Guizhou Province, P. R. China
11.4 MW Bundled Small Hydropower Project in Shanjunyan and Liaoli, Guizhou Province, P. R. China
Fujian Fuan Matoushan Hydropower Project
Jinji 25.2 MW Hydropower Project (the Project) in Guangxi Zhuang Autonomous Region, China
Dead Sea Works Ltd. Small Scale Fuel Switch Project
Dead Sea Magnesium (DSM) Fuel-Switch Project
Jiaozuo Coal Mine Methane (CMM) Power Generation Project of Jiaozuo Coal Industrial Group Co. Ltd., Jiaozuo City, Henan Pr
Bharat Petroleum Corporation Limited (BPCL)’s Wind Power Project, India
China Jintan Hydropower Project
Sichuan Miaopu Hydropower Project
Methane capture and destruction on Calle 100 landfill in Havana and Gascon landfill in Santiago de Cuba. Bundle CDM project
Shri Bajrang RE Project
Luoyingkou Hydropower Project in Heping County Guangdong Province, China
Shimenkai Hydropower Project
Anaerobic digestion at Animalia Genetics Ltd., Cyprus
Ayishan Small Hydropower Project in Gansu Province
Green Green Grass SBE Biomass Project
Dachunhe 50 MW Hydropower Project in Yunnan Province
Longzhou 1st Hydro Power Project
Hebei Yuxian Kongzhongcaoyuan 49.5MW Wind Farm Project
Roncheng Wind Power Project, 48.75MW
Banna Liusha River Fifth Level Power Plant Project
Hubei Yuhuangtan 10MW Small-Scale Hydropower Project
Santa Fe, Energy Wind farm
Hebei Chongli Qingsanying 49.3MW Wind Farm Project
Abatement of Green House Gas (GHG) emissions through biomass residue based cogeneration at Claris Lifesciences Limited
Sichuan Jiajiang Qianfoyan Hydro Project
25.5MW Xinnali Hydropower Project
Yeong Yang 61.5MW Wind Farm Project
Gansu Huanghe Chaijiaxia Hydropower Station Project
15 MW grid-connected wind power project by MMTC in Karnataka
Hubei Eco-Farming Biogas Project Phase I
Flare Gas Recovery and Utilization of Recovered Flare Gas for process heating requirements at IOCL, Haldia Refinery
SANTECH – Saneamento & Tecnologia Ambiental Ltda. – SANTEC Resíduos landfill gas emission reduction Project Activity
Sichuan Jiulong Shaping Hydropower Project
28MW Jinkouba Hydropower Project
Huade Changshun 49.5MW Wind Power Project
Sichuan Cong'en 8MW Hydropower Project
China Jiangzitian Hydropower Project
Xiaba 20MW Hydro Power Project in Guizhou Province China.
Yunnan Longchuan Nanwanhe 2nd Level Hydropower Station
MEN Energy Efficiency Improvement Project
Composting of solid biomass waste separated from the Palm Oil Mill Effluent (POME) through the use of AVC Sludge Dewateri
Composting of solid biomass waste separated from the Palm Oil Mill Effluent (POME) through the use of AVC Sludge Dewateri
Methane recovery and utilization through organic wastewater treatment in Malaysia
Yunnan Dayingjiang Meng’e Hydro Power Station
Santa Cruz S.A. - Açúcar e Álcool - Cogeneration Project.
Anshan Iron and Steel Group Corporation (Yingkou) Coke Dry Quenching Power Generation Project
Sichuan Greenleaf (Lvye) 60MW Hydropower Project
Huanghe Tongli WHR Project
Heilongjiang Shiwenzi Wind Farm Project
Waste Heat Recovery and Utilisation for Power Generation Project of Tongling Conch Cement Company Limited
Waste Heat Recovery and Utilisation for Power Generation Project of Jiande Conch Cement Company Limited
Waste Heat Recovery and Utilisation for Power Generation Project of Huaining Conch Cement Company Limited
Waste Heat Recovery and Utilisation for Power Generation Project of Digang Conch Cement Company Limited
Korea Land Corporation Pyeongtaek Sosabul-district new and renewable energy model city (Photovoltaic system + solar water
Top Gas Pressure Recovery based Power Generation from ‘G’ Blast Furnace
Waste Heat Recovery and Utilisation for Power Generation Pr
SSPL 4.5 MW WHRB CPP
Visakhapatnam (India) OSRAM CFL distribution CDM Project
Monterrey II LFG to Energy Project
Cheves Hydro Power Project, Peru
Gansu Huanghe Bingling Hydropower Station Project
Xinjiang Uygur Autonomous Region Wensu Tagake Hydropower Station
Fujian Pingnan Houlongxi 48MW Hydropower Project
Chumporn applied biogas technology for advanced waste water management
Yunnan Leidatan 108MW Hydropower Project
Sichuan Yanyuan Yongning River Hydropower Station
Hainan Wenchang Chaotanbi First Phase Wind Farm Project
Guohua Tongliao Kezuo Zhongqi Phase I 49.5 MW Wind Farm Project
Sichuan Jiangyou Longfeng Hydropower Station
Shandong Haiyang Qiuershan Wind Power Project
Diaobingshan New-built 49.5MW Wind Power Station Project
Gansu Zhuoni Niuzi 30MW Hydropower Project
Dalian Tuchengzi Wind Power Project 30 MW
Yunnan Langwaihe Hydroelectric Power Station
Curva de Rodas and La Pradera landfill gas management project
Fujian Jinjiang LNG Power Generation Project
China Xieshui Small Rundle Hydropower Project
Anshan Iron and Steel Group Corporation (Anshan) Coke Dry Quenching Power Generation Project
Sichuan Baihuatan 120MW Hydropower Project
Yunnan Gangquhe No.1 Hydropower Project
Jiangxi Liujinba 20MW Hydro Power Project
Wayao Forth Cascade Hydro Power Project in Yunnan Province
Samryangjin PV(photovoltaic) Power Plant
Inner Mongolia Siziwangqi Bayin’aobao Wind Power Project
Univanich Lamthap POME Biogas Project
Pan Ocean Gas Utilization Project
Cassava Waste To Energy Project, Kalasin, Thailand (CWTE project)
Yidaoqiao Hydropower Project in Tiechang River, Jiulong County, Sichuan Province
Wind Electricity Generation Project
Yunnan Yingjiang Xiangbai River Zhina Hydropower Station
The 84 MW New Bong Escape Hydropower Project, Azad Jammu and Kashmir (AJK), Pakistan
Inner Mongolia Bayannaoer Chuanjingsumu Wind Power Project
Qi’nan Hydro Power Project
Methane capture and destruction on La Hormiga landfill in San Fe
Heilongjiang Fujin Phase II 18MW Wind Power Project
Bromine Compounds Fuel-Switch Project
Moldova Soil Conservation Project
Liaoning Changtu Quantou Wind Power Project
CGN Inner Mongolia Huitengliang 300MW Wind Power Project
Wengyuan 20MW Hydro Power Project in Guizhou Province China
Fujian Zhouning Houlong 40MW Hydropower Project
Heilongjiang Yilan Hezuolinchang Wind Power Project
Methane Capture and On-site Power Generation Project at Sungai
Sichuan Erdaoqiao Hydropower Project
Methane Capture and On-site Power Generation Project at Syarikat Cahaya Muda Perak (Oil Mill) Sdn. Bhd. in Tapah,
Zilenghe 24MW Hydropower Project in Yunnan Province
Yingjiang Songpo Hydropower Station
Oil India Limited (OIL) – Greenhouse Gas Emission Reduction through Recovery and Utilization of Flare Gas
Expansion Project of Huadian Inner Mongolia Huitengxile Wind Farm
Jilin Tongyu Tongfa Wind Power Project
Sinohydro Inner Mongolia Ximeng Honggeer Wind Power Project
Heilongjiang Yilan Maanshan Wind Power Project
Hubei Lichuan Longqiao Hydropower Station
Baihubao 33.75MW Wind Power Generation Project in Shanxi Province
Zhuxikou Hydropower Project, P. R. China
The Rotem Amfert Negev (RAN) Natural Gas Fuel Switch Project
Yunnan Dujiacun Small Hydropower Project
Heilongjiang Huanan Hengdaishan West Wind Power Project
The 48MW wind power project in Lubei, Shandong Province
Dong Thanh Landfill gas CDM Project in Ho Chi Minh City
Sichuan Pingwu Xiannvbao Hydropower Station
Methane Recovery in Wastewater Treatment, Project AIN07-W-04, Sumatera Utara, Indonesia
Yunnan Nujiang Fugong Guquan River Hydropower Station
10 MW Biomass based renewable energy generation for the grid at Varam Bio Energy (P) Limited in Bhandara District, Mahara
Fujian Jiangle Gaotang Hydropower Project
Laiwu Iron & Steel Group Laigang Inc. 25MW Waste Gas Power Generation Project
China Chuandongxia Small Hydropower Project
Reduction in clinker usage in the production of cement through the increase in the use of additives at Lafarge Malayan Cemen
Wind power project by HZL in Gujarat.
AARTI CDM CPP
Inner Mongolia Duolun Daxishan 30.6MW Wind Power Project
Bii Stinu Wind Energy Project
Wind power project by HZL in Karnataka.
Baotou Iron & Steel Coke Dry Quenching #3 and Waste Heat Utilization for Electricity Generation Project
China Fujian Putian LNG Generation Project
DAEGU & SINANJEUNGDO PV(PHOTOVOLTAIC) POWER PLANT PROJECT
Guangxi Zhuang Autonomous Region Nandan Naba 1st Level Hydropower Station
Shanshuping 12 MW Small Hydropower Project in Sichuan Province, China
Yunnan Jinping Dapo Hydropower Station
10 MW Biomass based renewable energy generation for the grid, Jalagon District, Maharashtra, India
Nansha Hydro Power Project in Yunnan Province China
Jiangsu Rudong Lingyang Wind Power Project
Hubei Maduhe Hydro Project
COTRIBÁ Swine Waste Management System Project
Shangri-La Langdu River 4th Level Hydropower Station
10 MW Biomass based renewable energy generation for the grid at ASN Power Projects (P) Limited in Chandrapur District,Mah
Fuxin CMM/CBM Utilization Project in Liaoning Province
Gansu Yumen Sanshilijingzi Wind Power Project
Hangudi 5 MW Hydropower Project in Yunnan province
Jishou Huanglianxi 8MW Hydropower Project
PFC Emission Reductions at ALBRAS, Alumínio Brasileiro S.A.
Hunan Lizitang 9.6MW Hydropower Project of China
Gansu Kababanjiu 12.6MW Small Hydropower Project, China
Xinjiang Mayitasi Wind Farm Project
Shri Chamundi Captive Energy Private Limited”, 16MW biomass fired cogeneration plant for supply of power and steam to an
Korea Midland Power Co., LTD. (KOMIPO) Boryeong Small Hydroelectric Power Plant Project
Daofu County Mengtuo Hydro Project
Shangri-La Langdu River 1st Level Hydropower Station
Lushui Zijihe Small Hydropower Project
Macaohe 9.8MW Hydro Power Project in Guizhou Province
CECIC HKC Danjinghe Wind Farm Project
Zhejiang Qushan Wind Farm Project
Sichuan Tongjiang Gaokeng Hydropower Station Project
Hebei Shirenshan Wind Power Project
Beijing 48 MW Guanting Wind Power Project
Heilongjiang Beiantun 49.5MW Wind Power Project
Inner Mongolia North Longyuan Huitengxile WindFarm Project
Heilongjiang Huanan Hengdaishan East Wind Power Project
Yulong County Jinzhuang River Third Level Hydropower Project
Shenyang Laohuchong LFG Power Generation Project
Shuangbai Ejia Magahe River Hydropower Project
Guohua Inner Mongolia Huitengliang West Wind Farm Project
Xacbal Hydroelectric project
Hebei Shangyi Manjing West Wind Farm Project
Cuchildeo Hydroelectric Project
Inner Mongolia North Longyuan Huitengliang Windfarm Project
Shanxi Taigang Stainless Steel Co., Ltd. Sinter Machine Waste Heat Recovery and Generation Project
Huangtuwan Hydropower Project in Gansu Province
Shangri-La Langtayong Hydropower Station
Daning Coal Mine Methane Power Generation Project in Jincheng City Shanxi Province, China
Goldwind Damao Wind Farm Project
Shangri-La Langdu River 3rd Level Hydropower Station
Shangri-La Langdu River 2nd Level Hydropower Station
China Yanzhou Hydropower Expanded Project
Zhang Jiagang waste heat recovery from sulphuric acid production for electricity generation project
Xiaoxi Hydropower Project
Fuhui Inner Mongolia Narenbaolige Wind Farm Project
Fuhui Inner Mongolia Tugurige Wind Farm Project
Yangliutan Hydro Power Project
Shandong Luneng Dongying 48MW Wind Power Project
Jiangsu Qingshi Cement Plant's Low Temperature Waste Heat Power Generation Project
Jiuxiaohe and Sanhekou Small Hydroelectric Bundle Project
Henan Xichuan Waste Heat Recovery for Power Generation
Heilongjiang Dajiazishan 49.5MW Wind Power Project
Cristalino Small Hydroelectric Power Plant (hereafter referred to as “CristalSHP”)
Guangdong Nan Ao 26MW Wind Power Project
Zhonglian Julong Cement Waste Heat Recovery as Power Project
Angang Sinter Machine Waste Heat Recovery and Generation Project
Sichuan Kangding Sandaoqiao Hydropower Station
Amatitlan Geothermal Project
Power Prospect 9.9MW Rice Husk Power Plant (the “Project” or “project activity”)
40 MW Grid Connected Wind Power Project
The Third Cascade Hydropower Station of Niduhe River
Guangzhou Zhujiang Power Plant Gas (LNG) Combined Cycle Project
22.5 MW grid connected wind farm project by RSMML in Jaisalmer, India.
5.8 MW Wind Energy Generation by M/s Patspin India Limited.
1 MW Hwaseong PV (photovoltaic) Power Plant
Zhejiang Cixi Wind Farm Project
“Listrindo Kencana Biomass Power Plant”
SML WHRB CPP
Tiefa Coal Industry Group CMM Utilization Project
Wind Electricity Generation Project
GHG emission reductions through pre-heat train optimization in the CDU and VDU of Digboi Refinery,, Indian Oil Corpo
Ma Steel (old plant) CDQ and waste heat utilization project
China Tuanjie Small Rundle Hydropower Project
Methane Recovery in Wastewater Treatment, Project AIN07-W-01, Sumatera Utara (North Sumatera), Indonesia
Anshan Iron and Steel Group Corporation (Anshan) Blast Furnac
Coke Dry Quenching (CDQ) Waste Heat Recovery for Power Generation Project of Laiwu Iron & Steel Group Corp.
AIPL WHRB 1&2
Anshan Iron and Steel Group Corporation (Yingkou) Blast Furna
Gansu Luqu Dazhuang Hydropower Station Project
13.5MW WHR Project in Hunan Niuli Cement Co., Ltd.
Methane fired power generation plant in Samrong Thom Animal Husbandry, Cambodia
WHR CDM CPP
Electricity grid interconnection San Gabán – Mazuko – Puerto Maldonado
Inner Mongolia North Longyuan Zhurihe WindFarm Project
Sichuan Shimian Xieluo Wanba River Hydropower Station
8.75 MW Wind Power Project by Taurian Iron & Steel Company Private Limited in District
20 MW Bagasse Based Co-generation Power Project at Bannari Amman Sugars Limited, Nanjangud, Karnataka
Huainan Panyi and Xieqiao Coal Mine Methane Utilization Proje
GCL biomass gasification based power generation
Fuel Substitution by Hydro Generation in Pasto Bueno
Poechos II hydroelectric plant project
Yunnan Lushui County Laowohe 25MW Hydropower Project
Inner Mongolia Bayinhanggai 49.5MW Wind Farm Project
Hunan YangmingshanThree Level Hydropower Project
La Joya Hydroelectric Plant
Kunming Dongjiao Baishuitang LFG Treatment and Power Generation Project
Integrated Energy Ltd. Grid Connected Electricity Generation Plant using Natural Gas
29.7 MW Wind Power project in Karnataka, India
Shandong Tuoji Island Windfarm Project
KCP Waste Heat Recovery Project in a Cement Plant by The KCP Limited (Cement Unit), India
HITECH CDM CPP
Jiangsu Huaerrun Waste Heat Recovery Project
Thermal energy recovery for new applications at No.5 Sungei Kadut Street 6 by Bee Joo Industries Pte Ltd, Singapore
Jiangsu Jiaoqiao Cement Plant’s Low Temperature Waste Heat Power Generation Project
Yixing Shuanglong Cement Plant’s Low Temperature Waste Heat Power Generation Project
Shanxi Taigang Stainless Steel Co., Ltd. Waste Saturated Steam Recovery and Generation Project
Fuzhou Hongmiaoling Landfill Gas to Electricity Project
Ningxia Yinyi Hongsipu 49.50MW Wind-farm Project
GHG emission reduction by thermal oxidation of HFC 23 at refrig
Fosfertil Piaçaguera NAP 2 Nitrous Oxide Abatement Project
Jingdezhen Kaimenzi Ceramics Chemical Industry Group Limited Company CDQ Technology-Reform Project
Sichuan Chenjiaheba 20MW Hydropower Project
Langxiang 30MW Hydro Power Project in Guizhou Province China
Offis Textile Ltd. Fuel Switch, Israel
Power Generation by Waste Heat Recovery Project of Xinjiang Tianshan Cement Co. Ltd. in Urumqi City, Xinjiang Autonomous
Fuel Switching at Atocongo Cement Plant and Natural Gas Pipeline Extension, Cementos Lima, Peru.
Santo Domingo Wind Energy Project
Yunnan Lincang Zhenai Hydropower Project
2.5 MW Rice husk based cogeneration plant at Hanuman Agro Industries Limited
The model project for renovation to increase the efficient use of energy in brewery
Organic Waste Composting at Takon Palm Oil Mill, Malaysia
Milpillas Landfill Gas Recovery Project
Apaqui run-of-river hydroelectric project
Inner Mongolia Chifeng Dongshan Phase II 50MW Wind Power Project
Gianyar Waste Recovery Project
Fujian Wuyishan Wenlin River 2nd and 3rd Level Hydropower Station
Hunan Yuanshui Qingshuitang Hydropower Station
18 MW Natural Gas based community power plant and 2 MW Waste Heat Recovery system
China Tongwan Hydropower Project
Yunnan Lushui Jinman River Hydropower Station
Bundled wind energy power projects (2004 policy) in Rajasthan
Baragran Hydro Electric Project, 3.0 MW (being expanded to 4.9 MW)
Dongliuxi Erji 12.6 MW Hydropower Project in Hubei Province
Sanchawan 32MW Hydro Power Project in Guizhou Province China
Electrotherm 30 MW combined waste heat recovery and coal based captive power plant at Kutch
Tungabhadra wind power project in Karnataka
Enercon Wind Farm (Hindustan) Ltd in Karnataka
Lijiang Xinzhuhe Second Level Hydropower Project
CECIC Zhangbei Dayangzhuang Wind Farm Project
Hebei Chengde Huifeng Windfarm Project
Ceran´s Castro Alves Hydro Power Plant CDM Project Activity
Chuanhua N2O Abatement Project
15 MW Wind Energy Project in Maharashtra
Guangxi Xiafu Hydro Power Project
Methane capture from POME for electricity generation in Batu Pahat.
Guangxi Bajiangkou Hydropower Project
Hubei Xiakou Hydropower Project of Nanzhang County, Xiangfan City, Hubei Province, P.R. China
Inner Mongolia Chifeng Bolike 50MW Wind Power Project
Methane Recovery for Onsite Utilisation Project at Desa Kim Loong Palm Oil Mill, Sook, Keningau, Sabah, Malaysia
Primavera Small Hydroelectric Project
Changshatou 10MW Hydropower Project in Hubei Province
Chongqing Fuyuan (High Pressure) N2O Abatement Project
Incauca S. A. Fuel Switch from Coal to Green Harvest Residues CDM Project
Inner Mongolia Bayin’aobao 49.5MW Wind Farm Project (Phase I)
Danian 14MW Hydropower Project in Gansu Province
9 MW Neria Hydroelectric project, Karnataka, India
Chongqing Iron & Steel Co. Ltd. Waste Gas to Electricity Project
Electricity generation from mustard crop residues: Tonk, India
Biomass based Hot Air Generation at Fertilizer Unit of Tata Chemicals Ltd., Haldia, West Bengal
Energy efficiency and fuel switch project at Welspun India Limited
Pig City confined swine feeding operations methane capture and combustion from improved animal waste management syste
Pingyuan Tongli WHR Project
Yulong Tongli WHR Project
Yuexi Dayan Small Hydropower Project
Fuel Switching Project of the Aqaba Thermal Power Station (ATP
Hejiang County Yuanxing Hydro Project
Wulashan Line1 N2O Abatement Project
KKSL Lekir Biogas Project, Project BCM07_SLK_14
AWMS Methane Recovery Project MX07-S-113, Aguascalientes,
Shanxi Xiaoyi Waste Gas Combined Cycle Power Generation Project
Shibeishan Wind Power Generation Project in Huilai County, Guangdong Province
Emission reductions through partial substitution of fossil fuel with alternative fuels in three cement plants of Holcim Philippine
Shaba 24MW Hydropower Project in Yunnan Province, China
14 MW Bundled Small Hydropower Project in Xiping and Puhe
Low-temperature waste heat recovery for electricity generation project of Anhui Huaibei Mining (Group) Cement Co. Ltd.
Anaerobic Biodigesters in the Yucatán Peninsula 1
Jilin Liaoyuan Meihe coal mine methane power generation project
Matan 7MW Hydro Power Project in Guizhou Province, China
“Surplus power generation for grid” at Vayyuru, Andhra Pradesh
Chuanwei Group 24 MW Waste Gas based Captive Power Plant
First Farmers Holding Corporation (FFHC) Bagasse Cogeneration Plant
China Tumuxi Small Hydropower Project
Shanghai Baoshan Grid Connected Natural Gas Combined Cycle Power Plant Project
Zhengzhou Coal Industry (Group) Co., Ltd. Coalmine Methane Uti
Jiangxi Fuliang Zhangshukeng Hydropower Station
TTY Cambodia Biogas Project
“35 MW Bagasse Based Cogeneration Project” by Mumias Sugar Company Limited (MSCL)
Emission reductions through partial substitution of fossil fuel with alternative fuels in the 2 cement plants of PT Holcim Indone
Changtan Hydro Power Project in Guizhou Province
ANAEROBIC DIGESTION SWINE WASTEWATER TREATMENT WITH ON-SITE POWER PROJECT (ADSW RP2002)
Taebaek Wind Power Project
Shimen Suojie Small Hydropower Project in Changde, P.R. China
Waste Heat based Captive Power Project in Hunan Hualing Lian
Huangyutang Hydro Power Project in Guizhou Province
15 MW Grid Connected Wind Turbine Project in Karnataka
Inner Mongolia Wulanchabu Volan Cement Waste Heat Recovery Project
Biorgánicos Organic Waste Project (Biorgánicos OWP)
Tianjin Shuangkou Landfill Gas Recovery and Electricity Generation
Shandong Zaozhuang 15MW waste heat recovery for electricity generation project (1)
Comprehensive utilization of waste coal gas for electricity generation project in Shaanxi Xinglong Cogeneration Co. Ltd
CEMEX Colombia: Biomass project at Caracolito cement plant.
Avoidance of methane production in POME treatment through Boustead Biotherm Palmass Technology
De Martino WWTP upgrade
Guizhou Zhenyuan Putian Hydropower Station
Pingdingshan Coal (Group) Co., Ltd. Methane Utilization Project
PAA Biogas Extraction Project for Heat Generation
San José de Minas Hydroelectric Project
China Tuojiang Small Hydropower Project
4 MW biomass based power generation project at Guntur, Andhra Pradesh.
“6 MW bagasse based cogeneration plant for electricity generation for grid supply at Mawana Sugars Limited (MSL) at Mawan
Proactiva Tijuquinhas Landfill Gas Capture and Flaring project
Zhonggouwan Small Hydroelectric Project (ZSHP), Hunan Province, P.R.C
Kuantan Jabor-Jerangau Integrated Landfill Management
Anaerobic Biodigesters in the Yucatán Peninsula 2
China Xinhuang Xincun Small Hydropower Project
Energy efficiency improvement measures in CESC-TGS- modification of the Furnace Draft Control System and the Auxiliary Coo
Liaoyuan Jingang Cement Waste Heat Recovery as Power Project
Yunnan Yuanjiang Lutong Hydropower Station
Esajadi small hydropower project in Malaysia
24MW power generation from coking waste heat generated in the clean-type heat-recovery coke ovens at Shanxi Province Ga
Burning of solid biomass for process steam generation for beer manufacture in place of fuel oils at AMBEV´s Branchs Agudos (
Yima Coal Industry (Group) Co., Ltd. CMM utilization project
Yunnan Weixi Jicha Hydropower Project
Zhuhai Hengqin Island Wind Farm Project
Baofeng County Waste Heat Recovery for Power Generation
Yunnan Weixi Gedeng Hydropower Project
SMC WHRB 1&2
Waste Gas-based Cogeneration Project at Alexandria Carbon Black Co., Egypt
Power generation from coking waste heat utilization project at Taiyuan Gangyuan Coking & Chemicals Co., Ltd in China
Xinjiang Tianfeng Dabancheng Second Phase Wind Farm Project
Sulige Natural Gas based Power Generation Project
Power generation from coking waste heat utilization project at Taiyuan City Wanguang Coal and Coking Co., Ltd in Shanxi, Chin
Qinghai Ge-ermu Gas Turbine Power Plant Project
Power generation from coking waste heat utilization project at Qinyuan County Mingyuan Coal and Coke Co., Ltd in Shanxi, Ch
GEEA Biomass 5 MW Power Plant Project
Kanhym Farm manure to energy project
24MW Power Generation from Coking Waste Heat Generated in the Clean-type Heat-recovery Coke Ovens at Shanxi Sinochem
Power generation from coking waste heat utilization project at Taiyuan Yingxian Coking & Chemicals Co., Ltd in Shanxi, China
Ganluo Kaijianqiao Hydropower Project, P.R.China
10 MW Biomass Based Renewable Energy Generation for the Grid at Saradambika Power Plant Private Limited at Chandrapur
8.5 MW wind power project in Chitradurga district in Karnataka by Jindal Aluminium Ltd.
36MW Power generation from coking waste heat generated in the clean-type heat-recovery coke ovens at Shanxi Qinxin Coal
Feira de Santana Landfill Gas Project
Changwa 10 MW Small-scale Hydro Project
Chile: Quilleco Hydroelectric Project
Chile: Hornitos Hydroelectric Project
Liyutang small Hydropower project
Gas turbine co-generation project in Indonesia
Tangshan Xinfeng Thermal & Power Co., Ltd. Waste Gas Power Generation Project
Kunming - Wuhua Landfill Gas to Energy Project
Inner Mongolia Wudaogou 50.25MW Wind Power Project
Power generation from coking waste heat utilization project at Lan County Fengda Coking and Chemicals Smelting Co., Ltd in S
Regional landfill projects in Chile
Small Hydroelectric Steelworks of POSCO Co., Ltd. (Gwangyang Steelworks)
Power generation from coking waste heat utilization project at Shanxi Shouyang County Boda Industries Co., Ltd in Shanxi, Chi
Yunnan Zemahe 15MW Small Hydropower Project, P. R. China
Wulashan Line 2 N2O Abatement Project
Shijiazhuang Jinshi N2O Abatement Project
ISL Waste Heat Recovery Project, India
GEPL Biomass energy generation project at Faridabad, Haryana
Martinuv Espigão Hydroelectric Project
Guizhou Shuicheng Jinshizi Hydropower Station
Straw generation project in Wei county Hebei province, P.R. China
Mujiajia Erji 10MW Small Hydropower Project in Yunnan Province
Yunnan Dehong Longchuan Bienaihe 1st and 2nd Level Hydropower Stations
MAKATI SOUTH SEWAGE TREATMENT PLANT UPGRADE WITH ON-SITE POWER
Chongqing Menkantan Hydroelectric Project
Generation of electricity from 3.2 MW capacity wind mills by Gujarat JHM at Bhambarwadi, Maharashtra
Qinghai Qinggangxia 43.8MW Hydropower Project
Waste Heat Recovery and Utilisation for Power Generation Project of Chizhou Conch Cement Company Limited
Caoying Small Hydropower Project
24.75 MW Ranganathaswamy Mini Hydel Project, Karnataka, India
Generation of electricity from 9.6 MW capacity wind mills by S
Methane Recovery in Wastewater Treatment, Project AMA07-W-01, Perak, Malaysia
Zhongzhou 16.5 MW Hydropower Project
Nava Bharat RE Bagasse Project
Daguan Hongshayan 9.6 MW Small Hydropower Project in Yunnan Province, P.R.China.
USJ Açúcar e Álcool S/A – Usina São Francisco Cogeneration Project.
China Changniping Hydropower Project
Captive power generation through waste heat recovery system in a steel plant in Jinan City, China (Removed no corrections su
Capacity enhancement for export of surplus power to grid at Lakshmipuram, Andhra Pradesh, India
20MW Bagasse based Cogeneration power project” at Bannari Amman Sugars Limited Sathyamangalam, Tamil Nadu
Taohua 9MW Hydro Power Project in Guizhou Province, China
Lishiluo Erji 6.4MW Small Hydropower Project in Yunnan Province
Sichuan Zhaojiashan 20MW Hydropower Project
Pihe 9.6MW Small Hydropower Project in Yunnan Province
Yuntianhua Shuifu N2O Abatement Project
GREEN ENERGY TO GRID at Dhule, Maharashtra
A power generation project using waste heat from the Coke Dry Quenching (CDQ) equipment in China
NRL -Captive power generation by recovery and utilization of the waste energy (thermal and pressure) of HP steam
Hedcor Sibulan 42.5 MW Hydroelectric Power Project
Enhancing energy efficiency by replacing batch smelter by continuous smelter at Karaikal, Pondicherry
AWMS Methane Recovery Project BR06-S-18,, Parana, Rio Grande
AWMS Methane Recovery Project BR07-S-31, Mato Grosso do Sul,
CEMEX Costa Rica: Use of biomass residues in Colorado cement plant
Huadian Ningxia Ningdong Yangjiayao 45MW Wind-farm Project
PFC emission reductions at ALUAR Aluminio Argentino
Pontianak - GHG emission reduction through improved MSW management – LFG Capture, Flaring and Electricity Generation
Inner Mongolia Dali Phase IV 49.5MW Wind Power Project
Inner Mongolia Dali Phase V 49.5MW Wind Power Project
Alto-Tietê landfill gas capture project
Luojiaohe 20MW Hydro Power Project in Guizhou Province China
CTRVV Landfill emission reduction project
Someshwara small hydropower project (24.75 MW) in Karnataka, India
Mianyang Landfill Gas Utilsation Project
Wind power project by GFL in Gudhepanchgani
Rice husk based Co generation project at Dujana unit of KRBL Limited
"Waste Heat Recovery project" at Saraikela, Kharsavan, Jharkhand by M/s Kohinoor Steel Private Limited
UHE Mascarenhas power upgrading project
Fundão-Santa Clara Energetic Complex Project (FSCECP)
Kadamane Mini Hydel Scheme-1 (KMHS-1)
4MW Biomass Power Plants Using Waste Wood Chips & Sawdust in Central Java Province, Indonesia
Jiaping 5MW, Pingzhong 4.4MW Hydro Power Project in Guizhou Province, China.
Shaba 30MW Hydro Power Project in Guizhou Province China
Fuel oil to animal tallow switching at Companhia de Fiação e Tecidos Santo Antônio
Flare gas recovery project at Hazira Gas Processing Complex (HGPC), Hazira plant, Oil and Natural Gas Corporation (ONGC) Lim
Brasil Central Energia S.A. – Sacre 2 Small Hydro Power Plant Project
Liaoning Huanren Niumaodashan Wind Power Project
e7 Galapagos / San Cristobal Wind Power Project
Huayang Dier Line 2 N2O Abatement Project
Lingli 7.5MW Hydro Power Project in Guizhou Province, China
Nanzhahe Cascade Hydropower Project
Surat Thani Biomass Power Generation Project in Thailand
Yunnan Jiehua (Mono Pressure) N2O Abatement Project
Recycled Energy Electricity Generation Project by AMLSPL
Liuzhou Chemical Industry Co., LTD N2O Abatement Project
Fray Bentos Biomass Power Generation Project
Liaoning Xingcheng Haibin Wind Farm Project
Terrestre Ambiental Landfill Gás Project
Petrotemex Energy Integration Project
Fujian Beijin Hydropower Project
Yunnan Jiehua (Dual Pressure) N2O Abatement Project
Qinghai Jinshaxia 70MW Hydropower Project
BHL Thanabhawan Project
Huayang Dier Line 1 N2O Abatement Project
Douhuang 12.6 MW Small Hydropower Project
Guyana Skeldon Bagasse Cogeneration Project
Carhuaquero IV Hydroelectric Power Plant
Yunnan Lazhai Hydropower Project
Renewable biomass based thermal energy generation at Mahalaxmi Group of Companies, Ahmedabad
Conversion of existing open cycle gas turbine to combined cycle at the Central Termica Patagonia power station, Co
Sao Joao hydro power plant
Boiler Fuel Conversion from RFO to Biomass Based Briquettes at Fresenius Kabi India Private Limited, Ranjangaon (M.S.), India
Use of FINEX Off Gas for power generation in Pohang Steel Works
Inno-Malsa - Palm Oil Mill Waste Recycle Scheme, Malaysia
Yunnan Mopo River 12.5 MW Hydropower Project
Dwarikesh 8 MW Bagasse-Based Power Generation Project, Bijnor, UP India
Jielong Cascade Small-Scale Hydropower Project
American Israel Paper Mill (AIPM) Natural Gas Fuel Switch
Granja Tres Arroyos Methane Avoidance in Slaughterhouse Effluents Project
Inner Mongolia Sunjiaying 50.25MW Wind Power Project
LITL’s Wind Project at Tamil Nadu
Guangdong Longtan 2*7MW Hydropower project
8 MW biomass based renewable energy generation for the grid, Gondia District, Maharashtra,India
5 MW renewable energy project for a grid system” at Rohru Tehsil, Shimla District in Himachal, India
Empee Distilleries 10 MW Woody Biomass-Based Power Project, Tamil Nadu
Xinjiang Xiaocaohu Wind Power Project
Nanning Landfill Gas to Energy Project
Hubei Xuan’en Dongping Hydropower Station
China Zhijiang Peace Small Hydropower Project
AWMS Methane Recovery Project BR07-S-34, Bahia, Espirito Santo, Minas Gerais, and Sao Paulo, Brazil
AWMS Methane Recovery Project BR06-S-33, Minas Gerais and Sao Paulo, Brazil
Liujiashan 10 MW Small Hydropower Project in Jiangxi Province
5 MW Biomass based Cogeneration project” at Solan, Himachal Pradesh, by M/s Deepak Spinners Limited
Yuejiang Small-Scale Hydropower Project
Hongyan 8 MW Small-scale Hydro Project
Biogas and biomass based co-generation project at CDBL
Emek Hefer Biogas Project
AWMS Methane Recovery Project BR06-S-22, Minas Gerais, Braz
Bapan 12.7MW Hydropower Project
Biogas energy plant from palm oil mill effluent
6 MW Biomass residue based cogeneration unit by MPML at Villag
Baji River Stage I 10MW Run-of-river Hydropower Project
AWMS Methane Recovery Project MX07-S-112, Sonora, México
Hot air generation using renewable biomass fuel for spray drying application at H. & R. Johnson (India) Ltd, Kunigal.
Pushihe Erji 10 MW Small Hydropower Project in Yunnan Province
Aluhe 12.6 MW Small Hydropower Project in Yunnan Province
Steam Optimization in Cooking Process in Paper Plant
Biomass generation project, in Sheyang county, Jiangsu province, P.R. China
Project for the catalytic reduction of N2O emissions with a sec
Changpinghe Yiji and Erji 10.4 MW Bundled Small Hydropower Project
AWMS Methane Recovery Project MX07-S-111, Sonora, México
Fuel switchover from higher carbon intensive fuels to Natural Ga
Maocaoping 8 MW Small Hydropower Project in Yunnan Province
Fuling Waste Heat Recovery for power generation project
1.5 MW Deogad hydroelectric project in Maharashtra, district Sindhudurg, India by M/s Gadre Marine Export
Energy Efficiency Improvement by Waste Heat Recovery
Ratchaburi Farms Biogas Project at Veerachai Farm
AWMS Methane Recovery Project MX07-S-110, Chihuahua, México
Jinggangshan 36 MW Hydropower Project
Ratchaburi Farms Biogas Project at Nong Bua Farm
Zhejiang Provincial Energy Group Zhenhai Natural Gas Power Generation Co., Ltd.’s NG Power Generation Project
Xiaoshan Power Plant's NG Power Generation Project of Zhejiang Southeast Electric Power Co., Ltd.
Ratchaburi Farms Biogas Project at SPM Farm
Optimization of steam consumption in the process by installation of free flow falling film finisher evaporator and retrofit to the
AWMS Methane Recovery Project MX06-S-62, Coahuila, México
AESA Misiones (Proactiva Group) Sanitary Landfill Gas capture and flaring project
Generation of electricity from 12.8 MW capacity wind mills by
“3MW Iruttukanam Small Hydro Electric Project, Kerala, India” at Viyyat Power Private Limited in Taluka Devikulam, District Id
Daguan Linguanyan Small Hydropower Project in Yunnan Province, P.R.China
Mingying 3.75MW Hydro Power Project in Guizhou Province, China
8MW pure low temperature waste heat recovery (WHR) for power generation in SDIC Hainan Cement Co., Ltd.
Jinxiang – Golden Elephant Line 1 N2O Abatement Project
Jinxiang – Golden Elephant Line 2 N2O Abatement Project
Hot air generation using renewable biomass fuel for spray drying and vertical drying application at H.&R. Johnson (India) Limit
Yunnan Dali Yang_er 49.8MW Hydropower Project
Power generation from waste heat of submerged arc furnaces
Shandong Gaotang 30MW Biomass Power Generation Project
Methane Recovery and Utilisation Project at TSH Kunak Oil Palm Mill
La Virgen Hydroelectric Plant
AWMS Methane Recovery Project BR06-S-30, Mato Grosso and Mato Grosso do Sul, Brazil
Baotou Iron & Steel Blast Furnace Gas Combined Cycle Power Plant Project
Energy efficiency improvement in power generation at Sajjan India Limited, Ankhleshwar, Gujarat
Laguna de Bay Community Waste Management Project: Avoidance of methane production from biomass decay through comp
Tianji Group Line 2 N2O Abatement Project
Power Generation by Waste Heat Recovery Project in Henglai Building Materials Co. Ltd., Yixing City, Jiangsu Province, P. R. Ch
4.5 MW Wind Power Project in Kadavakallu, Andhra Pradesh
Jaroensompong Corporation Rachathewa Landfill Gas to Energy Project
Tianji Group Line 1 N2O Abatement Project
Energeticos Jaremar – Biogas recovery from Palm Oil Mill Efflue
Rehabilitation of six HPPs in the Republic of Macedonia
Tianji Group Line 3 N2O Abatement Project
Jorethang Loop Hydroelectric Project, India
Shandong Weihai 69 MW Wind Power Project
155 MW Gas based combined cycle power project at Hazira
MEN-Tangerang 13.6MW Natural Gas Co-generation Project
10 MW biomass based power generation project at Wani, Yavatmal by Shalivahana Projects Limited
Durango – EcoMethane Landfill Gas to Energy Project
VKG Steels & Energy Private Limited – 8 MW WHR Based Captive Power Project.
Argichi Small Hydroelectric CDM Project
Beijing Taiyanggong CCGT Trigeneration Project
“Coconut shell charcoaling and power generation at Badalgama, Sri Lanka”
Henan Zhengzhou Grid Connected Natural Gas Combined Cycle Power Plant
Shanxi Coal Transport Market Co., Ltd. Yangquan Branch CMM Ut
Hubei Hefeng Yanzi Town Baishun Village Taohuashan Hydropower Station
Power Generation (20MW) by utilizing Coke Oven Gas of China Coal and Coke Jiuxin Limited in Lingshi, Shanxi, P. R. China
Qinghai Dongxuerji 8 MW Hydropower Project
Beijing No.3 Thermal Power Plant Gas-Steam Combined Cycle Project Using Natural Gas
Lufeng Jiadong First Phase Wind Farm Project
Changshu Haike HFC 23 Decomposition Project
Monomeros Nitrous Oxide Abatement Project
Hunan Dongping 72MW Hydropower Project
ESTRE Pedreira Landfill Gás Project (EPLGP)
PARAÍSO SMALL HYDROPOWER PLANT – PCH PARAÍSO
Retamim Landfill Project
Caña Brava Hydroelectric Power Plant
N2O abatement project at nitric acid plant No. 11 at African Expl
5 MW Wind Power Project of Alembic Ltd at Bhavnagar , Gujarat, India
BBMG Cement WHR for 10.5 MW power generation project in Beijing
Grid-connected Combined Cycle Power Plant of capacity 219.067 MW using Natural Gas/ R-LNG as fuels at Gujarat, In
AWMS Methane Recovery Project MX06-S-48, Jalisco, México
AWMS Methane Recovery Project BR06-S-23, Mato Grosso and Goias, Brazil
Montevideo Landfill Gas Capture and Flare Project
Hebei Quzhai Cement 9000kW Waste Heat Recovery Project
Tambun LPG Associated Gas Recovery and Utilization Project
Priyata Intercontinental Wind Power Project, India.
Greenfield power project at Dwarikesh Dham
Quezon City Controlled Disposal Facility Biogas Emission Reduction Project
75MW wind power project in Maharashtra by Essel Mining Industries Limited
Yichang Yihua Waste Heat Recovery and Utilization project
Baxianyuan 27 MW Hydropower Project
6.0 MW Biomass based cogeneration power plant of Rama Paper Mills Limited, Kiratpur, Uttar Pradesh.
AWMS Methane Recovery Project BR06-S-26, Minas Gerais, Brazil
AWMS Methane Recovery Project BR06-S-28, Santa Catarina, Bra
AWMS Methane Recovery Project BR06-S-25, Minas Gerais, Brazil
AWMS Methane Recovery Project BR06-S-19, Goias, Brazil
AWMS Methane Recovery Project BR06-S-27, Goias, Brazil
AWMS Methane Recovery Project BR06-S-20, Minas Gerais, Brazil
AWMS Methane Recovery Project BR06-S-21, Goias, Brazil
AWMS Methane Recovery Project BR06-S-29, Sao Paulo, Brazil
AWMS Methane Recovery Project BR06-S-24, Mato Grosso and Mato Grosso do Sul, Brazil
San José del Tambo Hydroelectric Project
Effective utilization of waste heat by installing vacuum pre-concentrator in urea section at Indo Gulf Fertilisers (A Unit of Adity
Sandaowan Hydropower Project in Gansu Province, P.R. China
9.8 MW Renewable Energy Generation for the grid at South Asian Agro Industries Limited in Raipur District, Chattisgarh.
Ramgarh Chini Mills RE project
7.2 MW Wind Project at Chitradurga, Karnataka
China Guanmenyan Hydropower Project
Proactiva Mérida Landfill Gas Capture and Flaring project
PROBIOGAS-JP – João Pessoa Landfill Gas Project
La Cascada 2.3 MW Hydroelectric Project
20MW Waste gas based captive power project based at Kharagpur, West Bengal
Fujian Zhangpu Liuao 45MW Wind Power Project
Shandong Changdao 27.2 MW Wind Power Project
Irani Wastewater Methane Avoidance Project
Centro Industrial del Sur Organic Waste Project
Power generation from waste heat of new DRI kilns at JSPL
Koppal Green Power Limited Biomass Power Project
Hua'an Xipi Hydropower Project
Inner Mongolia Zhuozi 40MW Wind Power Project
Biomass Based Power Project of Balaji Agro Oils Ltd.
Project for the Catalytic Reduction of N2O Emissions with a Seco
Project for the catalytic reduction of N2O emissions with a secon
Maoshaping Hydro Power Project
GIPPL Waste Heat based 11.5 MW Captive Power Project
Nobrecel fuel switch in black liquor boiler Project
NSSM – Narkatiaganj Biomass Power Project
Fuel Free Electricity to Grid
6 MW Rice Husk based cogeneration plant at Bhageshwari Paper
Yuliangwan Small Hydroelectric Project, Hunan Province, China
Reducing the Average Clinker Content in Cement at CEMEX Mexico Operations.
Rehabilitation of the Callahuanca hydroelectric power station
Installation of Low Green House Gases (GHG) emitting rolling stock cars in metro system
Bundle of 100 village biomass gasifier based power plants totalling 5.15 MW for Decentralised Energy Systems India Pvt. Ltd. i
Bundled Wind Power Project of JeJu Special Self-Governing Province in Korea
Methane Recovery and Utilization CDM Project at Muyuan Swine Farm in Henan Province
Biomass thermal energy plant – Hartalega Sdn.Bhd, Malaysia
Heilongjiang Tangyuan Biomass Cogeneration Project
Amurang Biomass Cogeneration Project
Waste Gas based Captive Power Plant in Liangang Group
Wahei Hydroelectric Project
Shandong Wudi Biomass Generation Project
Fujian Pingtan Changjiang’ao 100 MW Wind Power Project
Ningxia Yinyi 49.50MW Wind-farm Project
The Anaerobic Digestion Swine Wastewater Treatment With On-Site Power Bundled Project (ADSW RP1001)
Guohua Qiqihaer Fuyu 1st Stage Wind Farm Project
Golden Hope Composting Project - Kerdau
Coronel landfill gas capture project
Golden Hope Composting Project - Melalap.
Flare gas recovery project at Uran plant, Oil and Natural Gas Corporation (ONGC) Limited
Golden Hope Composting Project - Merotai
Golden Hope Composting Project - Lavang
Inversiones Hondurenas Cogeneration Project
Shanxi Yangcheng Coal Mine Methane Utilization Project
12.8 MW Bundled Small Hydropower Project in Nasha and Nabin
Yuyao Electricity Generation Project using Natural Gas
China Shangbao Small Hydropower Project
La Ventosa Wind Energy Project
Sichuan Banzigou Small Hydropower Project, P.R. China
Biomass Gasification based Power Generation by Arashi Hi-Tech Bio-Power Private Limited
Rice husk based cogeneration plant (5 MW) at Shibzada Ajit Singh Nagar District, Punjab by M/s Nahar Industrial Enterprises li
Yeghegis small-scale hydro project
Factory energy efficiency improvement in compressed air demand and supply in Malaysia
Switching of fuel from coal to palm oil mill biomass waste residues at Industrial de Oleaginosas Americanas S.A. (INO
Ancon – EcoMethane Landfill Gas Project
Central Izalco Cogeneration Project
Power capacity expansion project at Dwarikesh Puram
Berlin Binary Cycle power plant
N2O decomposition project of PetroChina Company Limited Liaoyang Petrochemical Company
Emission reduction through partial substitution of fossil fuel with alternative fuels like agricultural byproducts & Municipal Sol
Tultitlan – EcoMethane Landfill Gas to Energy Project
Jiaozishan Landfill Gas Recovery and Utilisation Project
Waste heat power generation project at Hunan Anshi Xingyuan Power Generation Co., Ltd.
Ciudad Juarez Landfill Gas to Energy Project
The Wulabo 30 MW Wind-Farm Project in Urumqi, Xinjiang of China
10 MW biomass based power project of Ind Power limited
2.2 MW hydropower plant in Birsinghpur, Madhya Pradesh of Ascent Hydro Projects Limited (AHPL)
Nagamas Biomass Cogeneration Project in Indonesia
3 MW Wind Power Project at Chikkasiddavanahalli village, Chitradurga district, Karnataka
Tradewinds Methane Extraction and Power Generation Project
Project for the catalytic reduction of N2O emissions with a secondary catalyst inside the ammonia oxidation reactors of the NA
4 MW Bundled Grid Connected Wind Power Project in Tamilnadu, India
10.2MW Yangdun Small-Scale Hydropower Project
Xiaoshuichi Hydro Power Project of Lanzhou City, Gansu Province, P.R. China.
The TIMARPUR-OKHLA Waste Management Company Pvt Ltd's (TOWMCL) integrated waste to energy project in Delh
Methane recovery and utilisation project at United Plantations Berhad, Jendarata Palm Oil Mill, Malaysia
Baotou Iron & Steel Coke Dry Quenching and Waste Heat Utilization for Electricity Generation Project
K water Wind Power Plant Project in Bang-a muri
OULJA Landfill gas recovery and flaring
Project for the catalytic reduction of N2O emissions with a secondary catalyst inside the ammonia reactor of the No. 9 n
Burning of solid biomass for process steam generation for beer m
2.5 MW BEL grid-connected wind power project at Davanagere district, Karnataka, India
Co-composting of EFB and POME – MG BioGreen Sdn.Bhd (MGBG)
Tuanpo Hydro Power Project, Guizhou Province, China
Ningxia Shapotou Hydropower Project of Yellow River
Rio Grande do Sul Cooperatives Small Hydro Power Plants
Non-recovery type coke oven exhaust gas heat recovery power
PT. BUDI ACID JAYA Tapioca Starch Production Facilities Effluent Methane Extraction And On-site Power Generation Project in
30 MW WHR Project of Hongshi Group
Shree Chhatrapati Shahu RE Project
Bandar Baru Serting Biomass Project
7.25 MW wind energy project of Aruppukottai Sri Jayavilas Ltd,
DSM-Asmoli Bagasse Cogeneration Project
Phu Khieo Bio-Energy Cogeneration project (PKBC)
Dan Chang Bio-Energy Cogeneration project (DCBC)
Transalloys Manganese Alloy Smelter Energy Efficiency Project
MSPPL WHR based power project at Chattisgarh, India
4.0 MW Power Plant Using Clinker Cooling Gas Waste Heat
Biomass based renewable energy project in a Solvent Extraction
4MW Waste Heat Recovery based power project by GRSPL, India
Guohua Inner Mongolia Huitengliang Wind Farm Project
Hangyeong second phase SS-wind power Project
Waste gases utilisation for Combined Cycle Power Plant in Handa
Embralixo/Araúna - Bragança Landfill Gas Project
URBAM/ARAUNA - Landfill Gas Project (UALGP)
Catalytic N2O destruction project in the tail gas of the nitric acid plant PANNA 3 of Enaex S.A.
5 MW Upper Awa small hydroelectric project, Himachal Pradesh, India
Youshuishiti Hydroelectric Project
Xiangziyan Hydroelectric Project
Mensilin Holdings Biomass Energy Plant Project
Demand side energy efficiency project at IPCL-Vadodara Complex
Shanxi Liulin Coal Mine Methane Utilization Project
Hasars Landfill Gas Project
BHL Palia Kalan Project
Fujian Nanridao 16.15MW Wind Power Project
Yunnan Yingjiang Nandihe Hydro Power Project
KSPCL Waste Heat to Power project, India
DSM-Dhampur Bagasse Cogeneration Project
Yangjiawan 9MW Hydro Power Project in Guizhou Province, China
Wuerguli 30 MW Wind Power Project
AWMS Methane Recovery Project MX06-S-20, Yucatan, México
Jiangxi Fengcheng Mining Administration CMM Utilization Proje
Project for the catalytic reduction of N20 emissions with a secon
Palmas del Espino – Biogas recovery and heat generation from P
Eco Friendly Electricity Export to Grid
1.25 MW biomass based captive power plant by UP Asbestos Limited at Lucknow
Shanmugou Small Hydropower Project
Guangzhou Xingfeng Landfill Gas Recovery and Electricity Generation CDM Project
Pingwu Renjiaba 12.6 MW Small Hydropower Project, P.R.China
Puclaro Hydroelectric Power Plant
9 MW Renewable Energy Grid Connected Biomass Power Project
Bagasse based Cogeneration Project at Pudukkottai Tamil Nadu,
China Fluoro HFC23 abatement project in China
10MW Waste Heat Recovery based Captive Power Project at Vikash Metal and Power Limited
Partial substitution of fossil fuels with biomass in cement manu
Chilatán Hydroelectric Project
Jiangsu Qidong 91.5 MW Wind Power Project
SSML – Simbhaoli Biomass Power Project
Manasi River Stage I Hydropower Project of Hongshanzui Hydropower Plant, Xinjiang Tianfu Thermoelectric Co., Ltd.
GEEA-SBS Biomass Treatment Project in Alegrete, Rio Grande do Sul, Brazil
10 MW Renewable Energy Project for a Grid at Taraila, Himachal Pradesh.
Way Ganga hydro power project, Sri Lanka
“Neora Hydro Limited (NHL)” at Sakam Basti village, Darjeeling district, West Bengal,India
10 MW biomass based renewable energy generation for the grid in Amaravathi District of Maharashtra
Goldi-Lion Agricultural Development Corporation Methane Recovery and Electricity Generation Project
2.76 MW Grid Connected Renewable Energy Project in Rajasthan by Kalani Industries
Bondoc Realty Methane Recovery and Electricity Generation Project
Superior Hog Farms Methane Recovery
Erathna hydro power project, Sri Lanka
7.5 MW biomass plants using agricultural waste Limited
10 MW Somasila Hydro Power Project for a grid system by Balaji Energy Pvt.Ltd.
9.8 MW Biomass Based Power Plant at Lahari Power & Steels Limited in Champa-Janjgir District, Chattisgarh
Wuhuzha 12 MW Small Hydropower Project
Shaanxi Province Xunyang County Guihua Small Hydropower Project (SXGSHP)
6 MW RPPL biomass based power plant.
Hongyuan 10 MW Small Hydropower Project
Greenhouse gas (GHG) reduction by implementing energy efficient plough share mixer (PSM) technology in soap manufacturin
Biomass Based Cogeneration Units at Uttar Pradesh
Cervecería Hondureña Methane Capture Project
Yichun Shimaodingzi Wind Power Project 30.6MW
D&C Concepcion Farms, Inc. Methane Recovery and Electricity Generation Project
LG Chem Naju plant fuel switching project
Partial substitution of fossil fuels with biomass in cement manufacture
Optimal utilization of clinker by increasing the additives in cement production at Holcim Lanka Ltd (HLL), Sri Lanka
Shaanxi Province Ningshan County Small Hydropower Project (SNSHP)
Daegu Bangcheon-Ri Landfill Gas CDM Project
Jilin Baicheng ChaganHot Wind Power Project
Renewable biomass residue based steam generation at Arvind Mills, Santej.
ESTRE Itapevi Landfill Gas Project (EILGP)
1147.5 MW Natural gas based grid connected Combined cycle power generation project
Alto Benedito Novo Small Hydroelectric Project
Jiangsu Dongtai 201MW Wind Power Project
Mitigation of Methane Emissions in the Charcoal Production of Plantar, Brazil
Project for the catalytic reduction of N2O emissions with a second
Atiaia – Buriti Small Hydropower Plant.
Garganta da Jararaca Small Hydroelectric Power Plant (SHP)
8.75MW Bundle Wind Power Project in Maharashtra
"Forced Methane extraction from Organic wastewater", at Mandy
Khon Kaen Sugar Power Plant
Fujian Dongshan Wujiaobay 30MW Wind Power Project
Metrogas Watt’s Alimentos Package Cogeneration Project
Efficient use of industrial biomass residue for thermal energy generation
Grid-connected electricity generation from renewable sources at Kadavakallu, Putluru Mandal, Dist.
Laizhou Diaolongzui Wind Farm
10 MW biomass based renewable energy generation for the grid in Parbhani District of Maharashtra, India
Gansu Zhouqu Shimenping 15 MW Hydropower Station Project
M/S. Kothari Sugars and Chemicals Ltd (KSCL)’s Bagasse Based Co-generation Project, at Perambalur district, Tamil Nadu, India
Montecristo Hydroelectric Project
Bundled 3.0 MW Wind Energy Project in Tamilnadu
AWMS Methane Recovery Project MX06-S-99, Aguascalientes, Michoacan and Queretaro, México
Composting of organic waste in Wuzhou
Gansu Datang Yumen 49 MW Wind Power Project
7.5 MW Non-Conventional Renewable Sources Biomass Power Project
Gansu Qilianshan Cement 6000kW Waste Heat Recovery Project
Yunnan Heier 25MW Hydropower Project
7.85 MW Bundled Wind Power Project in Southern India
Nandong 12MW Hydro Power Project in Guizhou Province, China
Nongnan 12.6 MW Small Hydropower Project
7.5 MW Grid-Connected Biomass Power Project, by Ravi Kiran Po
Celtins and Cemat grid connection of isolated systems
Chumbagua Cogeneration Project
N2O decomposition project of Henan Shenma Nylon Chemical Co., Ltd
Electricity generation by utilization of waste heat from calcine
La Grecia Cogeneration Project
SRBSL – Waste Heat Recovery based Captive Power Project
Power generation from waste heat at NSIL
BHL Bilai Project
Ingenio Magdalena S.A. cogeneration project
Gansu Diebu Duoer 32MW Hydropower Project
Compañía Azucarera Hondureña S.A. cogeneration project
Cargill Uberlândia Biomass Residues Fuel Switch Project
AWMS Methane Recovery Project MX06-S-64, Coahuila and Durango, México
37.6 MW bundled wind power project in Nagercoil, Tamilnadu
Chacabuquito Hydroelectric Power Project
25.70 MW Bundled Wind Power Project in Udumalpet, Tamilna
Peruvian Fuel-Switching Project
AWMS Methane Recovery Project MX06-S-91, Nuevo Leon, México
Waste heat recovery based captive power project in integrated Iron & Steel plant
Lianghekou 15MW Small Hydropower Project, Gansu Province
19.27 MW Grid connected wind electricity generation project by KPR Mills in Tamil Nadu
AWMS Methane Recovery Project MX06-S-92, Sonora, México
Installation of Additional Urea Trays in Urea Reactors (11/21- R01)
Zhoubai Hydroelectric Project
Nalao 8 MW Small Hydropower Project
El Angel Cogeneration Project
Tres Valles Cogeneration Project
La Venta II
Fuel switch at BSM sugar mills
Santa Terezinha – Tapejara Cogeneration Project. (Usina de Açúcar Santa Terezinha Ltda.)
Energy Efficiency through Alteration of fuel oil atomizing media
4.5 MW Industrial Waste based Grid-connected Power Project
Zafarana Wind Power Plant Project
8.0 MW Biomass Based Power Project at Mahasamund, India
Modification of clinker cooler for energy efficiency improvement in cement manufacturing at Binani Cement Limited
Hainan Province Diaoluohe Hydropower Project
Energas Varadero Conversion from Open Cycle to Combined Cycl
BCML Haidergarh Bagasse Co-generation Project (India)
Kunak Bio Energy Project
A.T. Biopower Rice Husk Power Project in Pichit, Thailand
WCPM Energy Efficiency Project
Gansu Jingtieshan Hydro Power Project
AWMS Methane Recovery Project MX06-S-34, Coahuila and Dur
AWMS Methane Recovery Project MX06-S-63, Durango, México
AWMS Methane Recovery Project MX06-S-54, Sonora, México
AWMS Methane Recovery Project MX06-S-69, Chihuahua, México
AWMS Methane Recovery Project MX06-S-66, Durango, México
AWMS Methane Recovery Project MX06-S-96, Mexico and Puebla, México
Shandong Shanxian 1*25MW Biomass Power Plant Project
Korat Waste To Energy
Eliane Natural Gas fuel switch project
Rio Taquesi Hydroelectric Power Project
Pao De Acucar- Demand side electricity management -PDD 5
Pao de Acucar - Demand side electricity management - PDD 8
Pao de Acucar - Demand Side electricity management - PDD 6
Pão de Açúcar – Demand side electricity management – PDD 1
Pão de Açúcar – Demand side electricity management – PDD 4
Pão de Açúcar – Demand side electricity management – PDD 2
Pão de Açúcar – Demand side electricity management – PDD 3
Kunak Jaya Bio Energy Plant
Pão de Açúcar – Demand side electricity management – PDD 7
ENERGY EFFICIENCY MEASURES AT CEMENT PRODUCTION PLANT IN CENTRAL INDIA
ENERGY EFFICIENCY MEASURES AT CEMENT PRODUCTION PLANT
Bundled Wind power project in Tamilnadu, India co-ordinated b
6.5MW WHR Project in Huasheng Tianya Cement Co., Ltd.
Qixia Tangshanpeng Windfarm Project
11.2 MW Wind Power project in Tamilnadu, by Amarjothi Group
13.4 MW bundled wind power project in Chithradurga, Karnata
Vikram Cement (VC): Energy efficiency improvement by up gradation of preheater in cement manufacturing
Methane Capture and use as fuel at Rajaram Maize Products, Chattisgarh
15 MW Grid Connected Wind Energy Project at Sankaneri Village in Tamil Nadu
Guohua Hulunbeier Xinbaerhu Youqi 49.5MW Wind Farm Project
Dalmia Sugars Limited Nigohi project
Landfill gas recovery and electricity generation at “Mtoni Dumps
N2O Emission Reduction in nitric acid plant Paulínia, SP, Brazil
20MW Samal Grid-connected Hydroelectric Project in Orissa, India
FDSPL-Wind Based Power Generation Project
Al-Shaheen Oil Field Gas Recovery and Utilization Project
Quitaúna Landfill Gas Project (QLGP)
Inner Mongolia Chifeng Saihanba West 30.6 MW Wind Farm Project
119.8 MW Natural Gas based Combined Cycle Power Plant, at
Substitution of coal with jute biomass residue (caddies) in the s
6.75 MW Small Scale Grid Connected “Wind Electricity Generation Project” by Tamil Nadu Newsprint and Papers Limited
Dalmia Sugars Limited Jawaharpur RE project
NSL 27.65 MW Wind Power Project in Karnataka, India
SWITCHING OF FOSSIL FUEL FROM HSD TO NATURAL GAS BY REPLACING THE DIESEL ENGINES (1.6MWE*2) WITH GAS ENGINE
Sasol Nitrous Oxide Abatement Project
21 MW Bundled Wind Power Project in Vankuswade, Maharashtra
Yangquan Coal Mine Methane (CMM) Utilization for Power Generation Project, Shanxi Province, China
Fuel efficiency improvement in glass melting
Landfill Gas utilization at Seelong Sanitary Landfill, Malaysia
Ganxipo Hydroelectric Project
PT Navigat Organic Energy Indonesia Integrated Solid Waste Management (GALFAD) Project in Bali, Indonesia
Mondi Richards Bay Biomass Project
San Ramón Rural Electrification project
Aços Villares Natural gas fuel switch project
DSCL Sugar Ajbapur Cogeneration Project Phase II
Yichun Erduoyan Wind Power Project 28.05 MW
Rongcheng Dongchudao Wind Farm
Allain Duhangan Hydroelectric Project (ADHP)
2.25 MW Rice Husk based cogeneration plant at Siddeshwari Industries Pvt Ltd
Supply side energy efficiency measures at Tata Chemicals Limited, Mithapur
Gansu Diebu Niaojiaga 12.9 MW Hydropower Station Project
Reduction of Flaring and Use of Recovered Gas for Methanol Production
Jinan Landfill Gas to Energy Project
3.7 MW Bundled Wind Power Project at Priyadarshini Polysacks Ltd. Dhulia District Maharashtra
Heilongjiang Huafu Muling Wind Farm Project
Jiaojiping Hydroelectric Project
5 MW Renewable Energy Project for a Grid system, India at Beas
Philippine Sinter Corporation Sinter Cooler Waste Heat Recovery Power Generation Project
AWMS GHG Mitigation Project MX06-B-32, Aguascalientes and
Ningguo Cement Plant 9100KW Waste Heat Recovery and Utilisation for Power Generation Project of Anhui Conch Ce
The Godavari Sugar Mills Ltd (TGSML)’s 24 MW Bagasse Based
Shenzhen Xiaping Landfill Gas Collection and Utilization Project
Demand side energy efficiency projects at RIL-PG.
Catalytic N2O Abatement Project in the Tail Gas of the Nitric Acid Plant of the Hanwha Corporation (HWC) in Ulsan, Republic o
Yutan Hydroelectric Project
Ecofren Power 8 MW Renewable Sources Biomass Power Projec
Omnia Fertilizer Limited Nitrous Oxide (N2O) Reduction Project
HFC23 Decomposition Project at Zhonghao Chenguang Research In
Aurá Landfill Gas Project
Sudokwon Landfill Gas Electricity Generation Project (50MW)
14.85 MW Grid connected Wind farm project, at various locations in Tamil Nadu, by M/s Goyal MG Gases Private Limited
"Replacement of fossil fuel by biomass in Pyro-Processing" in Rajasthan by M/s JK Lakshmi Cement Limited (JKLCL)
Waste heat utilization for power generation at Ind Synergy Ltd, Kotmar, Raigargh in Chattisgarh, India
KM RE project
Bundled 15 MW Wind Power Project in India
Methane recovery and effective use of power generation project N
EnviroServ Chloorkop Landfill Gas Recovery Project.
Guangrun Hydropower Project in Hubei Province, P.R. China
Incomex Hydroelectric Project
Methane Recovery and Electricity Generation Project GCM 14
Methane Recovery and Electricity Generation Project GCM 4
Methane Recovery and Electricity Generation Project GCM 8
Methane Recovery and Electricity Generation Project GCM 20
Hebbakavadi Canal Based Mini Hydro Project in Karnataka, India
4.05 MW Grid connected Small Hydroelectric Project in Andhra Pradesh, India
Increase of Power Generation of the hydroelectric power station Fortuna in Panama (IPGFP)
Ojos de Agua Hydroelectric Project
Liaoning Changtu Wind Farm Project
Lower Manair Mini Hydel Scheme at Kakatiya Canal located in Andhra Pradesh, India
“Patikari Hydro Electric Power Project in Distt-Mandi, Himachal Pradesh, India.”
Reduction in Steam Consumption through Revamping of Ammonia Plant of Indian Farmers Fertiliser Cooperative Ltd (IFFCO) p
Biomass based power plant at Siltara, Raipur, Chhattisgarh, India.
SESL 6 MW Municipal Solid Waste Based Power Project at Vijayawada & Guntur, Andhra Pradesh
6 MW renewable energy project for a grid system by Ind-Barath Energies Limited
San Carlos Renewable Energy Project
Ningxia Tianjing 50.25MW Wind-farm Project
Xinjiang Dabancheng Sanchang First Phase Wind Farm Project
Inner Mongolia Huitengxile Jingneng 100MW Wind Power Project
Datang Jilin Shuangliao Wind Farm Project
Wuxi Taohuashan Landfill Gas to Electricity
Middle and Lower Kolab Hydroelectric Projects
"2 X 5 MW Upper khauli & Drinidhar small hydroelectric project for a grid system", Himachal Pradesh, India
Bio energy in General Deheza –Electricity generation based on peanut hull and sunflower husk
Grid connected 13MW biomass power project in Maharashtra
Fuel switch from fossil fuel to renewable biomass for thermal en
26 MW Biomass (Cogeneration) based Power generation Project
Kim Loong Methane Recovery for Onsite Utilization Project at Kota Tinggi, Johor, Malaysia.
Ceran's Monte Claro Run of River Hydropower Plant CDM Project Activity
Hebei Chengde Songshan Wind Farm Project
Boiler Fuel Conversion at Perstorp Chemicals India Private Limited (PCIPL), Vapi, India
Jiangsu Rudong Huangang Dongling Wind Power Project
Canabrava Landfill Gas Project
Energy Efficiency Improvement Project At A Beer Brewery In Lao PDR
ACEL Blended cement project at Sankrail grinding unit
Kaifeng Jinkai N2O Abatement Project
Jilin Tongyu Tuanjie wind project, 100.3 MW
Yangquan Coal Mine Methane Advanced Industrial Furnace Utilisation Project
Switching of fuel from Natural Gas to Hydrogen in CCU-II at Dahej complex of GACL
Gansu Dang River Hydropower Project
Installation of waste heat recovery system in a coking plant in Qian’an City, China
Yichun Daqingshan Wind Power Project
Quitaracsa I (“the project”).
Landfill Gas Capture and Power Generation Project in Tbilisi
Anguoer Hydropower Project in China
Hebei Kangbao Wolongtushan 30 MW Wind Farm Project
No.2 HFC-23 Decomposition Project of Zhejiang Juhua Co., Ltd, P
Guyuan 30.6MW Wind-farm Project
Birahi Ganga Hydro Electric Project
Guaxuma Renewable Irrigation Project
Sesa-Waste Heat Recovery Based Power Generation
Rice Husk based power project at Satia Paper Mills Limited (SPML), Punjab, India.
Rialma Companhia Energética S/A. – Santa Edwiges II Small Hydr
2 x 5 MW Baner khad & Iku khad small hydroelectric project for a grid system
Switching of fuel from Low Sulphur Waxy Residue fuel oil to natural gas at Gangnam branch Korea District Heating Co
Methane recovery from waste water generated from wheat straw wash at Paper manufacturing unit of Shreyans Indust
GHG emission reduction by energy efficiency improvement of clinker cooler in cement manufacturing at Rajashree cement at
Yunnan Whitewaters Hydropower Development Project
GHG emission reduction through the installation of energy efficient vacuum creating system in the vacuum distillation column
Low Grade Ore (LGO) beneficiation by Rajasthan State Mines &
Biomass based Cogeneration Power Project in Uttar Pradesh
Improvement in energy efficiency of steam generation and powe
Boiler Fuel Conversion from RFO to Biomass Based Briquettes at Pfizer Limited, Thane (M.S.), India
Hebei Shangyi Manjing East Wind Farm Project
Optimum utilisation of clinker for Pozzolana Portland Cement (PPC) production at Birla Plus Cement in Bathinda, Punjab, India
Waste heat recovery based power plant at Hindustan Zinc Limit
Pansan Coal Mine Methane Utilisation and Destruction Project
Energy efficiency and fuel switching measures in the caustic soda and sodium cyanide plant at Vadodara complex of GACL
24 MW Chayadevi Mini Hydro Power Project in Karnataka, India
Malwa Industries, Ludhiana Small Scale Biomass Project
GHG emission reduction by thermal oxidation of HFC 23 at Navin F
Production of blended cement with blast furnace slag at Cimento Mizu
Huadian Inner Mongolia Huitengxile 100.25MW Wind Farm Project
Bagasse based Cogeneration Plant at Seohara, Uttar Pradesh.
6.25 MW grid-connected Sattegala Mini Hydel Scheme at SLS Power Industries Ltd., in Chamarajanagar District, Karnataka
MSPSPL Waste Heat Recovery Based Captive Power Project
4.5MW grid-connected Sugur Mini Hydel Scheme at SLS Power Industries Ltd in Bellary District, Karnataka
Vikram Cement: Energy efficiency by up-gradation of clinker cooler in cement manufacturing
Tejona Wind Power Project (TWPP)
Varahi Tail Race Small Hydro Power Project of SPCL in Karnataka, India
Cogeneration system based on biomass (rice-husk) replacing oil fired boiler for process steam and generating power for partly
Korea South-East Power Co. (KOSEP) small scale hydroelectric power plants project(The Samchonpo Thermal Power Pl
Durgun Hydropower Project in Mongolia
Zhangbei Mijiagou 49.5 MW Windfarm Project
6 MW Renewable energy generation project by Varam Power Projects in India
Bagasse based Co-generation Power Project at Khatauli
8 MW biomass power project at Hassan, India
Energy Efficiency Measures At Paper Production Plant
Zhongjieneng Jurong 2*12MW Biomass Direct Burning Power Plant Project
Zhongjieneng Suqian 2*12MW Biomass Direct Burning Power Plant Project
Maguan Daliangzi Hydro Power Project
BOG and COG Utilisation for Combined Cycle Power CDM Project in Jinan Iron & Steel Works
Installation of co-generation project at sugar manufacturing unit of Mawana Sugars Limited
Bagasse based Co-generation Project at Nanglamal Sugar Complex.
Loma Los Colorados Landfill Gas Project
Bagasse based Co-generation Project at Mawana Sugar Works
Henan Luyi 25MW Biomass Cogeneration Project
Energy efficiency improvement project at ISL
Taishir Hydropower Project in Mongolia
Shandong Yucheng Xinyuan Biomass Heat & Power (“Yucheng Biomass CHP”)
Talia Landfill Gas Recovery Project and Electricity Production
Rialma Companhia Energética I S/A. - Santa Edwiges I Small Hydro Power Plant - Small Scale CDM Project
Santa Marta Landfill Gas (LFG) Capture Project.
AWMS Methane Recovery Project MX06-S-53, Sonora, México
AWMS Methane Recovery Project MX06-S-56, Sonora, México
Bagasse based Co-generation Project at Titawi Sugar Complex
Paso Ancho Hydroelectric Project
RIMA Fuel Switch in Bocaiúva
AWMS Methane Recovery Project MX06-S-55, Puebla, México
Frio Industrias Argentinas S.A (“FIASA”) Hydro-fluorocarbon 23
Vinasse Anaerobic Treatment Project - Compañía Licorera de Nicaragua, S. A. (CLNSA)
Quimvale and Gas Natural Fuel Switch Project
Petrobras Wind Power Project for Oil Pumping at Macau, Brazil
Biomass Based Steam Generation at Galam factory
6MW Biomass based Power Plant at Nellore.
"14.65 MW Wind Power Project" in Maharashtra by BF Utilities Ltd.
La Joya Hydroelectric Project (Costa Rica)
AWMS Methane Recovery Project MX06-S-51, Chiapas, México
Raudi Chemical Salts
Zámbiza Landfill Gas Project
Installation of Plate Type Heat Exchanger for preheating combust
Huaycoloro landfill gas capture and combustion
Hebei Jinzhou 24MW Straw-Fired Power Project
Grasim Cement: Energy efficiency by up-gradation of clinker cooler in cement manufacturing
Use of blast furnace slag in the production of blended cement at Votorantim Cimentos
Factory energy-efficiency improvement project in Malaysia (PHAAM, PCOM (PJ), PCOM (SA), PEDMA, MEDEM)
6 MW renewable energy project for a grid system by Sri Indra Po
Factory energy-efficiency improvement project in Malaysia (MAPREC, PRDM, PSCDDM, PAVCJM, PCM)
Bundled Wind Power Projects in Satara & Supa (Maharashtra in India) managed by Tata Motors Ltd.
Agropecuária Salto do Leão Ltda. – Spessatto, Santo Expedito and Barra do Leão Small Hydroelectric Power Plant Project
Up-gradation of Gas Turbine 1 (GT 1) and Gas Turbine 2 (GT 2) at co-generation plant of Hazira Gas Processing Comp
Changling Wind Power Project
12MW Bundled Wind Power Project in Tenkasi, Tamilnadu
Demand side energy efficiency programmes for specific technolo
Huaibei Haizi and Luling Coal Mine Methane Utilization Project
“Optimal Utilization of Clinker” project at Dalmia Cement (Bharat) Limited (DCBL), Dalmiapuram , Tamilnadu.
Waste Heat based 10 MW captive power project “GPIL- WHRB 2” CDM PROJECT ACTIVITY
Bii Nee Stipa III
Yanling Shendu Hydropower Project
India-FaL-G Brick and Blocks Project No.1
Destruction of HFC-23 at refrigerant (HCFC-22) manufacturing fa
Efficient utilisation of waste heat and natural gas at Dahej complex of GACL
Shalivahana Non-Conventional Renewable Sources Biomass Power Project
Tugela Mill Fuel Switching Project
Waste Heat based 4.75 MW captive power project "RSIPL- WHRB(1&2)" CDM PROJECT ACTIVITY
Substitution of clinker with fly ash in Portland Pozzolana Cement (Blended Cement) at Lafarge India Pvt. Ltd. - Arasmeta Ceme
Small-Scale Grid Connected Wind Farm
“8.75 MW Wind Power Project in Gujarat”
Yangyang Renewable Energy Project (3MW Wind Power + 1.4MW Small Hydroelectric Power)
Efficiency improvement of Turbine Generator to reduce fossil fuel consumption in the Coal fired boiler system
West Nile Electrification Project (WNEP)
Korea Water Resources Corporation (Kwater) small-scale hydroelectric power plants project II
6 MW renewable energy project for a grid system by Gayatri Agro Industrial Power Limited, India
6 MW biomass based grid connected power project, Andhra Prad
Waste heat recovery from Process Gas Compressors (PGCs), Mumbai high south (offshore platform) and using the reco
Paramount Integrated Corporation Methane Recovery and Electr
Catalytic N2O destruction project in the tail gas of three Nitric Acid Plants at Hu-Chems Fine Chemical Corp.
Inner Mongolia Huitengliang 49.5MW Wind Power Project
Rice husk based cogeneration power plant-II at SBPML
La Vuelta and La Herradura Hydroelectric Project
Reducing heat loss into atmosphere along with the flue gases by utilizing it for preheating of combustion air of service boiler a
Alternate arrangement for preheating fuel NG
4 MW renewable energy project by Sri Kalyani Agro Products & I
4.2 MW Wind power project in Maharashtra, by Bharat Forge Limited
11.3 MW renewable Energy Project for a Grid System by K.M.Power (P) Limited
Mysore Cements Limited Portland Slag Cement project
7.5 MW Grid Connected Biomass Power Project
Optimization of steam consumption at the evaporator
Generation of Electricity through combustion of waste gases from Blast furnace and Corex units at JSW Steel Limited (in JPL un
Use of waste gas use for electricity generation at JSW Energy Limited
22.5 MW Bhilangana Hydro Power Project (BHPP)
GACL Blended Cement Projects in India
Energy efficiency project in the Ramla Cement Plant in Israel through instalment of new grinding technology
Blended Cement Project with Fly Ash – Lafarge India Private Limited
Eurus Wind Farm
India Cements WHR project
Power generation from the proposed 11.2 MW waste heat recovery boiler at the ISA Smelt furnace of the Copper Smelter, Ste
Central de Resíduos do Recreio Landfill Gas Project (CRRLGP)
Inner Mongolia Chifeng Dongshan 49.3 MW Wind Power Project
Votorantim’s Hydropower Plant with existing reservoir “Pedra do Cavalo” CDM Project
Switching fossil fuels in an industrial facility by Indorama Cement Ltd (Removed no corrections submitted)
Uruba Renewable Irrigation Project
ISA Power 8 MW (Gross) Renewable Sources Biomass Power Project
Biomass based captive cogeneration project at Shri Renuga Textiles Limited
Alexigros Wind Farm Project
Fuel oil to natural gas switching at Votorantim Cimentos Cubatão
Osório Wind Power Plant Project
Energy Efficiency Improvement in Electric Arc Furnace at Indian Seamless Metal Tube Limited (ISMT), Jejuri, Maharashtra
Optimization of steam consumption by applying retrofit measur
15.4 MW wind farm at Satara District, Maharashtra.
R K Powergen 20MW grid connected renewable energy biomass power project
Usha Martin Limited - Waste Heat Recovery Based Captive Power Project activity
AWMS Methane Recovery Project MX06-S-28, Coahuila, México
Mari Wind Farm Project
AWMS Methane Recovery Project MX06-S-49, Veracruz, México
AWMS Methane Recovery Project MX06-S-36, Coahuila, Durango and Nuevo León, México
“Waste Heat Recovery based captive power generation by SKS Is
Methane Recovery and Electricity Generation Project GCM 9
AWMS Methane Recovery Project MX06-S-50, Puebla, México
Methane Recovery and Electricity Generation Project GCM 23
Methane Recovery and Electricity Generation project GCM 5
Methane Recovery and Electricity Generation Project GCM 12
Demand side energy conservation and reduction measures at ITC
Aquarius Hydroelectric Project
MAHARASHTRA, INDIA- Kurkumbh, 1.5 MW Biomass / Bagasse Based Co-generation Power Project
Anaconda Landfill Gas Project
10.6 MW wind farm at Village Badabagh, District Jaisalmer, Rajasthan.
Durban Landfill-gas-to-electricity project – Mariannhill and La Mercy Landfills
Saihanba East 45.05 MW Windfarm Project
AWMS Methane Recovery Project MX06-S-35, Jalisco and Michoacán, México
AWMS Methane Recovery Project MX06-S-42, Guanajuato, Michoacán, and Querétaro, México
11.35 MW Grid Connected Wind Electricity Project at Pohra (Rajasthan) in India
ARAPUtanga Centrais ELétricas S. A. - ARAPUCEL - Small Hydroelectric Power Plants Project
OSIL - Waste Heat Recovery Based Captive Power Project
12MW Captive Power Project based on Waste Heat Recovery of Industrial Waste Gases
Repowering Small Hydro Plants (SHP) in the State of São Paulo, Brazil
Saihanba North 45.05 MW Windfarm Project
Onyx Alexandria Landfill Gas Capture and Flaring Project
Sanquhar and Delta Small Hydro Power Projects
Darajat Unit III Geothermal Project
Fuel switch from fossil fuels to biomass briquettes for steam generation at the chemicals manufacturing plant of Lanxess India
20 MW Nasulo Geothermal Project
Lampung Bekri Biogas Project
Nakoda WHR CDM Project
BRT Bogotá, Colombia: TransMilenio Phase II to IV
Jilin Taonan Wind Power Project
El Canadá Hydroelectric Project
AWMS Methane Recovery Project MX06-S-45, Coahuila, México
AWMS Methane Recovery Project MX06-S-44, Sonora, México
Wind Electricity Generation at Erakandurai, Dist :Tirunavalli by M/s GHCL Ltd
Imbituva Biomass Project
AWMS Methane Recovery Project MX06-S-41, Coahuila, México
AWMS Methane Recovery Project MX06-S-27, Coahuila, México
AWMS Methane Recovery Project MX06-S-23, Guanajuato, México
AWMS Methane Recovery Project MX06-S-29, Durango, México
AWMS Methane Recovery Project MX06-S-26, Coahuila, México
AWMS Methane Recovery Project MX06-S-25, Coahuila, Mexico
AWMS Methane Recovery Project MX06-S-24, Guanajuato, México
Braço Norte IV Small Hydro Plant
Santa Lúcia II Small Hydro Plant
Braço Norte III Small Hydro Plant
Landfill Gas Recovery and Flaring for 9 bundled landfills in Tunisia
Improvement in Energy Consumption of a Hotel
"Supply side energy efficiency improvements in steam generation at CSL." by Chemplast Sanmar Ltd
Optimal utilization of clinker: Substitution of Clinker by Slag in Portland Slag Cement at OCL, Rajgangpur, Sundargarh, Orissa.
12MW Captive Power Project based on Waste Heat Recovery of
Erlongshan Hydropower Project in Gansu Province
Calope Hydroelectric Project
Methane Recovery and Electricity Generation Project GCM 10
Facilitating Reforestation for Guangxi Watershed Management in Pearl River Basin
Methane Recovery and Electricity Generation Project GCM 27
Methane Recovery and Electricity Generation Project GCM 29
Recovery of associated gas that would otherwise be flared at Kwale oil-gas processing plant, Nigeria
Candelaria Hydroelectric Project
Rudong County Wind Farm Project – China
Methane Recovery and Electricity Generation Project GCM 16
Methane Recovery and Electricity Generation Project GCM 11
Catalytic N2O Abatement Project in the Tail Gas of the Nitric Acid Plant of the Pakarab Fertilizer Ltd (PVT) in Multan, Pakistan
Trojes Hydroelectric Project
Methane Recovery and Electricity Generation Project GCM 13
Methane Recovery and Electricity Generation Project GCM 22
Methane Recovery and Electricity Generation Project GCM 28
Methane Recovery and Electricity Generation Project GCM 17
Methane Recovery and Electricity Generation Project GCM 7
Deoband Bagasse based Co-generation Power Project
7.5 MW wind farm of REI Agro Ltd. at Soda village in the state of Rajasthan, India.
1.5 MW Link Canal Mini Hydel Project
Gaya Lim Farm Inc. Methane Recovery
"16 MW Bagasse based cogeneration plant" by GMR Industries Ltd. (GIDL)
Avoidance of methane gas emission to atmosphere from C-03 washing tower by effictively utilizing the C-O3 off gas as fuel in p
RREPL-14MW Rice Husk Power Project
Methane Recovery and Electricity Generation Project GCM 21
Methane Recovery and Electricity Generation Project GCM 15
Uni-Rich Agro-Industrial Corporation Methane Recovery and Electricity Generation
Project for HFC23 Decomposition at Zhejiang Dongyang Chemical
Indocement Blended Cement Project
Project for HFC23 Decomposition at Limin Chemical Co., Ltd. Lin
Century Textiles & Industries Ltd blended cement projects at: • Century cement • Manikgarh cement • Maihar cement
5MW Renewable Energy Project for grid, Gansu Province, China
9.6MW Xiaohe Small Hydropower Project, China
Methane Recovery and Electricity Generation Project GCM 1
Methane Recovery and Electricity Generation Project GCM 26
Methane Recovery and Electricity Generation Project GCM 18
Methane Recovery and Electricity Generation Project GCM 6
Methane Recovery and Electricity Generation Project GCM 3
Methane Recovery and Electricity Generation Project GCM 2
Methane Recovery and Electricity Generation Project GCM 24
Joliza Farms Inc. Methane Recovery
Methane Recovery and Electricity Generation Project GCM 19
Methane Recovery and Electricity Generation Project GCM 25
Jilin Taobei Fuyu 49.5MW Wind Power Project
PERLABI HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT (PHP)
Concepción Hydroelectric Project
The 30 MW Tuoli Wind-Farm Project in Urumqi, Xinjiang of China
Gold Farm Livestocks Corporation Methane Recovery and Electricity Generation
Ramirana Emission Reduction Project of Agrícola Super Limitada
El Guanillo wind farm in Dominican republic
Fuel oil to natural gas switch at Solvay Indupa do Brasil S.A.”
AWMS Methane Recovery Project MX06-S-47, Sonora, México
AWMS Methane Recovery Project MX06-S-38, Tamaulipas, Mexico
AWMS GHG Mitigation Project BR05-B-03, Brazil
Kanfeng 15 MW Hydropower Station Project, Min County, Dingxi City Prefecture, Gansu province, China
AWMS Methane Recovery Project MX06-S-40, Puebla, Mexico
Liaoning Zhangwu 24.65MW Wind Farm Project
Liaoning Kangping 24.65MW Wind Farm Project
Shri Bajrang WHR CDM Project
India - Vertical Shaft Brick Kiln Cluster Project
Catalytic N2O destruction project in the tail gas of the Nitric Acid Plant of Abu Qir Fertilizer Co.
Djebel Chekir Landfill Gas Recovery and Flaring Project – Tunisia
Korea Water Resources Corporation (KOWACO) small-scale hydroelectric power plants project
GHG Emissions Reduction through Energy Efficiency Improvements
Ecatepec – EcoMethane Landfill Gas to Energy Project
Cachoeira Encoberta and Triunfo Small Hydroelectric Power Plants - Brascan Energética Minas Gerais S.A (BEMG) Project Activ
Passo do Meio, Salto Natal, Pedrinho I, Granada, Ponte and Salto
Wastewater treatment using a Thermophilic Anaerobic Digestor at an ethanol plant in the Philippines
AWMS Methane Recovery Project MX06-S-37, Sinaloa and Sono
AWMS Methane Recovery Project MX06-S-43, Oaxaca and Puebla, México
Generation of electricity from 1.2 MW capacity wind mills by Sun-n-Sand Hotels Pvt. Ltd. at Satara, Maharashtra
12 MW hydropower plant in Bhandardara in Maharashtra, India.
Luertai 12.2 MW Hydropower Station Project, Lintan County, Gannan Autonomous Tibetan Prefecture, Gansu province, China
Mahatma Gandhi Hydro Electric Tail Race Hydro Power Project of APPL, India
Água Doce Wind Power Generation Project
AWMS GHG Mitigation Project BR05-B-17, Espirito Santo, Mato G
ECOINVEST – MASTER Agropecuária – GHG capture and combustion from swine farms in Southern Brazil
Bunge Guara biomass project
Indocement Alternative Fuels Project
Switching of fuel from naphtha to natural gas in the captive power plant(CPP) at Dahej complex of Gujarat Alkalies a
Generation of electricity from 6.25 MW capacity wind mills by Sun-n-Sand Hotels Pvt. Ltd at Soda Mada Rajasthan
10 MW Biomass (Rice Husk) Based Power Generation Unit of M/s Rukmani Power and Steel Ltd.(RPSL)
Rosslyn Brewery Fuel- Switching Project
Rickli Biomass electricity generation project
Satyamaharshi 6 MW Biomass Power Project
125 MW Wind Power Project in Karnataka, India
Methane recovery and power generation in a distillery plant
7.5 MW Biomass (Mustard crop residue) based Power Project at RIICO Industrial area, Rajasthan by M/s Amrit Environmental
PetroSA Biogas to Energy Project
Krubong Melaka LFG Collection & Energy Recovery CDM Project
Electricity generation at 8 MW captive power plant using enthalpy
Pronaca: Afortunados Swine Waste Management
Umbrella Fuel-Switching Project in Bogotá and Cundinamarca
Jilin Changling Wind Farm Phase I Project
Pronaca: Valentina-San Javier Swine Waste Management
56.25 MW bundled wind energy project in Tirunelveli and Coimbatore districts in Tamilnadu, India.
Pronaca: Tropicales-Plata Swine Waste Management
Generation of electricity from 4 MW capacity wind mills by Sun-n-Sand Hotels Pvt. Ltd. at Supa, Maharashtra
SRGEL Non-Conventional Energy Sources Biomass Power Project
Nova Sinceridade Small Hydroelectric Power Plant - Brascan Energética Minas Gerais S.A. (BEMG) Project Activity
Jendarata Steam & Power Plant
6.0 MW Biomass based power project of Agri Gold Projects Limited (AGPL), Prakasham District, Andhra Pradesh.
AWMS GHG Mitigation Project MX06-B-19, Sonora, México
AWMS GHG Mitigation Project MX05-B-16, Sinaloa and Sonora,
AWMS GHG Mitigation Project MX05-B-17, Jalisco, México
Energy Efficiency Measures At a Thermal Power Generating Station Of CESC-limited, BBGS
AWMS GHG Mitigation Project MX06-B-33, Jalisco and San Luis
11.25 MW wind power project in Dhule, Maharashtra, India
Increasing the Additive Blend in cement production by Jaiprakash Associates Ltd (JAL)
6.6 MW Sheshadri Iyer Mini Hydel Power project of Atria Hydel Power Limited at Malavalli Taluk, Mandya District, Karnataka
Lusakert Biogas Plant (LBP), methane capture and combustion from poultry manure treatment
AWMS GHG Mitigation Project BR05-B-12, Mato Grosso, Mato Gros
Optimal utilization of clinker: Substitution of Clinker by Fly ash in Portland Pozzolana Cement blend at OCL, India
NorthWind Bangui Bay Project
AWMS GHG Mitigation Project BR05-B-08, Paraná and Rio Grande do Sul, Brazil
Advanced swine manure treatment in Maitenlahue and La Manga
AWMS GHG Mitigation Project MX06-B-31, Nuevo León and Tam
Puente Gallego Landfill gas recovery project, Gallego, Rosario, A
10.0 MW Biomass based independent power project of Jalkheri Power Private Limited, Jalkheri, Punjab.
Avoidance of Wastewater and On-site Energy Use Emissions and
Jaguari Energética S. A. – Furnas do Segredo Small Hydro Power Plant
Tarucani I (“the project”)
ENCO Biomass Energy Plant in Malaysia
“Methane Avoidance by Municipal Solid Waste Processing in the city of Chandigarh, India”
SIDPL Methane extraction and Power generation project
Agrawal RE Project
Bentong Biomass Energy Plant in Malaysia
Johor Bundled Biomass Steam Plant in Malaysia
Eecopalsa – biogas recovery and electricity generation from Palm Oil Mill Effluent ponds, Honduras
Aços Villares Natural gas fuel switch project
Methane Capture and Combustion from Swine Manure Treatment Project at PT Indotirta Suaka Bulan Farm in Indonesia
Waste heat recovery project based on technology up-gradation at Apollo Tyres, Vadodara, India
Inácio Martins Biomass Project
MNA Biomass 9.7 MWe Condensing Steam Turbine Project
AWMS GHG Mitigation Project BR05-B-01, Minas Gerais, Brazil
Ganpati co-generation project at Medak, Andhra Pradesh
Horizonte Wind Power Generation Project
Palestina Small Hydroelectric Power Plant - Brascan Energética Minas Gerais S.A. (BEMG) Project Activity
Cucaú Bagasse Cogeneration Project (CBCP)
“Blended cement with increased blend” at Orient cement’s Devap
Bagasse based power project at Jamkhandi Sugars Limited, Bagalkot, Karnataka
Solar steam for cooking and other applications
1 MW Donghae PV(photovoltaic) Power Plant
A joint venture project of cogeneration of electricity and hot
Demand side energy conservation & reduction measures at IPCL – Gandhar Complex
Generation of electricity from 2.5 MW capacity wind mills by Gujarat JHM Hotels Pvt. Ltd at Soda Mada Rajasthan
Switching of fossil fuel from Naptha & Diesel to Biomass (agricultural residue) for 9 MW Power Generation Unit of M/s. My Ho
Jilin Tongyu Huaneng 100.5MW Wind Power Project
Xiaogushan Hydropower Project in People's Republic of China
Angkor Bio Cogen Rice Husk Power Project
Jilin Taobei Huaneng 49.3MW Wind Power Project
Bagasse Based cogeneration power project of Rana Sugars Limited, Amritsar District, Punjab;
Guangdong Nan’ao Huaneng 45.05MW Wind Power Project
Project for HFC23 Decomposition at Changshu 3F Zhonghao New
Optimum utilisation of clinker by production of Pozzolana Cement at UltraTech Cement Ltd. (UTCL), Andhra Pradesh
CAPEX S.A. – AGUA DEL CAJÓN THERMAL POWER PLANT – OPEN TO COMBINED CYCLE CONVERSION
Switching of fuel from Naphtha to Natural gas at United Phosph
A retrofit programme for decentralised heating stations in Mongolia.
Fujian Zhangpu Liuao 30.6 MW Wind Power Project
Manal, Chandni and Timbi Small Hydroelectric Projects of HCPL
4.5 MW Biomass (low density Crop Residues) based Power Generation unit of Malavalli Power Plant Pvt Ltd.
4.5 MW Biomass (Agricultural Residue) Based Power Generation Unit of M/s Matrix Power Pvt. Ltd. (MPPL)
Seguntor Bioenergy 11.5MW EFB Power Plant
Kina Biopower 11.5MW EFB Power Plant
VGL - Waste Heat based 4 MW Captive Power Project at Raipur
JBSL–Waste Heat Recovery Based Captive Power Project
González Catán and Ensenada Landfill Gas Project.
Cosipar Renewable Electricity Generation Project.
Aguascalientes – EcoMethane Landfill Gas to Energy Project
AWMS GHG Mitigation Project BR05-B-16, Bahia, Goiás, Mato Grosso, Minas Gerais, Rio de Janeiro and São Paulo, Brazil
El Gallo Hydroelectric Project.
Ningxia Tianjing Shenzhou 30.6MW Wind-farm Project
Waste heat recovery based captive power project at Monnet
AWMS GHG Mitigation Project BR05-B-05, Minas Gerais and São
AWMS GHG Mitigation Project, MX06-B-18, Sinaloa, México
AWMS GHG Mitigation Project BR05-B-13, Goiás and Minas Gerai
AWMS GHG Mitigation Project BR05-B-11, Mato Grosso, Minas Gerais and São Paulo, Brazil
AWMS GHG Mitigation Project BR05-B-04, Paraná, Santa Catarina
AWMS GHG Mitigation Project BR05-B-15, Paraná, Santa Catarina, and Rio Grande do Sul, Brazil
AWMS GHG Mitigation Project BR05-B-10, Minas Gerais, Goias, M
AWMS GHG Mitigation Project BR05-B-14, Espírito Santo, Minas Gerais and São Paulo, Brazil
AWMS GHG Mitigation Project BR05-B-06, Bahía, Brazil
Irani Biomass Electricity Generation Project
8MW Waste Heat Recovery based Captive Power Project at OCL
Fuel oil to natural gas switching at Klabin Piracicaba boilers
São João Landfill Gas to Energy Project (SJ)
3 MW Poultry Litter Based Power Generation Project, Hyderabad
Song Muc Hydro Power Station Regeneration Project in Vietna
Taishan Cement Works Waste Heat Recovery and Utilisation for Power Generation Project
Monte Rosa Bagasse Cogeneration Project (MRBCP)
2x5 Radhanagari Hydro Electric Project
Power generation from waste heat of non-recovery type coke ovens at JSPL
Sihwa Tidal Power Plant CDM Project
AWMS GHG Mitigation Project BR05-B-09, Brazil
Optimum utilisation of clinker by PPC production at Binani Cement Limited, Rajasthan
AWMS GHG Mitigation Project BR05-B-02, Minas Gerais and São Paulo, Brazil
MSS Biomass 9.7 MWe Condensing Steam Turbine Project
Perpetual 7.5 MW Non-Conventional Renewable Sources Biomass Power Project
Biomass Power Project at Kalpataru Energy Venture Private Limited, Bayana Tehsil, Bharatpur District, Rajasthan
Quimobásicos HFC Recovery and Decomposition Project
SEO Biomass Steam and Power Plant in Malaysia
Indur 7.5 MW Non-Conventional Renewable Sources Biomass Power Project
LDEO Biomass Steam and Power Plant in Malaysia
Trupan Biomass Power Plant in Chile
8.5 MW Biomass based Power Project
Project for GHG Emission Reduction by Thermal Oxidation of HFC
KMS Power 6 MW Renewable Sources Biomass Power Project.
Off gases utilisation from C – 03 washing tower in Primary Reformer as fuel
Taraila Small Hydroelectric Project of Ginni Global Ltd.
Russfin Biomass CHP Plant Project.
Nueva Aldea Biomass Power Plant Phase 2
Youngduk Wind Park Project
Reduction in steam consumption in stripper reboilers through p
Bundled Wind power project in Jaisalmer (Rajasthan in India) managed by Enercon (India) Ltd.
Lihir Geothermal Power Project
Process Waste Heat utilization for power generation at Phillips Carbon Black Limited, Gujarat
Emission reduction through partial substitution of fossil fuel with alternative fuels like agricultural by-products, tyres and mun
Landfill gas recovery at the Norte III Landfill, Buenos Aires, Arge
Optimal Utilization of Clinker in PPC manufacturing at Birla Corporation Limited, Raebareli Unit
LaGeo, S. A. de C. V., Berlin Geothermal Project, Phase Two
Ningxia Helanshan Wind-farm Project, Ningxia Autonomous Region, China
AWMS GHG Mitigation Project BR05-B-07, Mato Grosso, Minas Ge
AWMS GHG Mitigation Project, MX05-B-15, Sonora, México
18 MW Kemphole Mini Hydel Scheme (KMHS), by International Power Corporation Limited, India
Sri Balaji 6 MW Non-Conventional Renewable Sources Biomass Power Project
ACC Blended cement projects at New Wadi Plant, Tikaria Cement Plant, Chanda Cement Works, Kymore Cement Wor
Anding Landfill Gas Recovery and Utilisation Project
Composting of Organic Waste in Dhaka
Partial replacement of fossil fuel by biomass as an alternative fuel, for Pyro-Processing in cement plant of Shree Cements Limit
Electric Power Co-Generation by LDG Recovery – CST - Brasil
Landfill Gas to Energy Project at Lara Landfill, Mauá, Brazil
Waste Heat Recovery Power Project at JK Cement Works (Unit of JK Cement Limited), Nimbahera, Chittorgarh, Rajasthan
Vajra and Chaskaman small hydro projects of Vindhyachal Hydro Power Ltd., Maharashtra, India.
Bundled wind power project in Chitradurga (Karnataka in India) managed by Enercon (India) Ltd.
TSIL – Waste Heat Recovery Based Power Project
BK Energia Itacoatiara Project
Santa Ana Hydroelectric Plant
Chambal Power Limited’s (CPL) proposed 7.5 MW biomass based power project at Rangpur, Kota District, Rajasthan, I
Pandurang SSK RE Project
LHSF Bagasse Project
6.5 MW biomass based (rice husk) power generation by M/s Indian Acrylics Ltd. and replacement of electrical power being im
Ajbapur Sugar Complex Cogeneration Project
Babanpur, Killa and Sahoke Mini Hydroelectric Projects
Biomass based independent power project at Malwa Power Priva
Lohgarh, Chakbhai and Sidhana Mini Hydroelectric Projects
Dolowal, Salar and Bhanubhura Mini Hydroelectric Projects
“Photovoltaic kits to light up rural households in Morocco”
JCT Hoshiarpur Small Scale Biomass Project
Lages Methane Avoidance Project
Sahabat Empty Fruit Bunch Biomass Project
ElDorado Energy Efficiency Project
12.3 MW wind energy project in Tamil Nadu, India
BT Geradora de Energia Elétrica S. A. – Ferradura Small Hydro Power Plant – Small Scale CDM Project
Lazaro Energy Efficiency Project
Energy efficiency through steam optimisation projects at RIL, Ha
Waste heat based 7 MW Captive Power Project Godawari Power and Ispat Ltd (GPIL)
5 MW Wind Power Project at Baramsar and Soda Mada, district Jaisalmer, Rajasthan, India.
Energy efficiency projects-Steam system upgradation at the manufacturing unit of Birla tyres.
Demand-side energy efficiency programme in the ‘Humidification Towers’ of Jaya Shree Textiles
Aleo Manali 3 MW Small Hydroelectric Project, Himachal Pradesh, India
14.8 MW small-scale grid connected wind power project in Jaisalmer state Rajasthan, India by RSMML
Thermal Efficiency Improvement Initiatives in Coal Fired Boiler
San Jacinto Tizate geothermal project
Replacement of Fossil Fuel by Palm Kernel Shell Biomass in the production of Portland Cement
Usinas Itamarati Cogeneration Project
Jepirachi Wind Power Project
AWMS GHG Mitigation Project, MX05-B-14, Jalisco, México
Nueva Aldea Biomass Power Plant Phase 1
Lepanto Landfill Gas Management Project
Zhangbei Manjing Windfarm Project
Gangwon Wind Park Project
La Higuera Hydroelectric Project, Chile
Wigton Wind Farm Project (WWF)
Grid-connected electricity generation from renewable sources at Satara by M/s Bajaj Auto Ltd. (BAL) using wind Power.
AWMS GHG Mitigation Project, MX05-B-13, Sonora, México
Shandong Dongyue HFC23 Decomposition Project
Landfill Gas to Energy Facility at the Nejapa Landfill Site, El Salvador
Caieiras landfill gas emission reduction
Equipav Bagasse Cogeneration Project (EBCP)
Moema Bagasse Cogeneration Project (MBCP)
Central Energética do Rio Pardo Cogeneration Project (CERPA)
Grid-connected electricity generation from renewable sources at Supa, Taluka Parner, Dist. Ahmednagar by M/s Bajaj Auto Ltd
Grid connected bagasse based cogeneration project of Ugar Sugar Works Limited (USWL).
Zillo Lorenzetti Bagasse Cogeneration Project (ZLBC)
San Carlos Bagasse Cogeneration Project (SCBCP)
Cruz Alta Bagasse Cogeneration Project (CABCP)
Lawley Fuel Switch Project
Termoelétrica Santa Adélia Cogeneration Project (TSACP)
Iturama Bagasse Cogeneration Project (IBCP)
Alto Alegre Bagasse Cogeneration Project (AABCP)
AWMS GHG Mitigation Project, MX05-B-12, Sonora, México
Meizhou Landfills Gas Recovery and Utilization as Energy
Campo Florido Bagasse Cogeneration Project (CFBCP)
Coruripe Bagasse Cogeneration Project (CBCP)
AWMS GHG Mitigation Project, MX05-B-10, Aguascalientes, Guanajuato and Queretaro, México
Vale do Rosário Bagasse Cogeneration (VRBC)
Coinbra-Cresciumal Bagasse Cogeneration Project (CCBCP)
Lucélia Bagasse Cogeneration Project (LBCP)
AWMS GHG Mitigation Project, MX05-B-04, Jalisco, México
HFC23 Decomposition Project of Zhejiang Juhua Co., Ltd, P. R. C
ESTRE’s Paulínia Landfill Gas Project (EPLGP)
Serra Bagasse Cogeneration Project (SBCP)
Colombo Bagasse Cogeneration Project (CBCP)
AWMS GHG Mitigation Project, MX05-B-08, Sonora, México
Cote small-scale hydropower plant
Bioenergia Cogeradora S.A. (“Bioenergia”), corresponding to th
Southeast Caeté Mills Bagasse Cogeneration Project (SECMBCP)
Cerradinho Bagasse Cogeneration Project (CBCP)
Jalles Machado Bagasse Cogeneration Project (JMBCP)
Rithwik 6 MW Renewable Sources Biomass Power Project
CECECAPA Small Hydroelectric Project
Zacapa Mini Hydro Station Project
Yojoa Small Hydropower Project
Pesqueiro Energia Small Hydroelectric Project (PESHP)
3.75 MW Small Scale Grid Connected “Demonstration Wind Farm Project” at Chalkewadi, District Satara, State Mahararashtra
Biomass Energy Plant-Lumut.
Santa Cândida Bagasse Cogeneration Project (SCBCP)
Alta Mogiana Bagasse Cogeneration Project (AMBCP)
Santa Elisa Bagasse Cogeneration Project (SEBCP)
Bandeirantes Landfill Gas to Energy Project (BLFGE)
Nova América Bagasse Cogeneration Project (NABCP)
“Optimal Utilization of Clinker” project at Shree Cement Limited (SCL), Beawar, Rajasthan
Nagda Hills Wind Energy Project (India)
El Molle – Landfill gas (LFG) capture project
CAMIL Itaqui Biomass Electricity Generation Project
Koblitz - Piratini Energia S. A - Biomass Power Plant – Small Scale CDM Project
6MW Somanamaradi grid connected SHP in Karnataka, India
AWMS GHG Mitigation Project, MX05-B-05, Jalisco, México
AWMS GHG Mitigation Project, MX05-B-09, Nuevo León, México
AWMS GHG Mitigation Project, MX05-B-06, Jalisco, México
Rice Husk Based Power Project
AWMS GHG Mitigation Project, MX05-B-07, Sonora, México
Hiriya Landfill Project
CDM SOLAR COOKER PROJECT Aceh 1
Abanico Hydroelectric Project
Sibimbe Hydroelectric Project
Rang Dong Oil Field Associated Gas Recovery and Utilization Project
Rice Husk based Cogeneration project at Shree Bhawani Paper Mills Limited (SBPML), Rae Bareli, Uttar Pradesh, India
GHG capture and combustion from swine manure management systems at Faxinal dos Guedes and Toledo
Moldova Energy Conservation and Greenhouse Gases Emissions
Brazil MARCA Landfill Gas to Energy Project
San Isidro Hydroelectric Plant
UTE Barreiro S.A. Renewable Electricity Generation Project
Matanzas Hydroelectric Plant
Moldova Biomass Heating in Rural Communities (Project Design Document No. 2)
Moldova Biomass Heating in Rural Communities (Project Design Document No. 1)
RSCL cogeneration expansion project
Energy efficiency through installation of modified CO2 removal
Methane Extraction and Fuel Conservation Project at Tamil Nadu
AWMS Methane Recovery Project MX05-S-11, Baja California, México
LA GLORIA Hydroelectric Project
AWMS GHG Mitigation Project MX05-B-03, Sonora, Mexico
Agua Fresca Multipurpose and environmental services project
Olavarría Landfill Gas Recovery Project
KUNAK BIO ENERGY PROJECT
Antonio Moran Wind Power Plant Project in Patagonia Region, Argentina
Biogas Support Program - Nepal (BSP-Nepal) Activity-2
Biogas Support Program - Nepal (BSP-Nepal) Activity-1
20 MW Kabini Hydro Electric Power Project, SKPCL, India
N2O Emission Reduction in Paulínia, SP, Brazil
BII NEE STIPA
18 MW Biomass Power Project in Tamilnadu, India
GHG emission reduction by thermal oxidation of HFC 23 at refrig
Project for the Refurbishment and Upgrading of Macho de Monte Hydropower Plant (Panama)
PROJECT FOR THE REFURBISHMENT AND UPGRADING OF DOLEGA HYDROPOWER PLANT (PANAMA).
Nanjing Tianjingwa Landfill Gas to Electricity Project
Yuzaikou Small Hydropower Station
24 MW Biomass Based Renewable Electricity Generation & Consumption in Ropar, Punjab, India
"Las Vacas" Hydroelectric project
10.25MW Chunchi Doddi Grid-connected SHP in Karnataka, India
3.5 MW Rice Husk based Cogeneration Project at Oswal Woolen M
3.5 MW Rice Husk based Cogeneration Project at Nahar Spinning Mills Ltd.
Bagepalli CDM Biogas Programme
AWMS GHG Mitigation Project, MX05-B-01, México
Granja Becker GHG Mitigation Project
AWMS GHG Mitigation Project, MX05-B-02, Sonora, México
Copiulemu landfill gas project (Center for the Storage and Transfer, Recovery and Control of Waste, Treatment and Disposal o
Cosmito landfill gas project (Improvement of Gas Extraction System in Old Cosmito Dump)
JCT Phagwara Small Scale Biomass Project
Nubarashen Landfill Gas Capture and Power Generation Project in Yerevan
N2O Emission Reduction in Onsan, Republic of Korea
Cuyamel Hydroelectric Project
Onyx Landfill Gas Recovery Project – Trémembé, Brazil
Poechos I Project
4.5 MW Maujhi Grid-connected SHP in Himachal Pradesh, India
Magal Ganga Small Hydropower Project
Hapugastenne and Hulu Ganga Small Hydropower Projects.
Small Hydropower Projects at Alupola and Badulu Oya.
Essaouira wind power project
APCL proposed 7.5 MW Mustard Crop Residue based Power Project
DSL Biomass based Power Project at Pagara
Santa Rosa
Rio Azul landfill gas and utilization project in Costa Rica
LOS ALGARROBOS HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT (PANAMA)
Vaturu and Wainikasou Hydro Projects
SRS Bagasse Cogeneration Project
Tétouan Wind Farm Project for Lafarge Cement Plant
Landfill Gas Extraction and Utilization at the Matuail landfill site, Dhaka, Bangladesh
Landfill gas extraction on the landfill Villa Dominico, Buenos Air
Methane capture and combustion from swine manure treatment for Pocillas and La Estrella
Methane capture and combustion from swine manure treatment for Peralillo
Methane capture and combustion from swine manure treatment for Corneche and Los Guindos
Kuyasa low-cost urban housing energy upgrade project, Khayelitsha (Cape Town; South Africa)
La Esperanza Hydroelectric Project
Salvador da Bahia Landfill Gas Management Project
Clarion 12MW (Gross) Renewable Sources Biomass Power Project
5 MW Dehar Grid-connected SHP in Himachal Pradesh, India
Graneros Plant Fuel Switching Project
Paramonga CDM Bagasse Boiler Project
Huitengxile Windfarm Project
Santa Cruz landfill gas combustion project
Cortecito and San Carlos Hydroelectric Project
Biomass in Rajasthan - Electricity generation from mustard crop
e7 Bhutan Micro Hydro Power CDM Project
Cuyamapa Hydroelectric Project
HFC Decomposition Project in Ulsan
Project for GHG emission reduction by thermal oxidation of HFC 2
RIO BLANCO Small Hydroelectric Project
Brazil NovaGerar Landfill Gas to Energy Project
 Request for Review Info Report Check

enewable Energy Limited (SECI-1)

yana Landfill Site in Western Province, Sri Lanka

ecovery Project

evelopers Pvt. Ltd.

& Group in Andhra Pradesh

arampujya Solar Energy at Telangana

atna Developers Pvt. Ltd. at Mahoba, UP
atna Developers Pvt. Ltd. at Gani, Kurnool, AP.
6 of Hu-Chems Fine Chemical Corp.
ower Project

h oil field area at Block-27 in Wilayat lbri of the Sultanate of OmanSubmission incomplete: 1: The DOE shall provide a complete validation o
tribution Network in Bangladesh
stribution Network in Bangladesh
stribution Network in Bangladesh
Gas Distribution Network in Bangladesh

Submission incomplete: The DOE shall state its opinion on an assessmen

eau Champ Limited in Mauritius

mentFirst-214

1) The DOE is requested to explain how it verified the Submission

complianceincomplete:
of the monitoring
VVS-PAplan
Para
with
357:The
the applied
DOE ismethodology.
requested to explai
In par

al in Puerto Lopez, Colombia

Dariba, Rajasthan

d, Building no. 12A, 12B, 12C& 20 of Sundew Properties Ltd.

Limited (EKIESL-CDM.July-14-01) Submission incomplete: The DOE shall further validate the compliance o
ar Park, Lal Sohanra, Cholistan, Bahawalpur, Pakistan
Heat Generation

Limited & Group (EKIESL-CDM.June-16-01)

ESL-CDM.January-15-01)
 ya Energy Pvt Ltd (EKIESL-CDM-APRIL-16-01) Submission incomplete: 1: By means of an on-site inspection or other me

Products, Bharuch , India

d Energy Production and Transformation for Leachate Evaporation

generation by Interocean Group
SL-CDM-May-16-01)
-CDM-APRIL-16-03)
Submission incomplete: As per PS para 256, the monitoring report shoul

CDM-May-16-03)

M.February-15-03)

Biogas from dairy buffalo manure at Pariyat, Jabalpur District, Madhya Pradesh, India
CDM-May-16-02)

L- CDM. September 15-02) Submission incomplete: The project participants shall, for the registered

erocean Group
rvices Limited (EKIESL-CDM.February-15-04) Submission incomplete: 1: The DOE shall determine whether there are p

M-May-16-04)
Ltd. Goa (EKIESL- CDM. April 16-04)
(EKIESL-CDM.April16-02) Submission incomplete: Paragraph 372 of VVS-PA:In response to the inco
DM-May-16-03)
Lakshmi Cement Limited, in Sirohi, Rajasthan, India

nstitutions in Uganda
Limited (EKIESL-CDM.April-13-02)
Submission incomplete: As per VVS 2.0, para 391, if the monitoring repo

Submission incomplete: 1: The verification report (p 12) states that the g

M.May-15-02)
o, Carangola, Calheiros, São Simão, Funil, São Joaquim, Fumaça IV, Jataí, Irara, Bonfante, Monte Serrat, Santa Fé, hereafter referred to as g
Submission incomplete: 1: The DOE (p 20) states that "Meters installed a
tries (EKIESL-CDM.December-14-02)

Submission incomplete: VVS-PA Para 372: There is no information on wh

 N1184), Brazil
2 of West Tehran Wastewater Treatment Plant

Submission incomplete: 1: VVS-PA Para 373(c)As per the ER spreadsheet

ar Wastewater treatment plant, Morocco

on of Potable Water in Qeshm Island
6 of Tehran South Wastewater Treatment Plant
am & Heera Asset of ONGC Submission incomplete: For this monitoring period, the CM emission fac

hree Cement Limited at Ras, Rajasthan, India

space Airoli Project, Navi Mumbai developed by Serene Properties Pvt. Ltd
Project Co-Operative Society Ltd.

M.February-15-03)
n industrial processes
DM.February-15-01)
Submission incomplete: 1: Paragraph 283 of VVS-PA:The DOE is requeste

chnology Pvt. Ltd. and Shirke Infrastructure in Maharashtra, India Submission incomplete: 1: Paragraph 242 of PS-PA: The PP has not repor
erations (EKIESL-CDM.February-15-05)

al Park, Pune Submission incomplete: VVS-PA Para 366:The maximum permissible erro
SL-CDM.December-14-01)
L-CDM.August-15-01)

Effluent Treatment Plant

EnvironmentFirst, India

Derba MIDROC cement plant

M.February-15-02)

t by Powerica
1)Limited
The DOE shall substantiate how it has verified that Submission
the project plant
incomplete:
has been
1: Scope:
operated
Theasverification
per the description
and certification
in the PDD
repor
fo

d lands in Jhansi Forest Division, Uttar Pradesh, India

ded lands in Mahoba Forest Division, Uttar Pradesh, India
ded lands in Renukoot Forest Division, Uttar Pradesh, India
raded lands in Sonbhadra Forest Division, Uttar Pradesh, India
Submission incomplete: Scope: The verification and certification report d
lands in Obra Forest Division, Uttar Pradesh, India
ed lands in Lalitpur Forest Division, Uttar Pradesh, India
lands in Kashi Forest Division, Uttar Pradesh, India
ded lands in Mirzapur Forest Division, Uttar Pradesh, India
Submission incomplete: 1: If, during the verification of a certain monitor

agar, ONGC, Assam

ding No 3, 8 and 14 of Serene Properties Pvt Ltd at Navi Mumbai

nataka and Maharashtra Submission incomplete: VVS-PA Para 373 (b)As per the ER spreadsheet, f

eration in Raipur, India Submission incomplete: Scope: The verification and certification report d
raded lands in Chitrakoot Forest Division, Uttar Pradesh, India

t Project, Thailand
ding nos: 1, 2, 4 and 5&6 of Serene Properties Pvt.Ltd.at Navi Mumbai
Submission incomplete: 1: The monitoring report does not describe the e

olar Semiconductor Power Company (India) Private Limited in the State of Gujarat, India
Submission incomplete: The DOE shall determine whether the calibratio

Submission incomplete: Scope: The verification and certification report d

aded lands in Allahabad Forest Division, Uttar Pradesh, India
ath, Maharashtra, India Submission incomplete: 1: The project participants shall describe the mo
Raigad District, Maharastra, India
Electric Project Submission incomplete: 1: As per paragraph 258 of PS-PA, the PP shall de
Submission incomplete: As per VVS 3.0, para 360, The DOE shall determi

tion system in Gerencia Refinería Barrancabermeja (GRB), Ecopetrol, S.A.

Submission incomplete: 1: The DOE (p 7) states that "Under section A.2 o

Submission incomplete: ¨The PP/DOE should provide further information

 Submission incomplete: 1: The DOE is requested to address the issues be

on at Aluminium metal recycling unit

em for sustainable development and poverty reduction in Pakkading, Bolikhamsay Province, Lao PDR.

ructure Development Pvt. Ltd.

tion of Calcium Oxide

Submission incomplete: 1: As per paragraph 366 of VVS-PA, if, during the

rprises in Rajasthan Submission incomplete: The Monitoring Report covers the first monitorin

pture and Utilisation Project

No 11 at Hyderabad

ower Station Murdhari in Albania)

l Hydro Project at Karnataka, India.

ating Company
th & Shahuwadi, Maharashtra
Maharashtra
Limited (EKIESL-CDM.January-14-04)

Submission incomplete: 1: How the value of parameter CODremoved,PJ,

Umbul Mas Wisesa Palm Oil Mill
CDM.June-10-01) Submission incomplete: 1: The DOE shall determine whether the register
tion Network in Bangladesh

kavadi village, Mandya District of Karnataka State, India

CT (JUN1133), BRAZIL

sh Synthetics Pvt. Ltd.

ergy Private Ltd., - Baap, Jodhpur, Rajasthan, India

n by Ambuja Cements, Rajasthan

the Pacific Coast of Colombia (Cauca – Nariño)

No 14 at Hyderabad
 of Visakhapatnam Steel Plant

hulpur plant of IFFCO” at Phulpur, Allahabad, Uttar Pradesh by M/s Indian Farmers Fertiliser Cooperative Ltd. (IFFCO)

ed (EKIESL-CDM.September-12-02)
Limited (EKIESL-CDM.April-13-03) Submission incomplete: The DOE shall determine whether the calibratio
Limited (EKIESL-CDM.September-12-01)

n South Africa

Limited (EKIESL-CDM.September-13-02)
Limited (EKIESL-CDM.June-13-02)

CDM.Dec-10-01)

ate of Maharashtra

IL at Ghazipur, India

tive Federation

Submission incomplete: 1: Scope: The monitoring report does not contai

Submission incomplete: Scope: The verification and certification report d

Living and Sustainable Growth in Bhutan

jarat by Powerica Limited
No 9 at Hyderabad

PALM OIL MILL EFFLUENT (POME), COOPEAGROPAL

CDM.December-10-02)
n Battery#4 of Rashtriya Ispat Nigam Limited
rprises in Maharashtra
ur Maharashtra

ossil fuel-fired (Natural Gas) Steam Boiler System

West Bengal, India

No 6 at Hyderabad
tural gas at Jurong Island in Singapore

ject (JUN1132), Brazil

-ordinated by Tamilnadu Spinning Mills Association (TASMA-II (B))

Submission incomplete: 1: The DOE is requested to address this issue as

at Maa Durga Rice Products (P) Ltd., Orissa

Wp Solar Power Project

Project, Thailand

Stutterheim, South Africa

at Ngong Hills, Kenya.

e Enterprises Limited in Gujarat, India
 Pvt. Ltd in Gujarat

rgy to a commercial
1) As perBuilding
page 12 of “Tool to calculate baseline, project
Submission
and/or leakage
incomplete:
emissions
1: There
fromiselectricity
no monitoring
consumption
diagram”,showing
version 01,
mon d

arnataka, India

ed (EKIESL-CDM.January-12-03)
Bundled Project
grid” (for simplicity hereafter referred to simply as the “LT-Amazonas Project”).

00MT/Annum to 12000MT/Annum

roducts in Rajkot District of Gujarat

ar Energy Private Limited

tidal Zone Offshore Wind Power Project

ark Vanijya Pvt. Ltd.,- Tinwari, Jodhpur, Rajasthan, India

ch district of Gujarat
eating and power (CCHP) systems in DLF Building 8 in Gurgaon, India
on System at Da Phuoc Integrated Waste Management Facility

Kutch district
1) in
TheGujarat state,emission
submitted India. reduction sheet indicates that
Submission
the monitored
incomplete:
quantity
PRCofdocuments
renewablewere
biomass
submitted
consumed
under
during
additiona
the

and prisons

) Qianlishan Coal Coking Co., Ltd. Coke Dry Quenching (CDQ) Technical Reconstruction Engineering Project
ni in Rajasthan

nd Power Project
AB Refinery - KNPC
 District in Gujarat
on in Aberdare Forest Complex & National Park area, Kenya
on in MAU Forest Complex, Kenya

(JUN1059), Brazil

yathri Sustainable Energies India Private Limited.

CDM Project in Sri Lanka

nd Power Project
Submission incomplete: 1: As per the “Tool to calculate the emission fac

connected renewable electricity through the SHPs Karl Kuhlemann and Helena Kuhlemann

by Friends Salt Works & Allied Ind. & Gautam Freight Pvt. Ltd.

Submission incomplete: 1: The DOE shall explain how it has verified the m
ect at Tangnu

ower Plant Project Submission incomplete: 1: Scope: The verification report does not list ea

ermoelectricity Joint Stock Company

nghuangqi 20MWp Solar PV Power Generation Project

PC at, Gujarat

ncreasing Blend in P·O42.5 Cement Project

mil Nadu by KBSPL

Limited (EKIESL-CDM.January-12-01)

astructure Ltd.
Power Project

-Scale Hydroelectric Power Projects

project bundle – Group 2 and Group 3

orporation of Uganda Limited

m Petrofils Pvt. Ltd

eneration Project

Wind Power Project

CDM.November-10-02)

DM.Aug-09-01) Submission incomplete: The DOE shall determine whether the monitorin
metals and materials through Electronic Waste collection and recycling process performed at Attero Recycling Pvt Ltd plant located in Roo
Submission incomplete: 1: As per VVS 3.0 para 366, if, during the verifica

undled Project Activities (hereafter referred to simply as “SHPPs in Braço do Norte River”)
orbandar district of Gujarat state, India
absorption towers by Indian Farmers Fertiliser Cooperative Ltd IFFCO, Paradeep unit, Orissa

ECT ACTIVITY
placement of Fuel Oil with Natural Gas in refinery furnace operations at Essar Oil Ltd.
extiles (P) Ltd., Tamil Nadu, India at village Andipatti taluk, Uthamapalayam taluk
Submission & Teni taluk,
incomplete: Teni District.
1: VVS-PA Para 367 Tamil
(b):nadu. India
Section C ofbythe
M/S Avane
monitor

power Co., Ltd.

Grid connected renewable electricity through the SHPs Canta Galo, Estância and Pegoraro
ct of Fengda Electric Power Co., Ltd.

na of Ivory Property Trust

er Plant at Hazira, Gujarat

CDM.OCT-09-01)

eni, Tamil Nadu

rama Poultries Limited at Tirupur, Tamil Nadu
m & Co. in Tamil Nadu, India
eration Project
L (India) Ltd.
Bottles Pvt. Ltd

ergy Assets Ltd

Ltd. Semi-coke Waste Gas for Power Generation Project

Gas-fired cogeneration Project

on, at Kothapeta, East Godavari, Andhra Pradesh, India.
Submission incomplete: 1: Assessment opinion Post Registration Change

Submission incomplete: 1: VVS-PA Para 365As per the registered PDD, m

ect located in Coimbatore, India

CDM.Nov-10-01)
Energy Limited in Maharashtra, India
yungnam Power bundling PV power plant project
heating and power (CCHP) systems in DLF Building 5 in Gurgaon, India

Engineering in Rajasthan

y Oil Palms Ltd Palm Oil Mill.

ment Limited, Karachi Plant

micals Pvt. Ltd. (EKIESL-CDM.May-12-01)

ar Photovoltaic Power Project

To Tapioca Starch Making Plant of APFCO, Vietnam

Derba MIDROC cement Plant

ect at kiln 2 of Bayano cement plant

Co. in Tamil Nadu, India

CDM Project At Heilongjiang Province, China

erobic treatment of industrial wool scouring effluent

at Tamil Nadu, India Submission incomplete: 1: Scope: Project participants shall describe the

generation Project
i open dump fill
Wind Power Project by KRBL Limited

n Jodhpur, Rajasthan

Power Company (Pvt) Ltd

Submission incomplete: The DOE is required to take due account of all au

by Sahyadri Industries Limited

ation Project

and Cooking Fuel Project 1

) Wanchen Energy Resources Co., Ltd. Qianfeng Cement Plant 4800 t/d clinker production line #1 technical reconstruction project
Ltd. (EKIESL-CDM.January-12-02)

) Wanchen Energy Resources Co., Ltd. Qianfeng Cement Plant 4800 t/d clinker production line #2 technical reconstruction project
e cogeneration project at OGPSCL
tion., Ltd Increasing Blend In Cement Production Project

dification of heat exchanger network at Kenya Petroleum Refineries Ltd

Rajasthan by Lexicon Vanijya Pvt. Ltd
Rajasthan by Symphony Vyapaar Pvt Ltd Submission incomplete: 1: Scope: The monitoring report does not contai

power Station
dropower Station

Submission incomplete: Scope: The current issuance workflow interface

ogeneration Project

MW Bagasse Based Co-generation Power Project

sions in the Charcoal Production of V&M Florestal, Minas Gerais, Brazil.
mited at village Gadna Dist- Jodhpur in Rajasthan, INDIA Submission incomplete: 1: As per VVS para 366, if, during the verification

Submission incomplete: Scope: The verification report does not provide

Submission incomplete: 1: The DOE shall determine whether the change

and Biological Corridors in the Eastern Plains of Colombia

y Generation, Nakhon Ratchasima

and Utilisation for Power Generation Project of Linxiang Conch Cement Company Limited

efficient refrigerators in India by LG Electronics India Pvt Ltd.

tarch wastewater biogas extraction and utilization project, Nakhonratchasima Province, Kingdom of Thailand
y Gujarat Fluorochemicals Limited (GFL)
in Shanxi Province
Project in Fujian Province
OME at Pelakar Mill, Jambi, Indonesia
outhwest Sichuan, China

Cells Upgrade & Retrofit Project

Envirotech (P) Ltd. Submission incomplete: Scope: The verification and certification report d
Submission incomplete:

age Pohara, Pohara-Baramsar, District Jaisalmer, Rajasthan, India

Generation Project
mal Energy in Bhavnagar.

davari Dist., Andhra Pradesh, India

, 000 m3 biogas from organic waste in Anyang City
technology

at M/s. Garware Polyester Limited, Waluj, Aurangabad, India

ers (BCSH) Project 1

nd turbine generators in Tamil Nadu, India

roject in Andhra Pradesh

oject in Maharashtra aggregated by Resurge Energy Private Limited

di in Southern District of National Capital Territory of Delhi through Reforestation
es Ciments Artificiels Tunisiens” cement plant, Tunis.
er Generation Project

ation Project
Submission incomplete: VVS-PA Para 374(b)As per the ER spreadsheet, a
hnologies Ltd.
THROUGH COMPOSTING OF MANURE WASTE
DM.SEP-09-01)

ni-hydropower station
Province, Vietnam

and Environment
koda Limited at Madhya Pradesh, India

n Helinge'er of Inner Mongolia, China

tion Project, Sukhothai, Thailand

– Barra da Paciência, Ninho da Águia, Corrente Grande, Paiol, São Gonçalo and Várzea Alegre Small Hydropower Plants
on and Power Generation Project
ration in Rajasthan

a) managed by Aarvee Denims & Exports Ltd.

Submission incomplete: 1: Scope: The verification report does not state t

O) to Liquefied Natural Gas (LNG) in DG Sets
ower Project

Modern Farming

Submission incomplete: Scope: The verification and certification report d

Submission incomplete: The DOE is required to provide the information

ower Company Limited

ect in upstream of Danghe River
Project in upstream of Danghe River

ode district, Tamil Nadu, India

ode district, Tamil Nadu, India

atment System in an Ethanol Plant Submission incomplete: 1: If, during the verification of a certain monitor
Raichur District, Karnataka, India

ed Wind Power Limited

e Sludge & Refuse Derived Fuel (RDF) at Arabian cement plant
Bikaner, Rajasthan, India
n Hunan VALIN Xiangtan Iron & Steel Co., Ltd.
jarat (India)
pati Polytex, Uttarakhand, India

at Yurimaguas industrial plant, Peru.

d Heat and Power (CHP) System in Apapa, Lagos, Nigeria

eration at Maple Leaf Cement Factory Limited, Iskanderabad, Pakistan

ills Ltd. Pakistan

Submission incomplete: 1: The DOE shall determine whether the calcula

Shanxi Province

tivity in Aurangabad

West Sumatera, Indonesia Submission incomplete: 1: Scope: The validation report does not contain
s and Construction Limited
Hydropower Pvt. Ltd.

ascade Bundled Small Hydropower Project

on) at Sungai Tengi Palm Oil Mill, Malaysia

ar thermal plant
Farm, Phase 1, South Africa
30MW, People´s Republic of China
er Green Co., Ltd

Submission incomplete: The emission reduction spread sheet (Generatio

& Maharashtra, India

eetarani Mohanty
r Treatment.
district, Roi-Et Province.
 ind Mills by KRBL Ltd. at Ratan Ka Bas site, Jodhpur district, Rajasthan, India
ndia by Goel International Pvt. Ltd

and recovery of biogas for electricity generation in Singapore

her Eco Power Limited, Chhata, Uttar Pradesh, India
Submission incomplete: Paragraph 231 of the CDM Project Standard for
hiraz Petrochemical Company

n landfill in Haidian District

a State, India

ited (RSGBL)

hnology by Aravali Infrapower Limited

tem Renovation Project

o., Ltd. in Nakhon Sawan, Thailand

ology at BALCO, India

CDM Project Submission incomplete: The DOE on page 7 of the verification report me
ined cycle power generation project

overy Power Generation Project

n project (CNG)

Submission incomplete:
ed (EKI.CDM.Mar-11-03)
 Submission incomplete:

jothi Spinning Mills Ltd

District Kutch of Gujarat

EKI-CDM.June-11-02)
stewater Project of Lianyungang Yida Alcohol Co., Ltd.

ness unit of NTPC limited

t. Ltd. at Wanakbori, Kheda, Gujarat
ipur, District Karnal of State Haryana (India)

er, Rajasthan

ycle power generation project

hemicals Limited, Tamilnadu, India (Renewable Energy Wind)

nestrivie’ LLC gas distribution network, Transnistria/Republic of Moldova
, 14th Avenue Commercial Site South Africa
hura, Uttar Pradesh
eneration Project

Tamilnadu, India Submission incomplete: The Monitoring Report covers the first monitorin

Submission incomplete: 1: Scope: The monitoring report does not indica

gy Private Limited Submission incomplete: 1: Scope: The monitoring report does not indica

gy Private Limited

Submission incomplete: 1: The validation report shall determine whethe

tion Project at Starch Tapioca Bandar Mataram, Central Lampung, Indonesia

g’an Cogeneration Plant

Jitai Sunshine power generation company

er Generation Project

arashtra and Tirunelveli district, Tamil Nadu India

W Wind Power Project

Xiangtan Iron & Steel Co., Ltd.
pturing for Heating and Electricity generation
ation Project
Wind Power Project
uction Project
.5MW Wind Power Project
st Furnace -4

t in Gujarat, India
kaner, Rajasthan, India
ower Station Project

kaner, Rajasthan, India

ower Station Project
Submission incomplete: 1: Scope: The verification and certification repor
ns as Reducing Agent in Pig Iron Mill in Brazil

t in Shanxi Province
ct in INDIA by KAMAL ENGINEERING CORPORATION [UNIT OF KEC INDUSTRIES LTD]

nxi Hengyuan Power Generation Company

 Submission incomplete: 1: Does the validation report determine whethe

e Recovery and Utilization Project

Project in Shanxi Province

ste Heat Recovery for Power Generation Project

nd Power Project

opower Project
Zhejiang Province
lization Project
Zhejiang Province
lization Project
Submission incomplete:
ntrade, Ramgarh, Jharkhand, India

opower Project
1) As per the submitted monitoring report, verification report and excel spreadsheet, the DOE/PP has reported that the Quanti

Project in Shanxi Province

ergy Private Limited Submission incomplete: As already communicated to the DOE, since the

acity Addition in Yaan City

ower Project
laza Indonesia
acity Addition in Yaan City
ower Project
laza Indonesia

ogas Recovery and Utilisation Project Submission incomplete:

Power Project
ind Power Project

Pradesh by DJ Energy Private Limited Submission incomplete: 1: The post-registration change proposes to corr
turing unit based on an energy efficient brick manufacturing tec

t in Morocco
wer Project

Power Generation

PV Power Plant Project

PV Power Plant Project

PV Power Plant Project

KIESL.CDM.September-11-02)
mpany Waste Heat Utilization for Power Generation Project
ct at kiln # 2 of Yaqui’s Cement Plant.

er Project at XAWO
ncorp Limited
 Submission incomplete: 1: Scope: The revised PDD does not contain a su

from forest plantations for the production of primary iron in Vallourec & Mannesmann do Brasil.

as & Power Group Zhuhai Gaolan Port Economic Zone Natural Gas Cogeneration Project
zation Project

ject in Liangshan Prefecture

Oil Extractions Pvt. Ltd., Andhra Pradesh, India

and biogas utilization project

le source: Windfarm Complex Santana do Livramento

d Energy Technology - Reliance Clean Power Pvt. Ltd.

wer Industries Ltd.
r Generation Phase One Project
ration Project

Sri Padmabalaji Steels Pvt Ltd, Coimbatore, Tamil Nadu, India Submission incomplete: 1: As per VVS-PA Para 363, DOE shall state whet
in Himachal Pradesh.
e Sludge & Refuse Derived Fuel (RDF) at Helwan cement plant
Solar Power Generation Project
neration Project
a Paper Industry Co. (QPIC)

angsu Huadian Qishuyan Thermal Power Co., Ltd.

.5MW Wind Power Project

Ningxia Electric Power Group Co., Ltd.

EKIESL.CDM.Aug-11-02)

asslands in Korea
a Textiles Private Limited

Submission incomplete: 1: Scope: The verification and certification repor

from the Neft Dashlari and Palchiq Pilpilassi oil fields of SOCAR

n Palm Oil Refinery

dropower Project

re district in the state Karnataka, India

de Bundled Small Hydropower Project

Submission incomplete: 1: Scope: The monitoring report does not contai

dfu Pulp, Writing & Printing Paper Co. (MEPPCO)

Oil Mill, Malaysia.

ps and replacement of Incandescent Light Bulbs (ICLs) with Compact Fluorescent Lamps (CFLs) by Green Village Ventures in different house
omass residues implemented at Renault Tanger Méditerranée (RTM) plant – Melloussa, Morocco

t in Rajasthan.
mer District, Rajasthan
e, Jaisalmer District in Rajasthan
provement Project
t Gadag District, Karnataka

n Conventional Energy Pvt Ltd

uan Biomass Cogeneration Co., Ltd
Farms India Private Limited in Gujarat

adesh of Raajratna Energy Holdings Pvt. Ltd

adesh of Raajratna Energy Holdings Pvt. Ltd
Wuhan Kaidi Phase I 49.5MW Project

y Gujarat Fluorochemicals Limited (GFL)

se Derived Fuel (RDF) at Kattameya cement plant

ensive Utilization Project in Paper Manufacturing of Hebei Hangyu Group Co., Ltd
ation Project
waste heat recovery and utilization for power generation project
9.5MW Wind Farm Project
Obodugwa and neighbouring oil fields in Nigeria
r Co., Ltd Biomass Power Plant Project

ran District, Rajasthan

Wp Solar PV Project

Guizhou Province
y and Utilization Project

k Refinery, West Bengal, India

Level Hydropower Project

ropower Project
ropower Project

iehua Chemical Branch Nitric Acid Project

hai Co., Ltd., Surat Thani, Thailand

Fertilizer Plant in Al Mansoura (Egypt)

adesh, India.

m Empty Fruit Bunches (EFBs) at QL Palm Oil Mill 1 at Tawau, Sabah

n System at QL Palm Oil Mill 1 at Tawau, Sabah
anant Co., Ltd., Prachinburi, Thailand

aoning Province
rid-Connected Power Station Stage II 20MWp Project

power Generation Project Submission incomplete: Scope: The spreadsheet does not contain all par

ind Power Project

Power Plant

unty, Yunnan Province

GL1 for Mukah Kilang Kelapa Sawit and Sawira Palm Oil Mill.
nt in Azerbaijan

in Rajasthan

Energy Generation Technology – Bundle - I Submission incomplete:

hur District of Karnataka State, India
on network in Tirupati and Puttur operational division of Andhra Pradesh
on network in Chittoor and Madanapalle operational division of Andhra Pradesh

Phase III 30MWp Solar PV Project

le source: Sete Lagoas Solar Power Plant

ct in Rajasthan

ct at CEMEX Valles Cement Plant.

Liaoning Province

uangxi Zhuang Autonomous Region

Factory, Lam Thap, Krabi Province,Thailand.

eneration Project

Submission incomplete: 1: Scope: The validation report does not contain

na, Patan District in Gujarat

p Solar Photovoltaic Power Project

econdary bundle Small Hydropower Project

wer Project
Shijiazhuang, Hebei Province
Phase II 10 MWp Solar Photovoltaic Power Project

in Himachal Pradesh

ur Maharashtra
cated at Chavaneswar, Satara district, Maharashtra, India

etnam Biofuels Joint Stock Company

Power Project

mercial building facility

Power Project

d Farm Project
dhya Pradesh

angshan, Hebei Province

ogeneration Project
Tamil Nadu, India

o Góes Small Hydro Power Plant

Gansu Province

Suryabumi Agrolanggeng.

Golden Blossom Sumatra.

 Phase I Project Submission incomplete: Section C of the submitted verification report sta

in new paper-production line

ems Limited

Wind Power Project

Ruchi Soya Industries Limited in Madhya Pradesh

Plant in Aswan (Egypt) Submission incomplete: VVS-PA Para 361 (e)As per the registered PDD, t

shan Prefecture, Sichuan Province

e in Tirunelveli District, Tamilnadu, India by M/s. Woodbriar Estate Ltd
Guizhou Province
Farm Kushui First Wind Power Project
alanga Province

Hydropower Station Project Submission incomplete: 1: Scope: The verification and certification repor
Plant Through Retrofitting Turbines

MW Wind Project

iang Uygur Autonomous Region, China

tream Cascaded Hydropower Project

wer Project
 lar PV Power Generation Project Submission incomplete: 1: VVS-PA Para 356(b)As per page 2 of the moni

gxi Province

ce in North Bengal
MW Wind Farm Project
O) to Liquefied Natural Gas (LNG) in Boiler
es Pvt Ltd (EKIESL-CDM. November -11-01)

arm Project
arashtra aggregated by Resurge Energy Private Limited

eda Hydropower Project

d Farm Project
CDM.March-11-02)

W Wind Power Project in Southeast Wind Zone of Hami City, Xinjiang Uygur Autonomous Region
tton Mills Private Limited

y; Bsarma El Koura, Lebanon

ted power generation project
y; Bsarma El Koura, Lebanon
ted power generation project

Wulatehouqi Bayin Baolige 10MWp PV Grid-connected Power Generation Project

for Power Generation Project

es Ltd and M/S Intex Technologies (India) Limited
ower Generation Project

t Nashik, Maharashtra, India Submission incomplete: 1: The DOE is requested to explain how it verifie

ropower Project

uels in Cement Facilities Project in Nigeria

bution network, Republic of Moldova

dia Pvt. Ltd., Rajasthan, India

W Wind Power Project

d Farm No.5-Hongmunaobao Wind Farm Phase I 49.5MW Wind Power Project

Submission incomplete: The DOE shall list each parameter required by th

k Tengah LPG Plant – PT. Yudistira Energy
unty of Gansu Province

ower Projects Private Limited

Plant Chicoasén II
ed Grid-connected Photovoltaic Power Generation Project

I 49.5MW Project

Shivlakha, Kutch, India

nj Landfill Site, Nis, Serbia

nd Biogas Utilization Project
d. In Tamilnadu, India.

Limited at Gujarat, India

ni Mohanty at Tamil Nadu, India

Submission incomplete: 1: Scope: The validation opinion does not contai

er in Uttarakhand
l (EKIESL-CDM.July-11-02)

oject in Hunan, China

project in PROAN farms, Jalisco

istal Limited Corporation

158 & SF317

tries Limited, India

n Energy Limited

eration Project of Jiande Conch Cement Company Limited (Phase II)

li Coolie Sangha
ect of Yunnan Province

ousing and Power Pvt. Ltd.

KIESL.CDM-Aug.11-03)

Power Project
er Plant Project
Phase I Project
Phase II Project

than Solar Private Limited

t in Shijiazhuang, Hebei Province

Power Project

. Chanthaburi
ngshan, Hebei Province

ase II 49.5 MW Project

tapioca starch plant to substitute the use of bunker oil at Udornthani Province, Thailand

) Power Plant Project

 .5MW Project

9MW Project
MW Windfarm Project

t at Atotonilco Cement Plant.

Submission incomplete: 1: Scope: The monitoring report does not contai

Wirajaya Packindo
th biogas recovery for cogeneration

el Bundle Hydropower Project Submission incomplete: The DOE shall determine whether the monitorin

lacement Project (2) in South Africa

MW Wind farm Project

eneration project at Rajasthan and Karnataka, India
ect in Baise, Guangxi Province

Wind Farm Project

y GRT group
V Power Plant Phase I 30MWp Project

le source: Windfarm Bons Ventos da Serra I

gwu Xiejiaping 49.5MW Wind Power Project
 ant in Tétouan
Submission incomplete: The monitoring report (page 9) indicates that th
harashtra State, India
uanwazitang 49.5MW Project

oject Activity

ment and Waste Residue Utilization Project

5MW Wind Power Project

ower Project

0MW Solar Power Project

liary Engineering Submission incomplete: Scope: The verification and certification report d

wer Generation

Submission incomplete: The DOE shall determine whether the monitorin

Glass WHR Power Generation Project

arm Phase I 49.5MW Project

nagar district, Gujarat Submission incomplete: 1: Scope: The validation opinion does not provid

ran Coal International Private Limited.

n at tyre manufacturing units in India

W Phase I Project
 Submission incomplete: Scope: The DOE shall determine whether the mo
hane Power Generation Project Phase 3
nsformation Chayouzhongqi Wind Farm 49.5MW Project

h and Bekaa
pferberg Landfill in Namibia
nd Power Project

Submission incomplete: 1. The DOE did not verify that the instruments w
hane Power Generation Project Phase 2

d around Beirut Southern Suburbs

Power Project

ourth Stage Hydropower Station Project

d around Beirut Central, Northern and Eastern Suburbs
Chain (Pvt.) Ltd. IRPC (Integrated Rice Processing Complex), Muridke, Pakistan

on from effluents ponds in Honduras

on by means the installation of composting systems
Power Project

rgy Private Limited in Maharashtra, India

nataka, India.

Farm Project
Wind Power Project

d Power Project
oject in Pingyin Sunnsy Cement Corporation Limited
chang County Sichuan Province

MW Wind Power Project

jiazhuang, Hebei Province
eration Project of Chongqing Conch Cement Company Limited (Phase I)

tang International 48MW Wind Farm Project

n for the grid by Bhavnagar Biomass Power Projects Pvt Ltd

ower project

Submission incomplete:
in Qadirpur utilizing permeate gas, previously flared

tari Palm Oil Mill at Central Kalimantan, Indonesia.

Submission incomplete: 1: The monitoring report does not provide a line

Sterling Agro Industries Ltd

ns as Reducing Agent in Pig Iron Mill of ArcelorMittal Juiz de Fora, Brazil

ng at Tan Thanh solid waste treatment plant

MW Wind Power Project

Co. Ltd. Thailand

Submission incomplete: 1. The DOE did not verify that the instruments w
ation Project
ase I Project

tion network of Armenia Republic

1) According to applied version of the monitoring methodology, it shall be verified whether the NCV of natural gas used by the

.5MW Wind Farm Project Submission incomplete: The DOE (p 58) raised CAR 1 by stating that "as p

MW Wind Power Project

power Project

mplemented by AEL in India

eneration Project
ct in a Distillery at Uttar Pradesh

lar Power Project

ed (EKI.CDM.July-11-01)
Wind Power Project
t in Hubei Province, China
d Farm Project
Submission incomplete: 1. There is an inconsistency in the cross referenc
Submission incomplete: 1: Scope: The monitoring report does not contai

tation Project

MW Wind Power Project

Tangshan, Hebei Province
Hezhou City, Guangxi Zhuang Autonomous Region
ct in Hubei Province, China
 ou Province China

5 MW Wind Power Project

d) - Windfarm Morro dos Ventos phase 2

ower Project
Wind Power Project
ect of Changle Sunnsy Cement Corporation Limited

turbines by Avon Cycles Limited

Premier Mills Private Limited

n Guizhou Province, China

rs Project in Guizhou Province, China Submission incomplete: Scope: The verification and certification report d
ane Digesters Project in Guizhou Province, China
t Pakistan Ltd.
hane (VAM) Comprehensive Utilization Project of Taiyuan, Shanxi Province
mil Nadu, India

mu Zhugaita power generation Co., Ltd.

Gansu Province
 5 MW Wind Power Project
.5MW Wind Power Project
c Power Project

9.5MW Wind Power Project

lant in Andhra Pradesh , India

.5MW Project

Submission incomplete:

ower Project of Huadian in Turpan

d Power Project

5 MW Wind Power Project

RTS for Gurgaon metro

wer Generation Project
by Enn Enn Corp Limited
ower Plant Project

eneration Project
Project Activity.

arm Project
Power Project
d Farm Project

n for the grid by Junagadh Power Projects (P) Ltd in Junagadh District, Gujarat
eration Project of Yiyang Conch Cement Company Limited
 Project in Shanxi Province Submission incomplete: 1: The DOE (p 8) states that "As per the CDM pro

Submission incomplete: The verification report does not include any info

ation at Lucky Cement, Pezu, Pakistan

A.P. and Gujarat, India

5MW Project
ham Phak Phaeo, Thailand

Submission incomplete: 1: The project participants shall provide all param

M/s. Mono Steel (India) Ltd. in Gujarat

nd Utilization Project

d Power Generation Project

gren County

Waste Incineration Project

for Power Generation Project

er treatment facility in K.S. Bio-Plus Co., Ltd., Thailand

ery for Power Generation Project

otovoltaic Power Project

atu Phase I 49.5MW Wind Farm Project

r Cooker Project

oject in Liuzhou City

oyang, Henan Province

er Generation Project

uoyang, Henan Province Submission incomplete: 1: Scope: The verification report does not descri

G Cement, Khofli Sattai Dera Ghazi Khan Plant

opower project

Heat Project

opower Station Project

Submission incomplete: 1: Scope: The verification report does not list ea
f Tamil Nadu, by JISL-India

ha Village, in Kutch district of Gujarat state, India Submission incomplete: An allometric equation has been applied to estim
Submission incomplete: Scope: The verification and certification report d

Submission incomplete: As per decision from EB106 report para 26b, if th

in HuaiNing Shangfeng Cement Co., Ltd.

Power Project
 o., Ltd. Semi-coke Waste Gas Power Generation Project
wer Generation Project
dropower Project

uaiHaeng, Thailand

n County, Hunan Province

roject of Period I
at Recovery for Cogeneration Project in Hubei Province

y Private Limited

rid-connected Solar Generation Project

MW Wind Power Project

Phase II 49.5MW Project

pavav Power Company Ltd. in Gujarat

Nadu and Madhya Pradesh
aharashtra, India

nd Farm Project
Bundled Small Hydropower Project in Gansu Province
ject at Cucuta cement plant

le source: Windfarm Complex Santa Vitória do Palmar and Chuí

s Utilization Project
Submission incomplete: 1: Scope: The monitoring report does not contai

t of Zibo Tengfei Biomass Cogeneration Co., Ltd.

ng) Master Phase I Project

ndfarms Macacos, Juremas, Pedra Preta and Costa Branca

at Recovery Power Generation (12MW) Project

ower Project

Energy Project in Ipoh, Malaysia

JNLF) Landfill Gas Recovery Bundled Project

rgaon, India

eration at Cherat Cement Company Limited, Nowshera, Pakistan

o., Ltd. Xitieshan 2nd Stage 20MWp PV Power Generation Project

evel Bundle Small Hydropower Project

County Fusheng Bundled Hydropower Station Project

ehr in the Chamba district of Himachal Pradesh by JSW Energy

ement Project
ement Project

s utilization for Thermal Energy at PT Indah Kiat Pulp & Paper, Serang

ectricity Company CMM Power Generation Project

eration at Lucky Cement Limited, Karachi Plant

MWp Solar Power Project

Cement Company Limited, Khairpur Plant

reatment facility
 an Spinning Mills Limited in Tamil Nadu, India

Submission incomplete: The DOE states that "Due to the corona virus pa

Submission incomplete: 1: Please provide details of accuracy class and ca

Power Project
mpany Private Limited
ects (P) Limited

t, South Africa

W Wind Power Project

ndfarm Campo dos Ventos II
.98 MW Project
r 49.4 MW Project
fill Gas to Energy Project
led CDM project

ropower Station Project

49.4 MW Project

l (EKIESL-CDM.August-11-02)
Hubei Province, China
eration Project
.4 MW Project

aic Power Generation Project Submission incomplete: As per VVS 3.0 para 366, if, during the verificatio

ation Project in Jilin Yatai Cement Co., Ltd.

braltar-Colombia
 Submission incomplete: 1: Scope: The verification and certification repor
tion power plant at Vemagiri, Andhra Pradesh, India

ngxin Wind Farm Project Phase II

Generation Project

MW Wind Power Project

olar Power Project
Co., Ltd. Taiyangshan 3rd Stage 50 MWp PV Power Project
p Solar Power Project

ation Project

i Autonomous County

ration at DG Cement Khairpur Plant

tch districts of Gujarat

MW Project
ation Project

yang, Henan Province

ng) Hanas Phase I Project

tong of Yunnan

Naini, Allahabad, India

hase I Project
ataka, India

and 2nd Stage Bundled PV Tidal Flat Ground Power Projects

u District Nandatan 20 MWp PV Power Project

Project, in Sandakan, Sabah Malaysia

ment and Upgrade Project in Nueva Ecija, Philippines

opower Project

Power Project

1) Section D.3 of the submitted monitoring report states

Submission
that the monitoring
incomplete:ofThe
theDOE
project
has validated
activity doesn
that ’the
t include
implementation
sampling. H
er Plants Project

ize Power Generation at PETROAMAZONAS Block 15 Facilities

wer Bundle Project
cker Moldova sugar plant
South Africa

Submission incomplete: In the verification report, the DOE states that K-

d Power Project

MW wind farm project

le Phase II 49.5MW Wind Power Project

oshuiqiao 49.5MW Wind Farm Project

9.5MW Wind Farm Project

Datang Angli 49.5MW Project

d Tamil Nadu

Power Generation Project

tan Grid-connected PV Power Project

t in Luoyang, Henan Province

er Generation Project

d) – Windfarm Complex Morro dos Ventos

dry Development Co., Ltd

hra Pradesh

ashtra, India
n South Africa
M/s. ZF Steering Gear (India) Ltd

wer Project
MW Wind Power Project

HI Energy Private Limited

ne Avoidance and Energy Generation Project, Malaysia

Huadian in Burqin

gqing City, P.R. China

M/s EMCO Limited

h Wind Farm 49.5 MW Project
y in Rajasthan, India

arat Solar Park, India

erprises Limited” at Ganapathypalayam in Coimbatore, Radhapuram, Kvalakuruchi in Tirunelveli and Govindapuram in Erode district, Tami
d Power Project

etnam Central Biofuels Joint Stock Company

Luoyang, Henan Province

ovince, Sumatera in Indonesia

project in Tamil Nadu, India

mited at Tamil Nadu, India

ex Project Activity.

ation synchronous Wind Turbine Generator Minqin County Hongshagang 49.5MW Shiyan Wind Power Project

d plant of Egypt Hydrocarbon Corporation at Ain Sokhna

eneration Project

long County
 Submission incomplete: 1: The DOE shall determine whether the monito

Power Project
gerators manufacturing project in India

ydropower Project
uette at Viet Nam Paiho. Ltd, Ho Chi Minh city, Vietnam

(Malana – II HEP)” at Kullu district of Himachal Pradesh State, India, by M/s Everest Power Private Limited

Wind Farm Project

d Farm Project

ation Project

Xuandong Coalmine VAM Oxidation and Utilization Project

ulang, Garut, Indonesia.
pment Co., Ltd. Qingsong Hydroelectric Project

GSPL in Gujarat
ower Project
r Generation Project Submission incomplete: 1: Scope: The spreadsheet does not contain all p

r Generation Project

ructions Private Limited

yan Wind Power Project

ower Project

n Juan de la Maguana in the Dominican Republic

ur district in the state of Rajasthan, India

ropower Project
wer Project

India by Bhilwara
d by Sri Shanmugavel Group

Luoyang, Henan Province

ower Project
m Phase I Project
Lingling Bundled Small Hydropower Project
hern Cape CFL Replacement Project (1) in South Africa

uanjiang County Manlai & Decong Bundled Small Hydropower Project

ade Bundled Small Hydropower Project

m Phase I 49.5MW Wind Project
quipment in ‘Socar Georgia Gas’ gas distribution system, Georgia
Bundled Small Hydropower Project

re Private limited

, Ltd. Semi-coke Waste Gas Power Generation Project

ower Project

emi-coke Waste Gas Power Generation

wit Mekar Palm Oil Mill 2, Central Kalimantan Indonesia
ndia Limited and M/s Surana Telecom and Power Limited

y and Utilisation for Power Generation Project of Qingxin Conch Cement Company Limited

ate, Malaysia
n in Rajasthan, India

ect, Jodhpur, Rajasthan, India

Jaisalmer, Rajasthan, India

hadrappa in Chitradurga district, Karnataka.

Lake Phase - II

ru, Malaysia
ts Private Limited
e I Wind Power Project

y of Sichuan Province
n the Brunca Region, Costa Rica (COOPEAGRI Project)

t in Uthaithani, Thailand
Submission incomplete:

11 Akal, Rajasthan
Wind Farm Project
led Small Hydropower Project

Palm Oil Mill, Malaysia Submission incomplete:

r Palm Oil Mill, Malaysia

Sabah Mills Sdn. Bhd.
 Submission incomplete: 1: Inconsistent information are presented in the
m Oil Mill, Malaysia
d Farm Project
of Maharashtra and Rajasthan, India

hydro project

MW Project
d Farm Project
Farm Project
Farm Project

MWp Wind-Solar Hybrid Power Project

Wind Power Project

Power Plant of Ningxia East Thermal Power Co., Ltd.

c Power Generation Project

Submission incomplete: Scope: The monitoring report does not contain r

ograph Systems on Road Freight Transportation CDM Project in

d Power Project

nggang city, Hubei Province

dling Project
Generation Project
MW Grid-connected Solar Power Generation Project in Alashan of Inner Mongolia
wind energy by GACL in Gujarat

su Province
 d Farm Project
d Power Project

wind energy by GACL in Gujarat

nd Farm Project

ngshan Wind Farm Project

o Power Project
n Infrastructure Development Private Limited in Maharashtra, India

t to generate electricity

Power and Logistics Private Limited

etrofitting Project
eration Project

eration Project of Chizhou Conch Cement Company Limited

W Wind Power Project

of Kilns in Loudi WUJO Industrial Co., Ltd

ation Project

do and Varginha Small Hydropower Plants

5MW Wind Project

t and Daocheng County Wang Zi Gou Hydroper Project Bundled Hydropower Project
ntal Wind Farm Project

supply for industrial steam production in Kenya

 ecovery Project

lopment Pvt. Ltd

uizhou Province China

on Project of Weifang Sunnsy Cement Corporation Limited

.5MW Wind Power Project

Andhra Pradesh

Wp Solar PV Power Generation Phase I Project

49.5MW Wind Power Project

oject by SCCPL in Tamil Nadu, India

pacity 374.57 MW at Gujarat, India

Cotton, India
5MW Project
ng Yongxing Phase One Wind Farm 49.6MW Wind Power Generation Project
Hydropower bundled project

ject in Vadodara District of Gujarat, India

ter treatment facility and renewable energy generation at Eiam E-San Renewable Co., Ltd. in Thailand
cal Co. Ltd Dai County Wind Farm Project

oject (0 Stage and 2nd Stage Hydropower station)

eration Project of Guiding Conch Panjiang Cement Company Limited (Phase I)

overy Power Generation (12MW) Project

rmal Energy

lisation Project

ojects Private Limited

nd Power Project

sion Project

W Wind Power Project

tion Plant in Campana, Argentina

Power Plant Project in KHNP

eration Project of Guiyang Conch Panjiang Cement Company Limited (Phase I)

le source: Windfarm Complex União dos Ventos, Serveng Civilsan S.A.

level Hydropower Project

production kiln in Mexico

ngjiawan Wind Farm Project
 1) Section D.3 of the submitted monitoring report states that the monitoring of the project activity does not include sampling.

PV Power Generation Project

o. 2 at Annaba, Algeria

wer Plant Project

nd in Brazilian Amazon
d Power Project

wer Generation project

ydropower Project

Hydro Project
o. 1 at Annaba, Algeria

nd Power Project
Power Project

One 49.5MW Project

cade Bundled Small Hydropower Project
opower Project
 Submission incomplete: 1: Scope: The monitoring report does not contai
m Project 22MW

er Generation Project
scade Bundled Small Hydropower Project

Power Generation Project

wei Xiangshan Phase III Wind-farm Project

t in Luoyang, Henan Province

n Luoyang, Henan Province

Submission incomplete: The registered monitoring plan as contained in P

n Rajasthan, India by M/s. Gangadhar Narsingdas Agrawal Group
ase I 49.5MW Windfarm Project
arm Project

gas by Lanco Kondapalli Power Private Limited

ermal Project

gation Systems (MIS) in cultivation of Banana Crop in Jalgaon, Dhule Nadurbar and Nashik districts, Maharastra State, India

el Hydropower Project

Power Project

sian Fabricx Private Limited

Phase I 49.5 MW Wind Power Project
wer Bundled Project
n CO., Ltd. Geermu 10MW Grid-connected Photovoltaic Power Generation
SubmissionProject
incomplete: 1: Paragraphs 303(a) and 304(a) of VVS-PA: The

gshuigou Bundled Hydropower Project

caúbas CDM Project

roducts Limited

d Power Project

ulunbeier City

Dindugal, Tamil Nadu

d Farm Project
tilization for Electricity Generation at Saremas 1 Palm Oil Mill, Sarawak, Malaysia

Submission incomplete: 1: The PP is requested to include, in Section C of

gda, Madhya Pradesh, India.

in Tongling Shangfeng Cement Co., Ltd. (Phase II)

oject Activity

haranka in Gujarat

r Investment Corporation Fanjiazhai 49.5MW Project

eration Project of Zongyang Conch Cement Company Limited

ovoltaic Technology - Dahanu Solar Power Pvt. Ltd.

Wind Farm Project

td Biogas Recovery and Utilization Project, Sanhe City, Hebei Province

water Treatment of Tangshan Sanyou Group Dongguang Pulp Co., Ltd.

Submission incomplete: The Verification Report states that the on-site ve

le, Inner Mongolia, P.R. China

V Power Generation Project

eration Project of Fenyi Conch Cement Company Limited

at Ecobio Carbon – Swine Culture Nº 1

Phase Project

Submission incomplete: The para 342 of VVS for PA version 2 provides th

 ower Project
ale Wind Turbine Shifan Wind Farm Project
Submission incomplete: The DOE is requested to clarify how it verified th

5MW Wind Power Project

ery to Power Project

shtra Vidhyut Nigam Limited

tilization Project in Palong, Malaysia

rnaces Waste Energy Utilization for Power Generation Project (Phase One)

eration Project of Shuangfeng Conch Cement Company Limited

r Investment Corporation Liujiashan 49.5MW Project

wer Generation Project

nterprises in Madhya Pradesh

ctromech Pvt. Ltd

Tianshan Electric Power Co., Ltd
indfarm Project Submission incomplete: 1: Scope: The verification report does not state t

farm Project

ject in KOWEPO

r Generation Project

mposting Facility at Madurai, India

Submission incomplete: 1: Scope: The verification and certification repor

MW Wind Power Project

ower Project

Private Limited, Tamilnadu

MW Wind Power Project

in 10 sub divisions of Jaipur City Circle of JVVNL, Rajasthan, Rajasthan, India
Submission incomplete: The DOE is requested to clarify how it has comp

rocess Heat Recovery

dong Bundled Small Hydropower Project
g City Liangshan Prefecture

EEP) in EDDI Bareilly, EDDII Bareilly, EDDI Badaun & EDD II Badaun Divisions, Bareilly Zone, Uttar Pradesh, India

arm Project
Bengbu Tushan Thermoelectricity Co., Ltd.

Guangdong Province, China

anxi Province

Phase I 49.5MW Project

Farm Project

eration project in Shandong Jikuang Morningsun Thermal Power Co., Ltd

I Wind Power Project

from surplus heat utilization of sodium sulfide furnace of Xiyu mining chemical industry

eration Project of Shimen Conch Cement Company Limited

wer Project

er and Heat Retrofit Project

Generation in Tamilnadu
hihua Panmei Combined Coking Co., Ltd

River 2# Hydropower Project Bundled Project

Lake Phase - I

an City Jufeng Biochemistry Science and Technology Co., Ltd.

d Power Project

cated at Manur and Vakaikulam, Tirunelveli district, Tamilnadu, India

ng Angli 49.5 MW Project

Cogeneration Project (TOS-2RIOS)

ndia) Limited in Maharashtra, India

urbine wind farm project

ma Palm Oil Mill, Pasaman Barat, Padang, West Sumatra, Indonesia

alm Oil Mill at Sorek, Riau, Sumatra, Indonesia.

dropower Station Bundled Project

tion Project

Submission incomplete: As per page 49 of PDD, the annual coal consump

y in Bangladesh (Bundle-2)
bine wind farm project
aic power generation Project

bhavlaxmi Clean Energy in Madhya Pradesh and Tamil Nadu, India

wit Mekar Palm Oil Mill, Kalimantan Tengah,Indonesia
MW Wind Power Project
ower Project

arm Project

y to power project

W Wind Farm Project

5MW Wind Power Project

a Sawit Palm Oil Mill, Kalimantan Tengah,

ower Generation Project

W Wind Power Project

Power Generation Project

ower plant at Jegurupadu, India

ict of Gujarat

d farm Project

hase 49.5MW Project

ng Gaole 49.5MW Wind Farm Phase I Submission incomplete: The DOE shall further explain how it has validate

W Power Generation Project in Guangxi Liuzhou Iron and Steel (Group) Company
49.5MW Wind Power Project
Project Activity.

Power Project

Submission incomplete: 1: Scope: The validation opinion report does not

n for Power Generation Project

wer Project
wer Station Project

Farm Project

overy Project

1) The DOE is requested to justify how the monitoringSubmission

has been carried
incomplete:
out in 1:
accordance
Scope: The
with
verification
the monitoring
and certification
plan or therepor
tem

oup Palm Oil Mill at PT. Berkat Sawit Sejati, Musi Banyuasin, Palembang, South Sumatra, Indonesia.

Submission incomplete: Scope: As per paragraph 357 (b) of the VVS-PA (

e Private Limited

at Katol and Bareilly, India

/s. SHALIVAHANA GREEN ENERGY LIMITED

nt in Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam Project

uizhou Province, China

Biogas Utilization Project

ed Hydropower Project

id plant #5 of Hu-Chems Fine Chemical Corp.“

a 10MW Grid-connected Photovoltaic Power Project

d Power Project
hanburi and Nakhonpatom Provinces, Thailand

of Qinghai Province, China Submission incomplete: 1: The DOE is requested to explain how the oper

ate of Rajasthan.
eration Project

5 MW Wind Power Project

Madhya Pradesh

ang, Indonesia

t Jaora-MP & Tenkasi-TN

neration Project

ject in Anqing City, Anhui Province

Submission incomplete: 1: Scope: The revised PDD does not contain a de
ation Bundling Project

Wind Farm Project

t in Sichuan Province Submission incomplete: The DOE shall explain how it has verified that th

Project in Vietnam
eration Project Submission incomplete: 1: Scope: The monitoring report does not contai
zi Wind Farm 49.5MW Project

in Rajasthan, India
Ltd. Pune Maharashtra, India

y M/s Biotech Vision Care Pvt.Ltd. & Dr. Arun Mehra in Tamilnadu, India

nd Farm Project

ect (JUN1115)
 opower Project

r Project Phase I

Submission incomplete: 1: The registered PDD (page 3 & page10) states

heating and power (CCHP) systems in DLF Silokhera in Gurgaon, India

Submission incomplete: 1: VVS-PA Para 258 and Para 360: For Akal site, M

mer Pvt. Limited, Dist-Baroda, (Gujarat), India

Wind Power Project

Consultancy Pvt. Ltd

izhou Province

d Farm Project
Submission incomplete: The DOE stated that the site visit for this project

Collection and Power Generation Project in Jiaonan City, P.R. China

d Power Project
d Farm Project
IN THE CARIBBEAN SAVANNAH OF COLOMBIA

nd Farm Project

ind Farm Project

mall Hydropower Project
Submission incomplete: Scope: The validation report does not contain in

ase 49.5MW Project

e 49.5MW Project

generation, in Kutch, Gujarat

Submission incomplete: 1: The monitoring plan requires parameter of Fla

ower Station Project

shui) Wind Farm Project

u) Wind Farm Project

alpani at Ratan Ka Bas (RKB), Rajasthan

d Farm Project

W Wind power Project

CDM Project
g Mingsheng Paper Co., Ltd.

oject at Jaisalmer, Rajasthan 2010

d Utilization Project

Photovoltaic Power Project

n project at Dhule, Maharashtra

Submission incomplete:

pment Co.,Ltd. Lianbu Hydroelectric Project

r Project Phase II
W Wind Power Project

arm Project

neration for Power Generation Project

azhanchang 49.5MW Wind Power Project

MW CDM Project Submission incomplete: 1: The DOE raised CAR 4 due to missing invoices

rivate Limited

ting at Vietstar municipal solid waste treatment facility

covery Project
kou City Haishan Paper Industry Co., Ltd.

l Development in Can Tho City

eneration project

nd Farm Project

roject at San Pedro Cement Plant

10MW Biomass (Rice Husk) Power Plant Project

ration Project

EEP) in EDDI Raibareili, EDDII Raibareili Divisions, Lucknow Zone, Uttar Pradesh, India
bal Ispat Koksna Industrija d.o.o. Lukavac (“Gikil”), Bosnia.
Farm Project

uram by M/s Surana Industries Limited

W Wind Power Project

MW Wind Power Project

ency initiatives at brick manufacturing plant in Golan, Gujarat, India
rmal Energy

ugar mills in Fazilka, Punjab, India

ugar mills in Morinda, Punjab, India

n Tamil Nadu, India

Pradesh, India
haura, Punjab, India.

MW Wind Power Project

dfarms Santa Clara I, Santa Clara II, Santa Clara III, Santa Clara IV, Santa Clara V, Santa Clara VI and Eurus VI
 S Energy Limited
cale Hydropower Project
d in Tamil Nadu

e (MSW) Power Generation Project

RY, CAPTURE AND FLARING OF METHANE FROM MANURE TREATMENT

te Resources from the Waste Water Treatment Facilities in Ningbo Wanlong Edible Alcohol Co., Ltd.
ase II Project

t Tirunelveli District, Tamil Nadu, India

MW Wind Power Project

Submission incomplete: Scope: The verification report does not state tha
 ropower Station Project

Project of Jilin Province

mall-scale Hydro Power Bundled Project

nd Farm Project Submission incomplete:

c Power Generation Project

pment Co., Ltd. Luogu Hydroelectric Project

by EMCO Limited
Utilization Project

Hydropower Project

I Hydropower Project Submission incomplete: Scope: The monitoring report does not contain t

uan Province

5 MW Wind Power Project

49.5MW Wind Power Project

Project”, Chamba district, Himachal Pradesh by M/s Jala Shakti Limited (JSL).

nd Farm Project

arm Project
wan Hydropower Plant Bundled Hydropower Project
U.F. at Rajasthan, India

Shaanxi Province

Submission incomplete:

t in Gujarat, India
um District of Karnataka State, India

aur Mercantile Pvt. Ltd.

cade Bundled Hydropower Project of China

 ted Solar PV Power Generation Project
Recovery Project
e I 49.5MW Project

ugar mills in Nakodar, Punjab, India

wer Project

gzi Wind Farm 49.5MW Project

d Farm Project

Dechang County Sichuan Province

ower Project

tion CMM Utilization Project

tion Project by Tamilnadu Newsprints and Papers Limited”

Kangra District of Himachal Pradesh, India

ect, Vietnam

s Project Activity

wer Generation (4.5MW) in Zhejiang Yunshi Cement Co., Ltd. of Zhaoshan Xinxing Group (ZSYS)
er Bundle Project Submission incomplete: 1: Scope: The monitoring report does not contai
Wind Power Project
Wind Power Project
Submission incomplete: 1: Scope: The verification and certification repor

M Project at Jahrom Power Plant

Phase I Project
roject in Tamil Nadu, India
Phase III bundle Project

M Project at Shirvan Power Plant

M Project at Sanandaj Power Plant

ation Project

Gujarat, India
olid Waste in Accra area
i Builders Pvt. Ltd.
 u Wind Farm 49.5MW Project
Wind Farm 49.5MW Project
ong Richeast Biotechnology Co., Ltd. in Wastewater Treatment

Farm Project
Submission incomplete: Scope: The verification and certification report d

er Generation Project
opower Project
at Buayai Bio Power.
Wind Farm 49.5MW Project
er, Yunnan Province, P.R.China

andra Village, Kolar District, Karnataka, India

reen Field Joint Stock Company

Wind Farm 49.5MW Project

nergy security

Submission incomplete: 1: Scope: The verification and certification repor

ossil fuels with alternative fuels at PT Semen Tonasa

oltaic Power Plant Submission incomplete: 1: Scope: The verification report does not descri

wer Generation Project in Shanxi Province

W Wind Power Project

Nuapada & Kalahandi District Orissa, India

Tamil Nadu
opment Co., Ltd.

49.5 MW Wind Power Project

em in the gas distribution networks in Khorezm region and the Republic of Karakalpakstan

Submission incomplete: Scope: The verification and certification report d

energy generation project at Chanderiya, Rajasthan

on Initiative Kibaranyeki Small Scale A/R Project
ation from oil mill plant effluents

ro Power Project

ect of Laiwu Iron & Steel Group Corp.

e I Wind-farm Project

small hydropower project in Shaanxi Province

wer Generation Project

Enterprises at Tejuva, Rajasthan

Zaozhuang Sunnsy Cement Corporation Limited

osed boiler in Narol – Vatva Road, Ahmedabad, Gujarat, India

ectricity Generation Project

mass) Power Projects Limited

 II Wind Farm Project

Bolangir & Titilagarh Divisions,Orissa, India

ected Solar PV Power Generation Project

ate of Andhra Pradesh.

province, China
roject in Gansu Province

milnadu, India

kh Agro Industries Limited in Dhule, Maharashtra

Pipes Limited and Sri KPR Infra and Projects Limited

icity Generation Project

Submission incomplete: Scope: The verification and certification report d

Valley Agroindustry

ou Wind Farm 49.5MW Project

d Farm Project
eration Project
i, Chhattisgarh

nt by M/s Milkfood Limited in Patiala (Punjab) & Moradabad (U.P) Districts

alpani in Rajasthan
Sichuan Province
s & Eco-Power Private Limited

Package Project.

Submission incomplete: Scope: The verification report does not provide

MW Project
ethane Destruction Project

ower project
ower project

ed Solar PV Power Generation Project

Submission incomplete: Paragraph 360 of VVS-PA:The DOE is requested

V wind farm project

Power Project in Zhanjiang City, Guangdong Province

batore district, Tamil Nadu
Project in Gansu Province

wei Xiangshan Phase II Wind-farm Project

 overy Project

and Utilization in Jinxian of Jiangxi Province

Submission incomplete: 1: Scope: The monitoring report does not contai

ayu Ayurvedic Research Foundation Pvt. Ltd.

eration at Lucky Cement Limited Pezu Plant

unities in Anantapur, Andhra Pradesh
Submission incomplete: 1: Minor issue: Note that the formula in the revi

almer, Rajasthan, India

tion Networks operated by the company JP Serbiagas

l Nadu, India
wer Farm Phase II 49.5 MW Project
Wind Farm Project

hotovoltaic Power Project

Submission incomplete: 1: VVS-PA, para 360, and PS-PA, para 258: As pe

by Gangadhar Narsingdas Agrawal Group

ailla fruit processing plant, Tucuman, Argentina

milnadu by Shri Ramalinga Mills Limited

 wastewater treatment in Embaré – Lagoa da Prata, Minas Gerais, Brazil

49.5MW Wind-farm project

9.5MW Wind-farm project

49.5MW Wind-farm project Submission incomplete: Scope: The verification report does not provide

Province, Viet Nam

Wind Farm II

Andori, Khandala
MILLS PVT LTD

omass Residues in the Production of Portland Cement

Submission incomplete: 1: Scope: The monitoring report does not contai

ra District of Himachal Pradesh, India

unjab, India
ansu Province

89MW Small Hydropower Project

at Advance Biopower

a, Dist. Nagaur, Rajasthan, India

f rice mills, India

e 49.5MW Project
 Submission incomplete: Scope: The validation opinion does not contain i
andong Province

ngxiang City, Jiangxi Province, China

by Nakoda Limited

zation for Power Generation Project

o-ordinated by Tamil Nadu Spinning Mills Association (TASMA-II)

, Shaanxi Province

oject in Anqiu Sunnsy Cement Corporation Limited

a wind power project for export to the Grid.

oning Province

nd Farm Project
f Ningxia Electric Power Group Co., Ltd.
se boiler to cogenerate heat and power
wer Generation in Sichuan Tianquan Cement Co., Ltd. of Zhaoshan Xinxing Group (ZSTQ)

ngdong Province
il Technologies Ltd., India
ndustrial Complex of Luján de Cuyo Submission incomplete: With regard to the sampling: (a) The sampling p
Submission incomplete: With regard to the sampling: (a) The sampling p
Submission incomplete: Scope: The spreadsheet does not contain all par

Pradesh, India

Abi Energy Bundle 3

Submission incomplete: As per VVS para 373(e), the DOE shall determine

wer Project (Ganzhezhai Project and Yinhe Project)

Waste heat Recovery Project

f Ningxia Electric Power Group Co., Ltd.

.99MW Small Hydropower Project

Submission incomplete: Scope: The verification report does not provide
cid plant PANNA 4 of Enaex S.A.
oke Oven Gas (COG) Based Electricity Generation Plant

for Power Generation Project Submission incomplete:

energy project aggregated by Resurge Energy Private Limited

in Jaipur District Circle of JVVNL, Rajasthan, India

- Son Ha and Dong Xuan Tapioca Starch Making Plants of APFCO, Vietnam

MW Wind Power Project Submission incomplete: 1: Scope: The verification and certification repor

rol (India) Pvt. Ltd.

hase I 49.5MW Project

estruction Project
Panshan Power Plant Co., Ltd.
Power Project

BCSH) Project 1

District of Inner Mongolia

 mills by Sun-n-Sand Hotels Private Limited at Maharashtra

o., Ltd. 25 MW Semi-coke Waste Gas Power Generation Project

CSH) Project 1

China Company Limited Liaoyang Petrochemical Company

a Company Limited Liaoyang Petrochemical Company

4 MW Power Generation at Dera Ghazi Khan Plant

Submission incomplete: VVS-PA Para 373(b)As per the ER spreadsheet, f

ation in Tiruvannamalai District, India

Submission incomplete: 1: Scope: The validation report does not contain

ro Industries Ltd
er Generation Project
Province, Viet Nam

Gansu Province

eration Project of Wuhu Conch Cement Company Limited

power Project

Station Project

aic Power Project

ation Power Plant Project
ct at Merida cement plant
ct at Tepeaca cement plant
Submission incomplete: 1: The DOE verified that I-REC issued during the
ol League, Inner Mongolia
ower Project

at Tamil Nadu, India

ect, Tamil Nadu

lant at Hazira, Gujarat

arm Phase II Project

Bhanjanagar Circle, Orissa, India Submission incomplete: 1: Scope: The spreadsheet does not contain exp
ation, Trang Submission incomplete: 1: Scope: The verification report does not descri

Enterprises Pvt. Ltd.

eration Project of Chizhou Conch Cement Company Limited Submission incomplete: The DOE is required to provide a proper justifica

neration Project
Submission incomplete: 1: Scope: The spreadsheet does not contain all p
s Palm Oil Mill in Pangkalan Lesung, Riau Indonesia

dues in Boilers for Heat Generation

ity, People’s Republic of China

Submission incomplete:

Power Project
´s forestry waste
Corporation Limited

r Power Generation Project of Shandong Shiheng Special Steel 960,000t/a Coking Plant

Province, Indonesia

Submission incomplete: 1: Scope: The revised PDD does not provide deta

Mukand Limited, Ginigera, Karnataka

on Initiative Kirimara-Kithithina Small Scale A/R Project

Power Generation Project
arm Project

t in Yatai Group Harbin Cement Co., Ltd. Submission incomplete: 1: Scope: The validation report does not contain

eafood industry in Maharashtra

oject in Hebei Province

oject in Jilin City, Jilin Province, P.R.China

u Province, China
mall Hydropower Project

Wind Power Project

u, India by M/s Binaguri Tea Company Pvt. Ltd.

Palakkad District, Kerala, India

Submission incomplete: The DOE stated that if there is delayed calibratio

’s National Rental House PV power plant bundling CDM project
ewater Treatment Project

ct in Wensu County, Xinjiang Uygur Autonomous Region, China

icity Generation Project by Indian Renewable Energy Foundation

Farm Project

Submission incomplete: 1. The template of the monitoring report is no lo

le Wind Farm Submission incomplete: Scope: The validation opinion does not contain i

Power Project

aburi province, Thailand

Submission incomplete: Scope: The verification report does not list each
R Palm Oil Mill
Submission incomplete: 1: The monitoring report specifies that the accur

omarigudda, Hassan district, Karnataka, India

 rnataka, India

ect IDES20091

n a Starch Plant for Energy & Environment Conservation at Nakorn Ratchasima

Generation in Zinc-smelting Industry

Submission incomplete: 1: The paragraph 385-6 of the validation and ver
Peddapuram, A.P. by Gautami Power Limited
arm Phase I Project

Submission incomplete: 1: Scope: The revised PDD does not contain a de

er Unit Retrofit for District Heating Project
ure gas-distribution pipelines in Tashkent City and Tashkent Region
Submission incomplete: Scope: The validation opinion does not contain a
andongnan Autonomous Region, Guizhou Province, P. R. China
ization Project IDES20091
m & Kalavad, Jamnagar, Gujarat, India of Rohit Surfactants Pvt. Ltd.

in Xinjiang Uygur Autonomous Region, China

roject in Shanxi Province
eration Project

xpansion Project
the Nanjing Caprolactam production facility

taic Power Project

er Generation Project
wei Xiangshan Phase I Wind-farm Project
in SGIS Songshan Co., Ltd. Submission incomplete: 1: The equation of estimation of carbon stocks P

for power generation (23MW) in Sichuan E'sheng Cement Holding Co., Ltd.

Submission incomplete: 1: Scope: The validation report does not contain

a Manufacturing Complex of IPCL

Submission incomplete: 1: The equation of estimation of carbon stocks P

ind Power Project

Submission incomplete: Description about verification of location of sam

by M/s Nagarjuna Fertilizers and Chemicals Limited

eneration Project Submission incomplete: Scope: The monitoring report does not contain a
ment in the Gas Distribution Network UzTransgaz- Garbgaz (GGT)

ns Bundle Project

1) The DOE is requested to further substaniate how the

Submission
monitoring
incomplete:
of quantity1:ofScope:
dieselThe
combusted
verification
complies
reportwith
doesthe
not"Tool
statetot

. Allgrow ventures

Power Project

Submission incomplete: 1: Scope: The verification report does not state t

Submission incomplete: 1: Scope: The verification report does not state t

d Farm Project
eration Project of Beiliu Conch Cement Company Limited

Oil Mill at Sinpun, Surat Thani, Thailand

power Project

nner Mongolia Autonomous Region

nd Power Project
Oil Mill at Sikao, Trang, Thailand

ernative Energy (Dangshan) Limited Submission incomplete: 1: Scope: The verification and certification repor
from Ethanol wastewater treatment at PT. Indonesia Ethanol, La
roject of China

ng Alcohol Co., Ltd.

Station Project
bricx Private Limited

ation Project
atment and Biogas Recovery Project
eration Project of Anhui Digang Conch Cement Company Limited
neration Project

rama Poultries Limited

omass Fuel at Saigon Ve Wong Co., Ltd, Ho Chi Minh city, Vietnam
mited in Kullu, Himachal Pradesh
& Guizhou Province, China
as Utilization Project
Joint Stock Co. Ltd.
ation Project

r Critical Technology - Jharkhand Integrated Power Ltd.

eration Project of Xingye Conch Cement Company Limited

Submission incomplete: Scope: The verification report does not provide

at dairy farms in Mexico – I

Submission incomplete: VVS-PA, paragraph 366:The DOE has mentioned
Submission incomplete: 1: Scope: The verification and certification repor
gas by the Vemagiri Power Generation Ltd.

shtra-India by M/s Biotech Vision Care Pvt Ltd.

ct in Nilai, Malaysia

on of efficient house-hold lighting by distribution of CFL lamps at token Price in the District of Ahmedabad (India)

Mill Private Limited, Tamil Nadu, India at Villages: Keelaveeranam, Kuruchampatti, Vadi, Ayansurandi, Rajagopalaperi, District: Tirunelveli,

ydropower Station Project

neration Phase I project

er Project in Zhejiang Province

Wood Industry Co., Ltd Submission incomplete: 1: The DOE is requested to explain how it verifie
Submission incomplete: Scope: The spreadsheet does not contain all par
y Manganese Ore (India) Limited.
.3 MW Wind Power Project

o., Ltd. 60 MW Semi-coke Waste Gas for Power Generation Project

Wind Power Project

r Generation Project
ase I Project

ation Bundled Project

eration Project of Baimashan Conch Cement Company Limited

er Station Project

No.1 Plant Project

aste gas and pre-heater flue gas for power generation at a cement plant in Madhya Pradesh
’nan Minhong Bio-tech Industry Co., Ltd.
wer Generation (10MW)
1) The DOE isinrequired
Hunan Liuyang Cement
to explain how itCo.,
hasLtd. of Zhaoshan
considered that Xinxing
Submission Group (ZSLY)
the post-registration
incomplete: Scope:
changes
The verification
submitted report
along with
doesthe
notrequest
providefo

d-cycle Power Generation Project

witching Project Submission incomplete: Verification of sampling plan and its implementa

as extraction and utilization project, Quang Ngai Province, Socialist Republic of Viet Nam
managed by Enercon (India) Ltd.
ounty, Guangdong Province, China

Submission incomplete: Scope: The verification report does not provide

pment Co., Ltd. Diluo Hydroelectric Project

lization Project

on Initiative Kamae-Kipipiri Small Scale A/R Project

n a Starch Plant for Energy & Environment Conservation at Chachoengsao
Submission incomplete: 1: For each parameter, the project participants s
ye Gold Owned Beatrix Mine in South Africa
Generation Phase 1 Project
1) The DOE shall clarify how it has verified that the calculation of project emissions, in particular, converted hydrocarbon emis

Submission incomplete: 1: VVS-PA, paragraph 361(b): As stated in the ve

rakhand by Alaknanda Hydro Power Company Limited.

or Hotel Golden Emerald

ñía Argentina de Levaduras S.A.I.C. Plant Project Submission incomplete: VVS-PA Para 373(b)As per the ER spreadsheet, f

erived From Palm Oil Mill

eong Hydro Power Plant Unit 4 Project
ogeneration in integrated pulp and paper unit of ITC PSPD at Bhadrachalam
Submission incomplete: 1: Scope: The monitoring report does not contai
ensive cattle1)grazing activities
The DOE in the region
is requested of Magdalena
to explain Bajo Sethe
how it confirmed Submission
monitoring
incomplete:
plan is in line
1: The
with
DOE
theismethodology,
requested to explain
as it does
hownotit include
conclu

Yunnan Province, China

i Province, China Submission incomplete: Scope: The verification report does not contain r
 r of ceramic kiln in Mexico
Solid Waste Management Central – CTRS / BR.040
neration Project

e as feed stock in pulp and paper Kunak, Sabah production i.e. Eko Pulp and Paper Project

t in Jilin Yatai Group Mingcheng Cement Co., Ltd.

egrated Textile Park Limited

Waste Heat for Power Generation Project

ts Pvt. Ltd. at Jodha village of Jaisalmer district in Rajasthan state”

Colombian Caribbean Savannas

on Limited in Gujarat
5MW Project

t Tamilnadu, India

in Karnataka Submission incomplete: 1: Scope: The monitoring report does not contai

Sivaganga District, Tamil Nadu

ystems for Rural Rwanda (Mugonero Esepan, Rwesero, Nyagasambu)

a by REI Agro Limited

ang Uygur Autonomous Region

hanxi Province

t Co. Ltd, Vietnam

wer Generation (12MW) in Hunan Cement Co., Ltd. of Zhaoshan Xinxing Group (ZSHN)

Submission incomplete: 1: As per paragraph 258 of PS-PA (version 02.0),

i Province, the People’s Republic of China

Guizhou province

eneration Project

tation Project

Submission incomplete: Scope: The monitoring report does not contain a

wer Generation (9MW) in Changsha Pingtang Cement Co., Ltd.

Submission incomplete: As per VVS para 361 (e), the DOE shall determin

print and Papers Limited

duction Project
Submission incomplete: Scope: The verification report does not contain i

eration Project of Xuancheng Conch Cement Company Limited

Plant through retrofitting turbines in China

er of Yunnan

ty, Hunan Province

tion Project
ize Power Generation at PETROAMAZONAS Block 15 Facilities
Bundled Project
try Co., Ltd. 21 MW Semi-coke Waste Gas for Power Generation Project
 Submission incomplete: VVS-PA Para 339: As per Para 339 of VVS-PA, ve

biogas extraction and utilization project, Binh Phuoc Province, Socialist Republic of Vietnam
Wind Power Project

eration Project of Fusui Xinning Conch Cement Company Limited

d Stone Industries (Kotah) Ltd Submission incomplete: 1: The DOE shall explain how the provision of pa

vince, P.R.China

hongmou County Henan Province

1) The Emission reduction claimed for the monitoring period is 30.5 % higher than assumed in the PDD. Electricity generation i
Submission incomplete: Scope: The verification report does not provide
city Generation Project
tion by M/s Armstrong Energy Pvt. Ltd at Nashik
te gas of clinker cooler and pre-heater for power generation at a cement plant in Rajasthan

thabhai Patel & Co. (CJP) at Belwa Ranaji Village, Shergarh Taluka, Jodhpur District, Rajasthan, India

Fuel Switch Project

neration Private Limited

r Critical Technology - Coastal Andhra Power Ltd Submission incomplete: Scope: The spreadsheet does not contain all par

hua and Lanshan counties of Yongzhou City, Hunan Province

zation project

ctricity Generation in Nakhon Ratchasima, Thailand

ind Power Project

 Station Phase 1 and Phase 2
t in Hebei Province
Municipal Waste Sanitary Landfill

d Farm Phase 1
ounty of Honghe Prefecture of Yunnan Province
ation in Tangjung, South Korea
ation in Cheonan, South Korea

in Alcohol Co., Ltd.

ast Furnace Gas Utilization for Power Generation Project

Submission incomplete: The DOE is requested to explain how it verified t

e nitric acid production plant in G.F.C, Syria

ct (1.36MW)
actor at Linqing Galaxy Paper Mill
Submission incomplete: Scope: The verification report does not state tha

Project in Sichuan Province

Biomass fired boiler at Limtex Tea and Industries Ltd

ech Pvt. Ltd.

ystems for Rural Rwanda (Shyira and Fawe)

Oil Mill at Bangsawan, Surat Thani, Thailand

iln fuel usage in Indonesia

 ation project Submission incomplete: Scope: The verification report does not state tha
bilitation project
on Project in Xi’an Guowei Starch Co., Ltd
ndia by M/s Venkatalaxmi Renewable Enegy Pvt. Ltd.
wind farm project

hou City, Hunan Province, P.R.China

ter biogas extraction and utilization project, Lampung Province, Republic of Indonesia
ills and Plains of Central Region of Nepal
roject in Maharashtra, India

Submission incomplete: Scope: The verification report does not provide

nxi Province, P.R.China

Submission incomplete: The submission and the verification seem to foll

arm Phase I 49.5MW Wind Power Project

ane Utilization Project

ricts of Harbin City

Treatment, Pahang, Malaysia

d Power Project
m Phase I Project
Wind Power Project
 Submission incomplete: 1: Scope: The submitted PRC does not contain a
roving Livelihoods and Watersheds Submission incomplete: 1: The “Data ” sheet of the submitted spreadshe
ent & Methane/Biomass Energy Generation Project

angyi Petrochemical Co., Ltd., China

ifang Hongrun Petrochemical Auxiliary Co., Ltd., China

oject in Zibo Sunnsy Cement Corporation Limited

hase II addition

ovince, China
tration By Adopting Environment Friendly Technology based Agroforestry Practices

eat Power Generation Project

ssion reductions on swine production by means the installation of better waste management systems

Power Project
Alcohol Co., Ltd.

a Electric Power Corporation

men Gresik cement plant in Tuban Submission incomplete: The DOE is requested to explain how it has com

Submission incomplete: 1: Scope: The verification report does not state t

uel gas consumption at GASCO
ower Project

r Station Project Submission incomplete: As per VVS para 361 (e), the DOE shall determin

Wind Farm Project

eration Project of Xing’an Conch Cement Company Limited

r Generation Project
6.4MW Hydro Power Station Project
annu, Punjab

aster Phase One Project

ataka, India

Wensu County, Aksu Area, Xinjiang Autonomous Region

ukou) Hydropower Station

Submission incomplete: 1: The revised PDD in this submission and the re

for fuelwood production (Democratic Republic of Congo)
n Tamilnadu

vities for commercial use

Submission incomplete: 1: Scope: The revised PDD does not provide deta
hachau in Kutch, Gujarat
electric Project

ssure gas distribution networks in Ferghana Valley Submission incomplete: Scope: The monitoring report does not contain a
er plant CDM project

Oil Mill at Saikhueng, Surat Thani, Thailand

Utilization Project

anning County, Sichuan Province

opower Project
omoters & Developers

Abadi in Kumai
o, Ivory Coast
dropower Stations Bundled Project Submission incomplete: If, during the verification of a certain monitoring

Submission incomplete: 1: Scope: The monitoring report does not contai

ject in Hulin City, Heilongjiang Province Submission incomplete:

Submission incomplete: Scope: The verification report does not indicate

y generation unit at Dalkhola , West Bengal

rovince, China Submission incomplete: Scope: The verification report does not indicate

ion Reductions from Swine Manure Management System, Diamantino, MT, Brazil
arm Project Submission incomplete: Scope: The verification report does not state tha

W Bundled Hydropower Project

”by Karur Textile Park Limited Submission incomplete: Scope: The spreadsheet does not contain all par
chao Coal Electricity Chemical Industry Co., Ltd.

Oil Mill at Kanjanadij, Surat Thani, Thailand

Energy Project
30MW Semi-coke Waste Gas Power Generation Project

bleaching unit at Exodus Knitwear Pvt. Ltd

ineering Co., Ltd. Submission incomplete: Scope: The verification report does not state tha

Rake Power Limited at Ramtek, Nagpur

tewater Treatment and Methane Recovery Project

ent Limited
ndia by DLF Home Developers Limited

atni District, Madhya Pradesh.

ane Foam (PUF) Submission incomplete: Scope: This request is returned per the DOE's re

ns of Hidroelectrica La Confluencia S.A.

OME) ponds and biogas utilisation - Exportadora del Atlántico, Aguan/Honduras

Shanxi Province

Farm 1st Stage Project

tion Project

Limited, India

Project in Hezhou City, Guangxi Zhuang

nd Jangi Villages, district Kutch, Gujarat, India, implemented by M/s Terapanth Foods Limited and Kutch Salt & Allied Industries Limited.

nas Phase One Project

 Hydropower
Submission incomplete: 1: Scope: The monitoring report does not contai

Submission incomplete: Scope: The validation report does not contain a

wer Generation Project

rat by WPPL

MW Project Submission incomplete: 1: Scope: The DOE shall determine whether the
Grande Small Hydropower Plants Project Activity

s (CFLs) to households in Ecuador

se II Project
eactor for wastewater treatment at a tapioca starch factory in Ketapang, Lampung, Indonesia.
Submission incomplete: 1: The DOE is requested to address the issues be
ricity Project

1) The DOE shall clarify how it has verified that the manufacturer's
Submission incomplete:
specifications
1: Scope:
on theThe
proper
monitoring
operational
report
conditions
does notofcontai
the fl

ower Project

Submission incomplete: Scope: The verification report does not provide

ine Spinning & Weaving and Misr Beida Dyers at Kafr El Dawar
Submission incomplete: The DOE shall determine whether the calibratio

W Wind Farm Project

Submission incomplete: 1: Scope: The verification report does not list ea

ossil fuels with renewable plantation biomass and biomass resi
 Submission incomplete: Scope: The verification report does not describe

riyadarshini Sahakari Soot Girni Ltd. at Shirpur in Maharashtra

Power Generation Pvt. Ltd. Submission incomplete: Scope: The validation opinion does not provide a

Hydropower Project

Submission incomplete:
opower Project

Chagantala Wind Power Project

n for the grid at Sri Panchajanya Power Pvt. Limited in Hingoli District, Maharashtra

Heat Recovery Project

Coke Dry Quenching and Waste Heat Utilization for Power Generation Project
y Generation Project”

ies Limited at Palsodi, District-Ratlam, Madhya Pradesh

n project located at Theni district, Tamil Nadu, India

d Farm Project

TMENT WITH ON-SITE POWER PROJECT (ADSW RP3002)

Inga I and II landfill (Quito, Ecuador)

wind farm project

State of São Paulo, Brazil
TMENT WITH ON-SITE POWER PROJECT (ADSW RP2024)

rgy Generation Project in Haining City

onge iron manufacturing process of HKMPL,India

Sichuan Province

, Sichuan Province
ower Stations
gy project in Tamil Nadu, India

n Shenma Nylon Chemical Co., Ltd.

d Power Plant Project

Bargarh & Bargarh West Divisions, Orissa, India
at Tirunelveli District, Tamil Nadu, India.

TMENT WITH ON-SITE POWER PROJECT (ADSW RP 3003)

TMENT WITH ON-SITE POWER PROJECT (ADSW RP3001)

 Submission incomplete: Scope: The monitoring report does not contain a
ment in the Gas Distribution Network UzTransgaz- Zhanubgaz (Zh
ounty, Guizhou Province, China

dro Power Bundle Project

biomass in Quilpue, Chile

at Hulett Starch Pty (Ltd) Germiston Mill

ujarat, India
ct at Zapotiltic cement plant
Submission incomplete: 1: VVS-PA Para 374(b) and 365The date of calibr

on at Tres Marias Plant – Votorantim Metais CDM Project Activity

or Power Generation Project
Beach Minerals Company Private Ltd.”
uangxi Zhuang Autonomous Region

a less GHG intensive technology

rovince, P.R. China

Submission incomplete: Scope: The monitoring report does not contain e

Ltd.’s Natural Gas Power Generation Project Submission incomplete: Scope: The spreadsheet does not contain all par

d in Shimla District of Himachal Pradesh

Methane Emissions in the Charcoal Production of Grupo Queiroz Galvão, Maranhão, Brazil

Aska Division Ganjam District, Orissa, India

tation Project
 Submission incomplete: 1: Scope: The verification report does not provid
ty Generation

Project in Jiangsu Helin Cement

1) According Co., Ltd.
to paragraph 199 of the VVM (version 1.2) the monitoring plan of the CDM project activity shall comply with the

ect in Inner Mongolia Autonomous Region

eration Project of Yingde Conch Cement Company Limited

of The Korea Southern Power Corporation (1MW Hadong Photovoltaic Power + 0.39MW Busan Photovoltaic Power, Bundling Project)

Wind Power Co., Ltd. 49.3MW Wind Power Generation Project

Digapahandi Division, Ganjam District, Orissa, India
y Super Wind Project Private Ltd. Submission incomplete: 1: Scope: The monitoring report does not contai
ndustrial Complex of La Plata Project

rovince, China

1) The applied methodology (ACM0012)  requires the parameter “Net Calorific Value annual average for WECM (NCVWCM,y) ”
1) The DOE is requested to explain how it has verifiedand
the the
parameter
action taken
MMFLwas
(Methane
"Take flare
sentand
to flares)
enginebeing
gas destruction
in accordance
as basel
with

nd Power Project
 y Simran Wind Project Private Ltd.

up by India Glycols Limited at Gorakhpur, U.P.

n Ikorodu, Lagos State

Bhadrak Circle, Bhadrak District, Orissa, India

roject, Hunan, P.R. China

ydropower Station

Gujarat, India, by M/s Energy Infratech Private Limited” in Jangi village

nataka by BPEIPL
Submission incomplete: Scope: The verification report does not contain i

Submission incomplete: Scope: The revised PDD does not contain a desc
ang Province, Thailand

d Power Project
nstallation of energy efficient direct melt technology in PET film manufacturing unit at, Uttaranchal, India
s by Amir Chand Jagdish Kumar Exports Ltd.

mber 09, 2007 project

at Bannari Amman Sugars Limited, Sathyamangalam, Tamil Nadu by Bannari Amman Sugars Limited
 Submission incomplete: 1: Scope: The monitoring report does not contai

Xinjiang Uyghur Autonomous Region

e grazing land
1) The DOE is requested to explain how it has verifiedSubmission
the parameter
incomplete:
MMFL (Methane
1: Scope:measured
The verification
sent toand
enclosed
certification
flares) repor
being

Mills Ltd., Jhang, Pakistan” Submission incomplete: The DOE (CLs 01/02) has verified that the param

power generation project

Submission incomplete: The number of Certified Emission Reduction and
njir Engineers & Contractors

y as Power Project

ITRUSVIL Citric Plant in Tucumán, Argentina

rivate Limited

vince, China

ster Industries limited, Khatima, Uttarakhand, India

Submission incomplete: Scope: The verification report does not state ho
Submission incomplete:

Tongdeli Coal Chemical Industry Co., Ltd

ropower Station Project

Power Project Submission incomplete: Scope: The monitoring report does not contain a
quipment in the Gas Distribution Network UzTransgaz- Markazgaz
Submission incomplete: 1: Scope: The verification report does not provid
Quarters – Eastern Region
Quarters – Western Region
Quarters – Southern and North East Region
 Plant, China1) The DOE is required to clarify the calculation of the EF Coal, Adv, CH4 in the MR and Excel spreadsheet which is based on an
Submission incomplete: Scope: The spreadsheet does not contain all par

ower Project

Submission incomplete: Scope: The verification report does not state tha

ower Project

biomass Project

Submission incomplete: Scope: The spreadsheet does not contain all par

ct, P.R.China

Level Hydropower Station

an Shipping India Private Limited

wer Generation Project

thane Utilization Project

ane Utilization Project
iver Xiabandi Hydropower Station
Farm Project

ected Wind Farms

ujarat, India
veli District, Tamilnadu Submission incomplete:
the Northern and Western region grids of India
1) The PDD (p 33) defines the sample method as "simple
Submission
random sampling
incomplete:
method
1: Scope:
" while
Thethe
verification
DOE statesreport
that does
"The not
clustering
state t

1) The DOE shall further explain how it has verified that

Submission
the project
incomplete:
activity has1:been
Scope:
implemented
The monitoring
fully report
as the initial
does notdesign
contai
of

Project in Tongling Shangfeng Cement Co., Ltd Submission incomplete: Scope: The verification report does not provide
njunyan and Liaoli, Guizhou Province, P. R. China Submission incomplete: Scope: The monitoring report does not contain a
ma Sugihwaras Palm Oil Mill, Sumatera, Indonesia.

hase II Project

Submission incomplete: Scope: The verification report does not list each

ecovery Project Submission incomplete: 1: Scope: The monitoring report does not contai

Farm Phase I Project

hase II Project

lization Project

M/s Rayana Paper Board Industries Ltd. (RPBIL), Vill: Dhaurahra, Post: Digha, Distt: Sant Kabir Nagar- 272 175, Uttar Pradesh

rm Project in China
 Submission incomplete: Scope: The verification report does not determin

Baripada Circle, Mayurbhanj District Orissa, India

r Generation Project of Yangquan City, Shanxi Province, P.R.China

oject, China

e Gas for thermal requirements in IOCL, Guwahati Refinery

y Project in Wanzhou District

1) The DOE is requested to explain how it concluded that
Submission
there is incomplete:
no delayed calibration
The DOE shall
for thermocouples
determine whether
at thethe
exhaust
monitorin
of t

xpansion at Hazira

eration project
neration project at Tirunelveli, Tamilnadu

dropower Station Project

r-Critical Technology - Sasan Power Ltd.

dropower Station

bundling project
1) The continuously monitored data for flare exhaust gas
Submission
temperature
incomplete:
shows that
Scope:
flare
The
exhaust
verification
gas temperature
report doesisnot
 above
describe
700

High-concentrated Organic Wastewater Treatment in Hubei, China

e be flared at the Asuokpu/Umutu Marginal Field, Nigeria
Submission incomplete: 1: Scope: The monitoring report does not contai

r Project in Guizhou Province

L at Raigarh

nt of Deepak Fertilisers & Petrochemicals Corporation Ltd. (“Deepak”), India

ng Plant at Delhi

1) Regarding the calculation of baseline emission for the electricity consumed in the absence of the project activity, the DOE h
1) The DOE is requested to clarify how it verified that Submission
the monitoring
incomplete:
is in accordance
Scope: The
to the
monitoring
Registered
report
Monitoring
does not
Plan
contain
and wa

er (BCSH) Project 1

on in Mangal Textile Mills (I) Pvt. Ltd.

anxi Province (Phase I)

Submission incomplete: Issue: This IRC is returned per DOE's request to c

unty, Yunnan Province

eration Project of Zhongguochang Conch Cement Company Limited

Papers Limited

itu Aeration
y, Sichuan Province, China

Xinjiang Uygur Autonomous Region, China

ect in Gyeonggi-do, Republic of Korea
nd Power Project

Project at Ningxia Saima Industry Co., Ltd.

 Submission incomplete: VVS-PA Para 373(b)As per the ER spreadsheet, f

Submission incomplete: Scope: The verification report does not state ho

, Guizhou Province, China

ngxi Zhuang Autonomous Region, China

PV Power Plants bundling Project Submission incomplete: 1: Scope: The verification report does not state t

eration Project of Hunan Conch Cement Company Limited

ower Project

ct Nakhon Pathom
g City Hainan Province, China
ne 6*2MW Coke Oven Gas Cogeneration Project

Submission incomplete: Scope: The verification and certification report d

Submission incomplete: 1: Scope: The monitoring report does not contai

EEP) in Cess Divisions of L.E.S.A. Lucknow Zone, Uttar Pradesh, India

eel in the State of Gujarat

R Palm Oil Mill

atel & Co. (CJP) at Sinnar, Maharashtra
Submission incomplete: Issue: The DOE is requested to submit the follow
1) The DOE has verified that the calibration of the sludge
Submission
weighbridge
incomplete:
complies
1: with
Scope:
theThe
monitoring
revised PDD
plan,
does
considering
not contain
thatacal
de

ration Project (TS46 Project)

 Submission incomplete: 1: Scope: The verification and certification repor
er Generation Project

1) Kitchen test was conducted to 10 households during

Submission
January 2019
incomplete:
to assess1:the
Asproportion
per the monitoring
of fuelwood
report,
useda Kitchen
for eachtest
of thw

the State of Gujarat

opower Project in Gansu Province, China

n at Tirunelveli District, Tamil Nadu

, Karnataka State, India. Submission incomplete: 1: Scope: The verification report does not provid

Submission incomplete: As discussed and agreed in the morning, the req

r Station Project
Submission incomplete: Scope: The revised PDD does not provide details

ataka, India

tion systems at industrial facilities in Gujarat by Gujarat Gas Company Limited (GGCL), India.
Submission incomplete: Scope: The monitoring report does not contain t
on Project at Bestway Cement Limited, Chakwal, Pakistan

amilnadu, India Submission incomplete: Scope: The verification report does not list each
anja Paraiso

t Jodhpur, Rajasthan
r (BCSH) Project 1

ery as Power Project

Submission incomplete: 1: Issue: the Monitoring Report contains blank p

ndling CDM Project

ed Cycle Power Plant Project

Power Project (II)

Submission incomplete: Scope: The spreadsheet does not contain the fo

es for Industrial Use in Brazil

Submission incomplete: The measurement frequency for CODinflow,l,y,

Submission incomplete: 1: VVS-PA Para 365: As per the ER spreadsheet,

heries Limited Submission incomplete: Scope: The verification report does not provide

The methodology (page 16 of ACM0002, version 09) requires that “electricity supplied by the project activity to the grid ” shall

Heat Power Generation Project

 Submission incomplete: 1: Scope: The monitoring report does not contai
sions in LCD Manufacturing Operations in the Republic of Korea (
Submission incomplete: Scope: The spreadsheet does not contain explan

Submission incomplete: 1: Scope: The monitoring report does not contai

Submission incomplete: 1: Scope: The spreadsheet does not contain exp

Submission incomplete: 1: Scope: The monitoring report does not contai

Submission incomplete: 1: The DOE has validated a temporary deviation

Submission incomplete: 1: Scope: The verification report does not indica

Power Project

Farm Project

Submission incomplete: Scope: The spreadsheet does not contain the fo

Qinghai Province, the People’s Republic of China

Utilization Calcium Carbide for Cement Clinker Project

wer Project

ower Project in Guizhou Province, China

ounty Fujian Province, China

Hydropower Project

EEP) in Circles I & II of Varanasi, Zone, Uttar Pradesh, India

Station Project
n Sugars Limited (NDSL)

uminium (PT. INALUM) Kuala Tanjung

Submission incomplete: The DOE shall determine whether the monitorin
Submission incomplete: 1: Scope: The monitoring report does not contai
ase wind farm project
Submission incomplete: 1: For each monitoring period, the DOE shall rep
) distribution project

d Level Hydropower Station

ing Mycorrhizal Inoculation in Chile

Submission incomplete: 1: Scope: The verification report does not indica

nglexi Hydropower Station

Wind Farm Project

Power Project
 on from wind energy project by Chennai Petroleum Corporation Limited.
Submission incomplete: Scope: The monitoring report does not contain t

r Bundle Project

Guangdong Province

el Hydropower Station Submission incomplete: The monitoring plan requires daily monitoring a

su Province

warikesh Sugar Industries Limited (DSIL)

trict, Maharashtra, India

gh efficiency power generation Submission incomplete: Scope: The verification and certification report d

Submission incomplete: Scope: The monitoring report does not contain a

Submission incomplete: 1: Scope: The validation opinion does not contai

Submission incomplete: Scope: The verification report does not state tha
Submission incomplete: 1: Issue: With regard to the sample size of the p
, an Environmental and Productive Alternative for the City and th
ower Project

Submission incomplete: The DOE (p 10) states that "Latitude and longitu

mbined cycle at Guaracachi power station, Santa Cruz, Bolivia

ind Farm Project
 The PPD in Page 33, states that “A connection with identical ammeters to the grid shown in Figure 6 will be built as backup. Th

ration Project, Thailand (KK6 Project)

Submission incomplete: 1: Scope: The monitoring report does not contai

of Deepak Fertilisers & Petrochemicals Corporation Ltd. (“Deepak
ach Minerals1)Company Privateplan
The monitoring Limited in India.
of the registered PDD does notSubmission
include theincomplete:
monitoring Scope:
of the parameter
The verification
FCdiesel
report
(Quantity
does not
of determin
diesel fir

y, Chongqing City, China

as Power Project

barga District, Karnataka

Waste in Lahore

ject in Zhaoping County, Guangxi Zhuang Autonomous Region, China

for Power Generation Project

bic Treatment – Barra do Garças Unit

Submission incomplete: 1: Scope: The monitoring report does not contai

Submission incomplete: VVS-PA Para 373(b)As per the ER spreadsheet, f

n Uttaranchal, India

milnadu by ITC Limited

 Submission incomplete: 1: Scope: The verification report does not state t
ction of hydraulic lime for the construction industry through the a

County Simao District Yunnan Province, China

Submission incomplete: Scope: The monitoring report does not contain a

Xinjiang, China

Ltd., Shanghai, P. R. China.

d Power Project

Submission incomplete: Scope: The DOE shall determine whether the mo

Submission incomplete: 1: Scope: The monitoring report does not contai

ONPI nitric acid plant in Bacong, the Philippines

ujarat in India

bic Treatment – Vilhena Unit

enan County of Qinghai Province, China
fermentation plant at Ingenio Providencia

overy and Energy Production Project

Submission incomplete: 1: Scope: The verification report does not descri

 Submission incomplete: The DOE shall list each parameter required by th

er biogas extraction and utilization project, Lampung Province, Republic of Indonesia

uel Switch Project
on from biomass (EFB) Honduras

eatment, Jambi, Indonesia Submission incomplete: 1: For each monitoring period, the actual operati

Submission incomplete: Scope: The verification report does not provide

nd Power Project

Wind Farm Project

ration Project, Thailand
1) The (TS5 the
DOE used Project)
accumulated operating hours data
Submission
(310 solarincomplete:
cookers sample)
Scope:inThe
order
monitoring
to determine
report
thedoes
number
not contain
of on-sita

ects for a grid system at Sri Sai Krishna Hydro Energies Private Limited in Kangra District, Himachal Pradesh.
t (Malana – II HEP)” at Kullu district of Himachal Pradesh State, India, by M/s Everest Power Private Limited
tion Project, Thailand (TL5&6 Project)
Wind Farm Project

Agro Industries Ltd.

dropower Project
cheme, Malaysia

ct in Gansu Province, China

m smelter at Hindalco, Hirakud India

acity wind mills by Mission

1) The Biofuels India Private
MR calculates baseline Limited
emissions (MBIPL),
according to in
theSangli
COD District, Maharashtra,
values removed by theIndia
treatment system. However, the calcula

ate of Tamil Nadu

ation Project in Hunan Province
ydropower Station
gram (TIST), Tamil Nadu, India
 azipur, India

eat Recovery Project Submission incomplete: 1: Scope: The monitoring report does not contai

xia Ningdong Yangjiayao

sion Sponge Iron Private Ltd, West Bengal, India

ônia Ltda - Small Hydropower Plants

Submission incomplete: Scope: The spreadsheet does not contain all par

Gansu Province, China

ang County Hebei Province
wer Station Project
er Station Project

ang County Hebei Province Submission incomplete: Scope: The verification report does not determin
tion project, Gujarat – India

nnan Province, China

ation Project, Yen Bai Province, Vietnam

ation Project, Quang Tri Province, Vietnam

on Project, Nghe An Province, Vietnam Submission incomplete: Scope: The verification report does not state tha
on Project, Nghe An Province, Vietnam
sewage sludge and energy generation in Shaoxing City, People’s Republic of China
ation Project,
TheLao CaiisProvince,
DOE requestedVietnam
to clarify how it verified that the methane content of biogas is monitored as required by the applied me

Project in Jiangxi Province

dro Power Station

Shanwanzi Wind Power Project

e heat Recovery Project

er biogas extraction and utilization project, Sakaeo Province, Kingdom of Thailand

at Tirunelveli District, Tamilnadu, India by Kallam Agro Products and Oils Private Limited

rm Concession Project
y as Power Project

gqing City, P.R. China

Hydropower Project Submission incomplete: 1: The DOE shall determine whether there are p

Madurai District, Tamil Nadu, India

ower Station
ocess Air Compressor of Ammonia plant at Indo Gulf Fertilisers, (A unit of Aditya Birla Nuvo Limited) Jagdishpur.

ower Generation Project

Power Generation Project
ery and Utilization Project Submission incomplete: Scope: The monitoring report does not contain i

tion Project
V plant of GSFC Ltd, Vadodara, India.
ndfill site, Mexico Submission incomplete: 1: Scope: The verification report does not conta
a Chemicals & Fertilizers Limited, India
Submission incomplete:
ower plants project
eatment, Riau Province, Indonesia
Chi Minh City
Treatment, Pahang and Negeri Sembila, Malaysia Submission incomplete: 1: Scope: The validation opinion does not contai
d Waste Heat Utilization for Power Generation Project
utilization for electricity generation project
Submission incomplete: 1: Scope: The monitoring report does not contai

ropower Station
1) According to the applied methodology, para 34, theSubmission
project emissions
incomplete:
and leakage
1: Scope:
must
Thebe
monitoring
deductedreport
from the
does
emission
not contai
red
Submission incomplete: 1: Scope: The spreadsheet does not contain the
tion Project (S&N project)
structure Pvt Ltd

Chemicals & Fertilizers Limited, India

Ambe Associates at Brahmanvel, Dist. Dhule (Maharashtra), India
very and Utilization for Power Generation Project Submission incomplete: Scope: The verification report does not provide

ovince, China
ment Waste heat Recovery Project
equestration project in José Ignacio Távara´s dry forest, Piura, Peru”
in Northwest Sichuan, China
Treatment, Pahang, Malaysia

nt Waste Heat Recovery Project

atment, Sumatera Utara, Indonesia
It has been noted that on several occasions during the monitoring period, the data provided shows that even when there is no

eatment, Aceh, Indonesia

ct AMA07-W-05,
1) ThePahang,
DOE hasMalaysia
verified that for the monitoring period from March 2010 to January 2011 (11 months) the volume of FFB (fresh

ct AMA07-W-07, Kedah, Malaysia

atment, Sumatera Utara, Indonesia
eatment, Sabah, Malaysia
eatment, Pahang, Malaysia
eatment, Pahang, Malaysia
eatment, Johor, Malaysia Submission incomplete: 1: Scope: The monitoring report does not contai
eatment, West Sumatera, Indonesia Submission incomplete: Scope: The DOE shall determine whether a com
atment, Sumatera Utara, Indonesia
ct AIN07-W-05, Sumatera Utara, Indonesia Submission incomplete: Scope: The spreadsheet does not contain the fo
eatment, Johor, Malaysia
eneration Project Submission incomplete: The DOE shall determine whether there is a tem
tilization Project

ane Foam (PUF) manufacturing by Acme TelePower Limited (ATPL)

Wind Farm project

Submission incomplete: Scope: The verification report does not provide

ity Generation Project” by KRBL Ltd., District Dhule, Maharashtra, India

ration Project

Submission incomplete: Scope: The monitoring report does not contain t

ty Generation in Suratthani, Thailand
ct for a Grid connected system, Tamil Nadu, India

e Gas for process furnace and other heating applications

t Indonesia, Cilegon
Submission incomplete: 1: Scope: The monitoring report does not contai
Nitrous Oxide Abatement Project Submission incomplete: 1: The DOE is requested to address the issues re
in the Northern Areas and Chitral (NAC), Pakistan
hane Power Generation Project

adesh, India Submission incomplete: 1: Scope: The verification report does not provid
Cement, Trincomalee
Submission incomplete: 1: Scope: The spreadsheet does not contain all p

ruong Thinh starch processing plant in Tay Ninh, Vietnam.

iet Ma starch processing plant in Tay Ninh,Vietnam
Foam (PUF) manufacturing by LIL Submission incomplete: If, during the verification of a certain monitoring

Krabi Province, Thailand

Submission incomplete: Scope: The verification report does not provide

Rajnandgaon Circle, Chhattisgarh , India
1) The revised monitoring plan (p 37) submitted in theSubmission
request forincomplete:
issuance defines
The DOE
thathas
theverified
efficiency
theofnumber
the SAVE80
of SAVE80
system
syst
fo

ansu Province, China

ffluent (POME) ponds and biogas flaring / utilisation

gy Pvt. Ltd. at Matrewadi & Varekrwadi, Satara district in Maharashtra
nt Waste Heat Recovery Project
heat using Heat Re-claimers at Emirates CMS Power
Submission incomplete: 1: VVS-PA, para 355: As per the PDD and section

h District, Gujarat

er biogas extraction and utilization project, Lampung Province, Republic of Indonesia

ect (Phase I)

aper manufacturing unit of Sree Sakthi Paper Mills Ltd., Kerala

W Cement Waste heat Recovery Project

fill in Mendoza, Argentina

1) The DOE is requested to further explain how it has Submission
verified thatincomplete:
the flare hasScope:
been adecquately
The verification
operating
report with
does temperature
not state ho

Submission incomplete: Scope: The verification report does not state tha
works of ONGC Submission incomplete: 1: Scope: The spreadsheet does not contain the

quipment in the KazTransgaz-Tbilisi Gas Distribution System- Tbilisi, Georgia

 1. The DOE is requested to clarify how it verified that the monitoring plan and the monitoring are in accordance with the appr

Aerobic System

Submission incomplete: 1: Scope: The spreadsheet does not contain exp

Submission incomplete: 1: The monitoring report (page 5) indicates that

hane in the existing sludge treatment system of the Cañaveralej

n by RSMML
ower Generation Project
1) According to the registered PDD, the expected electricity
Submission
generated
incomplete:
during aScope:
year isThe
2,675,400.
monitoring
Thereport
actualdoes
electricity
not contain
generaa

ic grid by the auto-generation of renewable energy in the Cañaveralejo Wastewater Treatment Plant of EMCALI in Cali, Colombia

Tapioca Processing Plant at P.V.D. International Company Limited,Submission

Thailand incomplete: 1: The DOE shall determine whether the calcula
Submission incomplete: 1: Scope: The verification report does not provid

ome communities of Paraguarí Department, Paraguay

Tapioca Processing Plant at Roi Et Flour Company Limited, Thailand

With On-Site Power Project (ADSW RP2007)

Submission incomplete: 1: Scope: The monitoring report does not contai
oject, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia
Submission incomplete: Scope: The validation opinion does not contain a
Generation in Suratthani, Thailand
lant(a bundling project which consists of 7different PV power plants)
t Project in Thailand

Sanitary Landfill, Hulu Selangor in Malaysia

The DOE is required to clarify the reasons for not submitting a request for revision of the monitoring plan, as requested by the
 Submission incomplete: Scope: The verification report does not list each

Submission incomplete: 1: Scope: The monitoring report does not contai

dongnan Autonomous Region, Guizhou Province, P.R. China Submission incomplete: 1: One of the changes is that no stratification cri

ement Production Renovation Project

wer Generation (2×7MW) in Guangdong Tapai Cement Co., Ltd.

the Palm Oil Mill Effluent (POME) through the use of AVC Sludge Dewatering System at Ever-Yield Sdn. Bhd. (Palm Oil Mill)

ale hydroelectric power plants project

us Steam based Captive Power Plant
Henan Province

g Power Generation Project of Xingang Company

ujarat State, India.

ct in Longgang Group

M Photovoltaic Lighting Project

ansu Province, the People’s Republic of China

es III Small Hydro Power Plant – Small Scale CDM Project
1) NCV of biomass residues was measured semi-annually, sending the samples to a qualified third party laboratory.   However,

plant project (5MW)

Wind Farm Project

nxi Province, P.R. China

Submission incomplete: Scope: The monitoring report does not contain t

Metal & Power Limited

all Hydropower Project in Heilongjiang Province
t in Shanxi Province
Submission incomplete: 1: Scope: The verification report does not provid
l-scale Hydro Power Project
Enshi Prefecture, Hubei Province, P.R. China

The monitoring plan (p32) illustrates that “WTGs of other investor ” are connected to the outlet of the substation. However, th
uangdong Province Submission incomplete: 1: Scope: The verification report does not list ea
ed (DSLHL), Himachal Pradesh, India
Submission incomplete: Scope: The verification report does not provide

the Palm Oil1.Mill

TheEffluent
applied(POME) throughstates
methodology the use of in
that, AVC
theSludge
case ofDewatering
increase ofSystem
Submission atutilization
SeriScope:
incomplete:
capacity Ulu Langat
The Palm facilities,
of existing Oil Mill
verification Sdn.
report Bhd.
thedoes
emission
not list
reducti
each

Submission incomplete: 1: Scope: The verification report does not descri

Submission incomplete: 1: Scope: The monitoring report does not contai
Submission incomplete: 1: Scope: The verification report does not provid
tion CDM Project

vince, China Submission incomplete: 1: Scope: The monitoring report does not contai

the Palm Oil Mill Effluent (POME) through the use of AVC Sludge Dewatering System at Syarikat Peladang Dan Perusahaan Minyak Sdn. Bh

gcun Hydropower Station

the Palm Oil Mill Effluent (POME) through the use of AVC Sludge Dewatering System at Kilang Kelapa Sawit Bukit Pasir Sdn. Bhd.
as to Energy Project Submission incomplete: 1: Scope: The monitoring report does not contai

Kesikou Hydropower Station

the Palm Oil Mill Effluent (POME) through the use of AVC Sludge Dewatering System at Malmaju Bina Sdn. Bhd.

PD at Lalganj
very based Captive Power Project
ct (Phase 1)
n Geermu City of Qinghai Province,People’s Republic of China
ogeneration Plant in Chile
of Adhunik Metaliks Limited
t RIMA magnesium production
1) On page 43 of the verification report the DOE assessed
Submission
that “VAD
incomplete:
should beScope:
equal or
Thelarger
verification
than VTR,
report
but does
the monitored
not provide
da

the Palm Oil Mill Effluent (POME) through the use of AVC Sludge Dewatering System at Banting Palm Oil Mill Sdn. Bhd.
With On-Site Power Project (ADSW RP1008)
With On-Site Power Project (ADSW RP1006)
With On-Site Power Project (ADSW RP1004)

nd Farm Project

W) and energy generation in Linyi City, Shandong, China

the Palm Oil Mill Effluent (POME) through the use of AVC Sludge Dewatering System at Tong Len 2 Palm Oil Mill (Owned by QL Plantation S

With On-Site Power Project (ADSW RP1007)

tilization Project

ed system in Himachal Pradesh, India

D Composting facility at Okhla, Delhi

With On-Site Power Project (ADSW RP1005)

With On-Site Power Project (ADSW RP2008)
ms Private Ltd. in Gadag, Karnataka

ty generation project in Gujarat, India

With On-Site Power Project (ADSW RP1003)

TMENT WITH ON-SITE POWER PROJECT

Tamil Nadu) Submission incomplete: 1: Scope: The monitoring report does not contai
he Caprolactam production plant in Thailand
pak Fertilizers and Petrochemicals Corporation Limited

or Ban Dung Palm Oil Mill

h Wind Farm 49.5 MW Project

With On-Site Power Project (ADSW RP1002)

TMENT WITH ON-SITE POWER PROJECT (ADSW) RP2006
TMENT WITH ON-SITE POWER PROJECT (ADSW RP2004)
TMENT WITH ON-SITE POWER PROJECT (ADSW RP2003)

xi Province, China
Submission incomplete:

ed air demand in Mexico

ON IN THE BOLIVIAN TROPICS BY SMALLHOLDERS OF “The Federación de Comunidades Agropecuarias de Rurrenabaque (FECAR)”
ne capture and combustion
ct for a Grid connected system, Tamil Nadu , India Submission incomplete: 1: Scope: The monitoring report does not contai

ower Generation Project Submission incomplete: 1: Scope: The verification report does not indica
mmam District of Andhra Pradesh, India under ITC Social Forestry
or Haranky Palm Oil Mill Submission incomplete: Scope: The certification report does not indicate

ect (Phase 1)

or Jugra Palm Oil Mill

dhra Pradesh, India

an Energética S/A Project Activity.

nergética S/A Project Activity

n Urumqi, China

n province, China
ower Plant, China
OR METHANE CAPTURE, FOSSIL FUEL DISPLACEMENT AND COGENERATION OF RENEWABLE ENERGY

Ghazipur, Delhi

M/s Obeetee Private Limited (OPL) at Sant Ravidas Nagar district, Uttar Pradesh
the Palm Oil Mill Effluent (POME) through the use of AVC Sludge Dewatering System at Lian Hup Palm Oil Mill (Owned by Harn Len Corpor
de Noviembre Power Plant
ject, P.R.China
power generation at Visa Steel Limited

Submission incomplete: Scope: The verification and certification report d

 Submission incomplete: 1: Scope: The verification report does not provid

ment facility for a Mezcal distillery

Submission incomplete: 1: Scope: The monitoring report does not contai

lid Waste and Food Waste through Composting

ry of Indian Oil Corporation Limited

1) The DOE is required to justify the calculation of theSubmission

project emissions
incomplete:
in particular:
1: Scope:(a)The
howverification
the use of report
defaultdoes
value
not
of provid
NCV f

ong Province,
TheChina
DOE is requested to clarify how it has verified thatSubmission
the emission
incomplete:
reductionsScope:
are correctly
The verification
calculated
report
as per
does
thenot
methodolog
provide
1) According to paragraph 205 (a) of the VVM version 1.2, the DOE is required to confirm that the monitoring plan and the app

cale Hydro Power Bundle Project

Shaanxi Province, China

Submission incomplete: Scope: The verification and certification report d
Mitigation Project , Shandong Minhe Livestock Co. Ltd., Penglai, Sh
o decrease the clinker content in Shanxi Guashan Cement

Submission incomplete: Scope: The monitoring report does not contain a

ent Project (Plant 1)

Submission incomplete: Scope: The verification report does not determin

ou Province, China

n Xiangcheng County
wer Station in the reach of Supa River, Yunnan province, China
acid plant Line 2

Generation The
Project
methodology (AM0001, version 5, pages 5-6) requires
Submission
the following
incomplete:
with regard
Scope:to
The
theverification
determination
report
ofdoes
w: "The
nothistorical
provide

r Power Generation Project of report

i. The verification Wugang No. 9that
states andmonitored
10 Coke Ovens
data for QWG,SP,y and QWG,AQC,y is incomplete from 01/06/2009 to 30/11/2

Electricity Generation Project

ent Project (Plant 2)

Submission incomplete: Scope: The verification report does not state tha
rgy Generation Project in Chaiyaphum, Thailand
Tech Carbon, Tamil Nadu
ower Station

1) The DOE shall clarify how it has verified that the calculation
Submissionof baseline
incomplete:
emission
Scope:factor
The spreadsheet
was in line with
doesthe
notmethodology,
contain all par
gi

n by SRF Limited

acid plant Line 1

nergy Project (3MW Yonggwang Photovoltaic Power + 0.75MW Kori Wind Power, Bundling Project)

TMENT WITH ON-SITE POWER PROJECT (ADSW RP2001) Submission incomplete: 1: Scope: The monitoring report does not contai
Nitric Acid Plant Line4 Submission incomplete: 1: Scope: The verification report does not provid

activity at Shirala, Maharasthra

Submission incomplete: 1: Scope: The monitoring report does not contai

ur, Maharashtra

using calcium carbide residue in the raw mix Submission incomplete: 1: Scope: The monitoring report does not contai
wer Generation Project of Laiwu Iron & Steel Group Corp.
report.
reou & Costi Ltd., Cyprus
Submission incomplete: Verification Report not consistent with the Mon

1) The DOE shall clarify how it has verified that the calculation
Submissionof baseline
incomplete:
emission
Scope:factor
The verification
was in line with
report
thedoes
methodology,
not providegi

nkou Hydropower Station

Badalgama, Sri Lanka”

ect by Raus Power in India Submission incomplete: Scope: The spreadsheet does not contain all par
line #4 at ”“Navoiazot”” plant
nt Project in Linfen City Submission incomplete: Scope: The verification report does not determin

1) The DOE is requested to clarify why the monitoring of 'electricity delivered to the grid (EGmeasured,y)' is considered to be i

deshwari Industries Pvt Ltd Submission incomplete: 1: Scope: The verification and certification repor

ration Project Submission incomplete: Scope: The verification report does not provide

Submission incomplete: Scope: The verification report does not provide

g biogas reuse for thermal oil replacement and electricity generatiSubmission incomplete: Scope: The verification report does not describe
ant Project in Leshan City

Hydropower Station
ject Activity on Private Lands Affected by Shifting Sand Dunes in Sirsa, Haryana

Submission incomplete: Scope: The verification and certification report d

Karnataka State (India)

Submission incomplete: 1: Scope: The monitoring report does not contai

1) The DOE is requested to explain how it verified the Submission
calibration of
incomplete:
the following
1: Paragraphs
thermocouples
365-369
in line
of VVS-PA:(a)
with paragraphs
As per366
thea

ad Datu Palm Oil Mill, Sabah, Malaysia

the Palm Oil Mill Effluent (POME) through the use of AVC Sludge Dewatering System at Kilang Kelapa Sawit Selumpur Sdn. Bhd.

ahan Palm Oil Mill, Sabah, Malaysia

hydropower1.plant
The at
DOEBhandardara -2to
is requested (project
clarify activity) in Maharashtra
how it assessed the datastate in India by Dodson
and calculation – Lindblom
of greenhouse Hydro Power
gas emission Privateconsidering
reductions Limited (D

line #2 at “Navoiazot” plant

The DOE shall clarify how it verified that the monitoring
Submission
plan and incomplete:
project monitoring
Scope: are
Theinverification
line with the
report
applied
doesmethodology,
not provide

n Project of Dengfeng City, Henan Province

per Limitada
e V Gas Turbine by steam injection and change of drive (from steam to electricity) of Ammonia cooling water pumps at NFCL
Province, China Submission incomplete: 1: Scope: The monitoring report does not contai
 er Project Bundle

1) The DOE shall clarify how it has verified that the calculation
Submissionof baseline
incomplete:
emission
1: Scope:
factor
Thewas
monitoring
in line with
report
the methodology,
does not contai
gi

eneration Project

ation Project
Submission incomplete: 1: Scope: The monitoring report does not contai

dled Project

W Wind Power Project

1. Further clarification is required as to why the PP/DOE did not report the values of parametersrepresenting pre-mining activ
1. The DOE shall clarify how the project monitoring hasSubmission
complied with
incomplete:
the methodology
1: Scope: The
withverification
regard to the
andparameters
certification“B14
repor
”(
Submission incomplete: Scope: The verification report does not state ho
ect by using calcium carbide residue in the raw mix

ystems through various energy efficiency measures at Anil Products Limited, Ahmedabad

y Litter in Tamil Nadu

tion Project
at Tirunelveli District, Tamil Nadu
andongnan Autonomous Region, Guizhou Province, P. R. China
njunyan and Liaoli, Guizhou Province, P. R. China

uangxi Zhuang Autonomous Region, China

on Project of Jiaozuo Coal Industrial Group Co. Ltd., Jiaozuo City, Henan Province
d Power Project, India

fill in Havana and Gascon landfill in Santiago de Cuba. Bundle CDM project

uangdong Province, China

PDD/monitoring report.10: Scope: The verification report does not conta

ough biomass residue based cogeneration at Claris Lifesciences Limited

C in Karnataka

e Gas for process heating requirements at IOCL, Haldia Refinery

da. – SANTEC Resíduos landfill gas emission reduction Project Activity

Submission incomplete: 1: The validation opinion does not contain an as

the Palm Oil Mill Effluent (POME) through the use of AVC Sludge Dewatering System at Taclico Company Sdn. Bhd.
the Palm Oil Mill Effluent (POME) through the use of AVC Sludge Dewatering System at Tanjung Panjang Palm Oil Mill Sdn. Bhd.
astewater treatment in Malaysia
 Coke Dry Quenching Power Generation Project

eration Project of Tongling Conch Cement Company Limited Submission incomplete: Scope: The verification report does not list the c
eration Project of Jiande Conch Cement Company Limited
eration Project of Huaining Conch Cement Company Limited
eration Project of Digang Conch Cement Company Limited
new and renewable energy model city (Photovoltaic system + solar water heating
Submission system)Scope: The verification report does not describe
incomplete:
n from ‘G’ Blast
TheFurnace
DOE (p 10) states that “In order to account for any possible uncertainty resulting from the lower accuracy of the auxiliary

The verification report (p 102) states that "the DOE performed

Submission a visit
incomplete:
of 76 randomly
1: Scope:
selected
The monitoring
households
report
within
does
fivenot
sections
contai
1. According to the Monitoring Plan (page 33; ID PEECY),
Submission
electricity
incomplete:
consumed 1: from
Scope:
the The
grid monitoring
by the project
report
activity
doesisnot
to be
contai
mon

Hydropower Station

waste water management

Wind Farm Project

ment project

Coke Dry Quenching Power Generation Project

Submission incomplete: 1: Scope: The monitoring report does not contai

Submission incomplete: 1: In the revised PDD, (a) under section B.7.1, a d

CWTE project)
long County, Sichuan Province
 Submission incomplete: 1: Scope: The verification report does not list ea

Azad Jammu and Kashmir (AJK), Pakistan

ower Project
1) The DOE is required to explain how it verified that the
Submission
calculation
incomplete:
approachScope:
used for
Thedetermining
verificationthe
report
LFG does
flow during
not contain
 the hi

Submission incomplete: In DOE’s response, the PP states the correct equ

Province China

1) The DOE shall explain how it has verified the compliance with incomplete:
Submission EB52, Annex1:60 for the
Scope: in-house
The measurement
monitoring of not
report does the contai
param

Submission incomplete: 1: Scope: The verification report does not provid

oject at Syarikat Cahaya Muda Perak (Oil Mill) Sdn. Bhd. in Tapah,

eduction through Recovery and Utilization of Flare Gas

ngxile Wind Farm

ower Project

t in Shanxi Province
Paragraph 197 of VVM (version 01.2) requires that for each monitoring period the verifying DOE shall identify any concerns re

witch Project

ct AIN07-W-04, Sumatera Utara, Indonesia

n for the grid1.atThe

Varam Bio Energy
Verification (P) Limited
Report in Bhandara
states the District, Maharashtra
use of "inundated area of proposed project is 3.829 km2" to calculate power density, bas

Gas Power Generation Project

ent through the increase in the use of additives at Lafarge Malayan Cement Berhad (LMCB)

Submission incomplete: 1: PS-PA, paragraph 260(b): As per Paragraph 26

 ste Heat Utilization for Electricity Generation Project

WER PLANT PROJECT

1st Level Hydropower Station
chuan Province, China

n for the grid, Jalagon District, Maharashtra, India

n for the gridFurther

at ASNclarification
Power Projects
shall(P)
beLimited in Chandrapur
provided District,Maharashtra
on how the DOESubmission
has verifiedincomplete:
that: a) theScope:
projectThe
wasverification
fully implemented
report does
according
not describe
to the

MW biomass fired cogeneration plant for supply of power and steam to an industrial facility in Karnataka.
Small Hydroelectric Power Plant Project

Submission incomplete: 1. There is an inconsistency in the cross-referenc

arm Project
ne Waste Heat Recovery and Generation Project
ct in Jincheng City Shanxi Province, China

cid production for electricity generation project

aste Heat Power Generation Project

r referred to as “CristalSHP”)

ower Project
eneration Project
1. The methodology requires that CO2 “emissions resulting from combustion of fossil fuels related to the operation of the geo

“Project” or “project activity”)

ed Cycle Project
ML in Jaisalmer, India.

Submission incomplete: 1: Scope: The verification and certification repor

Submission incomplete: 1: Scope: The monitoring report does not contai

timization inThe
the DOE
CDU shall
and VDU of Digboi Refinery,, Indian Oil Corpo
clarify how it confirmed that the monitoring was conducted and baseline emissions are calculated in accordanc

ct AIN07-W-01,
The Sumatera Utara
DOE verified (North Sumatera),
(Verification Indonesia
Report, Page 8) that the monitoring plan contained in the registered PDD complies with the app

r Power Generation Project of Laiwu Iron & Steel Group Corp.

1) The PDD estimated a total electricity generation of 869.4 GWh per year. However, during the last project monitoring year (

hom Animal Husbandry, Cambodia

 – Puerto Maldonado

el Company Private Limited in District

at Bannari Amman Sugars
1) The DOE Limited, Nanjangud,
is requested Karnataka
to clarify how it determined that
Submission
the calculations
incomplete:
of emission
Scope: The
reductions
verification
under
report
the CDM
does project
not describe
activ

1) The PDD (Page 5) states that the PP will install 2 Pelton turbines with a capacity of 400 kW, however, the monitoring report

Submission incomplete: 1: Scope: The monitoring report does not contai

ower Generation Project
neration Plant using Natural Gas

Submission incomplete: 1: Scope: The spreadsheet does not contain the

by The KCP Limited (Cement Unit), India

Submission incomplete: Scope: The verification report does not provide

.5 Sungei Kadut Street 6 by Bee Joo Industries Pte Ltd, Singapore
Waste Heat Power Generation Project
Waste Heat Power Generation Project
ated Steam Recovery and Generation Project

The DOE should verify that they have taken into account F-CDM-AM-Clar_Resp_ver 01.1, available at https://cdm.unfccc.int/U
Submission incomplete: Scope: The verification report does not determin

oup Limited Company CDQ Technology-Reform Project

rovince China

of Xinjiang Tianshan Cement Co. Ltd. in Urumqi City, Xinjiang Autonomous Region, P. R. China.
al Gas Pipeline Extension, Cementos Lima, Peru.

uman Agro Industries Limited

fficient use of energy in brewery

Wind Power Project Submission incomplete: Scope: The verification report does not list each

dropower Station
and 2 MW Waste Heat Recovery system

anded to 4.9 MW)

Province China
y and coal based captive power plant at Kutch

Submission incomplete: Scope: The monitoring report does not contain a

Submission incomplete: 1: Scope: The monitoring report does not contai

Submission incomplete: Scope: The verification report does not state ho

tion in Batu Pahat.

nty, Xiangfan City, Hubei Province, P.R. China

Desa Kim Loong Palm Oil Mill, Sook, Keningau, Sabah, Malaysia

t Residues CDM Project

oject (Phase I)

Submission incomplete: The QA/QC procedures for the parameter “Tota

of Tata Chemicals Ltd., Haldia, West Bengal

n India Limited
capture and combustion from improved animal waste management system

The PP/DOE shall justify and, if appropriate, correct the calculations of leakage emissions for upstream CH4 associated with ba

1) The PDD page 25 specifies that: "Methane concentration is determined using a Bacharach Model Fyrite (or equivalent) gas a

neration Project
County, Guangdong Province
ossil fuel with alternative fuels in three cement plants of Holcim Philippines Inc.

y generation project of Anhui Huaibei Mining (Group) Cement Co. Submission

Ltd. incomplete: 1: Scope: The monitoring report does not contai

eration project

dhra Pradesh

ogeneration Plant

bined Cycle 1)
Power PlantisProject
The DOE requested to further substantiate how itSubmission
has considered:1)
incomplete:
The delay
1: Scope:
in implementation
The monitoringnot
report
to bedoes
a permanent
not contaic

umias Sugar Company Limited (MSCL)

ossil fuel with alternative fuels in the 2 cement plants of PT Holcim Indonesia Tbk

TMENT WITH ON-SITE POWER PROJECT (ADSW RP2002)

e, P.R. China1. Clarifications are required on a statement on Page 12 in the verification report “electricity transferred from outside of the p

eat Recovery Project

city Generation
r electricity generation project (1)
tricity generation project in Shaanxi Xinglong Cogeneration Co. LtdSubmission incomplete: 1: Scope: The verification report does not descri

nt through Boustead Biotherm Palmass Technology

As per the applied methodology and the monitoring plan, the parameter MMelec is required to be monitored continuously. H

untur, Andhra Pradesh.

city generation for grid supply at Mawana Sugars Limited (MSL) at Mawana in Uttar Pradesh”.

unan Province, P.R.C

GS- modification of the Furnace Draft Control System and the Auxiliary Cooling Water System
ower Project

nerated in the clean-type heat-recovery coke ovens at Shanxi Province Gaoping City Sanjia Coking Co., Ltd. in China
on for beer manufacture in place of fuel oils at AMBEV´s Branchs Agudos (SP) and Teresina (PI)

a Carbon Black Co., Egypt

n project at Taiyuan Gangyuan Coking & Chemicals Co., Ltd in China
arm Project

n project at Taiyuan City Wanguang Coal and Coking Co., Ltd in Shanxi, China

n project at Qinyuan County Mingyuan Coal and Coke Co., Ltd in Shanxi, China

Generated in the Clean-type Heat-recovery Coke Ovens at Shanxi Sinochem Wonder Industries Co. Ltd.
n project at Taiyuan Yingxian Coking & Chemicals Co., Ltd in Shanxi, China

on for the Grid at Saradambika Power Plant Private Limited at Chandrapur District,
Submission Maharashtra
incomplete: 1: Scope: The monitoring report does not contai
n Karnataka by Jindal Aluminium Ltd.
nerated in the clean-type heat-recovery coke ovens at Shanxi Qinxin Coal and Coke Co., Ltd, China

Gas Power Generation Project

The DOE is requested to clarify how it verified that the calibration frequency of the meters is in line with the monitoring plan w

n project at Lan
TheCounty
DOE is Fengda
requiredCoking andhow
to clarify Chemicals Smelting
it closed-out theCo., Ltd in
2 FARs Shanxi,
raised China
in the previous verification, related to data protection measu

Gwangyang Steelworks)
n project at Shanxi Shouyang County Boda Industries Co., Ltd in Shanxi, China
nce, P.R. China
nnan Province
vel Hydropower Stations
ADE WITH ON-SITE POWER

d mills by Gujarat JHM at Bhambarwadi, Maharashtra

eration Project of Chizhou Conch Cement Company Limited

arnataka, India
1. The data on the generation recorded from the project WECs (12 turbines) in the spreadsheet indicates that the generation i

ct AMA07-W-01, Perak, Malaysia

ject in Yunnan Province, P.R.China.

neration Project.

ery system in a steel plant in Jinan City, China (Removed no corrections submitted)
to grid at Lakshmipuram, Andhra Pradesh, India
at Bannari Amman Sugars Limited Sathyamangalam, Tamil Nadu

nnan Province

he Coke Dry Quenching (CDQ) equipment in China

zation of the waste energy (thermal and pressure) of HP steam

ter by continuous smelter

1) 1. The at Karaikal,
monitoring plan ofPondicherry
the revised PDD (page 30) states:  a) “Accuracy of the flow meters utilized exceeds 99 percent acr
1) The monitoring plan of the revised PDD (page 28) states:a) ¨Accuracy of the flow meters utilized exceeds 99 percent across
Submission incomplete: 1: Scope: The monitoring report does not contai
ado cement 1.
plant
The DOE is requested to clarify how it verified that the readings of meter M1, owned by the PP, are same as readings of gri

ved MSW management – LFG Capture, Flaring and Electricity Generation

The DOE is required to clarify how it has verified that the project activity has been implemented and operated as per registere

rovince China Submission incomplete: 1: It is not clear how the DOE verifies the calcula

in Karnataka, India content in LFG was not reported in either monitoring report or in the verification report. Furtherinformation is requi
Methane
 t of KRBL Limited
van, Jharkhand by M/s Kohinoor Steel Private Limited

ps & Sawdust in Central Java Province, Indonesia

ct in Guizhou Province, China.

Fiação e Tecidos Santo Antônio

Complex (HGPC), Hazira plant, Oil and Natural Gas Corporation (ONGC) Limited
wer Plant Project
The DOE is requested to include in the Verification Report page A-32 (item 7) the PPs response for CR1 and the audit team con

The DOE shall clarify whether and how it verified the parameter
Submission"retrofit
incomplete:
within
1: the
Scope:
project
The boundary"
monitoringother
reportthan
does
the
not
CDM
contai
pro

on at Mahalaxmi Group of Companies, Ahmedabad Submission incomplete: Scope: The monitoring report does not contain t
mbined cycle at the Central Termica Patagonia power station, Co

Briquettes at Fresenius Kabi India Private Limited, Ranjangaon (M.S.), India

g Steel Works

Project, Bijnor, UP India

Submission incomplete: Scope: The verification report does not determin

rhouse Effluents Project

 Submission incomplete: Scope: The verification report does not provide

for the grid, Gondia District, Maharashtra,India

at Rohru Tehsil, Shimla District in Himachal, India
wer Project, Tamil Nadu

Espirito Santo, Minas Gerais, and Sao Paulo, Brazil

Gerais and Sao Paulo, Brazil
gxi Province
n, Himachal Pradesh, by M/s Deepak Spinners Limited

It is noted that for site 21802, the result of Flare efficiency

Submission
test conducted
incomplete:
on 28
Scope:
July 2009
The verification
(99.84%) hasreport
beendoes
applied
not retroacti
list each

1) The DOE is required to clarify how it verified the compliance

Submission
of incomplete:
the project with
Scope:
theThe
monitoring
verification
methodology
report doesAMS-III.H
not provide
v04
1) The DOE shall further substantiate how they have confirmed
Submissionthat
incomplete:
the operation
The DOE
of the
is project
requiredactivity
to further
is in clarify
line with
howthe
para
regi2

ora, México
spray drying application at H. & R. Johnson (India) Ltd, Kunigal.
nnan Province

gsu province,
TheP.R.
DOEChina
is required to clarify how it verified and reported
Submission
the monitoring
incomplete:
of the
Scope:
parameters
The verification
TSG, PSG,report
AIFR and
doesAFR,
not in
determin
accord

ydropower Project
ora, México The project efficiency for each unit were monitored and
Submission
calculated,
incomplete:
however these
1: Scope:
values
Thewere
verification
not usedreport
and baseline
does notefficien
state t

nnan Province

ra, district Sindhudurg, India by M/s Gadre Marine Export

huahua, México

Submission incomplete: Scope: The verification report does not list each
as Power Generation Co., Ltd.’s NG Power Generation Project
ct of Zhejiang
1)Southeast Electric
The maximum Power Co.,
permissible Ltd. given by the accuracy
error, Submission
of the gas
incomplete:
flow meter
Scope:
to theThe
engine
verification
(SN 285375),
reportisdoes
1% +not
0.5%
provide
Full Sc

by installation of free flow falling film finisher evaporator and retrofit to the chemical recovery boiler in Cachar Paper Mill of Hindustan Pap
uila, México
 as capture and
1). flaring project and the verification report indicate that the total electricity generated from other turbines connected to t
The spreadsheet

ala, India” at Viyyat Power Private Limited in Taluka Devikulam, District Idukki, Kerala by M/s Viyyat Power Private Limited.
nnan Province, P.R.China
Province, China
WHR) for power generation in SDIC Hainan Cement Co., Ltd.

spray drying and vertical drying application at H.&R. Johnson (India) Limited, Dewas, Madhya Pradesh.

nak Oil Palm Mill

Grosso and Mato Grosso do Sul, Brazil

cle Power Plant Project
at Sajjan India Limited, Ankhleshwar, Gujarat
ect: Avoidance of methane production from biomass decay through composting -1

n Henglai Building Materials Co. Ltd., Yixing City, Jiangsu Province, P. R. China

as to Energy Project
The PP/DOE shall clarify:1. How the methodological requirement of metering thermal energy generated in the project activity

1. The DOE is requested to clarify how it verified that the calculation of the grid emission factor is in line with the applied meth

Wani, Yavatmal by DOE

1) The Shalivahana Projects
is required Limited
to clarify how it has verified the compliance of the determination of flare efficiency, when adopting the

ased Captive Power Project.

Badalgama, Sri Lanka”

bined Cycle Power Plant
1.Further clarification is required as to why, even if the electricity consumed in the period from 24thFebruary to 24th March 2

an Hydropower Station
as of China Coal and Coke Jiuxin Limited in Lingshi, Shanxi, P. R. China

ned Cycle Project Using Natural Gas

The Executive Board at its 55th meeting has taken note on concerns connected with possible inflation of the baseline of HFC p
Clarification is required on: 1. How the DOE verified the
Submission
determination
incomplete:
of the permitted
Scope: Theoperating
verification
conditions,
report does
andnot
CLnormal
determin
as
 Submission incomplete:

1) The PP/DOE is requested to clarify why the campaign from 20 July 2006 to 18 February 2007 was selected as baseline camp

gar , Gujarat, India

project in Beijing Submission incomplete: Scope: The verification report does not state tha
acity 219.067 MW using Natural Gas/ R-LNG as fuels at Gujarat, In

Grosso and Goias, Brazil

Submission incomplete: Scope: The verification report does not state tha
Submission incomplete: Scope: The verification report does not provide

Submission incomplete: Scope: The spreadsheet does not contain explan

sion Reduction Project Submission incomplete: 1: Scope: The monitoring report does not contai
Mining Industries Limited

f Rama Paper Mills Limited, Kiratpur, Uttar Pradesh.

Gerais, Brazil
Calibration delay/ Gas analyzer: The PP stated, and the DOE verified, that the analyzers were taken to the manufacturer for re

Gerais, Brazil Submission incomplete: Scope: The verification report does not describe
As per the monitoring report (p 18), Landtec meter serial no. GM11592 was used to take methane concentration reading on 2

Gerais, Brazil
1) The DOE shall specify if the calibration frequency ofSubmission
biogas flowincomplete:
meters andScope:
Bacharach
The verification
Fyrite gas analyzers
report does
complies
not provide
with EB

Grosso and Mato Grosso do Sul, Brazil

um pre-concentrator in urea
1. The DOE section at
is requested toIndo Gulf
clarify Fertilisers
how (Athat
it verified Unitthe
of Aditya
projectBirla
Submission Group),
activity was Jagdishpur.
incomplete: implemented
Scope: The verification
as described
report
in the
does
PDD
not
considerin
contain i

at South Asian Agro Industries Limited in Raipur District, Chattisgarh.

The DOE shall clarify how it verified : (i) That the project
Submission
activity has
incomplete:
been implemented
1: The monitoring
as per the
report
description
on pagein3the
mentions
PDD cons
ra

d at Kharagpur, West Bengal

 Paragraph 62 of the Modalities and Procedures of the CDM stipulates that a DOE may only conduct verification activities after

1. Clarification is required on 1-1) the inconsistencies of

Submission
NAP valueincomplete:
of the historic
1: Scope:
campaign
The between
spreadsheet
9,704
does
tons
not
in contain
the monito
the
The DOE is requested to clarify how it verified the calculation
Submission
of baseline
incomplete:
campaign
Scope:length
The spreadsheet
(21,035 tHNO3)
doesconsidering
not containthat
the the
fo

The DOE shall clarify how it has confirmed that the calibration of equipments is done in accordance with the monitoring plan,

CEMEX Mexico Operations.

Submission incomplete: Scope: The validation opinion does not provide a
ng rolling stock cars in metro system
plants totalling 5.15 MW for Decentralised Energy Systems India Pvt. Ltd. in Bihar
verning Province in Korea
Muyuan Swine 1)Farm in Henan Province
The registered PDD in several sections has stated that the EFB at disposal sites is stockpiled and stored above the ground le

The PP/DOE shall further explain in the monitoring report and in the verification report that how ammeters, which are primari

The project activity as described in the registered PDD is the utilisation of cotton straws for electricity generation. However, it

ent With On-Site Power Bundled Project (ADSW RP1001)

Further clarification is required on how the DOE verified

Submission
the methane
incomplete:
content1:
in Scope:
LFG as The
per the
spreadsheet
methodology
doesrequirement
not contain the
for

Submission incomplete: 1: Scope: The verification report does not state t

ural Gas Corporation (ONGC) Limited Submission incomplete: Scope: The verification report does not state tha

Although it has been verified that the concentration of methane in the extracted gas was measured in accordance with monito

ha and Nabin Submission incomplete: Scope: The verification report does not state tha

ashi Hi-Tech Bio-Power Private Limited

ada Ajit Singh Nagar District, Punjab by M/s Nahar Industrial Enterprises limited
ed air demand and supply in Malaysia Submission incomplete: 1: The registered PDD (page 23) assumes two de
waste residues at Industrial de Oleaginosas Americanas S.A. (INO

Limited Liaoyang Petrochemical Company

ossil fuel with alternative fuels like agricultural byproducts & Municipal Solid Waste (MSW) in the manufacturing of portland cement at Vik
Submission incomplete: 1: Scope: The monitoring report does not contai

hi Xingyuan Power Generation Co., Ltd. Submission incomplete: 1: The monitoring report did not indicate the for

Xinjiang of China

radesh of Ascent Hydro Projects Limited (AHPL) Submission incomplete: 1: Scope: The verification report does not confir

illage, Chitradurga district, Karnataka

with a secondary catalyst inside the ammonia oxidation reactors of the NAN1 and NAN2 nitric acid plants at Abonos Colombianos SA (“Ab
in Tamilnadu, India

ansu Province, P.R. China. Submission incomplete:

ny Pvt Ltd's (TOWMCL) integrated waste to energy project in DelhSubmission incomplete: 1: Scope: The verification report does not determ
Plantations Berhad, Jendarata Palm Oil Mill, Malaysia
Heat Utilization for Electricity Generation Project

Submission incomplete: Scope: The spreadsheet does not contain the fo

with a secondary
1) The PDD states that the two old boilers are used as anback up for the system consuming fuel oil only. However, it is noted th
catalyst inside the ammonia reactor of the No. 9
Submission incomplete: 1: Scope: The monitoring report does not contai
Davanagere district, Karnataka, India
n.Bhd (MGBG)
Submission incomplete: Scope: The DOE has not certified in writing that

1. The PP/DOE are required to clarify how it verified the calibration of the backup-meter used to measure EGGEN in case of em

ties Effluent Methane Extraction And On-site Power Generation Project in Lampung Province, Republic of Indonesia

The DOE states in the verification report (p.10) that the actual emission reduction during this monitoring period is less than th

Submission incomplete: The DOE shall report information (data and varia
 Submission incomplete: 1: Scope: The verification report does not provid
Although the DOE verified that the calibration of the energy meters is being undertaken on an annual basis, the calibration da
It was reported, on Section A.1 from the monitoring report, that Phase II of the project was implemented to supply both steam

GRSPL, India
1) There are inconsistencies with two different import figures shown on worksheets "Electricity Transmitted" and "Data&Param
1.Clarification is required on the causes of 'some inconsistency
Submissionwas
incomplete:
found in the
1: Scope:
reportedThedata
monitoring
source andsection
report does
D of
notmonito
contai
Submission incomplete: 1. It is not clear how the DOE verifies the calcula
Submission incomplete: 1: It is not clear how the DOE verifies the calcula

he nitric acid plant PANNA 3 of Enaex S.A.

chal Pradesh, India

dara Complex

The DOE is requested to clarify how it verified that emission

Submission
reductions
incomplete:
are correctly
Scope: calculated
The verification
in accordance
report does
withnot
theindicate
approv

rovince, China

tan, México 1. The DOE shall confirm on how it has verified that the same quantity of methane is supplied for the residential thermal usage
1. The DOE verified that the gauze composition of ammonia
Submission
oxidation
incomplete:
catalystScope:
in the project
The verification
campaignreport
isdifferent
does not
fromstate
the bas
tha
The DOE raised CL4 regarding the difference between the total biogas flow and the sum of the biogas sentto the boilers and to

Asbestos Limited at Lucknow

Submission incomplete: 1: Scope: The monitoring report does not contai
ricity Generation CDM Project
t, P.R.China Submission incomplete: 1: Scope: The monitoring report does not contai
Submission incomplete: Scope: The validation opinion does not contain i
ower ProjectThe DOE is requested to clarify how it verified that the project activity was implemented and operated as described in the PDD
The DOE should verify that they have taken into account F-CDM-AM-Clar_Resp_ver 01.1, available athttps://cdm.unfccc.int/U

roject at Vikash Metalis and

The DOE Power to
requested Limited
clarify how it has verified that:1. The monitoring of quantity of peanut shells used in the project activ

anzui Hydropower Plant, Xinjiang Tianfu Thermoelectric Co., Ltd.

o Grande do Sul, Brazil
la, Himachal Pradesh.
 Darjeeling district, West Bengal,India
n for the grid in Amaravathi District of Maharashtra
ethane Recovery and Electricity Generation Project
in Rajasthan by Kalani Industries
neration Project
The DOE is required to clarify how it verified the compliance of the calculation of baseline emissions with paragraph 6 of the m

Submission incomplete: 1: Scope: The monitoring report does not contai

em by Balaji Energy Pvt.Ltd. Submission incomplete: 1: Scope: The monitoring report does not contai
& Steels Limited in Champa-Janjgir District, Chattisgarh
Submission incomplete: 1: Scope: The monitoring report does not contai
ropower Project (SXGSHP)

nergy efficient plough share mixer (PSM) technology in soap manufacturing at Hindustan Lever Limited (HLL), India

Electricity Generation Project

Submission incomplete: 1: Scope: The monitoring report does not contai
ment manufacture
ves in cement production at Holcim Lanka Ltd (HLL), Sri Lanka
er Project (SNSHP)

n at Arvind Mills, Santej.

ined cycle power generation project

oduction of Plantar, Brazilshall clarify why the validated values of AFRmax,

The PP/DOE Submission
AIFRmax
incomplete:
were wrong
Scope:and
Theprovide
verification
the statistical
report doesanalysis,
not provide
as requ

1. The DOE is requested to provide justification as to Submission

how the emission
incomplete:
reductions
Scope:
areThe
theverification
most conservative
report does
and not
in line
state
with
hoV

al energy generation Submission incomplete: Scope: The verification report does not state tha
le sources at Kadavakallu, Putluru Mandal, Dist.

n for the grid in Parbhani District of Maharashtra, India

asse Based Co-generation Project, at Perambalur district, Tamil Nadu, India

scalientes, Michoacan and Queretaro, México

mass Power Project Submission incomplete: Scope: The verification report does not provide
overy Project

ovince, China
1. According to the monitoring plan the NCV is to be recorded for every type of biomass but only the monthly average for all b

n Chemical Co., Ltd

Clarification is required from the DOE as to why the Monitoring Report referring to TVEM-01 and TVEM-02 as the main export

uila and Durango, México

The comparison of the actual CERs claimed in the monitoring period with the estimate in the PDD considers that the present m
The DOE shall clarify how it has verified, as mentioned on page 10 of the verification report, that the higher value of natural g

o Leon, México
integrated Iron & Steel plant

on project by KPR Mills in Tamil Nadu

s (11/21- R01)

Usina de Açúcar Santa

1) The DOETerezinha Ltda.)
is request to clarify how it verified the operation
Submission
of theincomplete:
project activity
Scope:conformed
The verification
with the
report
registered
does not
PDDcontain
as the pi
Further clarification is required on how the DOE verified that the latest official data published by CEA and available as of Decem
mprovement in cement manufacturing at Binani Cement Limited
The DOE stated in the verification report that it verified
Submission
the calibration
incomplete:
of the power
Scope:meters.
The verification
However,report
the date
doesofnot
thecontain
calibratii

1) During the site visit to Llocee SA de CV site, the DOE identified that a new project is being built around the digester, which is
1) The monitoring plan specifies that the accuracy of the meter used for measuring methane concentration has an accuracy w

uahua, México
ngo, México
co and Puebla, México Submission incomplete: 1: The Monitoring Report does not include a line
1. The DOE shall clarify how it has verified that the registered
Submission
monitoring
incomplete:
plan Scope:
is in accordance
The verification
with the
report
methodology,
does not provide
given th

CTION PLANT IN CENTRAL INDIA

CTION PLANT
The DOE states that the frequency of the calibration of the metering equipments is as per the revised the monitoring plan. The
The DOE is requested to correct the description of type of meters, which is described as ammeter in the verification report.

rjothi GroupThe DOE is requested to clarify how it has verified andSubmission

concluded incomplete:
that the actual
1: Scope:
CERs are
Theless
monitoring
than the estimated
report doesCERs
not in
contai
the

t by up gradation of preheater in cement manufacturing

Products, Chattisgarh
kaneri Village in Tamil Nadu
Farm Project
1. The PP/DOE shall clarify how is justified the dta on flare temperature higher than 500°C and in some cases higher than 850°

in Orissa, India
 nd Farm Project
The verification report mentions that CO2 emission factor of natural gas EFCO2,f,y is fixed based on IPCC default value for the
The DOE raised FAR2 in the previous verification report which required the project participant to install a dedicated separate s

ity Generation Project” by Tamil Nadu Newsprint and Papers Limited

L GAS BY REPLACING THE DIESEL ENGINES (1.6MWE*2) WITH GAS ENGINES (1.5 MWE*2) AT KOTA, RAJASTHAN BY M/S SAMCOR GLASS LT
Submission incomplete: Scope: The verification report does not state tha
e, Maharashtra
Power Generation Project, Shanxi
1.The monitoring reportProvince, China
states that "the weight of glass bottles produced is checked at regular frequency at calibrated weighin

d Waste Management (GALFAD) Project

1. Further clarification in Bali,
is required onIndonesia
how the DOE verified: i) the moisture content of biomass used considering that the appli

In the project scenario, to achieve equivalent steel output requires much less (around half) energy as compared to baseline sc
Submission incomplete: The DOE shall determine whether the registered

deshwari Industries Pvt Ltd

micals Limited, Mithapur

Methanol Production
The DOE is requested to clarify how it verified that the clarification by the meth panel (AM_CLA_0095) on the application of lo

ni Polysacks Ltd. Dhulia District Maharashtra

Further clarification is required on how the DOE has verified 1. The actual generation as compared to the estimate in the PDD,

eat Recovery1.Power Generation

The DOE Project
shall further clarify how it verified that calculation of the methane content by periodical measurement of CO2 wou
Submission incomplete: Scope: The spreadsheet does not contain all par
ry and Utilisation for Power Generation Project of Anhui Conch Ce
1. The DOE shall clearly state the implementation status of the project in each phase, in particular, clarification shall be provid

Submission incomplete: 1: Scope: The monitoring report does not contai

he Nitric Acid Plant of the Hanwha Corporation (HWC) in Ulsan, Republic of Korea
Further clarification is required on how the DOE verified the electricity exported in May 2007 which was calculated, in accorda
Submission incomplete: The paragraph 366 of VVS for PA version 2 state
The DOE should verify that they have taken into account F-CDM-AM-Clar_Resp_ver 01.1, available athttps://cdm.unfccc.int/U
Submission incomplete: Scope: The verification report does not describe
The DOE should further clarify why the emissions fromSubmission
the electricity
incomplete:
generated
Scope:
by the
The
two
verification
generatorsinstalled
and certification
prior toreport
the prd
 ious locations in Tamil Nadu, by M/s Goyal MG Gases Private Limited
essing" in Rajasthan by M/s JK Lakshmi Cement Limited (JKLCL)
ynergy Ltd, Kotmar, Raigargh
1. The DOE in Chattisgarh,
shall clarify India combusted in the project boilers was monitored considering that the monitoring repo
how the bagasse
Submission incomplete: 1: Scope: The monitoring report does not contai
Further clarification is required on how the DOE verified
Submission
that 90%incomplete:
of default flare
Scope:
efficiency
The monitoring
in accordance
report
with
does
thenot
methodolo
contain a

Submission incomplete: VVS-PA Para 374(c)The PP/DOE shall explain the

nataka, India
t in Andhra Pradesh, India
ower station Fortuna in Panama (IPGFP)

located in Andhra Pradesh, India

i, Himachal Pradesh, India.”
ng of Ammonia Plant of Indian Farmers Fertiliser Cooperative Ltd (IFFCO) plants
ttisgarh, India.
ect at Vijayawada & Guntur, Andhra Pradesh
y Ind-Barath Energies Limited
According to paragraph 204 of the VVM (version 1.2) , the monitoring of GHG emission reduction shall be implemented in acco

Power Project
It was observed that the DOE performed a “Preliminary Verification ” prior to the first periodic verification. However, the “Prel

ctric project for a grid system", Himachal Pradesh, India

n based on peanut hull and sunflower husk
The DOE is requested to clarify how it has verified that:1. The entire quantity of biomass measured by the weigh bridge install
The monitoring report stated that 3850 was the average tonnes of cane crushing per day while this cane crushing capacity wa
Submission incomplete: 1: Scope: The monitoring report does not contai
Project at Kota Tinggi, Johor, Malaysia.
CDM Project Activity

rivate Limited (PCIPL), Vapi, India

1. The DOE verified that the stack sample for estimating the flare efficiency was carried out on 8 May 2007 which is within two

ewery In Lao PDR

1. Further clarification is required on how the DOE verified
Submission
the results
incomplete:
of weekly
1: zero
Scope:
and
The
span
monitoring
checks(QAL3)
reportand
does
whether
not contai
the
Furnace Utilisation Project
CU-II at Dahej complex of GACL

ng plant in Qian’an City, China

1) The DOE explains on page 8 of the verification report that the CLA0191 has not been taken into account in the verification.

1. The monitoring plan (annex 4 of the PDD) stated that “The waste gas input and output will also be monitored. This is becau

imited (SPML),
ThePunjab,
PP/DOEIndia.
is required to incorporate the updated calibration
Submissiondates
incomplete:
of the meters
1: Scope:
located
Theat
spreadsheet
the powerplant,
does not
as table
contain
"Meter
all p

project for a grid system Submission incomplete:

el oil to natural gas at Gangnam branch Korea District Heating Co Submission incomplete: Scope: The verification report does not indicate
m wheat straw wash at Paper manufacturing unit of Shreyans Indust
vement of clinker cooler in cement manufacturing at Rajashree cement at District Gulbarga, Karnataka India

energy efficient vacuum

1) The actualcreating
emissionsystem in theare
reductions vacuum
founddistillation
to be highercolumn of petroleum
Submission
than theincomplete:refinery
ex-ante calculation
1: Scope:
ofThe
the verification
registered CDM-PDD
report does
duenot
tostate
decret
Submission incomplete: 1: Scope: The verification report does not provid
The DOE is requested to verify the calibration frequency for the meters used for measuring power generation from the two Di

Briquettes at Pfizer Limited, Thane (M.S.), India

d Cement (PPC)
The production
fixed carbonatpercentage
Birla Plus Cement in value
and NCV Bathinda,
havePunjab, India. from SAP database of the plant. Further clarification is require
been sourced

caustic sodaThe
and sodium
DOE cyanide
is required toplant
clarifyaton
Vadodara complex
how it has of GACL
confirmed Submission
the implementation
incomplete:
of the
1: According
project activity
to the as
monitoring
per the PDD
planconsidering
in the regist
th
The registered monitoring plan requires that 'electricity meters used for monitoring will be calibratedannually and the details
The DOE should verify that they have taken into account F-CDM-AM-Clar_Resp_ver 01.1, available athttps://cdm.unfccc.int/U

ag at Cimento Mizu
nd Farm Project

me at SLS Power Industries

Further Ltd., in
clarification Chamarajanagar
is required on how District,
the DOEKarnataka
verified
Submission
that the calculation
incomplete:of1:EGy
Scope:
(defined
The verification
by themethodology
report does
as net
notquanti
state h

SLS Power Industries Ltd in Bellary District, Karnataka

f clinker cooler in cement manufacturing

n Karnataka, India
eplacing oil fired boiler for process steam and generating power for partly replacement of grid power supply to the plant at M/s Indian Ac
 Submission incomplete: Scope: The Verification Report shall list the value
roelectric power plants project(The Samchonpo Thermal Power Pl

am Power Projects in India Submission incomplete: Scope: The verification report does not provide

ng Power Plant Project Submission incomplete: Scope: The monitoring report does not contain a
ng Power Plant Project

CDM Project in Jinan Iron & Steel Works

acturing unit of Mawana Sugars Limited
Sugar Complex.

1) The DOE is requested to clarify how it verified that the "Average CO2 emission factor for transportation of biomass with t

(“Yucheng Biomass
The PDDCHP”)
(p 15) stated that “The project activity regarding
Submission
methane
incomplete:
emissions 1:
reduction
Scope: The
is limited
monitoring
to thereport
Talia site.
does” However,
not contai

I Small Hydro Power Plant - Small Scale CDM Project Submission incomplete: Scope: The verification report does not provide
The DOE is requested to clarify how it verified:1) the monitoring
Submissionofincomplete:
sludge removal
1: Scope:
countThe
as monitoring
per paragraph
report
6. (v)
does
of the
notmethod
contai

The baseline fuel oil consumption has been calculatedSubmission

on assumption
incomplete:
that the1:
same
Scope:
energy
The monitoring
input wouldreport
have been
does required
not contai
in

The DOE explains on page 20 of the verification reportSubmission

that CLA0191
incomplete:
has not been
1: Scope:
takenThe
intomonitoring
account inreport
the verification.
does not contai
CLA01
Submission incomplete: 1: Scope: The monitoring report does not contai
corera de Nicaragua, S. A. (CLNSA)
The DOE is requested to clarify:1. The reason why the data accuracy for CaCO3 is on 10 kg (0.01 ton) level, while it is stated th

BF Utilities Ltd.

1. The DOE accepted the calculated fraction of methane

Submission
in LFG during
incomplete:
the period
1: Scope:
of 12-20
TheMarch
monitoring
and 30report
Marchdoes
to April
not based
contai
1) The DOE is required to further explain how the monitoring
Submission
planincomplete:
has been in1:
accordance
Scope: Thewith
verification
the methodology
report does
AMS-II.D
not state
vert

f clinker cooler in cement manufacturing

ed cement at Votorantim Cimentos
alaysia (PHAAM, PCOM (PJ), PCOM (SA), PEDMA, MEDEM)
 The DOE shall clarify how it verified the measured values of auxiliary consumption (recorded at site 1) for the monitoring perio

alaysia (MAPREC, PRDM, PSCDDM, PAVCJM, PCM)

harashtra in India) managed by Tata Motors Ltd.
Expedito and Barra do Leão Small Hydroelectric Power Plant Project
Submission incomplete: 1: Scope: The monitoring report does not contai
ne 2 (GT 2) at co-generation plant of Hazira Gas Processing Comp

The DOE shall clarify that how it has verified the calculation
Submission
of theincomplete:
emission factor
1: Scope:
(EFy) The
for the
monitoring
two yearreport
monitoring
does not
period
contai
is

ment (Bharat) Limited (DCBL), Dalmiapuram , Tamilnadu. Submission incomplete: Scope: The revised PDD does not contain a desc
PIL- WHRB 2” CDM PROJECT ACTIVITY
The DOE is requested to clarify how it has verified the conservativeness for the discount of emission reductions during the mo
The spreadsheet of the monitoring report shows that no electricity or diesel was consumed while bricks/blocks were produce
The DOE should verify that they have taken into accountSubmission
F-CDM-AM-Clar_Resp_ver
incomplete: Scope:01.1,
The verification
available athttps://cdm.unfccc.int/U
report does not provide
Submission incomplete: Scope: The verification report does not provide
Dahej complex of GACL Submission incomplete: 1: Scope: The monitoring report does not contai
Biomass Power Project

RSIPL- WHRB(1&2)" CDM PROJECT ACTIVITY

lana Cement (Blended Cement) at Lafarge India Pvt. Ltd. - Arasmeta Cement Plant
The DOE is required to verify that the common meters at the substations measure electricity exported from WTGs belonging t

wer + 1.4MW Small Hydroelectric Power)

uce fossil fuel consumption in the Coal fired boiler system

scale hydroelectric power plants project II

y Gayatri Agro
TheIndustrial Power Limited,
DOE is requested Indiathe value of the ex-post grid emission factor used for comparing in the verification report, 921
to correct
Submission incomplete: 1: Scope: The spreadsheet does not contain exp
(PGCs), Mumbai high south (offshore platform) and using the reco
1) The PDD (page 05) states that the biogas will be used to generate electricity for the farm through two parallel 75 kW biogas

hree Nitric Acid Plants at Hu-Chems Fine Chemical Corp.

Submission incomplete: The DOE shall explain how it has verified the info

flue gases by utilizing it for preheating of combustion air of service boiler at Indo-Gulf Fertilisers (A unit of Aditya Birla Nuvo Limited), Jagdi
The DOE is requested to clarify how it verified that the project activity has been operated as per the registered PDD, consideri

arat Forge Limited

m by K.M.Power (P) Limited

ste gases from Blast furnace and Corex units at JSW Steel Limited (in JPL unit 1), at Torangallu in Karnataka, India
W Energy Limited
 in Israel through instalment of new grinding technology
Private Limited

te heat recovery boiler at the ISA Smelt furnace of the Copper Smelter, Sterlite Industries India Limited (SIIL), Tuticorin

ower Project
oir “Pedra do Cavalo” CDM Project
ama Cement Ltd (Removed no corrections submitted)

ss Power Project
Renuga Textiles Limited

ntos Cubatão

ce at Indian The
Seamless Metal
DOE shall Tubeon
clarify Limited
how it(ISMT), Jejuri,that
has verified Maharashtra
the methodological requirement of daily calculation of emission reductions, st

rgy biomass power project

aptive Power Project activity
uila, México

cruz, México
uila, Durango
1. and
The Nuevo
DOE is León, México
requested to clarify how it verified that during the monitoring period there was no diversion of steam from the A

The DOE shall clarify how it verified: 1) The specifications of equipment replaced/retrofit for the newly implemented project m
The DOE is requested to clarify how it has verified the operation of the project activity is in accordance with the description pr

s / Bagasse Based Co-generation Power Project

salmer, Rajasthan. Submission incomplete: The DOE is requested to explain how it verified t
hill and La Mercy Landfills
Submission incomplete: Scope: The verification report does not state ho
o and Michoacán, México
ajuato, Michoacán, and Querétaro, México
at Pohra (Rajasthan) in India
mall Hydroelectric Power Plants Project

Recovery of Industrial Waste Gases

São Paulo, Brazil
 Submission incomplete: Scope: The monitoring report does not contain i

or steam generation at the chemicals manufacturing plant of Lanxess India Pvt. Ltd (LIPL),

Submission incomplete: 1: Scope: The monitoring report does not contai

uila, México

unavalli by M/s GHCL Ltd

uila, México
uila, México
ajuato, México
ngo, México
uila, México
uila, Mexico
ajuato, México
The PP/DOE shall further clarify the reason for a considerably low estimation of electricity generation in the PDD in compariso
The PDD requires the calibration of the energy meter in accordance with national regulatory specifications and the previous ve
Submission incomplete: Scope: The verification report does not contain a
fills in Tunisia
The spreadsheet of the monitoring report shows that the emission reduction by the use of solar power for heating Jucuzzi is b
Submission incomplete: Scope: The verification report does not provide
m generation at CSL." by Chemplast Sanmar Ltd
by Slag in Portland
The DOESlag Cement
verified thatatthe
OCL, Rajgangpur,
minimum Sundargarh,
between Orissa. of EGGen and EGAux and ii) in-house consumption/net export v
i)the difference

Submission incomplete: Scope: The verification report does not determin

anagement in Pearl River Basin

flared at Kwale oil-gas processing plant, Nigeria

he Nitric Acid Plant of the Pakarab Fertilizer Ltd (PVT) in Multan, Pakistan
 the state ofThe
Rajasthan, India.
DOE is requested to clarify how it verified the emission reduction calculations to be appropriate in particular considering t

R Industries Ltd. (GIDL)

from C-03 washing tower by effictively utilizing the C-O3 off gas asSubmission
fuel in primary reformer1:atScope:
incomplete: Indo Gulf
The Fertilisers,
monitoring(areport
unit of Aditya
does not Birla
contaiN

very and Electricity

The DOEGeneration
should verify that they have taken into account
Submission
F-CDM-AM-Clar_Resp_ver
incomplete: Scope:01.1,
The submitted
available athttps://cdm.unfccc.int/U
spreadsheet is not in an a
Submission incomplete: 1: Scope: The revised PDD does not contain a de
The Executive Board at its 55th meeting has taken note on concerns connected with possible inflation of the baseline of HFC p

ojects at: • Century cement • Manikgarh cement • Maihar cement

vince, China

Further clarification is required on how the DOE verified that the meter recalibration which was conducted more than 3 years

iang of China
y and Electricity Generation
per Limitada
1) The DOE shall explain how the monitoring has been conducted in line with the registered monitoring plan given that: a) a FA

aulipas, Mexico
The monitoring report only contains a final result of electrical leakage per site while the revisedmonitoring plan states that “If

ounty, Dingxi City Prefecture, Gansu province, China Submission incomplete: Scope: The verification report does not provide

Submission incomplete: 1: Scope: The monitoring report does not contai

he Nitric Acid Plant of Abu Qir Fertilizer Co. Submission incomplete: 1: Scope: The spreadsheet does not contain exp
ect – Tunisia
ll-scale hydroelectric power plants project
Improvements

c Power Plants - Brascan

1.The Energética
Verification ReportMinas Gerais
(VR, p.23, S.A
28) (BEMG)
states thatProject Activity for one of the meters, i.e. meter 00069901 was valid for 2 ye
the calibration
Submission incomplete: 1: Scope: The verification report does not determ
bic Digestor1)atThe
an ethanol plant in the Philippines
PDD (page 20) states that "methane concentration is determined with CO2 content testing and is obtained with a gas a

ca and Puebla, México

d mills by Sun-n-Sand Hotels Pvt. Ltd. at Satara, Maharashtra Submission incomplete: As per VVS 3.0, para 318, the DOE shall assess w
ashtra, India.
n County, Gannan Autonomous Tibetan Prefecture, Gansu province, China incomplete: Scope: The monitoring report does not contain i
Submission
wer Project of APPL, India
1. The PP/DOE shall clarify the list of electricity consumption
Submission
equipments
incomplete:
of allScope:
the sites,
Thesince
monitoring
the verification
report does
report
not(p.9)
contain
stata

and combustion from swine farms in Southern Brazil

Submission incomplete: Scope: The monitoring report does not contain i

captive power plant(CPP) at Dahej complex of Gujarat Alkalies a
nd mills by Sun-n-Sand Hotels Pvt. Ltd at Soda Mada Rajasthan
n Unit of M/s Rukmani Power and Steel Ltd.(RPSL)

Clarifications are required on how conservativeness when discounting electricity imported was assured, according with VVM p
1. The methane content in biogas was sampled three Submission
times a day incomplete:
and a daily methane
1: Scope:content
The monitoring
has beenreported.
report doesThe
notDOE
contai
is r

er Project at RIICO Industrial area, Rajasthan by M/s Amrit Environmental Technologies Pvt. Ltd.

CDM Project- The DOE is requested to clarify how it verified the impact on project emissions during the period 29/07/2008 to 31/12/2008

li and Coimbatore districts in Tamilnadu, India.

mills by Sun-n-Sand
The DOEHotels Pvt. Ltd.
mentioned at there
that Supa,was
Maharashtra
no coal consumption
Submission
in the project
incomplete:
activityScope:
however
Theon
verification
page 6 of report
the verification
does not report
state tha
it

Brascan Energética Minas Gerais S.A. (BEMG) Project Activity

rojects Limited (AGPL),

1. The Prakasham
PP/DOE District,
shall clarify Andhra
the list Pradesh.consumption
of electricity Submission
equipments
incomplete:
of allScope:
the sites,
Thesince
spreadsheet
the verification
does notreport
contain
(p.9-10)
explano
1) The DOE states in the verification report (p. 9) that the PDD specifies that the CO2 concentration is obtained with a gas anal
 1) The DOE identified that the LandTec portable gas analyser has a lower accuracy (3%) than the one specified in the revised m

erating Station
The Of
DOECESC-limited,
shall clarify BBGS
why it conducted the verification site visit (on 07 September 2009) prior to making the monitoring report

by Jaiprakash Associates Ltd (JAL)

Atria Hydel Power Limited at Malavalli Taluk, Mandya District, Karnataka
ombustion from poultry
1) The manure
revised treatment
monitoring plan states:a) “Accuracy of the flow meters utilized exceeds 99 percent across the entire measured

by Fly ash in Portland Pozzolana Cement blend at OCL, India

Submission incomplete: Scope: The verification report does not state tha
nd Rio Grande do Sul, Brazil
and La Manga
The DOE in verification report mentions “The digesters performance is as planned and the captured biogas is flared at all sites
1. The monitoring reported stated that during the failure of the flow meter, the LFG flow was calculated as the average flow o

t of Jalkheri The
Power Private
DOE Limited,to
is requested Jalkheri, Punjab.
clarify on how it verified:1. That the requirement of applied methodology AMSIII.H.v.1, which requir

ydro Power Plant

essing in the city of Chandigarh, India”

Submission incomplete: 1: Scope: The monitoring report does not contai

on from Palm Oil Mill Effluent ponds, Honduras

ure Treatment Project at PT Indotirta Suaka Bulan Farm in Indonesia

p-gradation at Apollo Tyres, Vadodara, India

The monitoring data is provided for nine sites whereasSubmission

the registered
incomplete:
PDD covered
1: Scope:
onlyThe
eight
spreadsheet
sites. The DOE
doesisnot
requested
containto
the
pr

The verification report mentions that the calibration of energy meter was conducted first on 3rd February 2006 and then seco

Energética Minas Gerais S.A. (BEMG) Project Activity

1. The monitoring report stated that the cement grinding capacity is being upgraded to 3 million tonnes/year in Devapur Unit

imited, Bagalkot, Karnataka

1) The DOE is requested to explain how it has verified that calibration was conducted in line with the registered monitoring pla

sures at IPCL – Gandhar Complex

d mills by Gujarat JHM Hotels Pvt. Ltd at Soda Mada Rajasthan
mass (agricultural residue) for 9 MW Power Generation Unit of M/s. My Home Power limited (MHPL) and Supply to APTRANSCO Grid.
1) It was noticed that the electricity generated during the present monitoring period was 16.6% higher than the estimate in th
 Submission incomplete: 1: Scope: The monitoring report does not contai

Sugars Limited, Amritsar District, Punjab;

The Executive Board at its 55th meeting has taken note
Submission
on concerns
incomplete:
connectedScope:
with possible
The spreadsheet
inflation of
does
thenot
baseline
contain
ofall
HFC parp

olana Cement at UltraTech Cement Ltd. (UTCL), Andhra Pradesh

LANT – OPENClarification
TO COMBINED CYCLE CONVERSION
is required on how the DOE has verified the calibration frequency of the custody gas meter and the gas chromato

ons in Mongolia.

Power Generation unit of Malavalli Power Plant Pvt Ltd.

r Generation Unit of M/s Matrix Power Pvt. Ltd. (MPPL)

1. The DOE is requested to clarify how it verified that the yearly calibration is adequate with the use of equipment while interv

1) The DOE is required to explain the reasons for records

Submission
of gas flow
incomplete:
above the1:maximum
The DOE did
capacity
not determines
of Flare 2 and
whether
Flare the
3 (1,50
pro

oiás, Mato Grosso, Minas Gerais, Rio de Janeiro and São Paulo, Brazil

1. The PP/DOE are requested to clarify how the PLF achieved

Submission
during
incomplete:
each month
1: Scope:
of the The
monitoring
monitoring
period
report
has does
beennot
calculated
contai
1. The PP/DOE shall clarify the list of electricity consumption equipments of all the sites, since the verification report (p.9) stat
1) The DOE has verified that the actual emission reduction (32,657 tCO2e) during the current monitoring period (01/06/09 to 3
1. The DOE raised a FAR in the previous and this verification report based on the fact that biogas was released to the atmosph

osso, Minas Gerais

The DOEandis São Paulo, Brazil
requested to clarify how it verified that there were no leakage emissions due to electricity consumption from Site 1

anta Catarina, andPP/DOE

1. The Rio Grande
shalldo Sul, Brazil
clarify the list of electricity consumption equipments of all the sites, since the verification report (p.9) stat

anto, Minas Gerais and São Paulo, Brazil

The DOE shall clarify the reason as to why the steam supplied by the FBC boiler tended to largely exceed the capacity of the FB

t, Hyderabad1. The verification on how the DOE closed out the CAR 1 on mistakes in Annex 1 of the 1st version monitoring report on Page 1

tilisation for Power Generation Project

type coke ovens at JSPL

 Binani Cement Limited, Rajasthan
erais and São Paulo, Brazil

urces Biomass Power Project

Private Limited, Bayana Tehsil, Bharatpur District, Rajasthan

s Biomass Power Project

The EB at its 55th meeting noted concerns regarding the potential to inflate the baseline of HCFC22 CDM project activities and

imary Reformer as fuel

Submission incomplete: 1: Scope: The monitoring report does not contai

1. The DOE is requested to clarify how it verified that:i. The application of IPCC default values for CO2 emission factor of fuel o

in India) managed by Enercon (India) Ltd.

Submission incomplete: Scope: The verification report does not indicate
at Phillips Carbon Black Limited, Gujarat
ossil fuel with1)alternative
The DOE hasfuels like agricultural
confirmed that twoby-products, tyres and municipal
additional parameters solid
("electricity waste (MSW)and
consumption" in the manufacturing
"emission factor ofof
theportland cemem
grid") were

at Birla Corporation Limited, Raebareli Unit

nomous Region, China are requested to clarify the list of electricity consumption equipments of all the sites, since the verification report
The PP/DOE

ternational Power Corporation Limited, India

es Biomass Power Project Submission incomplete:
karia Cement Plant, Chanda Cement Works, Kymore Cement Wor
1) The emission reductions have been calculated assuming
Submission
the default
incomplete:
value of1:0.5
Scope:
fixedThe
ex-ante
monitoring
in the PDD
report
fordoes
the parameter
not contai

ternative fuel, for Pyro-Processing in cement plant of Shree Cements Limited at Beawar in Rajasthan, India

Works (Unit of JK Cement Limited), Nimbahera, Chittorgarh, Rajasthan

yachal Hydro Power Ltd., Maharashtra, India.
aka in India) managed by Enercon (India) Ltd.
Submission incomplete: 1: The submitted spreadsheets for EFgrid,y calcu
The monitoring report (p. 11) shows two lines additional
Submission
to the main
incomplete:
line connected
Scope: to
Thethe
verification
site. Clarification
and certification
is required
report
on whd
Submission incomplete: As per VVS para 377 (c), the DOE shall determine
omass based power project at Rangpur, Kota District, Rajasthan, I
n by M/s Indian
The Acrylics Ltd. and replacement
DOE is requested of the
to clarify why electrical power
net export being
from theimported
Submission
factory tofrom
the state
incomplete: electricity
substation
Scope: The grid/has
(Ee,net),
DOE surplus
which powersumsupply
notiscertified
the theto
inofwritinggrid.
electric
that
The monitoring plan requires monitoring of auxiliary consumption, however in the excel spreadsheet provided the auxiliary co
The DOE is required to clarify: a) The reasons for 6% increase in the emission reductions as compared to the estimates in the P

Further clarification is required on how the DOE has verified the baseline emissions considering that the share of purchased w
The PP/DOE is requested to clarify: 1) why the net electricity generated was considered as zero for those days when the electr

mall Hydro Power Plant – Small Scale CDM Project

1. The DOE is requested to clarify how it verified that:1) The application of IPCC default values for NCV and emission factor of n
Submission incomplete: 1: Scope: The monitoring report does not contai
awari Power and Ispat Ltd (GPIL) Submission incomplete: 1: Scope: The monitoring report does not contai
ada, district Jaisalmer, Rajasthan, India.
n at the manufacturing unit of Birla tyres.
umidification Towers’ of Jaya Shree Textiles
achal Pradesh, India
oject in Jaisalmer state Rajasthan,
The DOE/PP India
shall further by RSMML
clarify on following issues:1. The verification report mentions that quantity of feed water used for em

Submission incomplete: 1: Scope: The verification report does not provid

mass in the production of Portland Cement
The DOE is requested to clarify the reason for the significant increase of the emission reduction claimed during this monitoring

Submission incomplete: Scope: The verification report does not determin

le sources at Satara by M/s Bajaj Auto Ltd. (BAL) using wind Power.
The Executive Board at its 55th meeting has taken note on concerns connected with possibly inflation of the baseline of HFC p

Site, El Salvador

le sources at Supa, Taluka Parner, Dist. Ahmednagar by M/s Bajaj Auto Ltd. (BAL) using wind Power.
of Ugar Sugar Works Limited (USWL).
 The PP/DOE are requested to provide information in the monitoring and verification report about the exact dates of calibratio
The approved monitoring methodology AM0015 requires that “The implementation of the project shall not increase the bagas

alientes, Guanajuato and Queretaro, México

The DOE is requested to clarify how for several months in 2007 the electricity generation values stated inthe spreadsheet of th

The Executive Board at its 55th meeting has taken note on concerns connected with possibly inflation of the baseline of HFC p

Submission incomplete: 1: The spreadsheet ( “Error ”) shows that 0.2% wa

The PP/DOE is requested to provide detailed calculations of the Operating Margin (OM) and the Build Margin (BM) and also in
The DOE is requested to further clarify the reason for increase in emission reduction from 48,454 in the PDD to 60,193 during

Submission incomplete: 1: Scope: The verification report does not indica

Submission incomplete: 1: Scope: The revised PDD does not contain a de

on Wind Farm Project” at Chalkewadi, District Satara, State Mahararashtra, India.

The DOE is requested to clarify the reason for increase in emission reduction from 26,214 as estimated in the PDD to 39,676 d
The PP stated that “The biomass residue is not stored for more than 4 months because only a relatively small amount of biom

ment Limited (SCL), Beawar, Rajasthan

– Small Scale CDM Project

León, México
 1. Further clarification is required on how the DOE verified that the selected 82 interviews representing 10% of the total equip

tilization Project
wani Paper Mills Limited (SBPML), Rae Bareli, Uttar Pradesh, India
management 1) systems at Faxinal
The DOE dos Guedes
is requested and Toledo
to substantiate how it has verified
Submission
that the
incomplete:
calculationScope:
of theThe
baseline
verification
emissions
and(EmBSL)
certification
 is in report
line witd

Submission incomplete: Scope: The monitoring report does not contain i

Submission incomplete: 1: Scope: The monitoring report does not contai

oject Design Document No. 2)

oject Design Document No. 1)
1. The DOE is requested to clarify how the application of the highest value of project SSCR recorded when the operation of the
1) The DOE shall clarify if the readings from the flow meters are directly applicable to the default density value used, i.e.  if the

California, México
Submission incomplete:

nia Region, Argentina

Submission incomplete: Scope: The verification report does not list each
Submission incomplete: A revised PDD has not been submitted to reflect
The DOE is requested to clarify how it verified the amount of HFC 23 supplied to the destruction process in the project emissio

cho de Monte Hydropower Plant (Panama)

NG OF DOLEGA HYDROPOWER
Monitored data onPLANT (PANAMA). and pressure shall be submitted as these are required monitoring data by the methodolo
LFG temperature

ation & Consumption in Ropar, Punjab, India

nataka, IndiaThe PP/DOE shall further clarify the following issues: 1) Why there was electricity generation on the 20th January 2008, while

ahar Spinning Mills Ltd.

Submission incomplete: Scope: The verification report does not provide
e and Transfer, Recovery and Control of Waste, Treatment and Disposal of Industrial and Household Waste)
traction System in Old Cosmito Dump)

tion Project in Yerevan Submission incomplete: 1: The DOE shall provide information on how it h

adesh, India
Submission incomplete: 1: Scope: The validation opinion does not contai

The approved deviation (DEV0181) stated that the net electricity generation is calculated from the gross generation readings

d Power Project

The DOE shall further clarify the exact time schedule when
Submission
the meters
incomplete:
weer replaced,
Meter reading
since the
data
numbers
provided
mentioned
in the spreadsheet
in the rev

landfill site,1.Dhaka,
It has Bangladesh
been noted that the emission reduction has been calculated based on cumulative readings for LFG flow which include

re treatment for Pocillas and La Estrella

re treatment for Peralillo
re treatment for Corneche and Los Guindos Stage concluded
ect, Khayelitsha (Cape Town; South Africa) Submission incomplete: If the results of the delayed calibration are not a
Submission incomplete: 1: Please provide a line diagram (graphical schem

Power Project

The applied methodology defines “The Operating Margin emission factor ….based on the latest year statistics data ”. However

Clarification is required on how the requirement of General Guidance on Small-scale project activities onassessment that the q

The DOE should verify that they have taken into account F-CDM-AM-Clar_Resp_ver 01.1, available athttps://cdm.unfccc.int/U
The DOE shall clarify that how it has verified that project is implemented and operational as described in the PDD considering
Submission incomplete: The DOE is requested to clarify: a) whether ther
 Completeness Check

shall provide a complete validation of the calibration dates of the equipment/instrument used during the monitoring period as per informa
all state its opinion on an assessment on when the changes occurred, reasons for these changes taking place and whether the changes wou

357:The DOE is requested to explain how it verified the compliance of the monitoring plan with the applied methodology. In particular: (a

all further validate the compliance of the monitoring conducted in accordance with the registered PDD. The PP/DOE are requested to addr
of an on-site inspection or other means of verification in accordance with paragraph 339 or 340 above, the DOE shall assess that all physic

ra 256, the monitoring report should contain a description of the implementation status of the project activity including relevant dates of

participants shall, for the registered CDM project activity for the monitoring period, identify the formulae used for, and provide the calcula

shall determine whether there are permanent changes to the registered monitoring plan, or whether the monitoring permanently deviate

72 of VVS-PA:In response to the incompleteness issue regarding the baseline emissions which included data for 01/01/2021, the export ge

.0, para 391, if the monitoring report covers the first monitoring period for the project activity, the verification report shall provide a desc

cation report (p 12) states that the global stakeholder consultation is "not applicable". However, this is the 1st monitoring period of which

, Santa Fé, hereafter referred to as group (“bundling”).

p 20) states that "Meters installed at separate at WTG and solar plant, the accuracy class -0.2s and calibration frequency of meters is once

Submission incomplete: 1. There is an inconsistency in the cross-referencing of the post-registration changes. The monitoring

372: There is no information on what the values in worksheet “DGR Oct 16 ” are (or what are the sources for these values). If the values c
 Submission incomplete: 1.The monitoring report as well as the verification and certification report refer to PRC (permanent ch

itoring period, the CM emission factor used for ER calculation was 0.3222 tCO2/MWh. However, it is not clear whether all the requiremen

h 283 of VVS-PA:The DOE is requested to explain how it validated the temporary deviation from the registered monitoring plan, in particula

h 242 of PS-PA: The PP has not reported in the revised PDD the impacts of the change on aspects listed under paragraph 242 of the PS-PA.2

366:The maximum permissible error of 0.2% is applied to all delayed calibration periods. The DOE is requested to explain how this approa
e verification and certification report does not describe the implementation status of the project as per VVS version 09.0 paragraph 385 (a
Submission incomplete: 1.Scope: According to PCP version 9 para 161(a) a duly completed "Post registration changes request

verification and certification report does not list each parameter required by the monitoring plan and does not provide an statement on ho

the verification of a certain monitoring period, the DOE identifies that the calibration has been delayed and the calibration has been imple

373 (b)As per the ER spreadsheet, for October 2015, the total generation has been divided equally for all days to get the net units for mo

verification and certification report does not provide a conclusion on the verified amount of emission reductions achieved nor/or confirm t

toring report does not describe the equipment used to monitor each parameter, including details on accuracy class, and calibration inform

all determine whether the calibration of the measuring equipment that has an impact on the claimed GHG emission reductions or net anth

Submission incomplete: Scope: A verification and certification report has not been submitted with a request for issuance as re

ct participants shall describe the monitoring system and provide line diagrams (graphical schemes) showing all relevant monitoring points.

ragraph 258 of PS-PA, the PP shall describe the monitoring system and provide line diagrams (graphical schemes) showing all relevant mon
Submission incomplete: Scope: According to PCP version 9 para 161(c), PS version 9 para 270 a revised PDD (in both clean and

p 7) states that "Under section A.2 of the PRC PDD, geo-coordinates of each WTGs are provided and same are found correct." The DOE is r

E should provide further information on: (1) The accuracy of the flow totalizers, differential pressure transmitters, temperature transmitte
s requested to address the issues below as per requirements of paragraphs 373(c) and 374(c) of the VVS version 02.0.(a) The Monitoring R

ragraph 366 of VVS-PA, if, during the verification of a certain monitoring period, the DOE identifies that the calibration has been delayed a

ing Report covers the first monitoring period (23 May 15 - 31 Mar 19) for the project activity, which has a fixed 10-year crediting period (2

Submission incomplete:

shall determine whether the registered monitoring plan has been properly implemented and followed by the project participants and mon
ve Ltd. (IFFCO)

all determine whether the calibration of the measuring equipment is conducted at the frequency specified in the applied methodology and

Submission incomplete: 1.Issue: There is an inconsistency in the cross-referencing of the post-registration changes. The monit

Submission incomplete: 1.Scope: The number of Certified Emission Reductions (CERs), within and between the documents is n
Submission incomplete: Scope: The number of Certified Emission Reductions (CERs), within and between the documents is no
s requested to address this issue as per paragraph 361 of the VVS for PA.The PDD page 9 two figures demonstrate auxiliary line with a me
o monitoring diagram showing monitoring points in section C of the Monitoring Report. As per the Instructions for completing form CDM-

Submission incomplete: 1.There is an inconsistency in the cross-referencing of the estimated amount of emissions (PRC). The P

Submission incomplete:
e “Tool to calculate the emission factor for an electricity system ”, Version 7, paragraph 42(b), if ex-post option is opted to calculate the ope

shall explain how it has verified the meters calibration details (and any corresponding adjustments in the ER spreadsheet) considering that

e verification report does not list each parameter required by the monitoring plan and does not provide an statement on how the DOE ver
Submission incomplete: Scope: Cross-referencing and versioning within and between the document is not correct and accurat

Submission incomplete: Scope: A spreadsheet containing emission reduction calculation has not been submitted with a reque
ecycling Pvt Ltd plant located in Roorkee, Uttarakhand, India
Submission incomplete: 1.The completed and signed request for post-registration changes is missing. The monitoring report a

rict.367
ara Tamil
(b):nadu. India
Section C ofbythe
M/S Avaneetha
monitoring Textiles
report, (P) Ltd
section E.6.2 of the verification report, and the ER spreadsheet mention that there was a d

nt opinion Post Registration Changes - Revised PDDThe DOE is requested to clarify on the changes to the registered monitoring plan consi

ara 365As per the registered PDD, monitoring report and the verification report, the calibration frequency of all ABT meters and Yard mete
 Submission incomplete: 1.Scope: A monitoring report using the form and guidelines for completing the monitoring report form

oject participants shall describe the monitoring system and provide line diagrams (graphical schemes) showing all relevant monitoring poin
equired to take due account of all authentic and relevant comments in the verification for the first request for issuance of CERs (para 394-

nical reconstruction project

nical reconstruction project

e monitoring report does not contain the values of the monitored parameters used to calculate baseline, project and leakage emissions as

urrent issuance workflow interface does not allow the secretariat to upload the PRC documents submitted together with the request for i
S para 366, if, during the verification of a certain monitoring period, the DOE identifies that the calibration has been delayed, conservative

verification report does not provide a conclusion on the verified amount of emission reductions achieved and/or determine that calculatio

shall determine whether the changes to the registered monitoring plan described in the revised PDD are in compliance with the applied m

Submission incomplete: 1.The appointment certificates or curricula vitae of the DOE ’s validation team members, technical exp

Submission incomplete: Scope: According to PCP for Project Activities version 2.0, para 199, a valid CDM-VCR-FORM shall be s

Submission incomplete: 1.Scope: According to PCP version 9 para 161(c), PS version 9 para 270 a revised PDD (in both clean an
Submission incomplete: Scope: The types of post registration changes are not consistent among the submitted documents.Issu
374(b)As per the ER spreadsheet, and verification report, PP has not raised invoices of Eragampatti WTGs for the period from 01/11/2019
 dropower Plants

e verification report does not state that the monitoring plan is in accordance with the applied methodology. (VVS v.7 para 274)Issue: It is o

verification and certification report does not provide a conclusion on the verified amount of emission reductions achieved nor/or confirm t
equired to provide the information on the global stakeholder consultation conducted after the publication of the first monitoring report (p

the verification of a certain monitoring period, the DOE identifies that the calibration has been delayed and the calibration has been imple
shall determine whether the calculations of baseline GHG emissions or baseline net GHG removals, project GHG emissions or actual net GH

Submission incomplete:

n reduction spread sheet (Generation, columns D & J) shows the data values for the parameter “Opportionate Percentage (%) ” based on w
31 of the CDM Project Standard for Project Activities (PS-PA) (version 2) allows the PP to seek deviation and it requires that the PP shall de

Submission incomplete:
ing Report covers the first monitoring period (31 Dec 12 - 31 Dec 20) for the project activity, which has a fixed 10-year crediting period (31

e monitoring report does not indicate whether any request for prior approval by the Board of changes to the registered CDM project activ
e monitoring report does not indicate whether any request for prior approval by the Board of changes to the registered CDM project activ

ation report shall determine whether the project participants proposed alternative monitoring arrangements or applied the most conserva

e verification and certification report does not describe the implementation status of the project as per VVS version 09.0 paragraph 385 (a
validation report determine whether the project participants proposed alternative monitoring arrangements or applied the most conserva

Submission incomplete: 1.Scope: According to PCP version 9 para 161(f) supplemental documentation(e.g. emission reduction

Submission incomplete: 1.Scope: According to PCP version 9 para 161(f) supplemental documentation(e.g. emission reduction

DOE/PP has reported that the Quantity of net electricity generation that is produced and fed into the grid as a result of the implementation

ommunicated to the DOE, since the PRC documents are submitted under additional documents, we are not able to process the PRC and th
 Submission incomplete: 1.Scope: According to PCP version 9 para 161(a) a duly completed "Post registration changes request

registration change proposes to correct the monitoring frequency for the parameter “Return trip road distance between the origin and de
e revised PDD does not contain a summary of impacts of the proposed or actual changes to the registered CDM project activity regarding:

S-PA Para 363, DOE shall state whether the monitoring has been carried out in accordance with the registered monitoring plan.As per the
e verification and certification report does not describe the implementation status of the project as per VVS version 09.0 paragraph 385 (a

e monitoring report does not contain a comparison of the actual CERs claimed in the monitoring period with the estimate in the PDD, and

n Village Ventures in different households in Barshi, Maharashtra, India

Submission incomplete: Scope: The number of Certified Emission Reductions (CERs), within and between the documents is no
preadsheet does not contain all parameters required to be monitored and/or reported at the intervals required by the monitoring plan an
e validation report does not contain an assessment on when the changes occurred, reasons for those changes taking place, whether the c
the submitted verification report states that Materiality has not been applied by the DOE during the verification process of this request fo

361 (e)As per the registered PDD, the net electricity generated will be cross-checked with electricity sales receipts obtained from the grid

Submission incomplete: 1.According to PCP for Project Activities version 1.0, para 196, a valid version of the CDM-MR-FORM s
ara 356(b)As per page 2 of the monitoring report, the commercial operation start date of the project is 29/05/2013, however, as per the ve

Submission incomplete: 1.Scope: According to PCP for Project Activities version 2.0, para 199, a valid CDM-VCR-FORM shall be
s requested to explain how it verified the implementation of the project activity in particular the model of the engine put in place. The PD

all list each parameter required by the registered monitoring plan and state how it verified the information flow (from data generation, agg
e validation opinion does not contain information on how the DOE validated that the changes from the registered monitoring plan are in a
 Submission incomplete: Scope: According to PCP v2 para 138(a) a duly completed "Post-registration changes request form"(F-

all determine whether the monitoring of parameters related to GHG emission reductions or net anthropogenic GHG removals in the registe
ing report (page 9) indicates that the check meter for Dhom SHP is out of plant premises whereas the DOE (VR, page 8) verifies that the ch

Submission incomplete: Scope: The number of Certified Emission Reductions (CERs), within and between the documents is no

all determine whether the monitoring of parameters related to GHG emission reductions or net anthropogenic GHG removals in the registe

e validation opinion does not provide an opinion on how the changes would impact: a) additionality; b) scale; c) applicability and applicatio
DOE shall determine whether the monitoring of parameters related to the GHG emissions reductions in the project activity has been imple

did not verify that the instruments were calibrated within the calibration frequency specified in the applied methodologies, the applied sta
 Submission incomplete: 1.In line with para 135 of the CDM project cycle procedure for project of activities, for issuance track,

toring report does not provide a line diagram showing all the relevant monitoring points as per paragraph 258 of the CDM project standard

Submission incomplete: Scope: The submitted documents are not internally and mutually consistent.Issue: Monitoring report
r the NCV of natural gas used by the project power unit(s) are within the uncertainty range of the IPCC default values as provided in Table

58) raised CAR 1 by stating that "as per tool to determine project emissions from flaring gases containing methane, if temperature of the e

Submission incomplete: 1.Scope: The cross-referencing and versioning within and between the document are not correct and
e monitoring report does not contain reference whether any request for temporary deviations or permanent changes from the registered
 Submission incomplete: Scope: The monitoring period throughout the documentation is not consistent.Issue: The monitoring

verification and certification report does not list each parameter required by the monitoring plan and does not provide an statement on ho
p 8) states that "As per the CDM project standard for project activities (Ver.1.0), for the “Permanent changes from the registered monitor

tion report does not include any information related to the verification of global stakeholder consultation required to be conducted by the

ct participants shall provide all parameters used to calculate the baseline, project and leakage GHG emissions by sources, or the baseline a

Submission incomplete: 1.Scope: The submitted documents are not internally and mutually consistent.Issue: The DOE is kindly
e verification report does not describe the implementation status of the project. (For project activities that consist of more than one site, t

e verification report does not list each parameter required by the monitoring plan and does not provide an statement on how the DOE ver

c equation has been applied to estimate the above-ground tree and shrub biomass. The DOE verified that the allometric equation used by
Submission incomplete:

on from EB106 report para 26b, if the site visits cannot be postponed, a proper justification should be provided by the DOE as to why the
e monitoring report does not contain a description of the monitoring systems, quality assurance and/or quality control system employed b
tes that "Due to the corona virus pandemic and there is higher risk for both verifier and PP, the verification team conducts remote audit a

Submission incomplete: There is an inconsistency in the cross-referencing of the post-registration changes. The monitoring rep

.0 para 366, if, during the verification of a certain monitoring period, the DOE identifies that the calibration has been delayed, conservativ
e verification and certification report does not describe the implementation status of the project as per VVS version 09.0 paragraph 385 (a
s validated that the implementation of the sampling plan for the two monitored parameters, Pn,i,y (Weight fraction of the waste type i in t
 Submission incomplete: 1.Scope: A monitoring report using the form and guidelines for completing the monitoring report form

ation report, the DOE states that K-505 was broken down on 5 March 2015 and restored on 16 October 2015 and "there was no power ge
ovindapuram in Erode district, Tamilnadu.
Submission incomplete:
e spreadsheet does not contain all parameters required to be monitored and/or reported at the intervals required by the monitoring plan
 nt information are presented in the monitoring report regarding the description of project system: (1) Page 19 of the monitoring report in

monitoring report does not contain reference whether any request for prior approval by the Board of changes to the registered CDM proje

Submission incomplete: Scope: According to PCP v2 para 138(b) an assessment opinion by the DOE must be submitted.There i
t activity does not include sampling. However, as per the registered monitoring plan in the PDD (pages 61-62), the monitoring report   (pag

Submission incomplete: Scope: A spreadsheet containing emission reduction calculation has not been submitted with a reque
e monitoring report does not contain a description of the monitoring systems, quality assurance and/or quality control system employed b
Submission incomplete: Scope: According to PCP v2 para 138(c) a revised PDD (in both clean and track changes version) must

ed monitoring plan as contained in PDD (refer section B.7 and Appendix 5) highlights that electricity generation from each project wind tur

aharastra State, India

hs 303(a) and 304(a) of VVS-PA: The DOE is requested how it concluded that the change to the project design does not adversely impact th

requested to include, in Section C of the Monitoring Report, a diagram of the project activity showing the main metering points, in line wit
tion Report states that the on-site verification was not conducted due to the COVID situation in the host country. The DOE is requested to

2 of VVS for PA version 2 provides the requirement for the mandatory on-site inspection at verification and the para 26 of EB 106 meeting
Submission incomplete: 1.There is an inconsistency in the cross-referencing of the post-registration changes. The monitoring r
e verification report does not state that the monitoring plan is in accordance with the applied methodology. (VVS v.2 para 232)Issue: The D

Submission incomplete:

equested to clarify how it has complied with the CDM VVS for PAs, version 03.0, paragraph 367, which requires the DOE to confirm that th
49 of PDD, the annual coal consumption data reported by the plant operators will be cross-checked against the data recorded in the coal p
all further explain how it has validated the applied values for ER calculation considering the delays of calibration for certain parameters. Th

e validation opinion report does not provide an opinion on how the changes would impact: a) additionality; b) scale; c) applicability and ap
 Submission incomplete:

er paragraph 357 (b) of the VVS-PA (version 1.0), the DOE shall identify any concerns related to the conformity of the actual CDM project a
Submission incomplete: Scope: The number of Certified Emission Reductions (CERs), within and between the documents is no
Submission incomplete:
e revised PDD does not contain a description of the corrections to project information and specify how it is in accordance with Appendix 1

all explain how it has verified that the calculated emission reduction values correspond exclusively to the monitoring period from 09/12/20

e monitoring report does not contain a description of the nature, extend and duration of the non-conforming monitoring and the propose
ered PDD (page 3 & page10) states that “project activity aims to construct up to 10,000 domestic biogas units of mainly 2m3 and 3m3 gas

ara 258 and Para 360: For Akal site, Mokhla site and Gangavansara site, page 15 of the monitoring report (shows one main meter and one

ted that the site visit for this project activity was not conducted due to the COVID-19 pandemic and the site visit cannot be postponed sinc
validation report does not contain information on how the DOE validated that the changes from the registered monitoring plan are in acco

Submission incomplete: 1. The validation report for post-registration changes and post-registration request form are submitte
aised CAR 4 due to missing invoices for some months during the monitoring period. However, the months referred in CAR 04 did not corre
 Submission incomplete: 1.Scope: The number of Certified Emission Reduction and the breakdown of CERs to be issued up to 3

Submission incomplete: Scope: The number of Certified Emission Reductions (CERs), within and between the documents are n

verification report does not state that the monitoring has been carried out in accordance with registered or the accepted revised monitorin
Submission incomplete:

Submission incomplete: Scope: A verification and certification report has not been submitted with a request for issuance as re
e monitoring report does not contain the values of the monitored parameters used to calculate baseline, project and leakage emissions as
Submission incomplete: 1.There is an inconsistency in the approval date of the post registration changes. The monitoring repo

Submission incomplete: Scope: The request for issuance form does not correspond to the correct number of Certified Emission
verification and certification report does not determine if the assumptions used in emission calculations have been justified as per VVS ver

Submission incomplete: Dear DOE representative, as per your notification sent via e-mail on 2nd April, 2015, we are sending y

e verification and certification report does not state that the monitoring plan is in accordance with the applied approved methodology and

e verification report does not describe the reasons for the phased-implementation delay and/or does not present the expected implemen
Submission incomplete:
 Submission incomplete: Scope: The number of Certified Emission Reductions (CERs), within and between the documents is no

verification and certification report does not state that the monitoring plan is in accordance with the applied approved methodology and, w
verification report does not provide an assessment on whether the calibration of measuring equipments was conducted at a frequency spe

Submission incomplete: 1.Scope: The submitted documents are not internally and mutually consistent.Issue: Reference numb

60 of VVS-PA:The DOE is requested to explain how the monitoring frequency of parameter APJ has been complied with, as: (a) The monito
e monitoring report does not contain a description of the monitoring systems, quality assurance and/or quality control system employed b

ue: Note that the formula in the revised PDD page 34 is blocking the paragraphs.2: Scope: The monitoring report does not contain the valu

Submission incomplete: Scope: The number of Certified Emission Reductions (CERs), within and between the documents is no
verification report does not provide an assessment on whether the calibration of measuring equipments was conducted at a frequency spe

e monitoring report does not contain the values of the monitored parameters used to calculate baseline, project and leakage emissions as
validation opinion does not contain information on how the DOE validated that the changes from the registered monitoring plan are in acc

to the sampling: (a) The sampling plan has provision “The stratified random sampling method will be used to take into account different e
to the sampling: (a) The sampling plan has provision “The stratified random sampling method will be used to take into account different e
preadsheet does not contain all parameters required to be monitored and/or reported at the intervals required by the monitoring plan an

para 373(e), the DOE shall determine whether appropriate emission factors have been correctly applied.For the option chosen by the PP, t
verification report does not provide a description of the actual operation of the project activity (VVS v2, para 228 (b))Issue: DOE shall provi

e verification and certification report does not state that the monitoring has been carried out in accordance with registered or the revised
 Submission incomplete: 1.Scope: A spreadsheet containing emission reduction calculation has not been submitted with a requ

373(b)As per the ER spreadsheet, for November 2018, the electricity exported to the grid and the electricity imported from the grid has b

e validation report does not contain information on how the DOE validated that the changes from the registered monitoring plan are in ac
verified that I-REC issued during the monitoring period was deducted from the Baseline GHG Emissions. However, the intervals for the I-RE

e spreadsheet does not contain explanation with regard to application of formulae in the spreadsheet.Issue: The CER calculation sheet sho
e verification report does not describe the implementation status of the project. (For project activities that consist of more than one site, t

equired to provide a proper justification as to why the site visits cannot be postponed, including the demonstration of a significant impact

e spreadsheet does not contain all parameters required to be monitored and/or reported at the intervals required by the monitoring plan
 Submission incomplete: Scope: The monitoring period throughout the documentation are not consistent.Issue:The monitoring

e revised PDD does not provide details that the assumptions or discount factors used for GHG emission reductions calculations are not ove

Submission incomplete:
 Submission incomplete: Scope: According to EB48 Annex 68 paragraph 8(c) a verification report must be submitted with a req

ted that if there is delayed calibration (of any meters), the PP conservatively applied zero for electricity generation in ER calculation during

Submission incomplete: 1.1. The template of the monitoring report is no longer valid (version 6.0). Kindly submit an updated m

validation opinion does not contain information on how the DOE validated that the changes from the registered monitoring plan are in acc

verification report does not list each parameter required by the monitoring plan and does not provide an statement on how the DOE verifi

toring report specifies that the accuracy of the flow meter (FIT-9611) ±0.5% , used for measuring parameter EGthermal,y is different from
raph 385-6 of the validation and verification standard require the DOE to assess and determine that the calculations of baseline GHG emis

e revised PDD does not contain a description of the corrections to project information and specify how it is in accordance with Appendix 1

validation opinion does not contain a confirmation that the changes do not require prior approval of the Board and the provisions of Appen

Submission incomplete: Issue: Please note that you have submitted through the VVM track whereas the verification was cond
tion of estimation of carbon stocks P(t) = Σ(PA(t) i + PB(t) i) * Ai as specified in the revised PDD (08) page 20 submitted for the PRC is not in

Submission incomplete: 1.Scope: All documents are not in English or do not contain a full translation of relevant sections into

tion of estimation of carbon stocks P(t) = Σ(PA(t) i + PB(t) i) * Ai as specified in the revised PDD (08) page 20 submitted for the PRC is not in

about verification of location of sample plots is not consistent.(i) On p.41 of VR, it is mentioned that "The provided documents /29/ /39/ co

monitoring report does not contain a comparison of the actual CERs claimed in the monitoring period with the estimate in the PDD, and ex

e verification report does not state that the monitoring has been carried out in accordance with registered or the accepted revised monito

e verification report does not state that the monitoring has been carried out in accordance with registered or the accepted revised monito
e verification report does not state that the monitoring has been carried out in accordance with registered or the accepted revised monito
 Submission incomplete: Scope: According to PCP v2 para 138(c) a revised PDD (in both clean and track changes version) must
e verification and certification report does not list each parameter required by the monitoring plan and does not provide an statement on
verification report does not provide a conclusion on the verified amount of emission reductions achieved and/or determine that calculatio

agraph 366:The DOE has mentioned that the meters with HTSC numbers 3769, 3770, 3772, 3773, 3774, 3775, 3776, 3777, 3778, 3789, 379
Submission incomplete: 1.Scope: A certification report has not been submitted with a request for issuance.Issue: The certificati

Rajagopalaperi, District: Tirunelveli, Tamilnadu by M/s K. P. R. Mill Private Limited

s requested to explain how it verified the completeness of the data as per paragraph 373(a) of VVS-PA. The monitoring plan requires the v
preadsheet does not contain all parameters required to be monitored and/or reported at the intervals required by the monitoring plan an
 Submission incomplete: 1.The monitoring repot and verification/certification report refer to a temporary deviation. However,

verification report does not provide an assessment on whether the calibration of measuring equipments was conducted at a frequency spe

of sampling plan and its implementation is not consistent with the monitoring report(a) On page 7 of the verification report (VR), the total
 Submission incomplete: 1.Scope: The number of Certified Emission Reductions (CERs), within and between the documents is n

verification report does not provide an assessment on whether the calibration of measuring equipments was conducted at a frequency spe

parameter, the project participants shall describe the equipment used to monitor each parameter, including details on accuracy class, and

ticular, converted hydrocarbon emissions ( HCE c,d) is in line with the registered PDD, given that the formula used in calculation sheet [colu

aragraph 361(b): As stated in the verification report, the DOE has also checked Invoices for accuracy of data and found that there is differe

373(b)As per the ER spreadsheet, for August 2018, the net electricity exported to the grid and net electricity imported from the grid were

e monitoring report does not contain the values of the monitored parameters used to calculate baseline, project and leakage emissions as
s requested to explain how it concluded that the project activity was implemented and operated as per PDD in accordance with the parag

Submission incomplete: Scope: According to PCP v2, kindly proceed with the submission of the request for Issuance in "Post-R
Submission incomplete: 1.Scope: The number of Certified Emission Reduction and the breakdown of CERs to be issued up to 3

Submission incomplete: Scope: According to PCP v2 para 138(a) a duly completed "Post-registration changes request form"(F-
 Submission incomplete: Scope: The number of Certified Emission Reductions (CERs), within and between the documents is no

ragraph 258 of PS-PA (version 02.0), the PP shall describe the monitoring system and provide line diagrams (graphical schemes) showing a
monitoring report does not contain a description of the monitoring systems, quality assurance and/or quality control system employed by

para 361 (e), the DOE shall determine whether quality assurance and quality control procedures have been applied in accordance with the
Submission incomplete: Scope: According to EB48 Annex 68 paragraph 8(c) a verification report must be submitted with a req

Submission incomplete: Scope: According to EB48 Annex 68 paragraph 8(c) a verification report must be submitted with a req
 Submission incomplete: Scope: The monitoring period throughout the documentation is not consistent.Issue: There is an incon

shall explain how the provision of paragraph 366 of the VVS version 03.0 is complied with considering that there is no information on the a

d in the PDD. Electricity generation is 29% higher than expected in the PDD, while the sensitivity analysis states that the project would be
Submission incomplete: Scope: A verification report has not been submitted with a request for issuance.Issue: Please note tha

preadsheet does not contain all parameters required to be monitored and/or reported at the intervals required by the monitoring plan an
 Submission incomplete: 1.In line with para 133 of the CDM project cycle procedure for project of activities, for issuance track,

verification report does not state that the monitoring has been carried out in accordance with registered or the accepted revised monitorin

Submission incomplete: 1.Scope: The submitted documentation are dated prior to the date of request for issuance submission
verification report does not state that the monitoring plan is in accordance with the applied methodology. (VVS v.2 para 232)Issue: The Ve

verification report does not provide a conclusion on the verified amount of emission reductions achieved and/or determine that calculatio

ion and the verification seem to follow VVM version 1.2 requirements. As discussed via separate communication, please re-submit the cas
e submitted PRC does not contain a revised PDD (in both clean and track-change versions) (PCP v7, para 146 (c)).Issue: The PP/DOE submi
” sheet of the submitted spreadsheet shows that the maximum accuracy of the meter has been applied for the electricity generation and

Submission incomplete: 1.Issue: There is an inconsistency in the cross-referencing of the applicable standardized baseline. The

equested to explain how it has complied with the requirements of the relevant guidelines from the CDM Validation and Verification Stand

e verification report does not state that the monitoring plan is in accordance with the applied methodology. (VVS v.2 para 232)Issue: The m

para 361 (e), the DOE shall determine whether quality assurance and quality control procedures have been applied in accordance with the
ed PDD in this submission and the revised PDD of the previous submission indicate the same completion date (i.e.01/07/2019) whereas diff

Submission incomplete: Scope: The cross-referencing and versioning within and between the document are not correct and ac

Submission incomplete: 1.Scope: According to PCP v2 para 138(c) a revised PDD (in both clean and track changes version) mus

monitoring report does not contain a description of the equipment used to monitor each parameter including details on accuracy class and

Submission incomplete: Scope: The number of Certified Emission Reductions (CERs), within and between the documents is no
 Submission incomplete:
Submission incomplete: 1.Scope: According to PCP v2 para 138(b) an assessment opinion by the DOE must be submitted.The a
e monitoring report does not contain calculations of baseline emissions, project emissions, leakage (if any), and emission reductions, inclu

verification report does not indicate that the information provided in the monitoring report has been cross-checked with other sources suc

verification report does not indicate that the information provided in the monitoring report has been cross-checked with other sources suc

verification report does not state that the monitoring has been carried out in accordance with registered or the accepted revised monitorin

preadsheet does not contain all parameters required to be monitored and/or reported at the intervals required by the monitoring plan an

verification report does not state that the monitoring has been carried out in accordance with registered or the accepted revised monitorin
request is returned per the DOE's request to change to VVS track.

h Salt & Allied Industries Limited.

e monitoring report does not contain the values of the monitored parameters used to calculate baseline, project and leakage emissions as

validation report does not contain a confirmation whether the temporary deviation from the registered monitoring plan or applied method

e DOE shall determine whether the monitoring of parameters related to the GHG emissions reductions in the project activity has been imp

s requested to address the issues below as per paragraphs 372 and 373 of the VVS for project activity.The spreadsheet “20180121 - 20181

Submission incomplete: Scope: According to EB48 Annex 68 paragraph 8(c) a verification report must be submitted with a req

Submission incomplete: Scope: The submitted documentation are dated prior to the date of request for issuance submission.I

all determine whether the calibration of the measuring equipment that has an impact on the claimed GHG emission reductions or net anth

e verification report does not list each parameter required by the monitoring plan (VVM v.1.2 para 206)Issue: a) The verification report sta
verification report does not describe the reasons for the phased-implementation delay and does not present the expected implementation

validation opinion does not provide an opinion on how the changes would impact: a) additionality; b) scale; c) applicability and application

Submission incomplete: 1.Scope: According to EB48 Annex 68 paragraph 8(c) a verification report must be submitted with a re

Submission incomplete: 1.Scope: According to EB48 Annex 68 paragraph 9(f), the monitoring period throughout the documen
monitoring report does not contain a comparison of the actual CERs claimed in the monitoring period with the estimate in the PDD, and ex

ara 374(b) and 365The date of calibration of steam flow meters and pressure gauge in 2012 is different in the monitoring report for curren
monitoring report does not contain emission factors, IPCC default values, and/or other reference values used in the calculation of emission
preadsheet does not contain all parameters required to be monitored and/or reported at the intervals required by the monitoring plan an
e verification report does not provide an assessment that all physical features of the proposed CDM project activity proposed in the regist

roject activity shall comply with the applied methodology. The monitoring methodology ACM0008 version 6 requires the emission factor o

voltaic Power, Bundling Project)

e monitoring report does not contain a description of the monitoring systems, quality assurance and/or quality control system employed b

al average for WECM (NCVWCM,y) ” to be monitored monthly (with a minimum frequency of six monthly monitoring in cases where it is e
and engine gas destruction as baseline". The DOE is requested to explain how these events have been taken into account in calculating th
 Submission incomplete: Scope: According to EB48 Annex 68 paragraph 8(c) a verification report must be submitted with a req

Submission incomplete: Scope: Cross-referencing and versioning within and between the document is not correct and accurat

Submission incomplete: Scope: According to EB48 Annex 68 paragraph 9(f), the monitoring period throughout the documenta

Submission incomplete: Scope: The number of Certified Emission Reductions (CERs), within and between the documents is no

verification report does not contain information on all CARs, CLs and FARs and/or provide an assessment and close out of any CARs, CLs or

evised PDD does not contain a description of the corrections to project information and specify how it is in accordance with Appendix 1 of
e monitoring report does not contain a description of the monitoring systems, quality assurance and/or quality control system employed b

e verification and certification report does not state that the monitoring has been carried out in accordance with registered or the revised

s 01/02) has verified that the parameters “Average mass fraction of carbon dioxide in the produced steam (Wsteam,CO2) and Average ma

Submission incomplete:

verification report does not state how the DOE verified the information flow for the listed parameters. (VVM v.1.2 para 206)Issue: The met
Submission incomplete: Scope: According to PCP v2 para 138(c) a revised PDD (in both clean and track changes version) must

monitoring report does not contain a comparison of the actual CERs claimed in the monitoring period with the estimate in the PDD, and ex

e verification report does not provide a summary of the verification process and/or the scope of verification. (VVM v.1.2 para 221 (a)).Issu
el spreadsheet which is based on an ex-ante value of  “Unit Standar Coal consumption (CC Coal, Adv) ” that differs from the one indicated
preadsheet does not contain all parameters required to be monitored and/or reported at the intervals required by the monitoring plan an

verification report does not state that the monitoring has been carried out in accordance with registered or the accepted revised monitorin

preadsheet does not contain all parameters required to be monitored and/or reported at the intervals required by the monitoring plan an

Submission incomplete: 1.Scope: The cross-referencing and versioning within and between the document are not correct and
 Submission incomplete: 1.Scope: According to PCP v2 para 138(c) a revised PDD (in both clean and track changes version) mus

e verification report does not state that the monitoring has been carried out in accordance with registered or the accepted revised monito

e monitoring report does not contain a description of the monitoring systems, quality assurance and/or quality control system employed b

verification report does not provide an assessment on whether the calibration of measuring equipments was conducted at a frequency spe
monitoring report does not contain a description of the nature, extend and duration of the non-conforming monitoring and the proposed a

verification report does not list each parameter required by the monitoring plan and does not provide an statement on how the DOE verifi

Submission incomplete:

72 175, Uttar Pradesh

verification report does not determine if the assumptions used in emission calculations have been justified and/or emission factors, defaul

all determine whether the monitoring of parameters related to GHG emission reductions or net anthropogenic GHG removals in the registe

Submission incomplete: Scope: According to EB48 Annex 68 paragraph 8(a) a monitoring report must be submitted with a req

verification report does not describe the reasons for the phased-implementation delay and/or does not present the expected implementati

e monitoring report does not contain a description of the monitoring systems, quality assurance and/or quality control system employed b
ce of the project activity, the DOE has reported that the  grid emission factor applied is 0.684 tCO2/MWh, while the diesel emission factor
Submission incomplete: Scope: According to EB48 Annex 68 paragraph 9(e), cross-referencing and versioning within and betw

RC is returned per DOE's request to change to VVS track.

 373(b)As per the ER spreadsheet, for September 2017, the electricity exported to the grid has been manually filled. The DOE is requested

verification report does not state how the DOE verified the information flow for the listed parameters. (VVM v.1.2 para 206)Issue: The mon

Submission incomplete: Scope: According to EB48 Annex 68,paragraph 7(b), the submitted documents must be internally and
e verification report does not state that the monitoring has been carried out in accordance with registered or the accepted revised monito

Submission incomplete: Scope: According to EB48 Annex 68 paragraph 8(c) a verification report must be submitted with a req

verification and certification report does not provide a conclusion on the verified amount of emission reductions achieved nor/or confirm t
e monitoring report does not contain emission factors, IPCC default values, and/or other reference values used in the calculation of emiss

Submission incomplete: 1.According to PCP for Project Activities version 1.0, para 196, a valid version of the CDM-MR-FORM s
e revised PDD does not contain a description of the nature and extent of the proposed or actual changes to the project design of a registe
e verification and certification report does not state that the monitoring has been carried out in accordance with registered or the revised

e monitoring report, a Kitchen test was done in 10 households to assess the average fuelwood use at 90/10 confidence/precision level for

Submission incomplete: 1.Scope: According to PCP v2 para 138(b) an assessment opinion by the DOE must be submitted.Pleas

and agreed in the morning, the request is sent back to you.

evised PDD does not provide details that the assumptions or discount factors used for GHG emission reductions calculations are not over-

Submission incomplete: 1.Scope: A monitoring report using the form and guidelines for completing the monitoring report form

Submission incomplete: According to the meeting report "Sixteenth conference call with DOE/AIE coordination forum" para. 1

verification report does not list each parameter required by the monitoring plan and does not provide an statement on how the DOE verifi
 Submission incomplete: Scope: According to EB48 Annex 68 paragraph 8(a) a monitoring report must be submitted with a req

Submission incomplete: Scope: According to PCP v2 para 138(c) a revised PDD (in both clean and track changes version) must

preadsheet does not contain the formulae of calculation that are shown in the spreadsheet cells whenever possible. (EB48 - Annex 68 par

ement frequency for CODinflow,l,y, CODww,treated,y and CODww,final,PJ,y is daily as per the monitoring plan in the registered PDD. The D
ara 365: As per the ER spreadsheet, apportioning is done for the month of July 2017. It is understood that the generation from 17/07/2017

Submission incomplete: Scope: The monitoring period throughout the documentation are not consistent.Issue 1: The submitte

the project activity to the grid ” shall be “hourly ” “measurement ” with source of data being at the “project activity site ”. The registered mo
 Submission incomplete: Scope: According to EB48 Annex 68 paragraph 9(e), cross-referencing and versioning within and betw

Submission incomplete: 1.Scope: The number of Certified Emission Reductions (CERs), within and between the documents is n

e monitoring report does not contain the values of the monitored parameters used to calculate baseline, project and leakage emissions as

Submission incomplete: Scope: According to EB48 Annex 68 paragraph 8(d) a certification report must be submitted with a req

e spreadsheet does not contain explanation with regard to application of formulae in the spreadsheet. (EB48 - Annex 68 paragraph 10 (b)

e monitoring report does not contain the implementation status of the project (including a brief description of the installed technology an
Submission incomplete: Scope: According to EB48 Annex 68 paragraph 9(e), cross-referencing and versioning within and betw

Submission incomplete: Scope: The submitted documentation are dated prior to the date of request for issuance submission.I

preadsheet does not contain the formulae of calculation that are shown in the spreadsheet cells whenever possible. (EB48 - Annex 68 par
 Submission incomplete: Scope: According to EB48 Annex 68 pargraph 8(e) a request for issuance form must be submitted with

all determine whether the monitoring of parameters related to GHG emission reductions or net anthropogenic GHG removals in the registe
e monitoring report does not contain a description of the monitoring systems, quality assurance and/or quality control system employed b

monitoring period, the DOE shall report: (a) The implementation status of the registered CDM project activity. For a project activity with ph

e verification report does not indicate that the information provided in the monitoring report has been cross-checked with other sources s
monitoring report does not contain the implementation status of the project (including a brief description of the installed technology and/

Submission incomplete: 1.Scope: According to PCP v2 para 138(a) a duly completed "Post-registration changes request form"(

verification and certification report does not provide an assessment on whether the calibration of measuring equipments was conducted a

Submission incomplete: 1.Scope: According to PCP version 9 para 161(b), VVS para 293 a validation report, including a validati

e validation opinion does not contain a confirmation that the changes do not require prior approval of the Board and the provisions of App
verification report does not state that the monitoring has been carried out in accordance with registered or the accepted revised monitorin
Submission incomplete: Scope: The cross-referencing and versioning within and between the document are not correct and ac

10) states that "Latitude and longitude were checked through Google earth software and GPS meter during site visit" and the monitoring r
 Submission incomplete: Scope: The number of Certified Emission Reductions (CERs), within and between the documents is no

e monitoring report does not contain a description of the monitoring systems, quality assurance and/or quality control system employed b

Submission incomplete: 1.Scope: According to EB48 Annex 68 pargraph 8(e) a request for issuance form must be submitted w
Submission incomplete: Scope: According to PCP v2 para 138(a) a duly completed "Post-registration changes request form"(F-

Submission incomplete: Scope: Cross-referencing and versioning within and between the document is not correct and accurat

373(b)As per the ER spreadsheet, for March 2020, the net electricity exported to the grid and net electricity imported from the grid have

Submission incomplete: Scope: According to EB48 Annex 68 paragraph 8(a) a monitoring report must be submitted with a req
 Submission incomplete: 1.Scope: According to EB48 Annex 68,paragraph 7(b), the submitted documents must be internally an

monitoring report does not contain a description of the monitoring systems, quality assurance and/or quality control system employed by

DOE shall determine whether the monitoring of parameters related to the GHG emissions reductions in the project activity has been imple

e monitoring report does not contain information on calibration of monitoring instruments (frequency, relevant dates of calibration and/o

e verification report does not describe the implementation status of the project. (For project activities that consist of more than one site, t
all list each parameter required by the registered monitoring plan and state how it verified the information flow (from data generation, agg

Submission incomplete: 1.Scope: According to EB48 Annex 68 paragraph 9(f), the monitoring period throughout the documen
Submission incomplete: Scope: According to EB48 Annex 68 paragraph 9(e), cross-referencing and versioning within and betw

Submission incomplete: Scope: According to EB48 Annex 68 paragraph 9(f), the monitoring period throughout the documenta

Submission incomplete: Scope: According to EB48 Annex 68 paragraph 9(e), cross-referencing and versioning within and betw

tment system. However, the calculation of emission reductions shall be based on the amount of  methane recovered and fuelled or flared
Submission incomplete: Scope: According to the meeting report "Sixteenth conference call with DOE/AIE coordination forum"
e monitoring report does not contain the values of the monitored parameters. (EB 54 Annex 34)Issue: Different sections of the Monitoring

Submission incomplete: Scope: According to PCP v2 para 138(a) a duly completed "Post-registration changes request form"(F-
preadsheet does not contain all parameters required to be monitored and/or reported at the intervals required by the monitoring plan an

Submission incomplete: Scope: According to EB48 Annex 68 paragraph 8(c) a verification report must be submitted with a req
Submission incomplete: Scope: According to EB48 Annex 68 paragraph 8(c) a verification report must be submitted with a req

verification report does not determine that calculations of baseline emissions, project emissions and leakage as appropriate have been car

Submission incomplete: Scope: A monitoring report using the Form and guidelines for completing the monitoring report form

verification report does not state that the monitoring has been carried out in accordance with registered or the accepted revised monitorin
 Submission incomplete: Scope: According to EB48 Annex 68 paragraph 9(b) the submitted spreadsheet must be submitted in a

shall determine whether there are permanent changes to the registered monitoring plan and, if there are, determine whether the perman

Submission incomplete: Scope: According to EB48 Annex 68 paragraph 9(f), the monitoring period throughout the documenta

Submission incomplete: 1.Scope: A monitoring report using the form and guidelines for completing the monitoring report form
Submission incomplete: 1.Scope: According to EB48 Annex 68 paragraph 9(e), cross-referencing and versioning within and bet
monitoring report does not contain information on calibration of monitoring instruments (frequency, relevant dates of calibration and/or v

Submission incomplete: Scope: According to EB48 Annex 68 paragraph 9 (e), the number of Certified Emission Reductions (CER

Submission incomplete:

e validation opinion does not contain a confirmation that the changes do not require prior approval of the Board and the provisions of App

e monitoring report does not contain the values of the monitored parameters. (EB 54 Annex 34)Issue: The Monitoring Report does not con

Submission incomplete: Scope: According to EB48 Annex 68 paragraph 9(b) the submitted spreadsheet must be submitted in a
e spreadsheet does not contain the formulae of calculation that are shown in the spreadsheet cells whenever possible. (EB48 - Annex 68 p

verification report does not provide an assessment on whether the calibration of measuring equipments was conducted at a frequency spe

ed shows that even when there is no biogas flow, the temperature of the flare remains very high. For example, for flare 1 on the 22 Novem
Submission incomplete: 1.Scope: According to EB48 Annex 68 paragraph 9(f), the monitoring period throughout the documen

11 months) the volume of FFB (fresh fruit bunches) processed   was 327,170 tonnes or about 26% higher than what was  projected in the P
e monitoring report does not contain information on calibration of monitoring instruments (frequency, relevant dates of calibration and/o
Submission incomplete: 1.Scope: According to EB48 Annex 68 paragraph 9 (e), the number of Certified Emission Reductions (C

preadsheet does not contain the formulae of calculation that are shown in the spreadsheet cells whenever possible. (EB48 - Annex 68 par

all determine whether there is a temporary deviation from the monitoring plan in the registered PDD (hereinafter referred to as the registe

Submission incomplete: Scope: According to EB48 Annex 68 paragraph 9 (e), the number of Certified Emission Reductions (CER

monitoring report does not contain the values of the monitored parameters. (EB 54 Annex 34)Issue: The monitoring report at its section D.

e monitoring report does not contain the implementation status of the project (including a brief description of the installed technology an
s requested to address the issues related to the implementation of project activity as below according to the VVS for project activity parag

e verification report does not provide an assessment on whether the calibration of measuring equipments was conducted at a frequency s

Submission incomplete: 1.Scope: The Validation and Certification confirms the application of version 6.0 of the VVS which is no
e verification of a certain monitoring period, the DOE identifies that the calibration has been delayed and the calibration has been impleme

verification report does not provide a conclusion on the verified amount of emission reductions achieved and/or determine that calculatio
s verified the number of SAVE80 systems in use for the 9th monitoring period of 01 Jul 18 - 30 Jun 19 as 3,861.85 based on the drop-out ra

ara 355: As per the PDD and section A.1. of the monitoring report, the installed capacity of the project is 5.8MW. However, as per section

verification report does not state how the DOE verified the information flow for the listed parameters. (VVM v.1.2 para 206), “Tool to dete

verification report does not state that the monitoring has been carried out in accordance with registered or the accepted revised monitorin
e spreadsheet does not contain the formulae of calculation that are shown in the spreadsheet cells whenever possible. (EB48 - Annex 68 p
 ing are in accordance with the approved methodology considering that the PP have not monitored the NCV of diesel fuel as per methodol

e spreadsheet does not contain explanation with regard to application of formulae in the spreadsheet. (EB48 - Annex 68 paragraph 10 (b)

toring report (page 5) indicates that the construction of the waste water treatment plant (WWTP-Cañaveralejo) was started in 1997 and p

Submission incomplete: Scope: According to EB48 Annex 68 paragraph 8(b) a spreadsheet containing emission reduction calcu

monitoring report does not contain a description of the monitoring systems, quality assurance and/or quality control system employed by

of EMCALI in Cali, Colombia

Submission incomplete: 1.According to PCP for Project Activities version 1.0, para 196, a spreadsheet containing the calculatio
Submission incomplete: Scope: According to EB48 Annex 68 paragraph 8(c) a verification report must be submitted with a req

e monitoring report does not contain the values of the monitored parameters. (EB 54 Annex 34)Issue: It is not clear how the compliance t

validation opinion does not contain a confirmation that the changes do not require prior approval of the Board and the provisions of Appen

monitoring plan, as requested by the FAR raised in the previous verification, and the reasons for addressing this issue through a new FAR in
 Submission incomplete: 1.Scope: According to EB48 Annex 68, paragraph 9(d) all documents must be in English or contain a fu

Submission incomplete: Scope: According to EB48 Annex 68,paragraph 7(b), the submitted documents must be internally and
e changes is that no stratification criteria and sampling intensity will be prescribed in the PDD and these will be defined in each monitoring

Bhd. (Palm Oil Mill)

Submission incomplete: Scope: The submitted documentation are dated prior to the date of request for issuance submission.I

ed third party laboratory.   However,  the DOE has not confirmed that at least three samples for each measurement have been taken for m

monitoring report does not contain the values of the monitored parameters. (EB 54 Annex 34)Issue: The monitoring plan requires the mon

e verification report does not provide an assessment that all physical features of the proposed CDM project activity proposed in the regist

utlet of the substation. However, the monitoring report (p.6) shows that “WTGs of other investor ” are connected to the inlet of the 33/22
 Submission incomplete: Scope: According to EB48 Annex 68 paragraph 8(c) a verification report must be submitted with a req

e verification report does not list each parameter required by the monitoring plan (VVM v.1.2 para 206)Issue: The monitoring plan (p. 37)

Submission incomplete: Scope: The number of Certified Emission Reductions (CERs), within and between the documents is no

Palm Oil Mill

verification Sdn.does
report Bhd.not list each parameter required by the monitoring plan (VVM v.1.2 para 206)Issue: The Verification Report does n

Submission incomplete: Scope: According to EB48 Annex 68 paragraph 9 (e), the number of Certified Emission Reductions (CER
e monitoring report does not contain information on calibration of monitoring instruments (frequency, relevant dates of calibration and/o
Submission incomplete: Scope: According to the EB 48, Annex 68, paragraph 10 (a) vii, the Monitoring Report contains calcula

e monitoring report does not contain the implementation status of the project (including a brief description of the installed technology an

ang Dan Perusahaan Minyak Sdn. Bhd.

awit Bukit Pasir Sdn. Bhd.

Submission incomplete: Scope: The submitted documents should be dated according to the logical sign-off sequence.Issue: Th

Submission incomplete: Scope: According to PCP v2 para 138(c) a revised PDD (in both clean and track changes version) must

verification report does not provide an assessment of the compliance with EB 52 Annex 60 'Guidelines for assessing compliance with the ca

Oil Mill Sdn. Bhd.

m Oil Mill (Owned by QL Plantation Sdn. Bhd.)

e monitoring report does not contain calculations of baseline emissions, project emissions, leakage (if any), and/or emission reductions, in

Submission incomplete: Scope: According to EB48 Annex 68 paragraph 9(e), cross-referencing and versioning within and betw

de Rurrenabaque (FECAR)”
 Submission incomplete: Scope: According to EB48 Annex 68 paragraph 9(e), cross-referencing and versioning within and betw
Submission incomplete: 1.Scope: The number of Certified Emission Reductions (CERs), within and between the documents is n

e verification report does not indicate that the information provided in the monitoring report has been cross-checked with other sources s

ertification report does not indicate the monitoring period under verification and/or the corresponding number of CERs requested by the

Submission incomplete:

Submission incomplete: 1.Scope: The number of Certified Emission Reductions (CERs), within and between the documents is n

Oil Mill (Owned by Harn Len Corporation Bhd., Palm Oil Mill Division)

Submission incomplete: Scope: According to EB48 Annex 68 paragraph 9(f), the monitoring period throughout the documenta
verification and certification report does not provide a conclusion on the verified amount of emission reductions achieved nor/or confirm t

Submission incomplete: Scope: According to EB48 Annex 68 paragraph 8(b) a spreadsheet containing emission reduction calcu
 Submission incomplete: Scope: A monitoring report using the Form and guidelines for completing the monitoring report form

e monitoring report does not contain a comparison of the actual CERs claimed in the monitoring period with the estimate in the PDD, and

e verification report does not provide a conclusion on the verified amount of emission reductions achieved and/or determine that calculati

Submission incomplete: Scope: According to EB48 Annex 68 paragraph 9(f), the monitoring period throughout the documenta
hat the monitoring plan and the applied methodology have been properly implemented and followed by the project participants. It has be

verification and certification report does not state that the monitoring plan is in accordance with the applied approved methodology and, w

monitoring report does not contain a comparison of the actual CERs claimed in the monitoring period with the estimate in the PDD, and/or

Submission incomplete: Scope: Cross-referencing and versioning within and between the document is not correct and accurat

verification report does not provide an assessment on whether the calibration of measuring equipments was conducted at a frequency spe

mplete from 01/06/2009 to 30/11/2009 because of the computer failure, hence data for this period was calculated based on monitored el
verification report does not state that the monitoring has been carried out in accordance with registered or the accepted revised monitorin
Submission incomplete: Scope: According to EB48 Annex 68 paragraph 8(c) a verification report must be submitted with a req

Submission incomplete: 1.Scope: A verification and certification report has not been submitted with a request for issuance as
preadsheet does not contain all parameters required to be monitored and/or reported at the intervals required by the monitoring plan an

Submission incomplete: Scope: According to EB48 Annex 68 paragraph 8(b) a spreadsheet containing emission reduction calcu

e monitoring report does not contain the values of the monitored parameters. (EB 54 Annex 34)Issue:The exact gauze compositions for th
e verification report does not provide a conclusion on the verified amount of emission reductions achieved and/or determine that calculati

e monitoring report does not contain information on calibration of monitoring instruments (frequency, relevant dates of calibration and/o

e monitoring report does not contain a description of the monitoring systems, quality assurance and/or quality control system employed b

Submission incomplete: 1.Scope: According to EB48 Annex 68 paragraph 8(a) a monitoring report must be submitted with a re

Report not consistent with the Monitoring report about pro-rata issuance of CERs(1) The verification report says all CERs are to be issued i

verification report does not provide a conclusion on the verified amount of emission reductions achieved and/or determine that calculatio
 preadsheet does not contain all parameters required to be monitored and/or reported at the intervals required by the monitoring plan an

Submission incomplete: Scope: According to EB48 Annex 68 paragraph 9 (e), the number of Certified Emission Reductions (CER

EGmeasured,y)' is considered to be in compliance with the approved monitoring plan given that the registered monitoring plan (B.7.1, pag

e verification and certification report does not list each parameter required by the monitoring plan and does not provide an statement on

verification report does not provide an assessment that all physical features of the proposed CDM project activity proposed in the registere

verification report does not provide an assessment of the compliance with EB 52 Annex 60 'Guidelines for assessing compliance with the ca
verification report does not describe the implementation status of the project (VVS v2, para 228 (a)).Issue: The Monitoring report page 4 a

Submission incomplete: Scope: The number of Certified Emission Reductions (CERs), within and between the documents is no

e monitoring report does not contain the implementation status of the project (including a brief description of the installed technology an
hs 365-369 of VVS-PA:(a) As per the information on page 35 of the verification report, there are penalty periods due to calibration gaps of t

awit Selumpur Sdn. Bhd.

omemission
gas Hydro Power Privateconsidering
reductions Limited (DLHPPL)
that abnormally large amount of electricity has been imported to the project activity through 110 kV l

verification report does not provide a conclusion on the verified amount of emission reductions achieved and/or determine that calculatio

water pumps at NFCL

e monitoring report does not contain the implementation status of the project (including a brief description of the installed technology an
 e monitoring report does not contain the values of the monitored parameters. (EB 54 Annex 34)Issue: The methodology (page 14, 15 and

e monitoring report does not contain calculations of baseline emissions, project emissions, leakage (if any), and emission reductions, inclu

metersrepresenting pre-mining activities and coal mine methane separately as required in the applicablemethodology.2. A revision of mon
e verification and certification report does not state that the monitoring has been carried out in accordance with registered or the revised
verification report does not state how the DOE verified the information flow for the listed parameters. (VVM v.1.2 para 206) Issue: The DO
 Submission incomplete: Scope: A verification report has not been submitted with a request for issuance.Issue: The Verification

Submission incomplete: 1.Scope: According to EB48 Annex 68 paragraph 8(a) a monitoring report must be submitted with a re

Submission incomplete: Scope: According to EB48 Annex 68 paragraph 9(f), the monitoring period throughout the documenta

he verification report does not contain information on all CARs, CLs and FARs and/or provide an assessment and close out of any CARs, CLs

Submission incomplete: Scope: According to EB48 Annex 68 paragraph 8(b) a spreadsheet containing emission reduction calcu

Submission incomplete: Scope: A verification report has not been submitted with a request for issuance.Issue: The view page o

ny Sdn. Bhd.
ng Palm Oil Mill Sdn. Bhd.
verification report does not list the complete set of data for the specific monitoring period. (VVM v.1.2 para 208 (a))Issue: The DOE is reque

Submission incomplete: 1.Scope: According to EB48 Annex 68 paragraph 9(e), cross-referencing and versioning within and bet
Submission incomplete: 1.Scope: According to EB48 Annex 68 paragraph 8(c) a verification report must be submitted with a re

e monitoring report does not contain information on calibration of monitoring instruments (frequency, relevant dates of calibration and/o
Submission incomplete: Scope: According to EB48 Annex 68 paragraph 8(a) a monitoring report must be submitted with a req

e monitoring report does not contain information on calibration of monitoring instruments (frequency, relevant dates of calibration and/o
sed PDD, (a) under section B.7.1, a description of parameters VB,dry-gas,y ( “not including dry gas used as fuel at oil flow station as substit
 Submission incomplete: Scope: According to EB48 Annex 68 paragraph 9(e), cross-referencing and versioning within and betw

Submission incomplete: Scope: According to EB48 Annex 68 paragraph 8(a) a monitoring report must be submitted with a req

ponse, the PP states the correct equation as CF/1000 * [EXPln(a) + b*ln(D)]. However, the actual equation applied is CF/1000 * EXP [ln(a) +

Submission incomplete: 1.Scope: The Monitoring Plan, version 3, dated 1 April, 2014 does not contain the request for post reg

e verification report does not provide an assessment on whether the calibration of measuring equipments was conducted at a frequency s

g DOE shall identify any concerns regarding the implementation of the project activity against the description in the PDD and, where conce

m2" to calculate power density, based on the Certification by Fujian Provincial Investigation Design & Research Institute of Water Conserv

ragraph 260(b): As per Paragraph 260(b) of the PS-PA, the project proponent is required to describe the equipment used to monitor each p
 Submission incomplete: Scope: According to EB48 Annex 68 paragraph 8(a) a monitoring report must be submitted with a req

Submission incomplete: Scope: According to EB48 Annex 68 paragraph 9(f), the monitoring period throughout the documenta

Submission incomplete: Scope: According to EB48 Annex 68 paragraph 9 (e), the number of Certified Emission Reductions (CER

verification report does not describe the reasons for the phased-implementation delay and/or does not present the expected implementati

Submission incomplete: Scope: The number of Certified Emission Reductions (CERs), within and between the documents is no

Submission incomplete: 1.Scope:1. There is an inconsistency in the cross-referencing of the VVS version. The issuance submiss
 Submission incomplete: 1.Scope: According to EB48 Annex 68,paragraph 7(b), the submitted documents must be internally an
Submission incomplete: Scope: According to EB48 Annex 68 paragraph 8(a) a monitoring report must be submitted with a req

related to the operation of the geothermal plant ” shall be considered while the DOE states that “the methodology ACM0002 ver.6 does n

Submission incomplete: Scope: According to EB48 Annex 68 paragraph 9(e), cross-referencing and versioning within and betw

e verification and certification report does not provide a description of the actual operation of the project activity as per VVS version 09.0

e monitoring report does not contain the values of the monitored parameters. (EB 54 Annex 34)Issue: As per the PDD (annex 4, page 46) t
missions are calculated in accordance with the monitoring plan, considering that the monitoring and verification reports refers to a revised

gistered PDD complies with the applicable methodology as required by the VVM paragraph 199 (EB 55 report, annex 1). However, the app

ng the last project monitoring year (from 1 October 2009 to 30 September 2010) the project generated 994 GWh, which is 14% higher tha
verification report does not describe the reasons for the phased-implementation delay and/or does not present the expected implementati

kW, however, the monitoring report (Page 2) states that the installed equipment consists of two Pelton turbines of 450 kW and 150 kW. A

Submission incomplete: Scope: According to EB48 Annex 68 paragraph 8(b) a spreadsheet containing emission reduction calcu

Submission incomplete: Scope: According to EB48 Annex 68 paragraph 9(e), cross-referencing and versioning within and betw

e spreadsheet does not contain the formulae of calculation that are shown in the spreadsheet cells whenever possible. (EB48 - Annex 68 p

Submission incomplete: Scope: According to the EB 48, Annex 68, paragraph 10 (a) vii, the Monitoring Report contains calcula

available at https://cdm.unfccc.int/UserManagement/FileStorage/SDLAKTYJB01PR94OHWN735VIGCU2ZQ.
verification report does not determine if the assumptions used in emission calculations have been justified and/or emission factors, defaul

Submission incomplete: Scope: According to EB48 Annex 68 paragraph 9(e), cross-referencing and versioning within and betw

Submission incomplete: 1.Scope: According to PCP for Project Activities para 196 a duly completed CDM-ISS-FORM shall be su

verification report does not list each parameter required by the monitoring plan and does not provide an statement on how the DOE verifi
 Submission incomplete: Scope: According to EB48 Annex 68 paragraph 9(e), cross-referencing and versioning within and betw

monitoring report does not contain a description of the monitoring systems, quality assurance and/or quality control system employed by

e monitoring report does not contain the implementation status of the project (including a brief description of the installed technology an

verification report does not state how the DOE verified the information flow for the listed parameters. (VVM v.1.2 para 206)Issue: The PP/D

Submission incomplete: 1.Scope: A monitoring report using the Form and guidelines for completing the monitoring report form

Submission incomplete: Scope: The number of Certified Emission Reductions (CERs), within and between the documents is no

procedures for the parameter “Total consumption of dry biomass category i for year y (BCi,y) ” require that the biomass consumption is cro

or upstream CH4 associated with baseline fuel HFO. It is noted that the PP calculated it using formula electricity generation (MWh) / powe

ch Model Fyrite (or equivalent) gas analyzer. The process is described in the Monitoring Plan. The measuring equipment is calibrated in ac
e monitoring report does not contain a description of the monitoring systems, quality assurance and/or quality control system employed b

e monitoring report does not contain information on calibration of monitoring instruments (frequency, relevant dates of calibration and/o

ty transferred from outside of the project activity ” as the PDD specifies that electricity from the project is supplied only to the steel manuf

e verification report does not describe the implementation status of the project. (For project activities that consist of more than one site, t

ed to be monitored continuously. However, in the spreadsheet, the project participant reported hourly averaged data for MMelec which w
 Ltd. in China

e monitoring report does not contain the values of the monitored parameters used to calculate baseline, project and leakage emissions as

is in line with the monitoring plan which describes the calibration frequency is annually; if this calibration appears to have not been annu

on, related to data protection measures.

sheet indicates that the generation in July, August and December is a single value, while the generation from September to November is th

Submission incomplete: Scope: According to EB48 Annex 68 paragraph 9(e), cross-referencing and versioning within and betw

Submission incomplete: Scope: The number of Certified Emission Reductions (CERs), within and between the documents is no

eters utilized exceeds 99 percent across the entire measured rate curve with an uncertainty range of less than + 1 percent ” b) “Methane c
s utilized exceeds 99 percent across the entire measured rate curve with an uncertainty range of less than + 1 percent¨;b) Methane concen
Submission incomplete: Scope: According to EB48 Annex 68 paragraph 9(e), cross-referencing and versioning within and betw
y the PP, are same as readings of grid meter M2, considering that the grid meter reading must be taking transmission losses and transform

ented and operated as per registered PDD (para195 of VVM v.1.2) considering that:i. the registered PDD (section A.2) indicates that two to

ear how the DOE verifies the calculations of the baseline GHG emission in accordance with the VVS -PA paragraph 376 (c).The formula def

Submission incomplete: 1.Scope: The cross-referencing and versioning within and between the document are not correct and
onse for CR1 and the audit team conclusion.

Submission incomplete: Scope: According to EB48 Annex 68 paragraph 9(e), cross-referencing and versioning within and betw

Submission incomplete:

monitoring report does not contain the values of the monitored parameters. (EB 54 Annex 34)Issue: The monitoring report has not provide

verification report does not determine if the assumptions used in emission calculations have been justified and/or emission factors, defaul
verification report does not provide an assessment on whether the calibration of measuring equipments was conducted at a frequency spe

verification report does not list each parameter required by the monitoring plan (VVM v.1.2 para 206)Issue: The approved PDD page 25 ind

Submission incomplete: Scope: The monitoring period throughout the documentation are not consistent.Issue: The monitorin
equired to further clarify how para 26 (b) of EB 106 meeting report has been complied with. The DOE stated that the site visit for this proje

verification report does not determine if the assumptions used in emission calculations have been justified and/or emission factors, defaul

e verification report does not state that the monitoring plan is in accordance with the applied methodology. (VVM v.1.2 para 200, 203 & 2

Submission incomplete: 1.Scope: The cross-referencing and versioning within and between the document are not correct and

verification report does not list each parameter required by the monitoring plan (VVM v.1.2 para 206)Issue: The Verification Report page 1

verification report does not provide an assessment of the compliance with EB 52 Annex 60 'Guidelines for assessing compliance with the ca

Cachar Paper Mill of Hindustan Paper Corporation Limited

 from other turbines connected to the common MSEDCL meter at the substation, EGm,y was calculated as the difference between total e

ower Private Limited.

rgy generated in the project activity was complied with.2. How the methodological requirement to compare the calculated energy genera

actor is in line with the applied methodology, ACM0002 version 06, considering that the CO2 emissions from some power plants were esti
Submission incomplete: Scope: According to EB48 Annex 68,paragraph 7(b), the submitted documents must be internally and
f flare efficiency, when adopting the default values, with the requirements from the "Tool to determine project emissions from flaring gase
Submission incomplete: 1.Scope: According to EB48 Annex 68 paragraph 8(a) a monitoring report must be submitted with a re

from 24thFebruary to 24th March 2009 has been reported, it was not included in the calculation of the totalelectricity consumed by the p

ble inflation of the baseline of HFC projects and thereby excessive generation of CERs. Therefore detailed information on production volum
verification report does not determine if the assumptions used in emission calculations have been justified and/or emission factors, defaul
 Submission incomplete: The IRC incomplete issue raised for the request for issuance for the monitoring period 03 Mar 2020 –

Submission incomplete: Scope: The submitted documentation are dated prior to the date of request for issuance submission.I

verification report does not state that the monitoring has been carried out in accordance with registered or the accepted revised monitorin

Submission incomplete: Scope: According to EB48 Annex 68 paragraph 9 (e), the number of Certified Emission Reductions (CER

verification report does not state that the monitoring has been carried out in accordance with registered or the accepted revised monitorin
verification report does not provide an assessment on whether the calibration of measuring equipments was conducted at a frequency spe

preadsheet does not contain explanation with regard to application of formulae in the spreadsheet.Issue: The submitted spreadsheet "Ins
e monitoring report does not contain a description of the monitoring systems, quality assurance and/or quality control system employed b

re taken to the manufacturer for re-calibration every six months. However, the calibration dates, as stated in the monitoring report, show

verification report does not describe the implementation status of the project. (For project activities that consist of more than one site, the
methane concentration reading on 20 April 2009 at site no. 21902. While the monitoring report (p 14) indicates that the Landtec meter GM

Submission incomplete: Scope: According to EB48 Annex 68 paragraph 9 (e), the number of Certified Emission Reductions (CER
Submission incomplete: 1.Scope: According to EB48 Annex 68 paragraph 9 (e),cross-referencing and versioning within and bet

Submission incomplete: Scope: Cross-referencing and versioning within and between the document is not correct and accurat

toring report on page 3 mentions rated power capacity of turbine as 2,400 KWh, whereas PDD specifies that the project activity has plate p
 conduct verification activities after it has made the monitoring report publicly available. In the verification report the DOE has stated that

e spreadsheet does not contain the formulae of calculation that are shown in the spreadsheet cells whenever possible. (EB48 - Annex 68 p
preadsheet does not contain the formulae of calculation that are shown in the spreadsheet cells whenever possible. (EB48 - Annex 68 par

cordance with the monitoring plan, considering that the latest calibration was done in August 2007 for the weigh bridge and steam flow m

Submission incomplete: 1.Scope: The cross-referencing and versioning within and between the document are not correct and

iled and stored above the ground level.  Also in the monitoring report in section E.3 states that "EFB are likely to continue to be stockpiled
Submission incomplete: Scope: According to EB48 Annex 68 paragraph 8(c) a verification report must be submitted with a req

at how ammeters, which are primarily used for measuring current, were used for measuring the amount of electricity in KWh.

r electricity generation. However, it has been noted that wood and cortices also have been used in the project activity during the monitori

e spreadsheet does not contain the formulae of calculation that are shown in the spreadsheet cells whenever possible. (EB48 - Annex 68 p

Submission incomplete: Scope: The cross-referencing and versioning within and between the document are not correct and ac
verification report does not state that the monitoring plan is in accordance with the applied methodology. (VVM v.1.2 para 200, 203 & 221

measured in accordance with monitoring plan and methodology and NMHC (Non Methane Hydro Carbon) concentrations in gas were anal

verification report does not state that the monitoring has been carried out in accordance with registered or the accepted revised monitorin
ered PDD (page 23) assumes two default values to be applied for the parameter “CO2 emission factor for freight transportation activity (i.

ufacturing of portland cement at Vikram Cement (VC), Neemuch (MP), India.

e monitoring report does not contain information on calibration of monitoring instruments (frequency, relevant dates of calibration and/o

Submission incomplete: Issue: 1. The Board agreed at EB 108 (December 2020), as temporary measures pending CMP guidanc

Submission incomplete: Scope: According to EB48 Annex 68 paragraph 8(a) a monitoring report must be submitted with a req

e verification report does not confirm that the error has been applied in a conservative manner, such that the adjusted measured values o

nts at Abonos Colombianos SA (“Abocol”), Colombia.

Submission incomplete: Scope: The number of Certified Emission Reductions (CERs), within and between the documents is no
e verification report does not determine if the assumptions used in emission calculations have been justified and/or emission factors, defa

preadsheet does not contain the formulae of calculation that are shown in the spreadsheet cells whenever possible. (EB48 - Annex 68 par
fuel oil only. However, it is noted that old boilers were not only fuelled by fuel oil but also animal tallow. As the types of fossil fuel used in
e monitoring report does not contain the values of the monitored parameters. (EB 54 Annex 34)Issue: The monitoring report does not pro

DOE has not certified in writing that the the project activity achieved the verified amount of emission reductions during the monitoring per

sed to measure EGGEN in case of emergency and whether this meter was used to read EGGEN during the monitoring period.2. The monito

c of Indonesia

his monitoring period is less than the estimate of 14,442 tCO2 which was calculated from the yearly estimate in the PDD and the period of

Submission incomplete: 1.Issue: The format of the monitoring report has been altered. The page numbering doesn't refer to t
 Submission incomplete: Scope: According to EB48 Annex 68 paragraph 9(e), cross-referencing and versioning within and betw
n an annual basis, the calibration dates were indicated as August and September 2006 for electricity generation meter and auxiliary consu
s implemented to supply both steam and electricity requirements of the plant. However, no explanations were provided on how the elect

ricity Transmitted" and "Data&Parameters" with some instances in "Electricity Transmitted" showing net electricity supplied to the grid as
e monitoring report does not contain the values of the monitored parameters. (EB 54 Annex 34)Issue: Regarding the monitoring of EGGEN
ear how the DOE verifies the calculations of the baseline GHG emission in accordance with the VVS -PA paragraph 376 (c).The formula def
ear how the DOE verifies the calculations of the baseline GHG emission in accordance with the VVS -PA paragraph 376 (c).The formula def

Submission incomplete: Scope: The number of Certified Emission Reductions (CERs), within and between the documents is no

Submission incomplete: Scope: The Verification Report indicates (VVM) inconsistent scheme selected in the project view page
verification report does not indicate that the information provided in the monitoring report has been cross-checked with other sources suc

ied for the residential thermal usage during the project as in the baseline; and2. How the DOE verified that leakage due to any diversion o
verification report does not state that the monitoring has been carried out in accordance with registered or the accepted revised monitorin
the biogas sentto the boilers and to the flare and closed CL4 by correcting the measured values based on themanufacture's letter on the

e monitoring report does not contain the values of the monitored parameters. (EB 54 Annex 34)Issue: The monitoring report / spreadshee

e monitoring report does not contain information on calibration of monitoring instruments (frequency, relevant dates of calibration and/o
Submission incomplete: Scope: A verification report has not been submitted with a request for issuance.Issue: Please note tha
nd operated as described in the PDD as per paragraph 197 of VVM (version 01.2) considering that the purchase order of the 90 TPH boiler
available athttps://cdm.unfccc.int/UserManagement/FileStorage/SDLAKTYJB01PR94OHWN735VIGCU2ZQ.

anut shells used in the project activity was conducted continuously using scales. The DOE shall also clarify how it considers that checking a
emissions with paragraph 6 of the methodology (i.e. for each year during the crediting period, emissions are calculated as the lower of the

Submission incomplete: Scope: According to EB48 Annex 68 paragraph 9(e), cross-referencing and versioning within and betw

e monitoring report does not contain a description of the monitoring systems, quality assurance and/or quality control system employed b

e monitoring report does not contain a description of the monitoring systems, quality assurance and/or quality control system employed b

d (HLL), India

e monitoring report does not contain the values of the monitored parameters used to calculate baseline, project and leakage emissions as

verification report does not provide an assessment on how it has validated that the measurements beyond the calibrated range of monitor

verification report does not state how the DOE verified the information flow for the listed parameters. (VVM v.1.2 para 206)Issue: The DOE

verification report does not state that the monitoring has been carried out in accordance with registered or the accepted revised monitorin
verification report does not provide a conclusion on the verified amount of emission reductions achieved and/or determine that calculatio

ut only the monthly average for all biomass types used were reported. 2. Please clarify how the DOE verified the diesel consumption, cons

01 and TVEM-02 as the main export and import meters respectively (see page 5) and also referring to TVEM-01 as the meter for monitorin

he PDD considers that the present monitoring period covers 29.5 months and the increase in CERs results in 7.19%. However, the present
t, that the higher value of natural gas consumption would result in conservative emission reductions as this parameter is used for the calc

verification report does not contain information on all CARs, CLs and FARs and/or provide an assessment and close out of any CARs, CLs or
hed by CEA and available as of December 2007 has been applied for the emission factors for years 2004-05 and 2005-06, in accordance wit
verification report does not contain information on all CARs, CLs and FARs and/or provide an assessment and close out of any CARs, CLs or

ng built around the digester, which is primarily aimed at increasing the production of biogas in the digester, to stir the sludge suspended, im
ne concentration has an accuracy within 0.5%. The DOE verified (page 10 of the verification report) that the accuracy of the portable gas a

toring Report does not include a line diagram showing the main monitoring points, as required by para. 259 of the PS-PA, v.03.0.2: As per
verification report does not provide an assessment on whether the calibration of measuring equipments was conducted at a frequency spe

the revised the monitoring plan. The DOE is required to provide the details of calibration of the meters including the last date of calibratio
mmeter in the verification report.

e monitoring report does not contain a description of the monitoring systems, quality assurance and/or quality control system employed b

and in some cases higher than 850°C during the period when the average gas flow rate was less than 300Nm3/hr, considering that as per
 based on IPCC default value for the entire crediting period. However, the monitoring methodology requires annual estimation of this para
pant to install a dedicated separate steam flow meter to avoid any future error from common steam flow metering and closed this FAR du

JASTHAN BY M/S SAMCOR GLASS LTD (SGL)

verification report does not state that the monitoring has been carried out in accordance with registered or the accepted revised monitorin

gular frequency at calibrated weighing machine and recorded regularly …". Further clarification is required on the exact frequency of the m

mass used considering that the applied methodology requires continuous on-site measurements. ii) the historical annual heat generations

) energy as compared to baseline scenario. Further clarification is required on how the DOE verified that fuel switching in the project activ
Submission incomplete: Scope: According to EB48 Annex 68 pargraph 8(e) a request for issuance form must be submitted with

Submission incomplete: Scope: According to EB48 Annex 68,paragraph 7(b), the submitted documents must be internally and

_CLA_0095) on the application of lower bound of 95% confidence interval had been followed, since the monitoring of methane fraction in

mpared to the estimate in the PDD, and 2. The implementation of the project since the load factor appears to have significantly increased

periodical measurement of CO2 would give result for methane content at 95% confidence level as required by the applied methodology. 2
preadsheet does not contain all parameters required to be monitored and/or reported at the intervals required by the monitoring plan an
articular, clarification shall be provided on the status of the second set of steam generators and turbo generator of 30 MW which was prop

e monitoring report does not contain the values of the monitored parameters. (EB 54 Annex 34)Issue: The registered PDD page 35 mentio

07 which was calculated, in accordance with the monitoring plan and the methodology.
ph 366 of VVS for PA version 2 states that if, during the verification of a certain monitoring period, the DOE identifies that the calibration h
available athttps://cdm.unfccc.int/UserManagement/FileStorage/SDLAKTYJB01PR94OHWN735VIGCU2ZQ.
verification report does not describe the implementation status of the project. (For project activities that consist of more than one site, the
verification and certification report does not list each parameter required by the monitoring plan and does not provide an statement on ho
considering that the monitoring report specifies use of belt scale and load cells whereas the verification report refers to belt weigher only.
Submission incomplete: 1.Scope: According to EB48 Annex 68,paragraph 10(e), the request for issuance form must correspond
monitoring report does not contain a description of the monitoring systems, quality assurance and/or quality control system employed by

374(c)The PP/DOE shall explain the number of days given as 31, 2 and 3 for January 2019 under ER spreadsheet (row 21 of the Tab “Mon

duction shall be implemented in accordance with the monitoring plan contained in the registered PDD. Section B.2 of the Registered PDD

odic verification. However, the “Preliminary Verification ” and the on-site visit of the first periodic verification (conducted on 28-29/07/200

Submission incomplete: Scope: According to EB48 Annex 68 paragraph 9 (e), the number of Certified Emission Reductions (CER
measured by the weigh bridge installed at the main entry of manufacturing plant was consumed in the project boiler only.2. The same quan
while this cane crushing capacity was stated in the PDD as 3500 tonnes per day. Further clarification is required what impact, would the ch
Submission incomplete: Scope: According to EB48 Annex 68 paragraph 9(b) the submitted spreadsheet must be submitted in a

t on 8 May 2007 which is within two months after installation of the flare. However, the methodology requires that the first measurement

Submission incomplete: Scope: The submitted documentation are dated prior to the date of request for issuance submission.I
ken into account in the verification. However, it provides additional information which is not part of the formal verification. CLA0191 shoul

will also be monitored. This is because they give an estimation of generation of power. Measurement of quantity of waste gas used, its tem

e spreadsheet does not contain all parameters required to be monitored and/or reported at the intervals required by the monitoring plan

Submission incomplete: Scope: According to EB48 Annex 68 paragraph 9 (e),cross-referencing and versioning within and betw
verification report does not indicate that the information provided in the monitoring report has been cross-checked with other sources suc

e verification report does not state that the monitoring plan is in accordance with the applied methodology. (VVM v.1.2 para 200, 203 & 2
e verification report does not provide information on data and variables that are different from the registered PDD or any approved revise
Submission incomplete: 1.Scope: According to EB48 Annex 68 paragraph 9 (e), the number of Certified Emission Reductions (C

plant. Further clarification is required on how these values were determined and how the DOE has justified that these values have been ch

to the monitoring plan in the registered PDD (Sec. D.2.1.3, pp. 23-24) "Plant Name," as ID#8, which refers to the "Identification of power
e calibratedannually and the details of these calibrations will be provided at verification'. However, no information isprovided regarding th
available athttps://cdm.unfccc.int/UserManagement/FileStorage/SDLAKTYJB01PR94OHWN735VIGCU2ZQ.

e verification report does not state how the DOE verified the information flow for the listed parameters. (VVM v.1.2 para 206)Issue:The Ve

supply to the plant at M/s Indian Acrylics Ltd., District Sangrur, Punjab, India.
Verification Report shall list the value for each parameter required by the monitoring plan (for each site in separate), in line with VVM v.1.2

verification report does not provide an assessment of the compliance with EB 52 Annex 60 'Guidelines for assessing compliance with the ca

monitoring report does not contain a description of the monitoring systems, quality assurance and/or quality control system employed by

Submission incomplete: Scope: According to EB48 Annex 68 paragraph 9(f), the monitoring period throughout the documenta

for transportation of biomass with trucks" and "CO2 emission factor for diesel" have been monitored as per methodology and monitorin

Submission incomplete: 1.Scope: According to EB48 Annex 68 paragraph 9 (e), the number of Certified Emission Reductions (C

verification report does not provide a conclusion on the verified amount of emission reductions achieved and/or determine that calculatio
e monitoring report does not contain a description of the monitoring systems, quality assurance and/or quality control system employed b

e monitoring report does not contain information on calibration of monitoring instruments (frequency, relevant dates of calibration and/o

Submission incomplete: Scope: The cross-referencing and versioning within and between the document are not correct and ac
e monitoring report does not contain information on calibration of monitoring instruments (frequency, relevant dates of calibration and/o
(0.01 ton) level, while it is stated that CaCO3 production was manually written by the operators based on the number of pallets (1000 kg p

e monitoring report does not contain the values of the monitored parameters. (EB 54 Annex 34)Issue: The monitoring report does not pro
e verification report does not state that the monitoring plan is in accordance with the applied methodology. (VVS v.2 para 232)Issue: The D
ed at site 1) for the monitoring period in accordance with the monitoring plan, considering that the values reported in the excel sheets are

e monitoring report does not contain the values of the monitored parameters. (EB 54 Annex 34)Issue: The monitoring report does not rep

Submission incomplete: 1.Scope: According to EB48 Annex 68,paragraph 7(b), the submitted documents must be internally an
e monitoring report does not contain a description of the monitoring systems, quality assurance and/or quality control system employed b

evised PDD does not contain a description of the nature and extent of the proposed or actual changes to the project design of a registered

f emission reductions during the monitoring period when the energy meters were not annually calibrated as per the PDD, based on 0.1% d
d while bricks/blocks were produced (such as May - August 2004 at AP/VZM/I/14, August 2005 at AP/EG/I/10, April- June 2004 at AP/WG
verification report does not provide a conclusion on the verified amount of emission reductions achieved and/or determine that calculatio
Submission incomplete: Scope: According to EB48 Annex 68 paragraph 9(e), cross-referencing and versioning within and betw
e monitoring report does not contain a description of the monitoring systems, quality assurance and/or quality control system employed b

ity exported from WTGs belonging to this project activity only to ensure the pro-rata calculation approach is accurate to estimate emission

paring in the verification report, 921 tCO2/GWh, as the recently published value by Government of India for the average emission factor o
e spreadsheet does not contain explanation with regard to application of formulae in the spreadsheet. (EB48 - Annex 68 paragraph 10 (b)
m through two parallel 75 kW biogas engines with a total installed capacity of 150 kW. However, the actual installed capacity is 340 kW: th

all explain how it has verified the information flow for each meter included in the monitoring plan (from data generation, aggregation, to re

of Aditya Birla Nuvo Limited), Jagdishpur

as per the registered PDD, considering the fact that the operating hours and the percentage of electricity exported to the rice mill and stee
 Submission incomplete: Scope: The submitted documentation are dated prior to the date of request for issuance submission.I

(SIIL), Tuticorin

alculation of emission reductions, steam savings and the specific steam consumption after eliminating the data for those batch/shifts whe

was no diversion of steam from the AFBC coal boiler to the project turbine. 2. Further information is required on the check meters to be ins

or the newly implemented project measure “P26 ”, as well as the determination of the baseline consumption (488,059.09 kWh) as per the
n accordance with the description provided in the registered PDD, considering the significant increase in electricity generation continuously

Submission incomplete:

verification report does not state how the DOE verified the information flow for the listed parameters. (VVM v.1.2 para 206)Issue: The PDD
 Submission incomplete: 1.Scope: According to EB48 Annex 68 paragraph 9 (e), the number of Certified Emission Reductions (C

e monitoring report does not contain a description of the monitoring systems, quality assurance and/or quality control system employed b

generation in the PDD in comparison to the actual electricity generation during the verification period.
ry specifications and the previous verification report states that the energy meters are annually calibrated by the CEMAT transmission com
verification report does not contain an indication whether data were not available because activity levels or non-activity parameters were
solar power for heating Jucuzzi is based on the monitoring of electricity produced by solar energy. However, the monitoring plan requires
verification report does not provide an assessment of the compliance with EB 52 Annex 60 'Guidelines for assessing compliance with the ca

in-house consumption/net export values was used for calculating the baseline emissions. However, the spreadsheet ( “ER ”) indicates tha

verification report does not determine if the assumptions used in emission calculations have been justified and/or emission factors, defaul
 Submission incomplete: Scope: According to EB48 Annex 68 paragraph 9 (e), the number of Certified Emission Reductions (CER

propriate in particular considering the inconsistencies between the electricity generated (Page 13 of the MR) with the running /outage ho

lf Fertilisers,Submission
(a unit of Aditya Birla Nuvo
incomplete: Limited)
1.Scope: Jagdishpur
According to EB48 Annex 68 paragraph 8(d) a certification report must be submitted with a r

ubmitted spreadsheet is not in an assessable unprotected format . Issue: The secretariat concluded that the request submission is incomp
Submission incomplete: Scope: The number of Certified Emission Reductions (CERs), within and between the documents are n
ble inflation of the baseline of HFC projects and thereby excessive generation of CERs. Therefore detailed information on production volum

h was conducted more than 3 years after previous calibration is in line with the “General Guidance to SSC CDM Methodologies ”.

d monitoring plan given that: a) a FAR was raised in the last verification report in order to revise   monitoring procedure IOA-531-005 (inte

visedmonitoring plan states that “If calculated, assume that all relevant electrical equipment operates at full rated capacity, plus 10% to a

verification report does not provide an assessment on whether the calibration of measuring equipments was conducted at a frequency spe

e monitoring report does not contain reference to the approved revised PDD, which resulted from the notification/ request for approval o
e spreadsheet does not contain explanation with regard to application of formulae in the spreadsheet. (EB48 - Annex 68 paragraph 10 (b)

e. meter 00069901 was valid for 2 years and the recalibration was delayed from February 2007 to March 2008. Clarification is required on
e verification report does not determine that calculations of baseline emissions, project emissions and leakage as appropriate have been c
testing and is obtained with a gas analyzer using the “Orsat ” method of volumetric analysis involving chemical absorption of a sample gas

.0, para 318, the DOE shall assess whether the data collection system meets the requirements of the registered monitoring plan as per th

monitoring report does not contain information on calibration of monitoring instruments (frequency, relevant dates of calibration and/or v

monitoring report does not contain a description of the monitoring systems, quality assurance and/or quality control system employed by

monitoring report does not contain information on calibration of monitoring instruments (frequency, relevant dates of calibration and/or v

was assured, according with VVM paragraph 199 a).Clarifications are required on how the DOE correctly followed VVM paragraph 185 co
e monitoring report does not contain calculations of baseline emissions, project emissions, leakage (if any), and/or emission reductions, in

e period 29/07/2008 to 31/12/2008 and that the approach used for the calculation of the emission reductions is the most conservative ass

verification report does not state that the monitoring has been carried out in accordance with registered or the accepted revised monitorin
Submission incomplete: Scope: According to EB48 Annex 68 paragraph 9(e), cross-referencing and versioning within and betw

preadsheet does not contain explanation with regard to application of formulae in the spreadsheet. (EB48 - Annex 68 paragraph 10 (b) (iii
entration is obtained with a gas analyzer using the “Orsat ” method of volumetric analysis with an accuracy with a ± ½ percent uncertainty
an the one specified in the revised monitoring plan (+ ½ percent uncertainty range). The DOE is requested to further clarify how it assessed

ior to making the monitoring report publicly available (08 September 2009) whereas paragraph 62 of the 'Modalities and procedures for a

percent across the entire measured rate curve with an uncertainty range of less than + 1 percent ”b) “Methane concentration is determine

verification report does not state that the monitoring has been carried out in accordance with registered or the accepted revised monitorin

captured biogas is flared at all sites and combusted in a generator at selected sites identified in the monitoring report ”. However there wa
Submission incomplete: 1.Scope: According to EB48 Annex 68 paragraph 8(a) a monitoring report must be submitted with a re

hodology AMSIII.H.v.1, which requires continuous monitoring of methane content in the biogas or alternatively with periodical measurem

Submission incomplete: 1.Scope: A verification report has not been submitted with a request for issuance.Issue: There is an in

e spreadsheet does not contain the formulae of calculation that are shown in the spreadsheet cells whenever possible. (EB48 - Annex 68 p

on 3rd February 2006 and then second on 29th April 2008. The DOE is requested to clarify how it has verified that the annual calibration re

million tonnes/year in Devapur Unit and to 2.22 million tonnes/year in Jalgaon Unit. However, the capacity stated in the registered PDD is 1

e with the registered monitoring plan, considering that the verification report states that calibration is not required once  instruments hav

Submission incomplete: Scope: According to EB48 Annex 68 paragraph 9(e), cross-referencing and versioning within and betw

nd Supply to APTRANSCO Grid.

16.6% higher than the estimate in the PDD and that there is an average increase in PLF of 26.3% also during the four previous monitoring
 Submission incomplete: 1.Scope: A monitoring report using the Form and guidelines for completing the monitoring report form

preadsheet does not contain all parameters required to be monitored and/or reported at the intervals required by the monitoring plan an

dy gas meter and the gas chromatograph against the requirements of the registered monitoring plan (p.37 of PDD).

Submission incomplete: Scope: Cross-referencing and versioning within and between the document is not correct and accurat

th the use of equipment while interval of the calibrations of flow meters was longer than one year (calibration certificates issued on 29/08

did not determines whether the proposed alternative monitoring arrangements for the non-conforming monitoring period apply conserva

Submission incomplete: Scope: According to EB48 Annex 68 paragraph 8(c) a verification report must be submitted with a req
nce the verification report (p.9) states that only “For a sample of sites, the list of equipment considered in the calculation was cross-check
ent monitoring period (01/06/09 to 30/04/10) increased by 25% over the corresponding amount estimated in the registered PDD (24,291
biogas was released to the atmosphere without combustion due to the ignition failure in the flares. The DOE closed the FAR raised in the v

o electricity consumption from Site 10700 considering that the monitoring report indicated that this site was in operation during the monit

nce the verification report (p.9) states that only “For a sample of sites, the list of equipment considered in the calculation was cross-check

largely exceed the capacity of the FBC boiler (30 TPH) for a significant duration of the monitoring period.

version monitoring report on Page 12 of the verification report is not completely stated. Further information is required and a complete v
 Submission incomplete: Scope: The number of Certified Emission Reductions (CERs), within and between the documents is no

f HCFC22 CDM project activities and thereby generate emission reductions that are in excess of what would have been issued in accordan
Submission incomplete: Scope: According to EB48 Annex 68,paragraph 7(b), the submitted documents must be internally and

e monitoring report does not contain information on calibration of monitoring instruments (frequency, relevant dates of calibration and/o

ues for CO2 emission factor of fuel oil is in accordance with the monitoring methodology.ii. The baseline SSCR re estimated by conducting

verification report does not indicate that the information provided in the monitoring report has been cross-checked with other sources (VV

he manufacturing
"emission factor ofof
theportland cement
grid") were at Grasim
monitored Industries
in order Limited-Cement
to accont division South
for project emissions, (GIL-CDS),
however theseTamilnadu,
parametersIndia.
were not included in the

he sites, since the verification report (p.9) states that only "For a sample of sites, the list of equipment considered in the calculation was cr

Submission incomplete: 1.Scope: The request for issuance form does not correspond to the correct number of Certified Emissi

e monitoring report does not contain the values of the monitored parameters. (EB 54 Annex 34)Issue: The monitored values of the share o

Submission incomplete: 1.Scope: According to EB48 Annex 68 paragraph 9(e), cross-referencing and versioning within and bet

Submission incomplete: The verification/certification report on page 15 section E.3.2.1 and monitoring report on page 15 secti
Submission incomplete:
para 377 (c), the DOE shall determine whether the baseline emissions calculations have been carried out in accordance with the formulae a
Submission incomplete: Scope: According to EB48 Annex 68 paragraph 8(a) a monitoring report must be submitted with a req
 grid/ surplusSubmission
power supply to grid. Scope: A monitoring report using the Form and guidelines for completing the monitoring report form
incomplete:
preadsheet provided the auxiliary consumption is calculated as the difference of the energy generated and the net saleable energy. Furthe
s compared to the estimates in the PDD in accordance with the requirement of the VVM, as the explanation on CR1 of the monitoring repo

ering that the share of purchased wood waste from the spot market has significantly increased throughout this monitoring period and it is
zero for those days when the electricity consumed was greater than the electricity generated (for example, cell J13 for 5 March 2008) and

ues for NCV and emission factor of natural gas and NCV of naphtha is in accordance with the monitoring methodology which requires the
e monitoring report does not contain the values of the monitored parameters. (EB 54 Annex 34)Issue: While the monitoring report lists th
e monitoring report does not contain information on calibration of monitoring instruments (frequency, relevant dates of calibration and/o

t quantity of feed water used for emission reduction calculation was measured using flow meter. However, the emission reduction spread

e verification report does not provide an assessment that all physical features of the proposed CDM project activity proposed in the regist
ction claimed during this monitoring period (2.5 times) compared to the PDD estimation, in particular, the changes in the gross electricity

verification report does not determine if the assumptions used in emission calculations have been justified and/or emission factors, defaul

bly inflation of the baseline of HFC projects and thereby excessive generation of CERs. Therefore detailed information on production volum
t about the exact dates of calibration of meters and its validity as referred in the confirmation letter dated 9th February 2007 provided by
project shall not increase the bagasse production in the facility and the bagasse at the project facility should not be stored for more than

alues stated inthe spreadsheet of the monitoring report are a summation of three values, while the electricity generationis measured by t

bly inflation of the baseline of HFC projects and thereby excessive generation of CERs. Therefore detailed information on production volum

dsheet ( “Error ”) shows that 0.2% was applied to the readings of ICE meter from 1 September 2016 to 31 March 2017. The verification rep
nd the Build Margin (BM) and also include values of relevant parameters used for emission factor calculations in the monitoring report as r
48,454 in the PDD to 60,193 during the monitoring period, in particular, on the changes in the gross electricity generation from the proje

e verification report does not indicate that the information provided in the monitoring report has been cross-checked with other sources s

Submission incomplete: Scope: The submitted documentation are dated prior to the date of request for issuance submission.T
e revised PDD does not contain a description of the nature and extent of the proposed or actual changes to the project design of a registe

as estimated in the PDD to 39,676 during the monitoring period, in particular, the changes in the gross electricity generation from the proj
ly a relatively small amount of biomass residue is stored from one crop season to another, to start up the boilers. ” However, the DOE state
 Submission incomplete: Scope: The submitted documentation are dated prior to the date of request for issuance submission.I
representing 10% of the total equipment installed are statistical representative for all operational solar cookers.2. The monitoring report

verification and certification report does not provide an assessment on whether the calibration of measuring equipments was conducted a

monitoring report does not contain information on calibration of monitoring instruments (frequency, relevant dates of calibration and/or v

e monitoring report does not contain information on calibration of monitoring instruments (frequency, relevant dates of calibration and/o

recorded when the operation of the plant was out of normal production range of ±5% is in accordance with the monitoring plan and the m
default density value used, i.e.  if the biogas flow readings are normalized to 0°C / 1 atm as per IPCC 1996 vol. 3, page 1.124. Please refer t

Submission incomplete: Scope: According to EB48 Annex 68 pargraph 8(e) a request for issuance form must be submitted with

verification report does not list each parameter required by the monitoring plan and does not provide an statement on how the DOE verifi
Submission incomplete: 1.Scope: According to PCP v2 para 138(b) an assessment opinion by the DOE must be submitted.Acco
uction process in the project emissions calculation.

d monitoring data by the methodology and the registered monitoring plan.

on on the 20th January 2008, while during the period from 21:45 18 January 2008 to 04:27 21 February 2008 the plant was shut down (p.4

verification report does not provide an assessment on whether the calibration of measuring equipments was conducted at a frequency spe
shall provide information on how it has verified the completeness of the line diagrams of the monitoring system, given the fact that the rel

Submission incomplete: Scope: Cross-referencing and versioning within and between the document is not correct and accurat

rom the gross generation readings from SCADA and estimated transmission loss and the DOE stated in the deviation request that “To kno

ng data provided in the spreadsheet is not consistent.Many of the cells in the spreadsheet contain values with ten places after decimal (e.g

readings for LFG flow which include those days when the electricity failures and maintenance occurred, resulting in no measurements on-

Submission incomplete: Issue: As per your request, we are sending back this request for issuance to you inorder to rearrange t
of the delayed calibration are not available, or the calibration has not been conducted at the time of the verification, the DOE, prior to fin
ovide a line diagram (graphical schemes) showing all relevant monitoring points as per the requirements of para. 258 of the ¨CDM Project

atest year statistics data ”. However, the operating margin emission factor was calculated based on three years data (2005-2007). Further

ct activities onassessment that the quantity of available biomass in the region is at least 25% larger than the quantity ofbiomass that is uti

available athttps://cdm.unfccc.int/UserManagement/FileStorage/SDLAKTYJB01PR94OHWN735VIGCU2ZQ.
Submission incomplete: According to the meeting report "Sixteenth conference call with DOE/AIE coordination forum" para. 1
equested to clarify: a) whether there is any change in the project design along with the change of the LFG collection efficiency. If yes, the D
onitoring period as per information contained in the MR which presents calibration dates that are not confirmed by the DOE (p.17 in the V
and whether the changes would have been known prior to the registration of the CDM project activity (para 309 (b) of VVS for PA version

methodology. In particular: (a) As per the applied methodology ACM0002, EGPJ,y refers to the quantity of net electricity generation that

PP/DOE are requested to address the issues below as per paragraphs 365, 366 and 371 of the VVS-PA ver.2. a) The DOE shall further valida
DOE shall assess that all physical features (technology, project equipment, and monitoring and metering equipment) of the registered CDM

ity including relevant dates of implementation and actual operation, e.g. dates of construction, commissioning, start of operation.

ed for, and provide the calculations of baseline GHG emissions (paragraph 264(a) of PA for PS version 2) The spreadsheet, "Ref.10379_MP

onitoring permanently deviates from the applied methodologies, standardized baselines, or their applied standards or tools, and, if there a

for 01/01/2021, the export generation data for the billing period 01/12/2020 to 01/01/2021 is now apportioned to the date 31/12/2020 t

on report shall provide a description of how the DOE conducted the global stakeholder consultation and took due account of all authentic

st monitoring period of which the DOE is required to provide its opinion on the global stakeholder consultation as per the para 394 of VVS

on frequency of meters is once in five years, however, there is no delay in calibration of energy meters." However, "Sonu Handicrafts_Win

tion changes. The monitoring report and verification/certification report refers to post-registration changes: temporary deviation whereas

r these values). If the values correspond to the controller data, it is observed that the total values do not match the controller data value p
ort refer to PRC (permanent changes) however, the request for issuance does not refer to a PRC and there is no post registration changes s

ar whether all the requirements of the tool to calculate the emission factor for an electricity system (version 4) are fully met. For example

ed monitoring plan, in particular: (a) Deviation 1: (i) It is not evident that the formulas described on page 8 of the monitoring report are ap

r paragraph 242 of the PS-PA.2: Paragraph 301 of VVS-PA: The validation report on section D.7 does not provide information how/what do

ted to explain how this approach is in accordance with paragraph 366 of VVS-PA as there is no information provided on the results of the
version 09.0 paragraph 385 (a).Issue: The applied methodology is applicable to claim emission reductions from renewable biomass. Durin
registration changes request form"(CDM-PRC-FORM) shall be submitted.Issue: The duly completed CDM-PRC-FORM is missing. 2.Scope: A

ot provide an statement on how the DOE verified the information flow for these parameters including the values in the monitoring report

the calibration has been implemented after the monitoring period in consideration (i.e. the results of delayed calibration are available), re

ays to get the net units for monitored period in these months. The DOE is therefore requested to explain how it has cross-checked the net

ons achieved nor/or confirm that appropriate methods and formulae for calculating baseline emissions, project emissions and leakage ha

cy class, and calibration information (frequency, date of calibration and validity), if applicable as per the registered monitoring plan.The mo

mission reductions or net anthropogenic GHG removals is conducted by the project participants at the frequency specified in the registere

th a request for issuance as required in the completeness check checklist for requests for issuance in line with PCP version 9 para 222.Issu

all relevant monitoring points. Please refer to PS PA v1.0 paragraph 259.The project participant is requested to provide the line diagrams s

mes) showing all relevant monitoring points. The PP is requested to provide a monitoring diagram which depicts: (1) The two groups of W
evised PDD (in both clean and track changes version) shall be submitted.Issue: The revised PDD in track changes is not provided.

re found correct." The DOE is required to provide further information on how it validated the correctness of newly incorporated geo-coord

tters, temperature transmitters and pressure transmitters used in the project activity as per VVS-PA para. 260 (b) and VVS v.03 para. 338 (
sion 02.0.(a) The Monitoring Report page 12 explains that the ¨Quantity of net electricity supplied by the project activity to the common m

calibration has been delayed and the calibration has been implemented after the monitoring period in consideration (i.e. the results of del

xed 10-year crediting period (23 May 15 - 22 May 25). However, the Verification and Certification Report (Sec. E.10, p. 22) states that the G

e project participants and monitoring results are consistently recorded as per the approved frequency (paragraph 361 of VVS for PA). The
n the applied methodology and the applied monitoring plan in line with VVS PA v03 para. 365.It verified that all the meters were calibrated

gistration changes. The monitoring report and verification/certification report refer to post-registration change type temporary deviation

d between the documents is not consistent.Issue: There is an inconsistency of the amount of CER between the ER spreadsheet (31,303 CO
between the documents is not consistent.Issue: There is an inconsistency of the amount of CER between the ER spreadsheet (35,319 CO2
strate auxiliary line with a meter applied in each Suba plant and Usaquen plant. Further PDD page 31 state “the net electricity supplied to
ons for completing form CDM-MR-FORM, line diagrams showing all relevant monitoring points shall be included in section C.2: There is no

mount of emissions (PRC). The PRC ER spreadsheet refers to “116,495 ” (sheet “Emissions ”) and “116,494 ” (sheet “PDD table summary ”).2.T
on is opted to calculate the operating margin OM, it is required to use the same data vintage (y, y-1 or y-2) throughout all crediting periods

spreadsheet) considering that the first calibration date/certification mentioned in Annex 1 in the Monitoring Report v1.2 and p.26 in the V

statement on how the DOE verified the information flow (from data generation, aggregation, to recording, calculation and reporting) for th
ment is not correct and accurate.Issue: The verification and certification report refers to version 2.0 of the PDD whereas a confidential vers

been submitted with a request for issuance as required in the completeness check checklist for requests for issuance in line with PCP vers
ssing. The monitoring report and verification and certification report refer to post-registration changes (permanent changes to the monito

et mention that there was a delay in calibration from September 2013 to February 2017 and accordingly an error factor of 0.2% has been

gistered monitoring plan considering that the revised PDD (Appendix 7, page 96) establishes that the changes are two: type of sampling fra

all ABT meters and Yard meters is once in three years. The calibration dates of the ABT meter at GETCO Substation are mentioned as 23/0
ting the monitoring report form (CDM-MR-FORM) has not been submitted with a request for issuance as required in the completeness che

ng all relevant monitoring points. This description may include data collection procedures (information flow including data generation, agg
or issuance of CERs (para 394-5 of VVS for PA version 2).The verification report (p 18) states that "Global stakeholder consultation" is "Not

oject and leakage emissions as well as other parameters required by the applied methodology and the registered monitoring plan as per P

together with the request for issuance re-submission by the DOE.Issue: The DOE is requested to re-upload the request for issuance (includ
as been delayed, conservative approach is to be applied in the ER calculation. The DOE stated that delay in calibration was observed and a

d/or determine that calculations of baseline emissions, project emissions and leakage as appropriate have been carried out in accordance

ompliance with the applied methodologies, standardized baselines and other applied standards or tools, and do not reduce the level of ac

team members, technical experts and internal technical reviewers for the proposed CDM project activity is not included in the validation

alid CDM-VCR-FORM shall be submitted.. The Board agreed at EB 108 (December 2020), as temporary measures pending CMP guidance at

a revised PDD (in both clean and track changes version) shall be submitted.Issue: The revised PDD has been submitted in both clean and tr
the submitted documents.Issue: Signed form refers to (1. corrections, 2. changes to the start date of the crediting period, 3. permanent c
or the period from 01/11/2019 to 30/11/2019 and 01/12/2020 to 31/12/2020 (for WTGs MNP 136 (HTSC No.2164 and MNP 143 (HTSC NO
(VVS v.7 para 274)Issue: It is observed that the emission factors of the fossil fuels are not included in the monitoring plan. The DOE is requ

ons achieved nor/or confirm that appropriate methods and formulae for calculating baseline emissions, project emissions and leakage ha
f the first monitoring report (paragraph 394-395 of VVS for PA version 2).The DOE (p18) states that " to perform the 1st periodical verifica

the calibration has been implemented after the monitoring period in consideration (i.e. the results of delayed calibration are available), th
GHG emissions or actual net GHG removals, and leakage GHG emissions have been carried out in accordance with the formulae and metho

te Percentage (%) ” based on which the net electricity exports and imports were calculated. The DOE is required to provide further informa
it requires that the PP shall describe the nature, extent and duration of the non-conforming monitoring period in the monitoring report, a
ed 10-year crediting period (31 Dec 12 - 30 Dec 22). However, under Sec. E.10 (p. 19), the Verification and Certification Report concludes t

e registered CDM project activity has been submitted and if applicable, the date of approval as per PS version 09.0 paragraph 245.Issue: Th
e registered CDM project activity has been submitted and if applicable, the date of approval as per PS version 09.0 paragraph 245.Issue: Th

s or applied the most conservative values approach referred to in the PS for the non-conforming monitoring period.Issue: Further informa

version 09.0 paragraph 385 (a). Scope: The verification report does not describe the reasons for the phased-implementation delay and/or
s or applied the most conservative values approach referred to in the PS for the non-conforming monitoring period?The DOE validated tha

tation(e.g. emission reduction worksheet, financial calculations) shall be submitted as appropriate.For the post-registration change, the ER

tation(e.g. emission reduction worksheet, financial calculations) shall be submitted as appropriate.For the post-registration change, the ER

a result of the implementation of the CDM project activity in year y (MWh/yr) (EGPJ,y) is equal to the electricity generated by the project

able to process the PRC and therefore will send this request back to the DOE in order for you to re-submit with the PRC. Please be informe
 registration changes request form"(CDM-PRC-FORM) shall be submitted.Issue:2.Scope: According to PCP version 9 para 161(b), VVS para

nce between the origin and destination for the raw materials from “continuously ” to “once in the monitoring period ”. The DOE is requeste
DM project activity regarding: a) the applicability and application of the applied methodology under the project activity has been registere

ed monitoring plan.As per the ER spreadsheet, for December 2019, the total generation has been apportioned based on number of days o
 version 09.0 paragraph 385 (a). Scope: The verification report does not describe the reasons for the phased-implementation delay and/or

h the estimate in the PDD, and explanation on any significant increase, including all information (i.e. data or parameters) that is different fr
between the documents is not consistent.Issue: Kindly address the inconsistency of information regarding the amount of emissions reduc
ired by the monitoring plan and the applied methodology?Issue: As discussed via phone, this is to reopen your interface in order for you t
es taking place, whether the changes would have been known prior to registration of the project activity, and how the changes would imp
tion process of this request for issuance.The DOE is requested to justify why the concept of materiality has not been applied during this ve

eceipts obtained from the grid operator. As per the verification report, the net electricity generation is cross checked with the records of s

ersion of the CDM-MR-FORM shall be submitted.1. The DOE is requested to submit the respective monitoring report using the valid version
5/2013, however, as per the verification report, the date is 23/08/2012. The DOE shall clarify on this inconsistency and explain how it has v

valid CDM-VCR-FORM shall be submitted.1.The raised FAR is incomplete. The Board agreed at EB 108 (December 2020), as temporary mea
he engine put in place. The PDD mentions the model as JGS 620-GS-S.L, whereas as per the the monitoring report, the model is J 620GS-F5

ow (from data generation, aggregation, to recording, calculation and reporting) for these parameters including the values in the monitorin
stered monitoring plan are in accordance to para 4 and 5 of the Appendix 1 of Project Standard which do not require prior approval of the
tion changes request form"(F-CDM-PRC)must be submitted.The DOE is kindly requested to submit the documentation for request for post

nic GHG removals in the registered PDD has been implemented in accordance with the registered monitoring plan (paragraph 363 of VVS f
VR, page 8) verifies that the check meter is installed at the project premises. The PP/DOE are requested to provide further information on

between the documents is not correct and accurate.Issue: The project view page and the request for issuance form (CDM-ISS-FORM) indic

nic GHG removals in the registered PDD has been implemented in accordance with the registered monitoring plan (paragraph 363 of VVS f

e; c) applicability and application of the baseline methodology: d) compliance of the monitoring plan with the applied monitoring methodo
project activity has been implemented in accordance with the monitoring plan contained in the registered PDD or any accepted revised mo

methodologies, the applied standardized baselines and/or the registered monitoring plan (Version 01.0 of the VVS for project activities, pa
f activities, for issuance track, the DOE shall submit a request for approval of changes (PRC) to the secretariat through a dedicated interfac

58 of the CDM project standard for project activities, version 02.0.2: The verification report page 15 confirms that, for the parameter EGBL

tent.Issue: Monitoring report refers to the baseline emission of 52,423 whereas the verification/certification report as well as the ER shee
ult values as provided in Table 1.2, Vol. 2 of the 2006 IPCC Guidelines, when the NCV is provided by the fuel supplier. The methodology fur

thane, if temperature of the exhaust gas of the flare is less than 500 C for any particular hour, it shall be assumed that during that hour th

document are not correct and accurate.Issue: 1. There is an inconsistency in the cross referencing of the version and completion date of th
t changes from the registered monitoring plan or applied methodology has been submitted, and if applicable, the date of approval as per
nsistent.Issue: The monitoring period 01 Jan 13 - 28 Feb 15 displayed on the project site does not correlate with the monitoring period con

ot provide an statement on how the DOE verified the information flow for these parameters including the values in the monitoring report
 s from the registered monitoring plan ”, if the changes to the monitoring of the registered CDM project activity is related to the one(s) liste

quired to be conducted by the project participant for the first monitoring period in accordance with para 184 of the CDM project cycle pro

ns by sources, or the baseline and actual net GHG removals by sinks, as well as other relevant parameters for the monitoring period as requ

sistent.Issue: The DOE is kindly requested to revise the content in first paragraph of the submitted Certification Statement. The title of the
consist of more than one site, the report shall clearly describe the status of implementation and starting date of operation for each site. Fo

statement on how the DOE verified the information flow (from data generation, aggregation, to recording, calculation and reporting) for th

he allometric equation used by the PP is already validated in the previous monitoring period (Verification report E.8.2, page 25). However,

ded by the DOE as to why the site visits cannot be postponed, including the demonstration of a significant impact of delaying the site visits
lity control system employed by the project activity, data collection procedures (information flow including data generation, aggregation,
team conducts remote audit as per para.22 of CDM-EB 112 Report through Tencent video conference APP, agreed by both DOE and PPs."

n changes. The monitoring report and verification/certification report refer to post-registration change type temporary deviation whereas

has been delayed, conservative approach is to be applied in the ER calculation. The DOE stated in the verification report that a maximum e
version 09.0 paragraph 385 (a). Scope: The verification report does not describe the reasons for the phased-implementation delay and/or
raction of the waste type i in the sample n collected during the year y) and FCFi (Fraction of fossil carbon in total carbon of waste type i) a
ting the monitoring report form (CDM-MR-FORM) has not been submitted with a request for issuance as required in the completeness che

5 and "there was no power generation occurred @ K-505 from 05.03.2015 to 15.10.2015 and thus no Form-B are available. The emission
quired by the monitoring plan and the applied methodology?Issue: There is typographical error in "Dashboard" sheet which indicates the
19 of the monitoring report indicate there are separate flow meters for biogas sent to gas engine and biogas sent to gas boiler; whereas (

es to the registered CDM project activity has been submitted and if applicable, the date of approval. (PS v1, para 189)The DOE/PP is reque

OE must be submitted.There is an inconsistency of the type of Post-registration changes between the monitoring report (Corrections, Per
2), the monitoring report   (pages 17-19), and verification report (pages 14-15), the Pn,i,y (Weight fraction of the waste type i in the sample

been submitted with a request for issuance as required in the completeness check checklist for requests for issuance in line with PCP vers
lity control system employed by the project activity, data collection procedures (information flow including data generation, aggregation,
d track changes version) must be submitted.As per EB67, Annex 4, para. 11 (c) and the Guidance provided at UNFCCC website (https://cdm

tion from each project wind turbine (EG controller, project) is measured using controller meters. EG controller, project is used to calculate
n does not adversely impact the additionality of the project activity based on the fact that the total capacity remains below 10 MW, consid

ain metering points, in line with the requirements of para. 258 of the PS-PA, v.03.0.2: The PP is requested to include in the Monitoring Rep
ntry. The DOE is requested to provide further information/verification opinion on the requirement "If the site visits cannot be postponed,

he para 26 of EB 106 meeting report requires the DOE to provide a proper justification if the site visits cannot be postponed.1) The verific
tion changes. The monitoring report on pages 5-6 refers to PRC types: permanent changes to the registered monitoring plan, or permanen
(VVS v.2 para 232)Issue: The DOE is requested to further substantiate the compliance of the registered monitoring plan with the methodo

res the DOE to confirm that the error has been applied: (a) In a conservative manner, such that the adjusted measured values of the delay
the data recorded in the coal purchase register of the plant, and the higher value after adjusting for the closing stock at the plant will be u
tion for certain parameters. The DOE shall provide an opinion on the actual verified errors of the meters. Please refer to verification and re

b) scale; c) applicability and application of the baseline methodology: d) compliance of the monitoring plan with the applied monitoring m
ty of the actual CDM project activity and its operation with the registered project design document and determine whether any deviation
between the documents is not consistent.Issue: The number of CERs is not consistent. As per your request dated 20/03/17, this submissio
n accordance with Appendix 1 of the Project Standard as per PS version 09.0 paragraph 275.Issue: The A.3. of the PDD provides the techn

nitoring period from 09/12/2014 to 31/12/2016 since as per the revised spreadsheet submitted the reported period for all the WES ends o

ng monitoring and the proposed alternative monitoring of the project activity (PS v07 para 268)Issue:The PP/DOE are requested to address
ts of mainly 2m3 and 3m3 gas storage capacities each for individual households of at least 2 zero-grazing cows in Nairobi River Basin ”and

ows one main meter and one backup meter for each of these sites which indicate that there is one transmission line connected to these m

visit cannot be postponed since a delay on performing the mandatory on-site visit for the project activity, will impact a delay in CERs deliv
ed monitoring plan are in accordance with paragraphs 4 and 5 of the Appendix 1 of Project Standard which do not require prior approval o

tion request form are submitted as attachments. However, a request for post-registration changes was not submitted along with the reque
eferred in CAR 04 did not correspond to the information presented in the spreadsheet. For example, the sheet called "Gereration Details"
wn of CERs to be issued up to 31 December 2012 and CERs issued from 01 Jan 2013, where applicable, in request for issuance form do not

between the documents are not consistent.Issue: 1. There is an inconsistency in the cross-referencing of the ER amount. The ER spreadsh

he accepted revised monitoring plan. (VVS v2 para 235)Issue: The monitoring plan requires the accuracy of M7 and M8 complies with the
th a request for issuance as required in the completeness check checklist for requests for issuance in line with PCP version 9 para 222.Issu
oject and leakage emissions as well as other parameters required by the applied methodology and the registered monitoring plan. (PS v7,
changes. The monitoring report refers on section B.2.5 to approved PRC (Permanent changes from registered monitoring plan, or perman

ct number of Certified Emission Reduction, specified by the DOE.Issue: There is an inconsistency of the total amount of CER between the s
e been justified as per VVS version 09.0 paragraph 403 (d).Issue: The DOE shall clarify how it has verified the grid emission factor (EFgrid,CM

d April, 2015, we are sending you back this request for issuance for you to re-submit, addressing the issues you raised regarding the incons

ed approved methodology and, where applicable, the applied approved standardized baseline as per VVS version 09.0 paragraph 388.Issu

esent the expected implementation dates. (VVS v5, para 228 (a))Issue: The PP has stated in the monitoring report page 4 that the phase II
between the documents is not consistent.Issue: 1. There is an inconsistency in the cross-referencing of the number of Certified Emissions

approved methodology and, where applicable, the applied approved standardized baseline as per VVS version 09.0 paragraph 388.Issue:
s conducted at a frequency specified in applied monitoring methodology or EB guidance if applicable, and/or the monitoring plan (VVS v2,

sistent.Issue: Reference number on the CER spreadsheet is 5257 (typo)!2.Scope: The number of Certified Emission Reductions (CERs), with

mplied with, as: (a) The monitoring report and the verification report state the frequency as annual whereas the registered monitoring pla
lity control system employed by the project activity, data collection procedures (information flow including data generation, aggregation,

port does not contain the values of the monitored parameters used to calculate baseline, project and leakage emissions as well as other p

between the documents is not correct and accurate.Issue: The amount of CER is not consistent between the CER Calculation sheet (17,69
s conducted at a frequency specified in applied monitoring methodology or EB guidance if applicable, and/or the monitoring plan (VVS v2,

oject and leakage emissions as well as other parameters required by the applied methodology and the registered monitoring plan. (PS ver
red monitoring plan are in accordance to para 4 and 5 of the Appendix 1 of Project Standard which do not require prior approval of the Bo

o take into account different ecological zones (Terai, Hills and Remote Hills) as strata. To make it more representatives, districts and village
o take into account different ecological zones (Terai, Hills and Remote Hills) as strata. To make it more representatives, districts and village
ired by the monitoring plan and the applied methodology?Issue: The registered monitoring plan (page 56 of the PDD) requires ex post upd

the option chosen by the PP, the tool to calculate the emission factor for an electricity system requires the OM to be calculated based on a
228 (b))Issue: DOE shall provide further evidence that the project activity is operating as per registered PDD, in particular the nitric acid p

with registered or the revised monitoring plan as per VVS version 09.0 paragraph 392.Issue: The DOE is requested to explain how the mon
ot been submitted with a request for issuance.2.Scope: The number of Certified Emission Reductions (CERs), within and between the docu

y imported from the grid has been manually filled. The DOE is requested to explain how it has cross-checked the net unit values for the pe

ered monitoring plan are in accordance with paragraphs 4 and 5 of the Appendix 1 of Project Standard which do not require prior approva
wever, the intervals for the I-REC issuances are indicated as “21/10/19-06/11/19 and 01/01/20-20/11/20 ”(monitoring report, page 2); “24/

: The CER calculation sheet shows, in all the yearly sheets, cells highlighted in yellow marked as “no operation ”, “no data recorded ”and “n
consist of more than one site, the report shall clearly describe the status of implementation and starting date of operation for each site. Fo

stration of a significant impact of delaying the site visits on the DOE, project participants or coordinating/managing entity (e.g. commitmen

quired by the monitoring plan and the applied methodology.Issue: The spreadsheet does not contain the parameters Tflare (Temperature
onsistent.Issue:The monitoring periods dates on the Issuance Request Form/Project view page are different from the dates reported on M

uctions calculations are not over-estimated as a result of the change ((PS v1, para 217)Issue: With regard to the change of accuracy of met
must be submitted with a request for issuance.Issue: Please note that you have submitted through the VVM track where as the verificatio

eration in ER calculation during the delayed calibration period. The DOE is requested to provide spreadsheet that shows the application of

0). Kindly submit an updated monitoring report using the latest version (version 7.0). 2.2. The template of the verification and certification

red monitoring plan are in accordance to para 4 and 5 of the Appendix 1 of Project Standard which do not require prior approval of the Bo

tement on how the DOE verified the information flow (from data generation, aggregation, to recording, calculation and reporting) for thes

EGthermal,y is different from the value of ±0.25% described in the monitoring plan of the registered PDD. The PP shall provide more infor
culations of baseline GHG emissions or baseline net GHG removals, project GHG emissions or actual net GHG removals, and leakage GHG e

n accordance with Appendix 1 of the Project Standard (PS v1, para 209)Issue: PP shall specify that the changes made to the revised PDD a

rd and the provisions of Appendix 1 of Project Standard apply to those correctionsIssue:The DOE verified the change in the meter in the se

reas the verification was conducted as per VVS. Kindly re-submit through the VVS track.
ubmitted for the PRC is not in line with the applied methodology AR-AMS0001 (v5) equation (24) P(t) = Σ(PA(t) i + PB(t) i) * Ai * (44/12) (VV

ation of relevant sections into English as per instructions for filling out the monitoring report form in line with PS version 9 para 260.Issue:

ubmitted for the PRC is not in line with the applied methodology AR-AMS0001 (v5) equation (24) P(t) = Σ(PA(t) i + PB(t) i) * Ai * (44/12) (VV

ovided documents /29/ /39/ confirm that there is cultivation all over the place including cutting of the natural belts, there was illegality of

he estimate in the PDD, and explanation on any significant increase, including all information (i.e. data or parameters) that is different from

or the accepted revised monitoring plan. (VVS v2 para 235)Issue: The parameter of “Daily Mean Weight of baked HHK bricks (DMW hhk br

or the accepted revised monitoring plan. (VVS ver. 07 para 280)Issues: i. The data source for the operating time for each solar cooker (ti) ha
or the accepted revised monitoring plan. (VVS ver. 07 para 280)Issues: i. The data source for the operating time for each solar cooker (ti) ha
d track changes version) must be submitted. According EB 68, Annex 33 "Implementation Plan for the Clean Development Mechanism Pro
s not provide an statement on how the DOE verified the information flow for these parameters including the values in the monitoring repo
d/or determine that calculations of baseline emissions, project emissions and leakage as appropriate have been carried out in accordance

5, 3776, 3777, 3778, 3789, 3790 and 3791 had a delayed calibration from period 03/11/2017 to 27/11/2017, and hence the error factor –
or issuance.Issue: The certification report states incorrect methodology (AM0028 v3).2.Scope: The monitoring period throughout the docu

monitoring plan requires the values of Vi,RG,m, VRG,m, MRG,m, vO2,EG,m, fcCH4,EG,m should be averaged on a minute basis. However, s
ired by the monitoring plan and the applied methodology.Issue: The spreadsheet does not show how the values mentioned in the monito
emporary deviation. However, the issuance submission does not include a request for post-registration cases. Temporarily deviation is a po

s conducted at a frequency specified in applied monitoring methodology or EB guidance if applicable, and/or the monitoring plan (VVS v2,

rification report (VR), the total number of sample plots are mentioned to be 35. On page 16 of the VR, it is mentioned that "the PP s’ total s
 d between the documents is not correct and accurate.Issue: The amount of CERs is not consistent among the submitted documentation a

s conducted at a frequency specified in applied monitoring methodology or EB guidance if applicable, and/or the monitoring plan (VVS v2,

details on accuracy class, and calibration information (frequency, date of calibration and validity) (paragraph 260(b) of PS for PA version 2

used in calculation sheet [column O of worksheets _1.2 Period1-Plant1-Daily(EX) and 2.2 Period1-Plant2-Daily(EX)] does not contain the t

and found that there is difference between electricity mentioned in JMR and Electricity mentioned in invoice4. This is due to the fact that

y imported from the grid were manually filled. The DOE was requested to explain how it cross-checked the net unit values for the period c

oject and leakage emissions as well as other parameters required by the applied methodology and the registered monitoring plan as per P
D in accordance with the paragraph 357 of VVS for PA (version 01.0), as the approved revised PDD describes: (i) Implementation of 4 trunk

equest for Issuance in "Post-Registration Changes" using the interface available to the DOE. Please note that the documentation relevant
wn of CERs to be issued up to 31 December 2012 and CERs issued from 01 Jan 2013, where applicable, in request for issuance form do not

tion changes request form"(F-CDM-PRC)must be submitted.Please note that while the form and related documents to post registration ch
between the documents is not correct and accurate.Issue: According to the submitted documents the total amount of CERs achieved for t

graphical schemes) showing all relevant monitoring points. The PP is requested to provide a monitoring diagram which depicts: (1) The thr
y control system employed by the project activity, data collection procedures (information flow including data generation, aggregation, rec

pplied in accordance with the registered monitoring plan.As the monitoring plan states that net electricity supplied by the project activity
must be submitted with a request for issuance.Issue:Inconsistency in VVS/VVM version - the Verification Report is based upon VVS where

must be submitted with a request for issuance.Issue: In particular the verification report is not signed.
nsistent.Issue: There is an inconsistency of the monitoring period between the project view page (26/12/2013 - 25/09/2014) and the rest o

here is no information on the actual results of the delayed calibration of the main and back-up meters or confirmation that the result of th

tes that the project would be above the benchmark if electricity generation would be 13.4 % above the generation applied in the PDD. The
ssuance.Issue: Please note that you have submitted through the VVS track where as the verification was conducted as per VVM. Kindly re-

ired by the monitoring plan and the applied methodology?Issue: The DOE is asked to state all values of monitoring electricity meters, inclu
f activities, for issuance track, the DOE shall submit a request for approval of changes (PRC) to the secretariat through a dedicated interfac

he accepted revised monitoring plan. (VVM v.1.2 para 206 & 221(d))Issue: The DOE should further clarify FAR01 raised given that it is not

equest for issuance submission.Issue 1: The submitted form for post-registration changes is signed on 17 April, 2014 which is prior to the fi
VVS v.2 para 232)Issue: The Verification Report in some sections reports that the monitoring plan is as per the approved revised MP; while

d/or determine that calculations of baseline emissions, project emissions and leakage as appropriate have been carried out in accordance

ation, please re-submit the case through the VVM track. It will be processed through the VVM track immediately.
 (c)).Issue: The PP/DOE submitted a request for a PRC which includes changes in planted area, species composition, technology applied an
the electricity generation and consumption for the month of Feb in 2019 and 2020. However, the DOE did not provide any verification opi

ble standardized baseline. The validation report for post-registration changes, monitoring report and verification/certification report refer

idation and Verification Standard for Project Activities (version 3), in particular, paragraph 391, which provides for the requirements for th

(VVS v.2 para 232)Issue: The methodology requires calculating the energy savings using the metered energy obtained, however neither th

pplied in accordance with the registered monitoring plan. As per the monitoring plan, there will be a cross check of measurement results
e (i.e.01/07/2019) whereas different version number (2.4 vs 2.2) and different content (80 pages vs 94 pages). The DOE is requested to ad

ocument are not correct and accurate.Issue: The Verification/ Certification Report refers to the Monitoring Report version 3, dated 11/09/2

nd track changes version) must be submitted.Please note that if the PDD submitted under confidential documents is the revised PDD it sh

g details on accuracy class and calibration information (frequency, dates of calibration and validity) as specified by the monitoring method

between the documents is not correct and accurate.Issue: There is an inconsistency of CER between the project view page (97,107 CO2) a
 DOE must be submitted.The asssessment opinion file submitted is the same as the Signed Form.2.Scope: According to PCP v2 para 138(c)
and emission reductions, including reference to formulae and methods used (PS v1, 194 (a)(b)(c)(d))Issue: The PP is requested to provide t

hecked with other sources such as plant log books, inventories, purchase records, laboratory analyses. (VVS v7, para 262 (b))Issue:The reg

hecked with other sources such as plant log books, inventories, purchase records, laboratory analyses. (VVM v.1.2 para 208 (a) and (b))Iss

he accepted revised monitoring plan. (VVS v2 para 235)Issue: The monitoring report reports that the feed-in electricity is calculated as the

ired by the monitoring plan and the applied methodology?Issue: The quantity of electricity generation (EGGEN,y) and the additional electr

he accepted revised monitoring plan. (VVM v.1.2 para 206 & 221(d))Issue: The DOE (VR page 27) acknowledges that there is a diesel gene
oject and leakage emissions as well as other parameters required by the applied methodology and the registered monitoring plan. (PS v1,

itoring plan or applied methodology does not require prior approval of the Board and the provisions of Appendix 1 of PS apply to those de

e project activity has been implemented in accordance with the monitoring plan contained in the registered PDD36 or any accepted revise

preadsheet “20180121 - 20181031 ” cell E24 demonstrates the value of FCH4,EL,y for the period 21 –31/01/2018 as 216 tCH4, which is bas

must be submitted with a request for issuance.Issue: For the submitted verification report the vvs track was used, while the project view p

uest for issuance submission.Issue: The Verification Statement is signed and dated 15/02/2012 which is prior to the final version and revis

mission reductions or net anthropogenic GHG removals is conducted by the project participants at the frequency specified in the registere

e: a) The verification report states that the clinker production is measured by 1) multiplying the kiln feed by the CK factor and; 2) weight sc
 the expected implementation dates. (VVS v6, para 263 (a))Issue: The registered PDD (p.10) indicates that the construction work for Phase

c) applicability and application of the baseline methodology: d) compliance of the monitoring plan with the applied monitoring methodolo

rt must be submitted with a request for issuance.Issue: Please note that you have submitted through the VVM track where as the verificati

riod throughout the documentation must be consistent.Issue: There is an inconsistency of monitoring period between the signed form an
he estimate in the PDD, and explanation on any significant increase, including all information (i.e. data or parameters) that is different from

e monitoring report for current monitoring period and that in the monitoring report for the first monitoring period. Example: Date of calib
d in the calculation of emission reductions. (EB48 - Annex 68 paragraph 10 (a) (v)).Issue: the PDD (page 50) states that "Unit standard coal
ired by the monitoring plan and the applied methodology?Issue:The MR and ER spreadsheet do not contain data from M5,M6 , which is re
activity proposed in the registered PDD are in place and/or that the project participant has implemented and operated the proposed CDM

requires the emission factor of Non-Methane-Hydro-Carbon (NMHC) to be "obtained through periodical analysis of the fractional compos

lity control system employed by the project activity, data collection procedures (information flow including data generation, aggregation,

onitoring in cases where it is established that the NCV of WECM does not fluctuate greatly).While the DOE has verified that this parameter
n into account in calculating the emission reductions.4: Scope: The verification and certification report does not provide an assessment an
 must be submitted with a request for issuance.Issue: Please note that you have submitted through the VVM track where as the verificatio

ment is not correct and accurate.Issue: Monitoring Report and Verification Report refer to the revised PDD version 5.2 dated 06/06/2012. T

od throughout the documentation must be consistent.Issue: Monitoring report (p. 15 section E. 4 emission reduction table) as well as the

between the documents is not correct and accurate.Issue: There is an inconsistency of CER between the verification report (34,085 CO2) a

d close out of any CARs, CLs or FARs issued. (VVM v.1.2 para 192, 194)Issue:Regarding the accuracy class of meter for measuring electricity

accordance with Appendix 1 of the Project Standard? (PS v1, para 209)Issue: The DOE is requested to (1) clarify the inconsistencies in the r
lity control system employed by the project activity, data collection procedures (information flow including data generation, aggregation,

with registered or the revised monitoring plan as per VVS version 09.0 paragraph 392.Issue: The DOE is requested to explain how it verifie

Wsteam,CO2) and Average mass fraction of methane in the produced steam (Wsteam,CH4) ”were not monitored on a quarterly basis as p

v.1.2 para 206)Issue: The methodology requires that the data for order of magnitude test and explanation of any differences with mass b
d track changes version) must be submitted.According to EB 68, Annex 33 "Implementation Plan for the Clean Development Mechanism Pr

he estimate in the PDD, and explanation on any significant increase, including all information (i.e. data or parameters) that is different from

. (VVM v.1.2 para 221 (a)).Issue: The Verification Report page 4 mentions: "During the visit DNV was able to verify that the project has bee
differs from the one indicated in the registered PDD. Please refer to Paragraphs 208 - VVM v. 1.2.
ired by the monitoring plan and the applied methodology?Issue: The applied methodology version 9 (page 16/19) requires the monitoring

he accepted revised monitoring plan. (VVM v.1.2 para 206 & 221(d))Issue: The DOE shall explain why the CL 01 has been closed considerin

ired by the monitoring plan and the applied methodology. B48 - Annex 68 paragraph 10 (b) (i)Issue: According to the monitoring plan, elec

document are not correct and accurate.Issue: The submitted documentation states AMS-I.D ver. 14, Grid connected renewable electricity
nd track changes version) must be submitted.The submitted PDD in clean version does not correspond to the submitted PDD in track chan

or the accepted revised monitoring plan. (VVS v2 para 235)Issue: The DOE is requested to provide more information on how it verified the

lity control system employed by the project activity, data collection procedures (information flow including data generation, aggregation,

s conducted at a frequency specified in applied monitoring methodology or EB guidance if applicable, and/or the monitoring plan? (VVM v
monitoring and the proposed alternative monitoring of the project activity (PS v1 para 206)Issue: The monitoring report, page 4 states tha

tement on how the DOE verified the information flow (from data generation, aggregation, to recording, calculation and reporting) for thes
nd/or emission factors, default values and other reference values have been correctly applied. (VVM v.1.2 para 208 (d) & (e))Issue: The va

nic GHG removals in the registered PDD has been implemented in accordance with the registered monitoring plan. (Please refer to VVS ver

must be submitted with a request for issuance.Issue: Verification and certification reports refer to monitoring report version 2 dated 20.0

ent the expected implementation dates. (VVM v.1.2 para 198 (a)).Issue: the verification report does not describe: i) the reason for the imp

lity control system employed by the project activity, data collection procedures (information flow including data generation, aggregation,
hile the diesel emission factor is 0.8 tCO2/MWh (P.46 of the VR). The DOE is requested to justify why application of the higher diesel emis
nd versioning within and between the document must be correct and accurate.Issue: The verification report refers on page 2 and 37 to th
 ly filled. The DOE is requested to explain how it has cross-checked the net unit values for the period considering the electricity sales and p

v.1.2 para 206)Issue: The monitoring plan requires that the "Area of the reservoir measured in the surface of water, after the implementa

ments must be internally and mutually consistent.Issue:The crediting period in the monitoring report (24/Sep/2010 - 30/Sep/2011) is inco
or the accepted revised monitoring plan. (VVS v2 para 235)Issue: The monitoring plan describes the parameter LFRi,y as Ex post Lamp Failu

must be submitted with a request for issuance.Issue: Verification Report submitted belongs to another Project (1899)

ons achieved nor/or confirm that appropriate methods and formulae for calculating baseline emissions, project emissions and leakage ha
sed in the calculation of emission reductions. (EB48 - Annex 68 paragraph 10 (a) (v)).Issue: The DOE should clarify the inconsistencies relat

ersion of the CDM-MR-FORM shall be submitted. The verification/certification report refers to the monitoring report version 2 dated 25.02
the project design of a registered project activity (PS v1, para 218 (a)(b)(c)(d)(e)Issue: The following changes from the project design in the
 with registered or the revised monitoring plan as per VVS version 09.0 paragraph 392.Issue: The DOE is requested how it confirmed that t

confidence/precision level for each of the common cooking item for non-project households where only traditional stoves are used. It also

DOE must be submitted.Please note that the Assessment opinion refers to VVS version 3 where as the VVS version on the view page is ve

tions calculations are not over-estimated as a result of the change (PS v1, para 217)Issue: The discount factor for adjusting the measured v

ting the monitoring report form (CDM-MR-FORM) has not been submitted with a request for issuance as required in the completeness che

IE coordination forum" para. 17, available under: https://cdm.unfccc.int/extranet/OE/teleconference/cc16_mr.pdf; the DOE is kindly requ

tement on how the DOE verified the information flow (from data generation, aggregation, to recording, calculation and reporting) for thes
must be submitted with a request for issuance.Issue: Verification and certification reports refer to monitoring report version 4 dated 10.0

d track changes version) must be submitted.According EB 68, Annex 33 "Implementation Plan for the Clean Development Mechanism Proj

possible. (EB48 - Annex 68 paragraph 10 (b) (ii)).Issue: Emission reduction calculations are based on the actual stand volumes obtained fro

an in the registered PDD. The DOE noticed that in some days during the monitoring period measurement of COD was missed, and it accep
e generation from 17/07/2017 to 31/07/2017 considered is taken from the controller meter data. However, the calibration details of the c

onsistent.Issue 1: The submitted Verification and Certification Report refer to the monitoring period "01 March 12 - 28 Feb 13". However,

ctivity site ”. The registered monitoring plan (page 22-23 of the PDD) requires that electricity supplied to the grid and imported from the gr
nd versioning within and between the document must be correct and accurate.Issue: There appears to be some inconsistency in the applie

d between the documents is not correct and accurate.Issue: The amount of CERs indicated in the spreadsheet is inconsistent with other d

oject and leakage emissions as well as other parameters required by the applied methodology and the registered monitoring plan. (PS v1,

t must be submitted with a request for issuance.Issue: The Certification report contains comments in German "Fehler! Verweisquelle konn

8 - Annex 68 paragraph 10 (b) (iii)).Issue: The monitoring period under request for issuance is 03/07/2010 to 31/03/2011, whereas it is sta

of the installed technology and/or equipments, relevant dates of project activity e.g. date of construction, commissioning, continued ope
nd versioning within and between the document must be correct and accurate.Issue: Verification report makes reference to the final mon

uest for issuance submission.Issue: Signed form (16.01.2012) is dated prior to the Certification and Verification report (10.02.2012).

possible. (EB48 - Annex 68 paragraph 10 (b) (ii)).Issue: The PP is asked to submit a spreadsheet in unprotected and replicable format.
e form must be submitted with a request for issuance.Issue: Name of DOE representative is missing in the signed form.

nic GHG removals in the registered PDD has been implemented in accordance with the registered monitoring plan (para 360 of VVS for PA
lity control system employed by the project activity, data collection procedures (information flow including data generation, aggregation,

y. For a project activity with phased implementation, the DOE shall state the progress of the project activity achieved in each phase under

s-checked with other sources such as plant log books, inventories, purchase records, laboratory analyses. (VVM v.1.2 para 208 (a) and (b))
 the installed technology and/or equipments, relevant dates of project activity e.g. date of construction, commissioning, continued operati

ration changes request form"(F-CDM-PRC)must be submitted.Please note that while the form and related documents to post registration

equipments was conducted at a frequency specified by the applied methodology, the standardized baseline and/or the monitoring plan a

tion report, including a validation opinion, by the DOE shall be submitted. The submitted "Assessment opinion for post registration change

oard and the provisions of Appendix 1 of Project Standard apply to those correctionsIssue: The revisions to section B.7 of the PDD are 'per
he accepted revised monitoring plan. (VVS v2 para 235)The DOE is requested to further explain how it confirms that the all monitoring pa
ocument are not correct and accurate.1) The Verification Report, page 32, the Verification Statement refers to the final version of the Mon

site visit" and the monitoring report (p 3) and the verification report (p 10) provide the location of 11 WTGs by providing individual latitude
 between the documents is not correct and accurate.Issue: The project view page should display the amount of CERs claimed for this moni

lity control system employed by the project activity, data collection procedures (information flow including data generation, aggregation,

nce form must be submitted with a request for issuance.Issue: The new form template should be used.2.Issue: The confidental file for July
tion changes request form"(F-CDM-PRC)must be submitted.The issuance track for post registration changes was not selected on the proje

ment is not correct and accurate.Issue: The Verification Report refers only to PDD version 6.0 dated 16/04/2011 and does not refer to PDD

y imported from the grid have been manually filled. The DOE is requested to explain how it has cross-checked the net unit values for the p

must be submitted with a request for issuance.Issue: The last version 03 Monitoring Report dated 18/08/2011 has not been submitted.
cuments must be internally and mutually consistent.Issue: The project title is not consistent throughout the submitted documentation. Th

y control system employed by the project activity, data collection procedures (information flow including data generation, aggregation, rec

project activity has been implemented in accordance with the monitoring plan contained in the registered PDD or any accepted revised mo

vant dates of calibration and/or validity) as specified by the monitoring methodology and the monitoring plan. (EB48 - Annex 68 paragraph

consist of more than one site, the report shall clearly describe the status of implementation and starting date of operation for each site. Fo
ow (from data generation, aggregation, to recording, calculation and reporting) for these parameters including the values in the monitorin

riod throughout the documentation must be consistent.Issue: In the certification statement in the Verification report on p. 122 the start d
nd versioning within and between the document must be correct and accurate.Issue: Item 4, page 25 in the Verification report - The Verifi

od throughout the documentation must be consistent.Issue: The Request for Issuance form and the webpage state the monitoring period

nd versioning within and between the document is correct and accurate.Issue: The date of the PDD, version 19, is not displayed correctly o

ecovered and fuelled or flared that is monitored ex-post according to paragraph 34 of AMS III.H version 9.  The DOE shall clarify how this re
DOE/AIE coordination forum" para. 17, available under: https://cdm.unfccc.int/extranet/OE/teleconference/cc16_mr.pdf The DOE is kind
ent sections of the Monitoring Report reffer to data/values presented in a table in section E.4. However, there is no table in section E.4 of

tion changes request form"(F-CDM-PRC)must be submitted.Please note that while the form and related documents to post registration ch
ired by the monitoring plan and the applied methodology?Issue: The monitoring plan (the registered PDD, page 32) requires the monitorin

must be submitted with a request for issuance.Issue: Please note that you have submitted through the VVM track where as the verificatio
must be submitted with a request for issuance.Issue: Please note that you have submitted through the VVM track whereas the verification

as appropriate have been carried out in accordance with the formulae and methods described in the monitoring plan and the applied me

ng the monitoring report form (F-CDM-MR -)has not been submitted with a request for issuance.Issue: The latest monitoring report version

he accepted revised monitoring plan. (VVM v.1.2 para 206 & 221(d))Issue: The monitoring plan requires the measurement of the Cogener
dsheet must be submitted in an assessable unprotected format.Issue:

etermine whether the permanent changes comply with the relevant requirements in the “CDM project standard for project activities ”. Ple

od throughout the documentation must be consistent.Issue:Summary of the verification opinion in the Verification report states that CQC

ting the monitoring report form (CDM-MR-FORM) has not been submitted with a request for issuance as required in the completeness che
and versioning within and between the document must be correct and accurate.Issue: Page 5 of Verification report refers to the monitori
nt dates of calibration and/or validity) as specified by the monitoring methodology and the monitoring plan. (EB48 - Annex 68 paragraph 1

tified Emission Reductions (CERs), within and between the documents must be correct and accurate.Issue: The amount of number of Certi

oard and the provisions of Appendix 1 of Project Standard apply to those correctionsIssue:The DOE is requested to clarify how it validated

Monitoring Report does not contain information on the parameter CAPpj - Installed capacity of the hydropower plant after the implementa

dsheet must be submitted in an assessable unprotected format.Issue: However, the submitted spreadsheets are not assessable. (CER Calc
er possible. (EB48 - Annex 68 paragraph 10 (b) (ii)).Issue: 1. The DOE is requested to clarify the calculation method of the carbon content a

s conducted at a frequency specified in applied monitoring methodology or EB guidance if applicable, and/or the monitoring plan? (VVM v

ple, for flare 1 on the 22 November 2009, from 8:13 to 17:00, there was no biogas flow and however, the temperature of the flare was alw
riod throughout the documentation must be consistent.Issue: In the certification statement on page 116 of the verification report, the mo

n what was  projected in the PDD (maximum of 260,000 tonnes)  thereby resulting in a corresponding increase of 24.5% over the projecte
vant dates of calibration and/or validity) as specified by the monitoring methodology and the monitoring plan. (EB48 - Annex 68 paragraph
ertified Emission Reductions (CERs), within and between the documents must be correct and accurate.Issue: The number of CERs is incons

possible. (EB48 - Annex 68 paragraph 10 (b) (ii)).Issue: The PP/DOE shall provide a spreadsheet where is possible to trace the emission red

nafter referred to as the registered monitoring plan), the applied methodologies, the applied standardized baselines, or the other applied m

tified Emission Reductions (CERs), within and between the documents must be correct and accurate.Issue: The Request for Issuance form

nitoring report at its section D.2 - Data and parameters monitored, for several parameters such as (i) Volume of biogas sent to the flaring s

of the installed technology and/or equipments, relevant dates of project activity e.g. date of construction, commissioning, continued ope
e VVS for project activity paragraphs 354 - 356:The DOE is requested to address the issues below: a. MP page 5 reports 42 micro hydro pow

was conducted at a frequency specified in applied monitoring methodology or EB guidance if applicable, and/or the monitoring plan (VVS v

rsion 6.0 of the VVS which is no longer valid at the time of re-submission of this request for issuance.. On 1 April 2015, entered into force v
e calibration has been implemented after the monitoring period in consideration (i.e. the results of delayed calibration are available), the D

d/or determine that calculations of baseline emissions, project emissions and leakage as appropriate have been carried out in accordance
1.85 based on the drop-out rate (8.35%) for the 8th monitoring period and the drop-out rate (11.83%) for the 9th monitoring period. Duri

MW. However, as per section A.3. of the registered PDD and section B.1. of the monitoring report, the installed capacity of Sol Plaatje uni

v.1.2 para 206), “Tool to determine project emissions from flaring gases containing methane ”and associated clarification (AM_CLA_0047

he accepted revised monitoring plan. (VVS v2 para 235)Issue: The DOE is requested to further substantiate how the monitoring has been
er possible. (EB48 - Annex 68 paragraph 10 (b) (ii)).Issue: The formulae for Gross Electricity Exported (Column H) values is missing.2: Scope
of diesel fuel as per methodology requirement (i.e. measurements or reliable local or national data) whereas the IPCC default value was a

8 - Annex 68 paragraph 10 (b) (iii)).Issue: The spreadsheet does not contain explanation on how the calibration delay for the main meter m

ejo) was started in 1997 and plant operationalized in 2002; and the verification report (page 10) states that “the plant was operated as per

ining emission reduction calculation must be submitted with a request for issuance.Issue: There is inconsistency of total sum of the Net el

y control system employed by the project activity, data collection procedures (information flow including data generation, aggregation, rec

sheet containing the calculations of emission reductions or net anthropogenic removals must be submittedIssue: The submitted spreadshe
must be submitted with a request for issuance.Issue: The Verification Report was conducted in line with the VVS track, while the project v

ot clear how the compliance to manufacturer ’s specification for operation of flare, especially the flare temperature is met. As per flare ma

rd and the provisions of Appendix 1 of Project Standard apply to those correctionsIssue: The DOE shall clarify how the proposed correctio

his issue through a new FAR in the current verification.

ust be in English or contain a full translation of relevant sections into English, in cases where DOE considers the provision of the original do

ments must be internally and mutually consistent.Issue: Monitoring Report section A.7: crediting period dates wrong
be defined in each monitoring event. The DOE is requested to explain how this is in accordance with paragraph 4(k) of “Guidelines on acco

uest for issuance submission.Issue: The Certification Report has been signed on 01/08/2012, which is prior to the finalization of the Verific

rement have been taken for monitoring this parameter.Methodology ACM0006 version 6 requires that Net Calorific Value of biomass resid

nitoring plan requires the monitoring of "Total electricity generation by the project " based on "monthly aggregated". However, the monit

activity proposed in the registered PDD are in place and/or that the project participant has implemented and operated the proposed CDM

ected to the inlet of the 33/220kV substation. As a consequence, an apportionment of the transmission loss is used in the calculation in th
must be submitted with a request for issuance.Issue:Issue:The Verification Reprot is referring to the VVS instead of VVM as indicated in th

e: The monitoring plan (p. 37) requires "Hourly meter readings of the power generated shall be recorded in a log book", however only dail

between the documents is not correct and accurate.Issue: The number of CERs (2,981 CO2) indicated in the spreadsheet is not consistent

The Verification Report does not include the DOE's assessment on: i) Compliance with temperature monitoring requirements stated on p.

tified Emission Reductions (CERs), within and between the documents must be correct and accurate.Issue: The spreadsheet indicates the c
vant dates of calibration and/or validity) as specified by the monitoring methodology and the monitoring plan. (EB48 - Annex 68 paragraph
toring Report contains calculation of baseline emissions, project emissions, leakage (if any) and emission reductions.Issue: Baseline and pr

of the installed technology and/or equipments, relevant dates of project activity e.g. date of construction, commissioning, continued ope

cal sign-off sequence.Issue: The Verification Report , page 1 shows that the date of the revision of this VR is 25/07/2010 and this is prior to

d track changes version) must be submitted.According to EB 68, Annex 33 "Implementation Plan for the Clean Development Mechanism Pr

sessing compliance with the calibration frequency requirements' for the calibration delay. (VVM v.1.2 para 184 (a) (ii) & EB 52 Annex 60)Is
and/or emission reductions, including reference to formulae and methods used. (EB48 - Annex 68 paragraph 10 (a) (vii))Issue: The monitor

nd versioning within and between the document is correct and accurate.Issue: The PDD on the project view page is dated 02 June 2009 an
nd versioning within and between the document must be correct and accurate.Issue: The verifier confirms on page 2 of the VR that the m
d between the documents is not consistent.Issue: There is an inconsistency of the amount of CER between the ER calculation spreadsheet

s-checked with other sources such as plant log books, inventories, purchase records, laboratory analyses. (VVM v.1.2 para 208 (a) and (b))

mber of CERs requested by the DOE. (EB48 Annex 68 para 10 (d))Issue: The last paragraph of the certification report provided by the DOE m

d between the documents is not consistent.Issue: There is an inconsistency in the cross-referencing of the emission reductions amount. T

od throughout the documentation must be consistent.Issue: Throughout the submitted documentation, the monitoring period is incorrect
ons achieved nor/or confirm that appropriate methods and formulae for calculating baseline emissions, project emissions and leakage ha

ining emission reduction calculation must be submitted with a request for issuance.Issue: The emission reduction calculation spreadsheet
ng the monitoring report form (F-CDM-MR -)has not been submitted with a request for issuance.Issue: As per the discussion at the direct c

h the estimate in the PDD, and/or explanation on any significant increase. (EB48 - Annex 68 paragraph 10 (a) (viii)).Issue: the Monitoring Re

and/or determine that calculations of baseline emissions, project emissions and leakage as appropriate have been carried out in accordanc

od throughout the documentation must be consistent.Issue:The monitoring period is from 12 May 2010 to 15 October 2010. However, the
e project participants. It has been observed that there are inconsistencies between the monitoring plan and the monitoring carried out for

approved methodology and, where applicable, the applied approved standardized baseline as per VVS version 09.0 paragraph 388.Issue:

he estimate in the PDD, and/or explanation on any significant increase. (EB48 - Annex 68 paragraph 10 (a) (viii)).Issue: The monitoring repo

ment is not correct and accurate.Issue: The monitoring report (page 7) and the verification/certification report (page 42) refer to PDD versi

s conducted at a frequency specified in applied monitoring methodology or EB guidance if applicable, and/or the monitoring plan? (VVM v

culated based on monitored electricity output and the specific heat to power ratio of the boilers during the remainder of the monitoring p
he accepted revised monitoring plan. (VVS v2 para 235)Issue: The DOE is requested to clarify how it has verified the parameter, COD conc
must be submitted with a request for issuance.Issue: Please note that you have submitted through the VVM track where as the verificatio

with a request for issuance as required in the completeness check checklist for requests for issuance in line with PCP version 9 para 222.Iss
ired by the monitoring plan and the applied methodology?Issue: The spreadsheet do not contain all the parameters required to be monito

ining emission reduction calculation must be submitted with a request for issuance.Issue: ER calculation for 25-30/11/2009 missing.

xact gauze compositions for the historical campaigns (GCnormal), the Baseline Campaign (GCBL) and for the Project Campaign (GCProject)
and/or determine that calculations of baseline emissions, project emissions and leakage as appropriate have been carried out in accordanc

vant dates of calibration and/or validity) as specified by the monitoring methodology and the monitoring plan. (EB48 - Annex 68 paragraph

lity control system employed by the project activity, data collection procedures (information flow including data generation, aggregation,

rt must be submitted with a request for issuance.Issue: The monitoring report refers to project activity 2331.2.Scope: According to EB48 A

says all CERs are to be issued in the 1st commitment period (sec E.8.7), whereas the monitoring report says the CERs are split across the fi

d/or determine that calculations of baseline emissions, project emissions and leakage as appropriate have been carried out in accordance
ired by the monitoring plan and the applied methodology?Issue: The monitored data of the historical campaigns were not provided either

tified Emission Reductions (CERs), within and between the documents must be correct and accurate.Issue: In the submitted Verification Re

ed monitoring plan (B.7.1, page 30) states that the electricity export data will be cross checked with invoices issued by the grid operator, w

s not provide an statement on how the DOE verified the information flow for these parameters including the values in the monitoring repo

tivity proposed in the registered PDD are in place and/or that the project participant has implemented and operated the proposed CDM p

sessing compliance with the calibration frequency requirements' for the calibration delay. (VVM v.1.2 para 184 (a) (ii) & EB 52 Annex 60)Is
he Monitoring report page 4 and the Verification report pages 9 -10 provide explanation of special events occurred during this monitoring

between the documents is not consistent.Issue: There is an inconsistency of CER between the project view page/signed form (58,331 CO2

of the installed technology and/or equipments, relevant dates of project activity e.g. date of construction, commissioning, continued ope
ods due to calibration gaps of the thermocouples for parameter Tflare with serial numbers 685169-1, 686675-5, HM00001007/2-3, 690553

oject activity through 110 kV line during the monitoring period.

d/or determine that calculations of baseline emissions, project emissions and leakage as appropriate have been carried out in accordance

of the installed technology and/or equipments, relevant dates of project activity e.g. date of construction, commissioning, continued ope
methodology (page 14, 15 and 16) requires that the recording frequency for parameters NCSG, VSG, TSG, PSG, NCSGBC, VSGBC, TSGBC, PSG

and emission reductions, including reference to formulae and methods used as per PS version 09.0 paragraph 253.Issue: It was found in th

hodology.2. A revision of monitoring plan should be submitted to align with the current installation of flow meters,i.e. two mines had an a
with registered or the revised monitoring plan as per VVS version 09.0 paragraph 392.Issue: The DOE is requested to explain how it verifie
v.1.2 para 206) Issue: The DOE is requested to explain how it verified that the values of LOI* used in the calculation of emission reduction
ssuance.Issue: The Verification Report refers to UNFCCC Validation and Verification Manual (Version 01.2, EB 55). However the project vie

rt must be submitted with a request for issuance.Issue: Appendix B of the monitoring report does not include monitoring data from 1st of

od throughout the documentation must be consistent.Issue: There is inconsistency of Monitoring period end date between the view page

and close out of any CARs, CLs or FARs issued. (VVM v.1.2 para 192, 194)Issue: The DOE is requested to address inconsistencies of findings

ining emission reduction calculation must be submitted with a request for issuance.Issue: No emission reduction spreadsheet has been su

ssuance.Issue: The view page of the request for issuance states that the verification is carried out under VVS track. However the Verificatio
208 (a))Issue: The DOE is requested to provide information on how it verified the partial electricity generation deducted from the total out

and versioning within and between the document is correct and accurate.Issue: Certification report refers to the PDD version 3 as the fina
rt must be submitted with a request for issuance.Issue: Please note that you have submitted through the VVM track whereas the verificati

vant dates of calibration and/or validity) as specified by the monitoring methodology and the monitoring plan. (EB48 - Annex 68 paragraph
must be submitted with a request for issuance.Issue: Last version of Monitoring Report (version 04, 16/12/2011) was not submitted

vant dates of calibration and/or validity) as specified by the monitoring methodology and the monitoring plan. (EB48 - Annex 68 paragraph
el at oil flow station as substitute for wet gas, estimated to 7 MMSCFD ”) has been removed; (b) the value of parameter d and L are correc
nd versioning within and between the document must be correct and accurate.Issue: There are inconsistencies regarding the version and

must be submitted with a request for issuance.Issue: Only version 1 of the Monitoring Report was submitted, although reference is made

pplied is CF/1000 * EXP [ln(a) + b*ln(D)]. E.g. cell N4 of tab “Tree Biomass ” of the ER sheet. As well, the equation described in cell E2 of tab

ontain the request for post registration changes related to section B.2. The DOE confirms in the Monitoring Report: "There is no request fo

was conducted at a frequency specified in applied monitoring methodology or EB guidance if applicable, and/or the monitoring plan? (VVM

n in the PDD and, where concerns arise, submit either a notification or a request for approval of changes from the project activity as descr

rch Institute of Water Conservancy & Hydropower issued on 23/08/2009. The power density calculated based on this value is 10.97W/m2,

ipment used to monitor each parameter, including details on accuracy class, and calibration information (frequency, date of calibration an
must be submitted with a request for issuance.Issue: Certification and Verification reports refer to monitoring report version 2 dated 15.0

od throughout the documentation must be consistent.Issue: The Verification and Certification report, version 01.1, pages 5, 9, 11, 24, 29 r

tified Emission Reductions (CERs), within and between the documents must be correct and accurate.Issue: However, the monitoring repor

ent the expected implementation dates. (VVM v.1.2 para 198 (a)).Issue: It is not clear how the implementation status of Phase II has been

between the documents is not correct and accurate.Issue: The CERs in the monitoring report are 68,881 while the project view page state

version. The issuance submission page refers to VVS version 2, which is no longer valid, whereas the verification and certification report re
cuments must be internally and mutually consistent.Issue: CER calculation spreadsheet has the title "Shangri-La Langdu River 4th Level Hy
must be submitted with a request for issuance.Issue:The Monitoring report contains track changes. Please submit the clean final version.

odology ACM0002 ver.6 does not require that project emissions from transport should be deducted from emission reductions ”. Further cla

nd versioning within and between the document must be correct and accurate.Issue:Versions and dates of the Monitoring Report are not

ctivity as per VVS version 09.0 paragraph 385 (b).Issue: Page 2 of the monitoring reports states that part of the recovered CMM is ultimate

r the PDD (annex 4, page 46) the PP is required to report any retrofit event that could impact baseline emissions, however, the PP did not
tion reports refers to a revised monitoring plan which has not been submitted and approved for this project activity.

rt, annex 1). However, the approved monitoring plan does not require the measurement of the volume of the auxiliary fuel used by proje

GWh, which is 14% higher than the estimation in the PDD. The PP/DOE shall further explain how the project activity was operated accord
ent the expected implementation dates. (VVM v.1.2 para 198 (a)).Issue: The DOE shall explain how it has verified the implementation sche

ines of 450 kW and 150 kW. According to VVM version 1.2 para 197, if the DOE identifies that the implementation or operation of the CDM

ining emission reduction calculation must be submitted with a request for issuance.Issue:ER calculation spreadsheet for the 21 Nov 08 - 3

nd versioning within and between the document must be correct and accurate.Issue: The submitted Monitoring Report refers to version 0

er possible. (EB48 - Annex 68 paragraph 10 (b) (ii)).Issue: The DOE explains that CER volume for the monitoring period has been reduced b

toring Report contains calculation of baseline emissions, project emissions, leakage (if any) and emission reductions.Issue:The submitted s

nd/or emission factors, default values and other reference values have been correctly applied. (VVM v.1.2 para 208 (d) & (e))Issue: The DO

nd versioning within and between the document must be correct and accurate.Issue: The verification report refers to the wrong monitorin

ed CDM-ISS-FORM shall be submitted.Issue: The Risk acknowledgement and acceptance form is not submitted. 2.Scope: According to PCP

tement on how the DOE verified the information flow (from data generation, aggregation, to recording, calculation and reporting) for thes
nd versioning within and between the document must be correct and accurate.Issue: The verification report refers to the monitoring repo

y control system employed by the project activity, data collection procedures (information flow including data generation, aggregation, rec

of the installed technology and/or equipments, relevant dates of project activity e.g. date of construction, commissioning, continued ope

v.1.2 para 206)Issue: The PP/DOE explained that the 1st generator was stopped for overhaul between 01 Nov 2010 and 30 Jan 2011. How

ting the monitoring report form (F-CDM-MR -)has not been submitted with a request for issuance.Issue: The submitted monitoring report

between the documents is not correct and accurate.Issue: According to the project view page the total emission reductions claimed for th

he biomass consumption is crosschecked with the data of net electricity generation and fossil fuels (if used) by an energy balance to check

icity generation (MWh) / power plant efficiency (%) x HFO NCV (TJ/t) x upstream CH4 emission factor (tCH4/TJ), whereas it should be calcu

g equipment is calibrated in accordance with the manufacturer specifications. The equipment is accurate to within 0.5%.  An industry stan
lity control system employed by the project activity, data collection procedures (information flow including data generation, aggregation,

vant dates of calibration and/or validity) as specified by the monitoring methodology and the monitoring plan. (EB48 - Annex 68 paragraph

pplied only to the steel manufacturing facility.2. Clarification is required how the DOE verified that the monitoring of EGy and EGaux was

consist of more than one site, the report shall clearly describe the status of implementation and starting date of operation for each site. Fo

aged data for MMelec which was then multiplied by 24 (hours) to get daily quantity of methane sent to electricity generation (MMelec). T
oject and leakage emissions as well as other parameters required by the applied methodology and the registered monitoring plan. (PS v1,

ppears to have not been annually the DOE should explain why then not first a request for deviation was submitted
m September to November is the summation of five different values. Further clarification is required.2. The monitoring plan requires to mo

nd versioning within and between the document is correct and accurate.Issue: The verification report refers in page 30 to the PDD version

between the documents is not correct and accurate.Issue: According to the Certification Report a total of 450,086 CERs has been certified

n + 1 percent ” b) “Methane concentration is determined using a Bacharach Model Fyrite (or equivalent) gas analyzer. The process is desc
1 percent¨;b) Methane concentration is determined using a Bacharach Model Fyrite (or equivalent) gas analyzer. The process is described
nd versioning within and between the document is correct and accurate.Issue: The uploaded PDD is version 6, dated 07.12.2010, whereas
smission losses and transformer losses into account and thus should be lower than the reading of M1.2. The DOE is also requested to veri

ction A.2) indicates that two torches would be used in the project activity in order to burn the extracted gases whereas the monitoring rep

graph 376 (c).The formula defaulted in spreadsheet “MR 5 – CTRVV-V.1, Cells C34, A43 and C43 ”to calculate BECH4,y is (1-OXtop_layer) *

document are not correct and accurate.Issue: Monitoring Report submitted with this request for issuance has version 1.2, dated 10 Januar
nd versioning within and between the document must be correct and accurate.Issue: The Certification Statement states:'' In DNV ’s opinion

nitoring report has not provided the value for parameter Plant Name - Identification of the power plants for the OM and for the BM. Furth

nd/or emission factors, default values and other reference values have been correctly applied. (VVM v.1.2 para 208 (d) & (e))Issue: The DO
s conducted at a frequency specified in applied monitoring methodology or EB guidance if applicable, and/or the monitoring plan (VVS v2,

The approved PDD page 25 indicates that the accuracy of the equipment used to measure the methane content in the biogas is within 0.5

onsistent.Issue: The monitoring period dates are inconsistent throught all the documents submitted with the request for issuance.
that the site visit for this project activity was not conducted due to the COVID-19 pandemic and the site visit cannot be postponed since a

nd/or emission factors, default values and other reference values have been correctly applied. (VVS v7, para 290 (e))Issue: The DOE is requ

(VVM v.1.2 para 200, 203 & 221(d))Issue: The DOE validated that the monitoring plan is in accordance with version 3 of ACM0009 (availab

document are not correct and accurate.Issue: The Verification/ Certification Report refers to the Monitoring Report version 2, dated 12 Se

The Verification Report page 12 mentions that parameter EFCO2,natural gas,y is obtained from IPCC 2006. However, the Monitoring Repo

sessing compliance with the calibration frequency requirements' for the calibration delay. (VVM v.1.2 para 184 (a) (ii) & EB 52 Annex 60)Is
 the difference between total electricity generation by all windmills and EGn,y . The DOE is requested to clarify how the total
‘ electricity ge

the calculated energy generation using specific fuel consumption and fuel consumed in the project, and the metered energy and choosing

m some power plants were estimated based on the efficiency of the power plants while the methodology requires to calculate CO2 emissio
ments must be internally and mutually consistent.Issue: The crediting period of project activity 1473 is from 25 Feb 08 to 24 Feb 18 (Fixed
ect emissions from flaring gases containing methane", as records of temperature of the exhaust gas, temperature of the flare and methan
rt must be submitted with a request for issuance.Issue: The summary of emission reduction on page 25 of the monitoring report is not com

lelectricity consumed by the project.2.Further clarification is required regarding the starting date of the monitoring period of the electricit

ormation on production volumes of HCFC22 by registered CDM projects in connection with developments in the HCFC22 market and poss
nd/or emission factors, default values and other reference values have been correctly applied. (VVM v.1.2 para 208 (d) & (e))Issue: The PP
nitoring period 03 Mar 2020 – 31 Dec 2020 which contains a PRC 1 might impact to the PRC1 and PRC2 contained in the request for issuan

uest for issuance submission.Issue: The signed Request for Issuance form is dated 31 August 2012 prior to the date of submission of the re

he accepted revised monitoring plan. (VVM v.1.2 para 206 & 221(d))Issue: The monitoring plan requires that "The delivered Energy (wh) a

tified Emission Reductions (CERs), within and between the documents must be correct and accurate.Issue: The amount of Total Project Ac

he accepted revised monitoring plan. (VVS v7 para 278)Issue:The PP/DOE are requested to address the following inconsistencies: i. The M
s conducted at a frequency specified in applied monitoring methodology or EB guidance if applicable, and/or the monitoring plan? (VVM v

he submitted spreadsheet "Instrument Errors - Revision 00" contains four sheets. PP/DOE is requested to explain how they have been app
lity control system employed by the project activity, data collection procedures (information flow including data generation, aggregation,

n the monitoring report, show that there has been a delay in the calibration (Apr to Nov). Hence, the PP/ DOE are requested to clarify how

nsist of more than one site, the report shall clearly describe the status of implementation and starting date of operation for each site. For C
tes that the Landtec meter GM11592 was first calibrated on 24 April 2009, the monitoring plan requires that prior to the use of Landtec m

tified Emission Reductions (CERs), within and between the documents must be correct and accurate.Issue: Inconsistencies between the Am
and versioning within and between the document must be correct and accurate.Issue: The signed form for Request for Issuance correspo

ment is not correct and accurate.Issue:The Verification Report and Assessment Opinion refer to the PDD version 3.3 dated 30/11/2007, wh

the project activity has plate power capacity of 2.3MW. The DOE shall provide information how it verifies that the project is implemented
report the DOE has stated that it commenced the verification including conducting the first onsite visit (29-31 July 2008) during the monito

er possible. (EB48 - Annex 68 paragraph 10 (b) (ii)).Issue: As per EB48 Annex 68, paragraph 10b(ii), as well as the "Issuance - Information an
possible. (EB48 - Annex 68 paragraph 10 (b) (ii)).Issue: According to the monitoring report (p27), there were time period when measureme

weigh bridge and steam flow meter and in July 2007 for the electronic tri vector meter. The monitoring plan specifies an annual frequency

document are not correct and accurate.Issue: Page 39 of the Verification Report displays the final version dated 27 May, 2013. However, t

y to continue to be stockpiled at the landfill site throughout the crediting period.  It was clarified by the Meth Panel through AM_CLA_004
must be submitted with a request for issuance.Issue: The Verification Report used the VVS track, while on the project view page the VVM

electricity in KWh.

ct activity during the monitoring period. The DOE is requested to clarify how it has verified the baseline emissions from the use of wood a

er possible. (EB48 - Annex 68 paragraph 10 (b) (ii)).Issue: The CER sheet provided does not contain the recorded data of methane concentr

ocument are not correct and accurate.Issue: Certifiction/verification report on page 2 refer to final monitoring report dated 15.09.2014 an
VVM v.1.2 para 200, 203 & 221(d))Issues: The Verification Report does not include information regarding to: - Verification of the requireme

oncentrations in gas were analysed, however, the monitored values were not reported as per the requirement of the methodology. Furthe

he accepted revised monitoring plan. (VVS v2 para 235)Issue: The DOE is requested to further explain how it concluded that the monitorin
eight transportation activity (i.e. Light vehicles (245 gCO2/t km) and heavy vehicles (129 gCO2/t km)) ”. The leakage calculation has applied

vant dates of calibration and/or validity) as specified by the monitoring methodology and the monitoring plan. (EB48 - Annex 68 paragraph

easures pending CMP guidance at CMP 16, to process requests for issuance of CER for emission reductions achieved on or after 1 January

must be submitted with a request for issuance.Issue: The final monitoring report (version 3, 29.09.2011) has not been submitted.

he adjusted measured values of the delayed calibration shall result in fewer claimed emission reductions; (VVS v3, para 239(a))Issue: It has

between the documents is not consistent.Issue: There is an inconsistency of CER between the project view page (97,263 CO2) and the res
d and/or emission factors, default values and other reference values have been correctly applied. (VVM v.1.2 para 208 (d) & (e))Issue: The

possible. (EB48 - Annex 68 paragraph 10 (b) (ii)).Issue: According to the monitoring report (page 23 and 24), measurement of NCSG and VS
the types of fossil fuel used in the boilers affect the baseline emission calculation, further clarification is required on how the DOE verified
monitoring report does not provide values for the parameters EGy, EGexport, EGimport and TE for the period from 05 November 2007 to 3

ons during the monitoring period as per VVS version 09.0 paragraph 412.Issue: (a) "Section H. Certification statement" of the verification

onitoring period.2. The monitoring report states, in page 10, that electricity-meters used to measure auxiliary consumption are installed in

e in the PDD and the period of 13 months and raised a CL to clarify it. However, the monitoring period (23/10/08-23/10/09) for this reque

e numbering doesn't refer to the total number of pages. Kindly clarify.2.Scope: The number of Certified Emission Reductions (CERs), within
nd versioning within and between the document is correct and accurate.Issue: The registered PDD version 1.2 is dated 22/06/07. Howeve
tion meter and auxiliary consumption meter respectively and May 2008 in original monitoring report but only January 2009 in revised mon
ere provided on how the electricity requirement from the power plant was met before the implementation of the turbine and for some pe

ectricity supplied to the grid as higher than the electricity generated. Further clarification is required as to how the DOE verified the param
ding the monitoring of EGGEN and EGAUX, the DOE shall confirm that the monitored results of functional meters (excluding meter M26) h
graph 376 (c).The formula defaulted in spreadsheet “Excel sheet 03 1179 5 ver, Cells C31, A40 and C40 ”to calculate BECH4,y is (1-OXtop_
graph 376 (c).The formula defaulted in spreadsheet “1247 sheets 03, cells C31, A40 and C40 ”to calculate BECH4,y is (1-OXtop_layer) * (FC

between the documents is not correct and accurate.Issue: The Monitoring Report and Verification Report indicate the amount of CERs inc

ected in the project view page (VVS)Issue:

hecked with other sources such as plant log books, inventories, purchase records, laboratory analyses. (VVM v.1.2 para 208 (a) and (b))Iss

eakage due to any diversion of methane from the residential thermal use to the project activity has been accounted for as per the method
he accepted revised monitoring plan. (VVM v.1.2 para 206 & 221(d))Issue: During PC12 (26/05/2010- 06/07/2010) the parameter NAP wa
hemanufacture's letter on the possible errors. However, the PP/DOE did not report the total amount ofbiogas which is required by the revi

monitoring report / spreadsheet do not contain the values of wCH4 (methane fraction in the landfill gas).2: Scope: The monitoring report d

vant dates of calibration and/or validity) as specified by the monitoring methodology and the monitoring plan. (EB48 - Annex 68 paragraph
ssuance.Issue: Please note that you have submitted through the VVS track where as the verification was conducted as per VVM. Please no
ase order of the 90 TPH boiler has been checked by the DOE while the registered PDD indicates 100TPH boiler.

ow it considers that checking a sample record of stock for Nov-Dec 2005 is sufficient for a monitoring period of seven years;2. The measur
 calculated as the lower of the values between (i) the actual monitored amount of methane captured and destroyed by the project activit

nd versioning within and between the document must be correct and accurate.Issue: In the certification statement on page 18 of the Veri

lity control system employed by the project activity, data collection procedures (information flow including data generation, aggregation,

lity control system employed by the project activity, data collection procedures (information flow including data generation, aggregation,

oject and leakage emissions as well as other parameters required by the applied methodology and the registered monitoring plan as per P

he calibrated range of monitoring equipments have no material impact over the total emission reductions.Issue: The DOE shall substantiat

v.1.2 para 206)Issue: The DOE stated that the flare temperature and operation time have been recorded every five minutes and aggregat

he accepted revised monitoring plan. (VVS v2 para 235)Issue: The DOE is requested to further explain how it confirms that the monitoring
d/or determine that calculations of baseline emissions, project emissions and leakage as appropriate have been carried out in accordance

the diesel consumption, considering that the monitoring report states that the plant uses a small quantity of diesel by a DG set to meet e

-01 as the meter for monitoring power exported/imported (see page 9)

7.19%. However, the present monitoring period covers 28.6 months (870 days) and the emission reductions increased in 10.5% with resp
parameter is used for the calculation of both the project and baseline emissions.

d close out of any CARs, CLs or FARs issued. (VVM v.1.2 para 192, 194)Issue: The DOE raised CL regarding the use of compressor rated capa
nd 2005-06, in accordance with the PDD and applied methodology.
d close out of any CARs, CLs or FARs issued. (VVM v.1.2 para 192, 194)Issue: The CAR 12 questioned the inconsistencies between the value

o stir the sludge suspended, improving the gas extraction in order to streamline the measurement and gas burned. The DOE is requested
accuracy of the portable gas analyser used for measurement is 3% for methane contents above 15% of methane. The DOE shall clarify how

of the PS-PA, v.03.0.2: As per the PDD, equations 24 and 23, the following formulas are required to calculate (a) PEBR=GPWCH4*EFCH4,BR
s conducted at a frequency specified in applied monitoring methodology or EB guidance if applicable, and/or the monitoring plan (VVS v2,

ding the last date of calibration and the validity of the certificate.

lity control system employed by the project activity, data collection procedures (information flow including data generation, aggregation,

m3/hr, considering that as per the manufacturer s’ specification the average gas flow rate higher than 300Nm3/hr ensures a temperature o
 annual estimation of this parameter based on the supplier data, local data and country specific value based on that order. Further clarifica
etering and closed this FAR during this verification based on the fact that the coal fired boiler was not operational and there was no coal co

he accepted revised monitoring plan. (VVM v.1.2 para 206 & 221(d))Issue: The DOE (p 12) states that "Monitoring of the project activity p

n the exact frequency of the measurement and how the DOE has verified the calibration for the equipments measuring parameter MGy (m

rical annual heat generations in 2001-2003 which are different from the values in the validated PDDiii) the steam measurement since the

l switching in the project activity does not focus primarily on energy efficiency, as required by this applied methodology AMS-III.B. v10 .
e form must be submitted with a request for issuance.Issue: The document attached belongs to another project.

ments must be internally and mutually consistent.Issue: The data of the "Monthly Power Generation" table (Annex 1) of the monitoring re

nitoring of methane fraction in LFG was not conducted continuously.

to have significantly increased as compared to the PDD estimate.

by the applied methodology. 2. The PP/DOE shall clarify the list of electricity consumption equipments of all the sites , since the verificatio
ired by the monitoring plan and the applied methodology?Issue:The DOE/PP is requested to explain how the emission factor has been cal
ator of 30 MW which was proposed to be installed in 2007-2008. 2. Clarifications are required on: a) the role of parameters (e.g. Qproejct

egistered PDD page 35 mentions that to establish the weighted average of the emission factor in CPP, some parameters including Power G

dentifies that the calibration has been delayed and the calibration has been implemented after the monitoring period in consideration (i.e

nsist of more than one site, the report shall clearly describe the status of implementation and starting date of operation for each site. For C
ot provide an statement on how the DOE verified the information flow for these parameters including the values in the monitoring report
 rt refers to belt weigher only. 2. The PP/DOE shall clarify why the NCV of bagasse was not monitored as required by the applied methodol
ssuance form must correspond to the correct number of Certified Emission Reduction, specified by the DOE.Issue: The amount of CER indi
y control system employed by the project activity, data collection procedures (information flow including data generation, aggregation, rec

heet (row 21 of the Tab “Monitored Data ”). Refer Para 374 (c) of VVS-PA, version 3.0.

on B.2 of the Registered PDD states that the emission factor is calculated ex-ante and is fixed for the crediting period. However, Section D

(conducted on 28-29/07/2008 and 27-28/02/2009, respectively) were done prior to the publication of the monitoring report version 1 (27

tified Emission Reductions (CERs), within and between the documents must be correct and accurate.Issue: In section E.5 of the monitoring
ct boiler only.2. The same quantity of energy input in the boiler is required in the baseline as in the project, for calculations of equivalent c
ed what impact, would the change in the cane crushing have on the reference plant efficiency.
dsheet must be submitted in an assessable unprotected format.Issue: 2 ER Spreadsheets are protected.

res that the first measurement should be made at the time of installation. Further clarification is required.2. The revision of the monitoring

uest for issuance submission.Issue: The signed form is not the last dated document.
mal verification. CLA0191 should be fully considered in the verification process.2) According to the PDD the two production lines started op

ntity of waste gas used, its temperature and its composition will also provide evidence that the electrical energy is being generated with n

quired by the monitoring plan and the applied methodology.The DOE is requested to validate the electricity generation by Santa Edwiges

nd versioning within and between the document must be correct and accurate.Issue: In particular, the project title is inconsistent in the su
hecked with other sources such as plant log books, inventories, purchase records, laboratory analyses. (VVM v.1.2 para 208 (a) and (b))Iss

(VVM v.1.2 para 200, 203 & 221(d))Issue: The methodology requires the calculating of the energy savings due to the equipment installed.
ed PDD or any approved revised PDD, and has caused an increase in estimates of the emission reductions in the current monitoring period
ertified Emission Reductions (CERs), within and between the documents must be correct and accurate.Issue: Emission reduction sheet in th

that these values have been chosen in a conservative manner in accordance with the methodology.

o the "Identification of power source/plant for the OM" is a parameter to be monitored. However, the VCR in Sec. E.6.1. Data and parame
mation isprovided regarding the calibration for energy meters (e.g. calibration frequency, validity, dates, entity thatconducted the calibrati

VM v.1.2 para 206)Issue:The Verification report states that for the monitoring period under consideration meters have been changed for th
 parate), in line with VVM v.1.2 paragraph 206.Issue: In addressing this issue, the DOE shall report in the Verification Report the informatio

sessing compliance with the calibration frequency requirements' for the calibration delay. (VVM v.1.2 para 184 (a) (ii) & EB 52 Annex 60)Is

y control system employed by the project activity, data collection procedures (information flow including data generation, aggregation, rec

od throughout the documentation must be consistent.Issue: The monitoring period on the project view page and in the signed form is from

r methodology and monitoring plan requirement, and correctly applied as per paragraph 208(e) of the Validation and Verification Manu

ertified Emission Reductions (CERs), within and between the documents must be correct and accurate.Issue: Validation report, Monitoring

d/or determine that calculations of baseline emissions, project emissions and leakage as appropriate have been carried out in accordance
lity control system employed by the project activity, data collection procedures (information flow including data generation, aggregation,

vant dates of calibration and/or validity) as specified by the monitoring methodology and the monitoring plan. (EB48 - Annex 68 paragraph

ocument are not correct and accurate.Issue: The Verification Report is referring to version 2 of the Monitoring report (19/12/2012) which h
vant dates of calibration and/or validity) as specified by the monitoring methodology and the monitoring plan. (EB48 - Annex 68 paragraph
e number of pallets (1000 kg per pallet), each of which consists of 50 bags of 20 kg; and2. How it verified that the amounts of CaCO3 rejec

monitoring report does not provide the dates and results of the flare efficiency monitoring. It also does not explain whether the flare was o
(VVS v.2 para 232)Issue: The DOE is requested to further explain how it confirmed the monitoring plan in the registered PDD is in accorda
eported in the excel sheets are derived from the calculations of gross generation and electricity exported. DOE/PP if necessary, shall also s

monitoring report does not report the value of the monitored parameters throughout the monitoring period.2: Scope: The verification repo

cuments must be internally and mutually consistent.Issue: The header of page 2 of the Certification statement refers to "150 MW GRID CO
lity control system employed by the project activity, data collection procedures (information flow including data generation, aggregation,

e project design of a registered project activity (PS v1, para 218 (a)(b)(c)(d)(e)1)It is not clear how the DOE has validated that the change o

per the PDD, based on 0.1% defined as the uncertainty in the testing report rather than 0.5% of the meter specification.
10, April- June 2004 at AP/WG/I/9, August - October 2004 and March 2006 at AP/KRIS/I/6 and May 2006 at AP/KRIS/I/3). Further clarificati
d/or determine that calculations of baseline emissions, project emissions and leakage as appropriate have been carried out in accordance
nd versioning within and between the document is correct and accurate.Issue:There is an inconsistency in the version of the PDD. In partic
lity control system employed by the project activity, data collection procedures (information flow including data generation, aggregation,

accurate to estimate emission reductions attributable to this project.

the average emission factor of the grid is 722.28 tCO2/GWh.

8 - Annex 68 paragraph 10 (b) (iii)).Issue: Spreadsheet does not include explanation for the heading used in the PGC Train B calculation spr
nstalled capacity is 340 kW: three biogas generator sets with 75 kW each and one generator set of 115 kW. The DOE is requested to clarif

a generation, aggregation, to recording, calculation and reporting). The recorded monthly value for each meter shall be included in the ER

ported to the rice mill and steel plant have been consistently higher than the estimate in the PDD. It is noted that the operating hours exce
uest for issuance submission.Issue: The date provided in the Certification Statement (20/11/10) and in the Verification Opinion page 27, (2

ata for those batch/shifts when production is beyond ± 5% of the nameplate capacity has been met.

d on the check meters to be installed to measure total electricity generation and auxiliary electricity consumption as required by the monit

n (488,059.09 kWh) as per the methodology and monitoring plan requirement, since the information is not presented in the documents; 2
tricity generation continuously during 3 years since the start of crediting period. The PP stated that this was due to an environment regula

v.1.2 para 206)Issue: The PDD, page 21, indicates that the equipment used to measure the methane content in the biogas will provide an
ertified Emission Reductions (CERs), within and between the documents must be correct and accurate.Issue: The CER Calculations sheet - I

lity control system employed by the project activity, data collection procedures (information flow including data generation, aggregation,

y the CEMAT transmission company. However, in this verification report, the DOE verified the calibration certificates which were issued on
non-activity parameters were not monitored in accordance with the registered monitoring plan? In such cases, does the verification repor
r, the monitoring plan requires the measurement of energy difference between the inlet and outlet of solar heater. Further clarification is
sessing compliance with the calibration frequency requirements' for the calibration delay. (VVM v.1.2 para 184 (a) (ii) & EB 52 Annex 60)Is

readsheet ( “ER ”) indicates that the baseline emissions calculated for the month of October 2008 is the maximum between (i) and (ii) abov

nd/or emission factors, default values and other reference values have been correctly applied. (VVM v.1.2 para 208 (d) & (e))Issue: The mo
tified Emission Reductions (CERs), within and between the documents must be correct and accurate.Issue: The amount of CERs is not corre

R) with the running /outage hours of the plant (Page 8 of the MR) as provided below:i)For the month of December 2007, the plant was run

ort must be submitted with a request for issuance.2.Scope: According to EB48 Annex 68 paragraph 9(e), cross-referencing and versioning w

request submission is incomplete after the DOE/PP failed to provide an unprotected calculation spreadsheet "Accounting eligible HFC-23
between the documents are not consistent.Issue: There is an inconsistency of the total number of CER between the CER_BC6a and CER_B
ormation on production volumes of HCFC22 by registered CDM projects in connection with developments in the HCFC22 market and poss

DM Methodologies ”.

g procedure IOA-531-005 (internal QA/QC)  in line with the registered monitoring plan; however, the revised version was only available on

l rated capacity, plus 10% to account for distribution losses, for 8760 hours per annum. ”The PP/DOE arerequired to provide details of elec

s conducted at a frequency specified in applied monitoring methodology or EB guidance if applicable, and/or the monitoring plan? (VVM v

cation/ request for approval of changes from the project activity as described in the registered PDD sought by PP/DOE and approved by th
8 - Annex 68 paragraph 10 (b) (iii)).Issue: The DOE has explained that FE, Flare combustion efficiency, has been measured by a gas quality a

08. Clarification is required on how the DOE has closed the issue concerning the impact of delayed calibration without making the most co
ge as appropriate have been carried out in accordance with the formulae and methods described in the monitoring plan and the applied m
cal absorption of a sample gas. The equipment and test procedures will provide an accuracy with a + ½ percent uncertainty range".Howev

ered monitoring plan as per the applied methodologies, the applied standardized baselines and the other applied methodological regulato

nt dates of calibration and/or validity) as specified by the monitoring methodology and the monitoring plan. (EB48 - Annex 68 paragraph 1

y control system employed by the project activity, data collection procedures (information flow including data generation, aggregation, rec

nt dates of calibration and/or validity) as specified by the monitoring methodology and the monitoring plan. (EB48 - Annex 68 paragraph 1

lowed VVM paragraph 185 concerning the yearly calculation of the emission factor EFy.
and/or emission reductions, including reference to formulae and methods used. (EB48 - Annex 68 paragraph 10 (a) (vii))Issue: the Monitor

ns is the most conservative assumption theoretically possible as per para 209(a) of the Validation and Verification Manual version 1.2

he accepted revised monitoring plan. (VVM v.1.2 para 206 & 221(d))Issue: The verification report states (page 12) that the monitoring has
nd versioning within and between the document must be correct and accurate.Issue: In the verification report and in the certification repo

Annex 68 paragraph 10 (b) (iii)).Issue: The DOE submitted 2 files with the request for issuance - one containing the values of monitored pa
with a ± ½ percent uncertainty range; however, the accuracy of the Landtec portable gas analyser used, which is   3% for CO2 contents abo
 further clarify how it assessed the consistency of the accuracy of the gas analyzer with the accuracy specified in the revised monitoring p

odalities and procedures for a clean development mechanism, as defined in Article 12 of the Kyoto Protocol' stipulates that the first step i

ne concentration is determined with CO2 content testing and is obtained with a gas analyzer using the “Orsat ”method of volumetric analy

he accepted revised monitoring plan. (VVM v.1.2 para 206 & 221(d))Issue: The revised monitoring plan Section D.4. states that the "Accur

ing report ”. However there was no generator installed at either of the sites, the DOE shall correct the statement in the verification report.
rt must be submitted with a request for issuance.Monitoring report belongs to another project. Therefore, the CER amount, reference num

vely with periodical measurement at 95% confidence level was met; 2. The implementation status of 1X140 KW turbine mentioned in the

r issuance.Issue: There is an inconsistency of the VVS version within the verification report as pages 7 and 32 refers to VVS 9 and pages 7, 1

er possible. (EB48 - Annex 68 paragraph 10 (b) (ii)).Issue: Regarding the electricity consumption by the project activity the CER sheet prese

d that the annual calibration requirement for this meter as mentioned on page 19 of the PDD was met.

tated in the registered PDD is 1.7 and 0.7 million tonnes/ year for the two Units respectively. Further clarification is required on how the D

equired once  instruments have been set into operation, whereas the registered monitoring plan indicates that calibration of the instrume

nd versioning within and between the document must be correct and accurate.Issue: The Certification, Verification and Monitoring Report

g the four previous monitoring periods. The PP/DOE indicated that such increase is due to greater flow of water in the river as compared
ting the monitoring report form (F-CDM-MR -)has not been submitted with a request for issuance.Issue: The monitoring report submitted

ired by the monitoring plan and the applied methodology?Issue: The CER spreadsheet only presents consolidated values of all the require

ment is not correct and accurate.Issue: The validation report has been conducted with reference to the revised PDD version 4.0, therefore

on certificates issued on 29/08/2007 and 09/12/2008).

nitoring period apply conservative assumptions or discount factors to the calculations to the extent required to ensure that GHG emission

must be submitted with a request for issuance.Issue: Please note that you have submitted through the VVM track. As per the information
he calculation was cross-checked with the equipment installed at the site …”2. Other issuesThe DOE states that the portable gas analyser is
n the registered PDD (24,291 tCO2e). However, mathematically, the increase can be calculated as 34.4%. Furthermore considering the ac
E closed the FAR raised in the verification report by stating that “the igniters are checked at monthly ”. However, the revised monitoring pla

in operation during the monitoring period even though there was no gas generation.

he calculation was cross-checked with the equipment installed at the site …”Other Issues 2. The calibration frequency of gas analyser defin

n is required and a complete verification report is required.2. If the internal consumption is to be calculated permanently, a FAR should be
 between the documents is not correct and accurate.Issue: The number of CER is not consistent within the ER spreadsheet as there is no li

have been issued in accordance with CDM rules and requirements.Information is required on the following: 1. Production levels of HCFC2
ments must be internally and mutually consistent.Issue:You have not responded to the initial incomplete issue of an inconsistency of proj

vant dates of calibration and/or validity) as specified by the monitoring methodology and the monitoring plan. (EB48 - Annex 68 paragraph

CR re estimated by conducting test on CDU-I in February 2007 is applicable for CDU-II also.iii. The emission reductions are calculated in acc

hecked with other sources (VVM v.1.2 para 208 (a) and (b))Issue: The DOE is requested to include information on how the values of specifi

meters were not included in the revised monitoring plan. The DOE is required to clarify how it has verified that the monitoring was conduct

dered in the calculation was cross-checked with the equipment installed at the site …..."OTHER ISSUES:The DOE states that the portable ga

ect number of Certified Emission Reduction, specified by the DOE.Issue: The request for issuance form refers to 282301 CO2 whereas the

monitored values of the share of different types of organic wastes have not been provided; the spreadsheet only presents the aggregated a

and versioning within and between the document must be correct and accurate.Issue: The Validation Report refers to an updated version

itoring report on page 15 section C.3.1 refer to post-registration change "Temporary deviations". However, there are no PRC documents s

ccordance with the formulae and methods described in the registered monitoring plan;As per the PDD, EGBL is calculated as EGexport –E
must be submitted with a request for issuance.Issue: The Monitoring Report version 3 of 08/10/2011 for the monitoring period 01/04/200
ng the monitoring report form (F-CDM-MR -)has not been submitted with a request for issuance.Issue: There is no monitoring report subm
he net saleable energy. Further clarification is required.
on CR1 of the monitoring report (page 13) is incomplete. b) How it was verified that the firewood used during the monitoring period is a r

this monitoring period and it is unclear how these wood waste would have been treated in the absence of the project, since there have be
cell J13 for 5 March 2008) and why the PP did not consider the electricity consumed by the project activity for those days when there was

thodology which requires the measurement of NCV of fuel used.2) The emission reductions are calculated in accordance with the method
e the monitoring report lists the parameters to be monitored, the monitoring report does not present the actual values for the parameters
vant dates of calibration and/or validity) as specified by the monitoring methodology and the monitoring plan. (EB48 - Annex 68 paragraph

the emission reduction spread sheet has used a factor of 1.03, estimated from blow down test, for calculating the feed water quantity;2. T

activity proposed in the registered PDD are in place and/or that the project participant has implemented and operated the proposed CDM
hanges in the gross electricity generation from the project, electricity supplied for consumption in the mill and net electricity supplied to th

nd/or emission factors, default values and other reference values have been correctly applied. (VVM v.1.2 para 208 (d) & (e))Issue: The ve

ormation on production volumes of HCFC22 by registered CDM projects in connection with developments in the HCFC22 market and poss
th February 2007 provided by the energy concessionary CEMIG.
d not be stored for more than one year. ”Clarification is required on how this requirement has been met.

ity generationis measured by two meters.

ormation on production volumes of HCFC22 by registered CDM projects in connection with developments in the HCFC22 market and poss

arch 2017. The verification report states that “Based on calibration certificates checked a delay in calibration has been identified for the fol
s in the monitoring report as required by the monitoring plan and the methodology.
city generation from the project, electricity supplied for consumption in the mills and net electricity supplied to the grid.

s-checked with other sources such as plant log books, inventories, purchase records, laboratory analyses. (VVM v.1.2 para 208 (a) and (b))

uest for issuance submission.The Verification/Certification Report, page 2 shows that the date of the revision of this VR/CR is 29/02/2012
the project design of a registered project activity (PS v1, para 218 (a)(b)(c)(d)(e)Issue: The PDD (page 2) states "It is projected to have a no

ricity generation from the project, electricity supplied for consumption in the mill and net electricity supplied to the grid.
ilers. ” However, the DOE stated that there were some changes in the PPA and the main reason of the changes was the supply of electricit
uest for issuance submission.Issue: There is inconsistency with the logical sign off of the documents. The VR is dated on 30.8.12 and the M
kers.2. The monitoring report stated that 842 solar cookers were implemented while the verification report stated that 833 solar cookers w

equipments was conducted at a frequency specified by the applied methodology, the standardized baseline and/or the monitoring plan a

nt dates of calibration and/or validity) as specified by the monitoring methodology and the monitoring plan. (EB48 - Annex 68 paragraph 1

vant dates of calibration and/or validity) as specified by the monitoring methodology and the monitoring plan. (EB48 - Annex 68 paragraph

the monitoring plan and the methodology.2. The verification report and the spreadsheet show that the energy contribution share of natu
l. 3, page 1.124. Please refer to VVM version 1.2 paragraph 208 (d).

e form must be submitted with a request for issuance.Issue: The 2nd page of the request for issuance signed form has not been submitted

tement on how the DOE verified the information flow (from data generation, aggregation, to recording, calculation and reporting) for thes
DOE must be submitted.According to the submitted assessment opininion there are no post-registration changes.2.Scope: A monitoring r

8 the plant was shut down (p.4 of monitoring report). And the plant was shut down from 04:05 on 14 July 2008 to 05:05 on 15 July 2008 b

s conducted at a frequency specified in applied monitoring methodology or EB guidance if applicable, and/or the monitoring plan (VVM v.1
tem, given the fact that the relevant monitoring points of parameter QHNO3,cons,y is not observed in the diagram in page 5 of the monito

ment is not correct and accurate.Issue: The submitted documentation for the request for issuance of the monitoring period 01 Jan 10 - 31 D

deviation request that “To know the percentage of losses, the proponent used the net electricity data measured after the setting of the m

th ten places after decimal (e.g. B27), others have two places of decimal (e.g. B25). This cannot be meter readings that were read by a per

ulting in no measurements on-site (e.g. data from 4/02/08). Further clarification is required.2. Explanation is required on how the emission

e to you inorder to rearrange the project interface with the correct documents. We will prioritize this case upon re-submission.
rification, the DOE, prior to finalizing the verification, shall request the project participants to conduct the required calibration and shall de
para. 258 of the ¨CDM Project Standard for project activities¨, Version 02.0.2: The Monitoring Report should provide information on the va

ars data (2005-2007). Further clarification is required on how the DOE verified the calculation of the grid emission factor as per the applied

quantity ofbiomass that is utilised including the project activity has been met.

IE coordination forum" para. 17, available under: https://cdm.unfccc.int/extranet/OE/teleconference/cc16_mr.pdf; the DOE is kindly requ
ollection efficiency. If yes, the DOE is requested to explain why this is considered as correction rather than changes to the project design; b
med by the DOE (p.17 in the Verification Report). E.g. NQ1000: 03/09/2019, 01/10/2020; MN1032: 03/09/2019, 29/09/2019, 01/10/2020;
a 309 (b) of VVS for PA version 3).The validation opinion for the changes to the project design does not contain the assessment on when th

net electricity generation that is produced and fed into the grid. However, in the project activity EGPJ,y refers to project plant/unit for capti

a) The DOE shall further validate the calibration of monitoring equipment considering that the PDD p.27 and MR p.10 have the provision t
uipment) of the registered CDM project activity specified in the registered PDD are in place and that the project participants have operated

ng, start of operation.

spreadsheet, "Ref.10379_MP2_Spreadsheet", shows how the baseline emission reduction has been calculated. However, it does not prov

ndards or tools, and, if there are, determine whether the permanent changes or the deviation comply with the relevant requirements in th

oned to the date 31/12/2020 to match the end date of monitoring period. The DOE is requested to explain: (a) How this approach is in line

ok due account of all authentic and relevant comments in the verification: The DOE is requested to clarify the reason why it concluded secti

on as per the para 394 of VVS for PA version 2. 2: The DOE states that it has not conducted the on-site inspection due to the Covid-19 pan

wever, "Sonu Handicrafts_Wind" sheet in the submitted spreadsheet shows and states that "Error Factor 0.2% has been applied due to del

temporary deviation whereas there is no request for post-registration changes submitted along with the issuance request.

tch the controller data value provided in the generation sheet. The DOE is requested to provide clarification.
 no post registration changes submitted with this request for issuance. In line with para 135 of the CDM project cycle procedure for projec

n 4) are fully met. For example, •The MR and the excel calculation file provide only a number of OM emission factor (0.3800 tCO2/MWh)

f the monitoring report are applied in the ER sheets; (ii) The ER sheets (for example in file “Annex 30 to CER Sheet ”) include parameter "M

vide information how/what documents the DOE reviewed in order to confirm that the description in the revised PDD reflects the impleme

provided on the results of the delayed calibration test of the meters.

om renewable biomass. During this monitoring period, the project activity has consumed rice husk and woody biomass, and the emission
RC-FORM is missing. 2.Scope: According to PCP version 9 para 161(b), VVS para 293 a validation report, including a validation opinion, by th

alues in the monitoring reports as per VVS version 09.0 paragraphs 393 and 409 (e).Issue: 1. The DOE is requested to clarify why it has not

d calibration are available), referring to the illustrative examples in the appendix below, the DOE may conclude its verification, provided th

w it has cross-checked the net unit values for the period that is apportioned considering the JMR and invoices correspond to data for the e

ject emissions and leakage have been followed as per VVS version 09.0 paragraphs 403 (c) and 409 (j).Issue: The formula applied to calcula

stered monitoring plan.The monitoring plan explains, on table D.2, that the value of the parameter EGfacility,y was adjusted due to caliibra

ency specified in the registered monitoring plan (paragraph 368 of VVs for PA version 2).1) The calibration dates are not consistent betwe

th PCP version 9 para 222.Issue: The submission is made under VVS version 9.0. In line with the Implementation plan for new CDM regulati

to provide the line diagrams showing all relevant monitoring points in the monitoring report.2: For each parameter, the project participan

picts: (1) The two groups of WTGs described in the ERs calculation spreadsheet; (2) The other non-project activities connected to the main
nges is not provided.

newly incorporated geo-coordinates of each WTGs in the revised PDD since there was no evidence/information on how it validated.2: The

60 (b) and VVS v.03 para. 338 (a-ii); (2) The actual error identified in the delayed calibration certificates of equipments identified as “¨D10¨
oject activity to the common metering point/grid in year y¨ is calulcated as EGPJ,facility,y = EG Export ,y - EG Losses,y. However, it is found

deration (i.e. the results of delayed calibration are available), the DOE may conclude its verification, provided the conservative approach is

c. E.10, p. 22) states that the Global stakeholder consultation is not applicable to the project activity. The DOE is requested to explain how

graph 361 of VVS for PA). The monitoring plan requires the annual monitoring of FCH4, j/FCH4, z/ (leak flow rate of methane for leak (j, z) f
all the meters were calibrated annually from 2015 to 2020 in accordance with monitoring plan. However the Annex 1 of the monitoring re

nge type temporary deviation whereas the issuance request form does not refer to post-registration changes and the submission does not

he ER spreadsheet (31,303 CO2), verification/certification report (33,301 page 16) and the rest of the documents submitted (31,301 CO2).
e ER spreadsheet (35,319 CO2) and the rest of the documents submitted (35,317 CO2). Please note that the Project emissions and leakage
“the net electricity supplied to the grid will be determined as the measured quantities of the grid electricity delivered to the grid minus the
ded in section C.2: There is no information how the DOE verified that the commissioning date of the project activity is 10/06/2014 and the

eet “PDD table summary ”).2.There is an inconsistency in the period of the temporary deviation. The submission page refers to 12/03/201
 roughout all crediting periods. Against this requirement and for the first monitoring period for 1 November 2014 to 31 December 2017, it

g Report v1.2 and p.26 in the Verification Report v03 is "11/06/2014" (Set 1 meters), whereas the monitoring period starts on 06/01/2014.

alculation and reporting) for these parameters including the values in the monitoring reports (VVS v2, para 236, 284 (e)).Issue: The DOE is
D whereas a confidential version of PDD (version 2.1) was submitted during the request for registration process in response to the reques

r issuance in line with PCP version 9 para 222.Issue: No emission reduction spreadsheet is submitted.
manent changes to the monitoring plan and changes to the project design). However, there is no submission for post-registration changes.

error factor of 0.2% has been applied to the period with delayed calibration. However, as per the ER spreadsheet, the delay in calibration

s are two: type of sampling framework (from systematic to random sampling) and monitoring all trees instead of the ones with diameters

bstation are mentioned as 23/03/2015 and 19/03/2018. The monitoring period considered for this submission is 01/08/2013 to 31/12/202
uired in the completeness check checklist for requests for issuance in line with PCP version 9 para 222.Issue: The monitoring report (versio

including data generation, aggregation, recording, calculations and reporting), organizational structure, roles and responsibilities of person
keholder consultation" is "Not applicable for the present monitoring period". However, this is the 1st request for issuance for the project a

ered monitoring plan as per PS version 09.0 paragraphs 247 and 248 (a) (c) (d) (e) (f).Issue: The unit of D.2. of the monitoring report provi

he request for issuance (including the PRC documents) due to the current issuance workflow interface does not allow the secretariat to up
alibration was observed and addressed in line with para 366 (a) of CDM validation and verification standard for project activities, version 0

een carried out in accordance with the formulae and methods described in the monitoring plan and the applied methodology document. (

d do not reduce the level of accuracy of the monitoring compared with the requirements contained in the registered monitoring plan. Plea

not included in the validation report for post-registration changes.2.Scope: The types of post registration changes are not consistent amon

res pending CMP guidance at CMP 16, to process requests for issuance of CER for emission reductions achieved on or after 1 January 2021

submitted in both clean and track changes. However, it is using an old template version 06 instead of version 08.2.Scope: The cross-referen
editing period, 3. permanent changes from registered monitoring plan, monitoring methodology or standardized baseline and 4. changes t
.2164 and MNP 143 (HTSC NO.2165) and for period of 08/12/2015 to 08/01/2016 (for WTGs MNP 143 (HTSC NO.2165) as net payable am
onitoring plan. The DOE is requested to provide information on how it has verified the completeness of the monitoring plan as per the app

ject emissions and leakage have been followed as per VVS version 09.0 paragraphs 403 (c) and 409 (j).Issue: The DOE is requested to expla
orm the 1st periodical verification of the “10 MW Manjanadka Hydro project, Karnataka, India ”(UN reference number:9467)". However, i

d calibration are available), the DOE may conclude its verification, provided the following conservative approach is adopted in the calculati
with the formulae and methods described in the registered monitoring plan (VVS-PA ver. 01 paragraph 376 (c).The emission reduction cal

red to provide further information on how it verified the parameter since 1) the monitoring report/ER spreadsheet do not provide how th
od in the monitoring report, and (a) propose alternative monitoring arrangements for the non-conforming monitoring period by applying
ertification Report concludes that the assessment of Global Stakeholder Consultation is not applicable. The DOE is requested to explain how

n 09.0 paragraph 245.Issue: The project view page indicates that the revised PDD was approved on 17 April 2015 by the Board. However, t
n 09.0 paragraph 245.Issue: The project view page indicates that the revised PDD was approved on 17 April 2015 by the Board. However, t

period.Issue: Further information and justification is required regarding the appropriateness and the conservativeness of the proposed ap

-implementation delay and/or does not present the expected implementation dates as per VVS version 09.0 paragraph 385 (a).Issue: The D
period?The DOE validated that the sampling for parameters Wsteam,CO2,y and Wsteam,CH4,y was not quarterly in accordance with the r

ost-registration change, the ER spreadsheet is missing.2.Scope: All documents are not in English or do not contain a full translation of relev

ost-registration change, the ER spreadsheet is missing.2.Scope: All documents are not in English or do not contain a full translation of relev

city generated by the project activity and supply to the grid. However, as per the equation 8 of the applied methodology ACM0002 versio

ith the PRC. Please be informed that the PRC option has been opened and you are kindly requested to re-submit this request with PRC doc
 rsion 9 para 161(b), VVS para 293 a validation report, including a validation opinion, by the DOE shall be submitted.3.Scope: According to

g period ”. The DOE is requested to clarify how it considers the revised monitoring plan in compliance with the applicable methodological to
ject activity has been registered; b)compliance of the monitoring plan with the applied methodology; c) the level of accuracy and complet

ed based on number of days of the monitoring period in December 2019. However, the apportioning procedure mentioned in the registere
-implementation delay and/or does not present the expected implementation dates as per VVS version 09.0 paragraph 385 (a).Issue: On p

parameters) that is different from that stated in the registered PDD) as per PS version 09.0 paragraphs 256 and 257.Issue: The DOE is requ
he amount of emissions reductions for this monitoring period. This submission displays two different amount of CERs: 56,769 ER and 56,75
ur interface in order for you to submit the revised document with the request for issuance form via the workflow.
d how the changes would impact the overall operation/ability of the project activity to deliver emission reductions as stated in the PDD as
not been applied during this verification process. Please refer to VVS PA ver. 0.30 para 324.

checked with the records of sold electricity available on SIC website. For December 2019, the DOE/PP shall provide information on wheth

g report using the valid version of the applicable monitoring report form as per VVS version 01.0 paragraph 337. Please note that no final m
tency and explain how it has verified the start date of operation. Refer Para 356(b) of VVS-PA version 3.0.2: VVS-PA Para 361(e)As per the

mber 2020), as temporary measures pending CMP guidance at CMP 16, to process requests for issuance of CER for emission reductions ac
eport, the model is J 620GS-F57. Please refer to paragraph 354 of VVS for project activities (version 02.0).2: The DOE is requested to explai

ing the values in the monitoring report, as per VVS- PA ver.2. para. 364.It is observed that in the CER spreadsheet, worksheet “Baseline da
t require prior approval of the Board (VVS v2, para 248,262)Issue: The DOE is requested to explain why a prior approval PRC is not submitt
mentation for request for post registration changes along with the request for issuance using the designated web interfaces. For consisten

g plan (paragraph 363 of VVS for PA version 01). The DOE (p 11) states that “Regarding the value of electricity exported to the grid (EGexpo
rovide further information on the location of the main and check meters of Kasari SHP and Dhom SHP by providing clear line diagrams (gra

ce form (CDM-ISS-FORM) indicate 211,621 tCO2 whereas the monitoring and the verification/certification reports indicate 209,766 tCO2. T

g plan (paragraph 363 of VVS for PA version 01). The DOE (p 11) states that “Regarding the value of electricity exported to the grid (EGexpo

e applied monitoring methodology; e) level of accuracy of the monitoring (VVS v.2 para 279 (c))Issue: The Verification Report page 18 state
DD or any accepted revised monitoring plan. (VVS v7 para 278)Issue: As per pages 5-6 of the monitoring report, Tucheng 13 and Songhe Ca

e VVS for project activities, paragraph 368)Issue: According to the calibration dates indicated in the monitoring report, the gas analyzers w
 t through a dedicated interface on the UNFCCC CDM website. However, the PRC documents were submitted under additional documents

that, for the parameter EGBL,y,Rajasthan, the value of net electricity supplied from JMR and invoices raised was found the same to be co

n report as well as the ER sheet refer to baseline emission of 52,424.

supplier. The methodology further states that if the monitored values fall below this range, additional information from the testing laborat

umed that during that hour the flare efficiency is zero." However, "ID 23,24,25,26,29 PE_Flare 2016" and "ID 23,24,25,26,29 PE_Flare 2017

sion and completion date of the monitoring report. The verification/certification report (page 22) refers to version is 1.1 dated 03/02/2021
e, the date of approval as per PS version 09.0 paragraph 250.Issue: The monitoring report does not contain information on the request for
ith the monitoring period contained in the submitted documentation. Kindly address this inconsistency of information along the submissio

alues in the monitoring reports as per VVS version 09.0 paragraphs 393 and 409 (e).Issue: The DOE is requested to explain how it verified p
ity is related to the one(s) listed below which do not require prior approval by the Board: (a) Change of calibration frequency or practice fo

4 of the CDM project cycle procedure version 01. Refer para. 394 of CDM VVS for PA version01.

the monitoring period as required by the registered monitoring plan, the applied methodologies, the applied standardized baselines and

on Statement. The title of the project activity is not consistent with the registered project. Kindly ensure consistency of information.2.Scop
e of operation for each site. For CDM project activities with phased implementation, the report shall state the progress of the proposed CD

alculation and reporting) for these parameters including the values in the monitoring reports (VVS v2, para 236, 284 (e)).Issue: The monito

ort E.8.2, page 25). However, the DOE is requested to provide its opinion by elaborating how it verified the suitability of the allometric equ

mpact of delaying the site visits on the DOE or PP. The DOE is requested to provide a proper justification in the verification report why the s
data generation, aggregation, recording, calculation and reporting), organizational structure, roles and responsibilities of personnel, emerg
greed by both DOE and PPs." The para 22 of EB 112 report also refers to paragraph 26 of the EB 106 meeting report which states that i) "A

temporary deviation whereas the issuance request form does not refer to post-registration changes and the submission does not include

ation report that a maximum error (i.e. +0.2% for imports and -0.2% for exports) was applied to the measures from September 2020 to De
total carbon of waste type i) as described in the monitoring report, has met the requirements of the monitoring plan in the registered PDD
uired in the completeness check checklist for requests for issuance in line with PCP version 9 para 222.Issue: The final Monitoring Reports

B are available. The emission reduction for the period (05.03.2015 to 15.10.2015) is considered zero (checked by the assessment team in
rd" sheet which indicates the emission reduction of 2013 from 11January 2013 to 31 December 2013 while the monitoring period starts fr
s sent to gas boiler; whereas (2) Diagrams in page 5 and 8 of the monitoring report implies one single biogas connection to an single recipi

para 189)The DOE/PP is requested to explain why the post registration change does not need prior approval , considering that two new pa

oring report (Corrections, Permanent changes from registered monitoring plan, and changes to the project design) whereas the Post-regis
the waste type i in the sample n collected during the year y) and FCFi (Faction of fossil carbon in total carbon of waste type i) are to be mo

r issuance in line with PCP version 9 para 222.

data generation, aggregation, recording, calculation and reporting), organizational structure, roles and responsibilities of personnel, emerg
UNFCCC website (https://cdm.unfccc.int/Reference/Guidclarif/old_pdd/index.html), the submitted revised PDD template form is no longe

er, project is used to calculate share of electricity exported / imported by the wind turbine (EG export, project / EG import, project) in the t
remains below 10 MW, considering that the additionality of the project activity during the registration was demonstrated using investmen

include in the Monitoring Report, a description on how the sampling has been conducted for the following monitored parameters: Mbiom
e visits cannot be postponed, a proper justification should be provided by the DOE why the site visits cannot be postponed, including the

ot be postponed.1) The verification report (p 6) provided the justification to the requirement for the mandatory on-site inspection against
monitoring plan, or permanent deviation of monitoring from the applied methodologies, standardized baselines, or other methodological
nitoring plan with the methodology as Section B.7.1 of the PDD states that the parameter EFgrid is fixed ex-ante while the methodology (p

measured values of the delayed calibration shall result in fewer claimed GHG emission reductions or net anthropogenic GHG removals; (b
ing stock at the plant will be used to calculate annual coal and diesel consumption. The DOE is requested to explain how crosschecking ha
ase refer to verification and reporting requirements as per the VVS version 03.0, paragraphs 366 and 367

with the applied monitoring methodology; e) level of accuracy of the monitoring, as per VVS version 09.0 paragraphs 320 and 326 (c).Issue
ermine whether any deviation or the proposed or actual changes in the implementation or operation of the project activity comply with th
dated 20/03/17, this submission is marked incomplete.
of the PDD provides the technologies and/or measures which is not relevant to the project activity as it states (p 5) that "Boryeong small h

d period for all the WES ends on 08/01/2017, in line with para. 372. of the VVS v03.0.It is noted that the CERs value reported in this 3rd m

DOE are requested to address the following inconsistency: The MR (pg. 13) states that “ESj.i, import ,y have not been monitored as per PD
ws in Nairobi River Basin ”and “Project activity displaces use of non-renewable biomass by introducing biogas digesters and stoves. ”The D

sion line connected to these meters for each of these sites. However, single line diagrams on pages 16 and 17, show two transmission line

ill impact a delay in CERs delivery as there is an ERPA in place, signed in between the parties. However, the verification report did not cont
do not require prior approval of the Board as per VVS version 09.0 paragraphs 289 and 312.Issue: The DOE shall provide information on ho

ubmitted along with the request for issuance. 2. The issuance request is submitted under VVS version 2 which is no longer valid since 7 Oct
et called "Gereration Details" in the spreadsheet states "Year 2017 - SLDC report for the month of Oct 2017 is Missing" and "Year 2017 - In
uest for issuance form do not correspond to the number of Certified Emission Reduction and breakdowns, verified by the DOE.Issue: We o

e ER amount. The ER spreadsheet ( “Summary Sheet ”), monitoring report and verification/certification report refer to ER 31,332 whereas th

M7 and M8 complies with the relevant regulation of Lao PDR. The DOE is requested to further substantiate how the meter accuracy of 1.0
th PCP version 9 para 222.Issue:1. The verification and certification report, under section E.4., refers to "Post registration changes have be
ered monitoring plan. (PS v7, para 191, 192 (a)(c )(d)(e)(f))Issue: In the submitted ER spreadsheet, as part of worksheet "calculation", the
ed monitoring plan, or permanent deviation of monitoring from the applied methodologies, standardized baselines or other methodologic

amount of CER between the signed form and project view page (349,960 CO2) with the rest of the documents submitted ( 403,960 CO2). A
grid emission factor (EFgrid,CM,y) to be 0.85285 tCO2/MWh as mentioned in the monitoring report (page 08 and 20) and the ER spreadsh

ou raised regarding the inconsistency in the amount of emission reductions. Best regards, Your CDM team, UNFCCC secretariat

rsion 09.0 paragraph 388.Issue: The monitoring requirements of parameter Pclinker,y (page 35 of ACM0003 version 7.4.1) require direct m

eport page 4 that the phase III (Autopista Oriental) is delayed. However, the DOE has not described the reason and expected implementa
number of Certified Emissions Reductions. The ER spreadsheet “ER Calculation Sheet-5821 ”in cell D39 refers to “40,965 ”whereas cell D48

on 09.0 paragraph 388.Issue: It is observed that the NCV of biogas has been determined ex-ante. However, page 19 of AMS I.C version 18
the monitoring plan (VVS v2, para 243)Issue: (a) The Verification Report page 27 states: "The DOE verified that the dates of calibrations ce

ission Reductions (CERs), within and between the documents is not correct and accurate.Issue: ER spreadsheet refers to CER of 42,195.02

the registered monitoring plan state is as once at the beginning of each crediting period; (b) The monitoring report and verification report
data generation, aggregation, recording, calculation and reporting), organizational structure, roles and responsibilities of personnel, emerg

e emissions as well as other parameters required by the applied methodology and the registered monitoring plan as per PS version 09.0 p

e CER Calculation sheet (17,697 CO2) and the rest of the documents submitted (17,615 CO2).
the monitoring plan (VVS v2, para 243)Issue: The DOE is requested to explain how it verified the calibration of the meters, in particular as

ered monitoring plan. (PS ver. 09 para 248 )Issues: i. The registered MP (pg. 30) shows that monitored data for biomass consumed (Qsawd
equire prior approval of the Board (VVS v2, para 248,262)Issue: the post registration change (PRC) to the PDD (i.e. inclusion of the paramet

sentatives, districts and villages and different biogas plants sizes will also be considered while samples picked up randomly from each cate
sentatives, districts and villages and different biogas plants sizes will also be considered while samples picked up randomly from each cate
the PDD) requires ex post updating of EFgrid, BM, y, build margin grid emission factor. The PP/DOE has mentioned about citing a third par

OM to be calculated based on a full generation –weighted average for the most recent 3 years for which data were available at the time of
D, in particular the nitric acid production process, based on submitted documentation, it appears that the facility have had overproduction

uested to explain how the monitoring has been carried out in accordance with the registered monitoring plan: (a) The DOE checked the pre
within and between the documents is not correct and accurate.Issue: The amount of CERs in the Validation Opinion for PRC is incorrect o

the net unit values for the period considering the electricity sales and purchase receipts obtained from the grid company correspond to d

h do not require prior approval of the Board as per VVS version 09.0 paragraphs 289 and 312.Issue: The DOE is requested to explain under
onitoring report, page 2); “24/10/2018-16/11/2018, 01/01/2019-13/09/2019 and 01/01/2020-20/11/2020 ”(Verification report, page 14)

n ”, “no data recorded ”and “no data ”. PP is requested to explain whether "no operation" refers to the meter itself or a particular equipme
e of operation for each site. For CDM project activities with phased implementation, the report shall state the progress of the proposed CD

naging entity (e.g. commitment/ timeline as per the validation or verification contract, CER delivery commitment by project participants),

rameters Tflare (Temperature in the exhaust gas of the flare) and ηflare (Efficiency of open and enclosed flare).2: Scope: The verification r
from the dates reported on MR, VR and Excel Sheet.

he change of accuracy of meter B from 0.5S to 1.0S, the revised PDD does not provide details on the discount factor used for baseline emi
 track where as the verification was conducted as per VVS. Kindly re-submit through the VVS track.

that shows the application of zero electricity generation during delayed calibration period for meters with delayed calibration. Refer to pa

e verification and certification report is no longer valid (version 02.1). Kindly submit an updated verification and certification report using

equire prior approval of the Board (VVS v2, para 248,262)Issue: The DOE is requested to clarify how the changes from the registered monit

ulation and reporting) for these parameters including the values in the monitoring reports (VVS v2, para 236, 284 (e)).Issue: The monitorin

he PP shall provide more information on how it considered this change as a temporary deviation and not a permanent change from the mo
 removals, and leakage GHG emissions have been carried out in accordance with the formulae and methods described in the registered m

es made to the revised PDD are in accordance with Appendix 1 of the Project Standard.2: Scope: The validation opinion does not contain a

e change in the meter in the section of B.7.2 (monitoring plan) of the PDD as " Corrections that do no affect project design". However, the
(t) i + PB(t) i) * Ai * (44/12) (VVS for PA (v2) paragraph 113).2: 1) The DOE (p 37) confirms that "a more conservative values of 0.51 (Pinus c

h PS version 9 para 260.Issue: Sheets "HMA-Calcul emission CO2" and "HMA" of the CER calculation spreadsheet are not in English.2.Scope

(t) i + PB(t) i) * Ai * (44/12) (VVS for PA (v2) paragraph 113).2: This request for issuance involves PRC including temporary deviations, corre

al belts, there was illegality of the trees as small logs were being cut and loaded on the vehicles, and some patrol man have supported the

ameters) that is different from that stated in the registered PDD (VVS v07, para 273)Issue: The emission reduction of 413,750 tCO2e consi

aked HHK bricks (DMW hhk bricks,di)" has not been daily monitored as per revised monitoring plan during period of 01/07/2014 to 31/08/

me for each solar cooker (ti) has been indicated as follows: a) the registered MP (pg. 18) _ “determined by the result of the sampling survey
me for each solar cooker (ti) has been indicated as follows: a) the registered MP (pg. 18) _ “determined by the result of the sampling survey
Development Mechanism Project Standard, Validation and Verification Standard and Project Cycle": Starting 1 February 2013 DOEs shall su
values in the monitoring reports as per VVS version 09.0 paragraphs 393 and 409 (e).Issue: The parameter “Quantity of chemical oxygen
een carried out in accordance with the formulae and methods described in the monitoring plan and the applied methodology document. (

and hence the error factor –0.2% is applied for export values and +0.2% for import and transmission loss values. However, it is observed
g period throughout the documentation are not consistent.Issue: The view page shows the monitoring period as 10/01/2012 - 09/07/2012

on a minute basis. However, some data was missing in the spreadsheets. For example, on 6 Nov 2019, time stamp 7:56 is missing.2: The D
lues mentioned in the monitoring report were reached. The spreadsheet should be revised to clearly show how the values of EGExport,y (
. Temporarily deviation is a post-registration change and therefore documentation required for other type of post-registration change is a

the monitoring plan (VVS v2, para 243)Issue: "The DOE (p 16) states that "A delay of 5 days has occurred in the calibration of energy mete

entioned that "the PP s’ total sample plots calculated is 35 distributed in five strata.". However, on page 13 of the monitoring report (MR),
e submitted documentation and web interface.2.Scope: Cross-referencing and versioning within and between the document is not correc

the monitoring plan (VVS v2, para 243)Issue: The DOE states that the installed equipment essential for measuring parameters required fo

h 260(b) of PS for PA version 2).The monitoring report does not provide all information on calibration such as the replacement date of ther

ily(EX)] does not contain the theoretical emission factor of methane (EFCH4).  It is noted that this factor is included in the formula mentio

e4. This is due to the fact that Invoice is generated based on scheduled Energy at 0:00 Hrs of First day of month to 0:00 Hr of last day of m

net unit values for the period considering the invoices from EVN and local Gia Nghia Electricity Company correspond to data for the entire

ered monitoring plan as per PS version 09.0 paragraphs 247 and 248 (a) (c) (d) (e) (f).Issue: The monitoring report states that the annex 3
(i) Implementation of 4 trunk lines, whereas there are 5 trunk lines as per the monitoring report. The MR also refers to PDD s’ provision th

t the documentation relevant to the revision of the monitoring plan are to be submitted along with the request for isssuance. The DOE is r
uest for issuance form do not correspond to the number of Certified Emission Reduction and breakdowns, verified by the DOE.Issue: There

uments to post registration changes have been submitted by the DOE, it is required that the documents be uploaded through the PRC inte
amount of CERs achieved for this monitoring period is 54,172 tCO2. However, the project view page and the provided documents also refe

ram which depicts: (1) The three different customers stated in the spreadsheet (i.e. Vaayu (India) Power Corporation Private Limited- I, - I
a generation, aggregation, recording, calculation and reporting), organizational structure, roles and responsibilities of personnel, emergen

upplied by the project activity to CCPG will be double checked by receipt of sales, the DOE is requested to clarify how it crossed-checked t
port is based upon VVS whereas the project view page indicates VVM 1.2
3 - 25/09/2014) and the rest of the documents submitted (26/12/2013 - 24/09/2014).

firmation that the result of the delayed calibration is within the maximum permissible error in order to support the correct application of

eration applied in the PDD. The increase is explained by hydrological conditions that were above the long-term average during the monitor
ducted as per VVM. Kindly re-submit conducting verficiation as per VVS.

itoring electricity meters, including M2 and M4.

t through a dedicated interface on the UNFCCC CDM website. However, the PRC documents were submited under additional documents

R01 raised given that it is not clear what specific adjustments for the next verification period will be done with respect to the unit convers

il, 2014 which is prior to the finalization of the DOE's Assessment Opinion dated 15 July 2014. Issue 2: The Verification Statement is dated
e approved revised MP; while in certain sections, it refers to revisions explained in "Annex 3". Further on page 28, the VR states-"The mon

een carried out in accordance with the formulae and methods described in the monitoring plan and the applied methodology document. (
osition, technology applied and number of sample plots. Further, the VR (pg. 48) indicates that during the site visit variations were observ
ot provide any verification opinion on the delayed calibration of the meters. Therefore, the DOE is required to provide further information

ation/certification report refer to standardized baseline, ASB0050-2020 version 1, whereas the project is not registered with ASB0050-202

des for the requirements for the stakeholder consultation conducted after the publication of the first monitoring report in accordance with

y obtained, however neither the monitoring report nor the spreadsheet calculates the energy savings due to the project activity.2: Scope:

heck of measurement results with records for sold electricity. The DOE is requested to clarify how it crossed-checked the values of EGfacil
s). The DOE is requested to address the inconsistency and submitted the valid revised PDD with correct version number and completion da

eport version 3, dated 11/09/2013. However, the Monitoring Report version 2, dated 18/12/12 has been submitted with this request for is

ments is the revised PDD it should be submitted both in clean and track changes version. 2.Scope: A monitoring report using the Form and

fied by the monitoring methodology and the monitoring plan as per PS version 09.0 paragraph 248 (b).Issue: 1. Section C of the monitoring

ject view page (97,107 CO2) and the rest of the submitted document (66,045 CO2). Please note that the total amount of CERs achieved in
 cording to PCP v2 para 138(c) a revised PDD (in both clean and track changes version) must be submitted.A revised PDD was not submitte
he PP is requested to provide the calculation of error margin for the monitored carbon stock changes in the living biomass.2: Scope: The ve

v7, para 262 (b))Issue:The registered PDD (p.2) indicates that the boiler is capable of utilizing both biomass and coal as fuel. The MR (p. 15

M v.1.2 para 208 (a) and (b))Issue: The DOE did not indicate how it had verified the invoicing periods of the bidirectional meter used to mon

n electricity is calculated as the difference of the data from Meter A and line loss (0.308%) according the power purchase agreement, while

EN,y) and the additional electricity consumed (EGPJ,y) have not been reported as required by the applied methodology.

ges that there is a diesel generator installed on-site that is not mentioned in the monitoring plan. Further, as per EB49 Annex 28 footnote
ered monitoring plan. (PS v1, para 191, 192 (a)(c )(d)(e)(f))Issue: The Registered monitoring plan page 28 states that the parameter FCi,y r

endix 1 of PS apply to those deviations as per VVS version 09.0 paragraphs 289, 298, 300, 301 and 302.Issue: The DOE has provided a verifi

PDD36 or any accepted revised monitoring plan (VVS Ver. 7 para 278). Issue: "The applied methodology ACM0002 version 12 requires tha

2018 as 216 tCH4, which is based on one of the data resulting from the spreadsheet “hourly-201801 ”column BJ (average CH4 density in LF

used, while the project view page mentions the vvm track.

r to the final version and revision of the Certification Report dated 16/02/2012.

ency specified in the registered monitoring plan (paragraph 365 of VVS for PA version 3).1) There are inconsistencies in the calibration dat

he CK factor and; 2) weight scales in lines 1, 2 and 3 after the clinker cooler. The DOE is requested to provide further verification opinion o
e construction work for Phase II will begin one year after the Phase I begins operation. The monitoring report (p.2) shows that Phase I was

pplied monitoring methodology; e) level of accuracy of the monitoring (VVS v.2 para 279 (c))Issue: the DOE shall provide validation opinio

M track where as the verification was conducted as per VVS. Kindly re-submit through the VVS track.2.Scope: According to EB48 Annex 68

d between the signed form and the view page (01.01.2011-31.12.2011) and the rest of the documents submitted (13.01.2011-31.12.2011)
ameters) that is different from that stated in the registered PDD (VVS v07, para 273)Issue: The emission reduction of 598,346 tCO2e for th

period. Example: Date of calibration of steam flow meters was 24/01/2012 (with due date as 23/01/2013) in the first monitoring report an
tates that "Unit standard coal consumption" is fixed ex-ante at 320 gce/kWh while the monitoring report refers to 314.35 gce/kWh.
data from M5,M6 , which is required by the monitoring plan.
d operated the proposed CDM project activity as per the registered PDD or the approved revised PDD. (VVM v.1.2 para 196)Issue:It is not

alysis of the fractional composition". While this parameter is not relevant for this monitoring period as the NMHC concentration is below

data generation, aggregation, recording, calculation and reporting), organizational structure, roles and responsibilities of personnel, emerg

as verified that this parameter has been monitored during the current monitoring period at six monthly intervals (page 33 of the verificatio
not provide an assessment and close out of any CARs, CLs or FARs issued, nor/or if appropriate, an assessment of remaining issues from th
 track where as the verification was conducted as per VVS. Kindly re-submit through the VVS track.

ersion 5.2 dated 06/06/2012. The latest PDD available is PDD version 5.1 dated 16/12/2011

eduction table) as well as the ER calculation spread sheet refer to the wrong monitoring period (30.11.2010-31.07.2011) where as the mon

ification report (34,085 CO2) and the rest of the documents (53,791 CO2). Please also note that the breakdown of the CER in 2012 should

meter for measuring electricity supplied from the grid, the DOE (p 12) states that "installed meter s’ capacity of project site #1 and project s

ify the inconsistencies in the revised PDD given that the capacity of both the gas engines has been changed to 2 x 1.063 MW in the projec
data generation, aggregation, recording, calculation and reporting), organizational structure, roles and responsibilities of personnel, emerg

uested to explain how it verified the following parameters in accordance with the monitoring plan, methodology and applicable tool which

tored on a quarterly basis as per the registered monitoring plan between 11/03/2020 and 20/11/2020 and the historical highest value dur

of any differences with mass balance approach should be documented as part of the monitoring plan and monitoring reports submitted fo
n Development Mechanism Project Standard, Validation and Verification Standard and Project Cycle": Starting from 1 Februrary 2013, DO

ameters) that is different from that stated in the registered PDD) (VVS ver. 07, para 2273)Issue: The emission reduction of 911,269 tCO2e

verify that the project has been implemented as planned and as mentioned in the registered PDD by visiting some of the households selec
6/19) requires the monitoring of parameter 'TEGy = Total electricity produced by the project activity, including the electricity supplied to t

01 has been closed considering the meter (M5) used to monitor electricity imports from the grid for residual area and emergency was no

ng to the monitoring plan, electricity is delivered from the project to the grid through two substations, Dongling and Huangang, each havin

nnected renewable electricity generation. However, this project activity was registered with AMS-I.D. ver. 13- Grid connected renewable e
e submitted PDD in track change. MI2.Scope: The cross-referencing and versioning within and between the document are not correct and

mation on how it verified the sampling approach “cluster sampling ”for the monitoring of Number of CFLs placed in service and operating

data generation, aggregation, recording, calculation and reporting), organizational structure, roles and responsibilities of personnel, emerg

the monitoring plan? (VVM v.1.2 para 184 (a) (ii) & EB 52 Annex 60)Issue: The monitoring plan (page 34 of the PDD) requires annual exam
oring report, page 4 states that "It is proposed that the maximum value (100%) during this monitoring period operational under normal co

ulation and reporting) for these parameters including the values in the monitoring reports (VVS v2, para 236, 284 (e)).Issue:a) The DOE is r
ara 208 (d) & (e))Issue: The validation report does not include assessment of the grid emission factor applied for the baseline emission calc

g plan. (Please refer to VVS version 2 paras. 360 and 361). 1) As per registered PDD, monitoring parameter “volumetric fraction of H2O in ti

ng report version 2 dated 20.09.2011 which has not been submitted.

cribe: i) the reason for the implementation delay of Tay Mo landfill; ii) the expected implementation date for Tay Mo landfill and Phase II o

data generation, aggregation, recording, calculation and reporting), organizational structure, roles and responsibilities of personnel, emerg
ation of the higher diesel emission factor of 0.8 tCO2/MWh to the project activity is considered appropriate, as the methodology (p.16) req
refers on page 2 and 37 to the monitoring report dated 07.02.2012 (version 3) where as the monitoring report is version 4 dated 05.04.20
ring the electricity sales and purchase receipts obtained from the grid company correspond to data for the entire month. Refer Para 373 (

of water, after the implementation of the project activity, when the reservoir is full" is to be measured annually. However the monitoring r

ep/2010 - 30/Sep/2011) is inconsistent with VR and CR.

er LFRi,y as Ex post Lamp Failure Rate for CFL type i in year y. However, the spreadsheet and the monitoring report does not show that the

ject emissions and leakage have been followed as per VVS version 09.0 paragraphs 403 (c) and 409 (j).Issue: The DOE is required to provid
larify the inconsistencies related to the source of the NCV,i,y value between the emission reduction spreadsheet, MR, verification report a

g report version 2 dated 25.02.2018, however the final monitoring report (version 2) is not submitted. 2.The documents shall be submitted
from the project design in the registered PDD are observed: i) installation of an additional train, i.e. Train 6; ii) reduction of the Water Rec
uested how it confirmed that the registered monitoring plan has been properly implemented. The monitoring plan requires the sampling f

ditional stoves are used. It also states that the reliability was achieved. However: (a) There is no information on the expected value of the p

version on the view page is version 2.2.Scope: A verification report has not been submitted with a request for issuance.Issue: Please note t

for adjusting the measured values has not been presented in the revised monitoring plan. See PS v.1 appendix 1 para 4.

uired in the completeness check checklist for requests for issuance in line with PCP version 9 para 222.Issue: The submitted monitoring rep

mr.pdf; the DOE is kindly requested to submit the PDD applying the latest version approved by the Board. Please refer to EB68, Annex 43 a

ulation and reporting) for these parameters including the values in the monitoring reports (VVS v2, para 236, 284 (e)).Issue: The DOE shall
ng report version 4 dated 10.09.2011 which has not been submitted.

Development Mechanism Project Standard, Validation and Verification Standard and Project Cycle": Starting from 1 Februrary 2013, DOEs

al stand volumes obtained from the monitored data collected from the sample plots. In the spreadsheet submitted, it is not shown how th

COD was missed, and it accepted this as PP is using average value of the monitoring period which is representative of the daily monitored
the calibration details of the controller meters have not been provided in the monitoring report. The DOE is therefore requested to provid

ch 12 - 28 Feb 13". However, the request for issuance is for the monitoring period 01 Sep 11 - 28 Feb 13 Issue 2: The submitted Monitorin

grid and imported from the grid will be “monitored and measured by bi-directional meters installed in the project site ”. However, the DOE
ome inconsistency in the applied methodology as the verification report (pages 11 & 26) and the certification report mention ACM0078 wh

et is inconsistent with other documents.2.Scope: The submitted documentation are dated prior to the date of request for issuance submis

ered monitoring plan. (PS v1, para 191, 192 (a)(c )(d)(e)(f))Issue: The monitoring plan (PDD page 28-29) indicates that the electricity gener

n "Fehler! Verweisquelle konnte nicht gefunden werden". Please submit the clean final version of the Certification report.

31/03/2011, whereas it is stated as 01/07/2010 (0:00)~31/03/2011 (24:00) in cell 55A of the calculation spreadsheet namely 3177_ER_W

ommissioning, continued operation periods, etc.) during the monitoring period under consideration. (EB48 - Annex 68 paragraph 10 (a) (i)
kes reference to the final monitoring report version 2 dated 10/01/2012. This happens on page 2 and page 30 under References section. T

on report (10.02.2012).

ed and replicable format.

g plan (para 360 of VVS for PA v03.0). “Generation Details ”work sheet of the ER spreadsheet submitted indicates that the monthly monitor
data generation, aggregation, recording, calculation and reporting), organizational structure, roles and responsibilities of personnel, emerg

achieved in each phase under verification. If the phased implementation is delayed, the DOE shall describe the reasons and present the ex

VM v.1.2 para 208 (a) and (b))Issue: The DOE is requested to explain how it has crosschecked the values provided in the monitoring report
mmissioning, continued operation periods, etc.) during the monitoring period under consideration. (EB48 - Annex 68 paragraph 10 (a) (i) &

ocuments to post registration changes have been submitted by the DOE, it is required that the documents be uploaded through the PRC in

e and/or the monitoring plan as per VVS version 09.0 paragraph 400.Issue: The verification and certification report states that the PP has a

n for post registration changes" is not the latest form (CDM-PRCV-FORM). The DOE is requested to submit the respective verification and

section B.7 of the PDD are 'permanent changes from the registered monitoring plan or monitoring methodology' rather than a 'correction'
rms that the all monitoring parameters stated in the monitoring plan have been sufficiently monitored, as the revised monitoring plan defi
o the final version of the Monitoring report as of 2 October, 2013, version 3.0. However, the final version of the Monitoring Report is date

by providing individual latitudes and longitudes. However, the longitudes provided in both the monitoring report and the verification repo
 of CERs claimed for this monitoring period. Kindly update a request for issuance site by changing the amount of CERs and resubmit a requ

data generation, aggregation, recording, calculation and reporting), organizational structure, roles and responsibilities of personnel, emerg

e: The confidental file for July 2011 does not contain any information on sheets "User Guide", "input" and "ER".3.Scope: According to EB48
was not selected on the project view page.

11 and does not refer to PDD version 7 dated 19/08/2014 submitted with a PRC request.

d the net unit values for the period considering the JMR and invoices correspond to data for the entire month. Refer VVS-PA Para 373 (b) o

11 has not been submitted.

submitted documentation. The title should be read as: "Reduction of energy consumption during the production of hydraulic lime for the

a generation, aggregation, recording, calculation and reporting), organizational structure, roles and responsibilities of personnel, emergen

DD or any accepted revised monitoring plan. (VVS v7, para. 278)."The applied methodology ACM0002 version 8 requires that the monitori

n. (EB48 - Annex 68 paragraph 10 (a) (iv) & EB 54 Annex 34)Issue: The calibration data for the import watt-meter is not provided in the mo

e of operation for each site. For CDM project activities with phased implementation, the report shall state the progress of the proposed CD
ing the values in the monitoring report.VVS version 3.0; paragraph 364

on report on p. 122 the start date of the monitoring period is wrong (01/03/2011 should be 01/03/2010).2.Scope: According to EB48 Anne
Verification report - The Verification Statement and Certification Report - refer to Monitoring Report Version 06 dated 18 April 2011. Certi

e state the monitoring period as 13 Feb 2010 - 31 Jan 2011. The Monitoring Report v02 and the Verification/Certification Report state it as

19, is not displayed correctly on the Certification statement (12-2-10 instead of 12-12-09). In the verification opinion of the Verification Re

he DOE shall clarify how this requirement is met.  Please refer to AMS III.H version 9 paragraph 34.
/cc16_mr.pdf The DOE is kindly requested to submit the PDD with the latest version approved by the Board. Please refer to EB68, Annex 4
re is no table in section E.4 of the Monitoring Report.2: Scope: The verification report does not describe the reasons for the phased-imple

uments to post registration changes have been submitted by the DOE, it is required that the documents be uploaded through the PRC inte
age 32) requires the monitoring of "TEGy" (measured continuously and recorded on a monthly basis) –"Total electricity produced by the p

track where as the verification was conducted as per VVS. Kindly re-submit through the VVS track.
track whereas the verification was conducted as per VVS. Kindly re-submit through the VVS track

oring plan and the applied methodology document. (VVM v.1.2 para 208 (c) & 221 (h))Issue: The DOE is required to further explain how it

test monitoring report version 02 from 11/09/2012 as referred to in the VR is missing, i.e. has not been uploaded under additional docum

measurement of the Cogeneration system electricity output (CEO) while the monitoring report indicates that this parameter is calculated
dard for project activities ”. Please refer to VVS PA v1.0 paragraph 296-299.The PRC request and the revised PDD indicate the change to the

cation report states that CQC confirms the reporting period from Reporting 04/12/2010 to 10/03/2011. The monitoring report for this req

uired in the completeness check checklist for requests for issuance in line with PCP version 9 para 222.2.Scope: The cross-referencing and
n report refers to the monitoring report version 1.1 dated 18.10.2012.2.Scope: According to EB48 Annex 68 paragraph 9(e), cross-referenc
 (EB48 - Annex 68 paragraph 10 (a) (iv) & EB 54 Annex 34)Issue: The monitoring report does not contain calibration details that cover the m

he amount of number of Certified Emission Reductions (CERs) is not consistent throughout the submitted documentation. Validation Repo

sted to clarify how it validated that the Corrections related to the incorporation of the "sales receipts" as a cross check to the electricity ge

wer plant after the implementation of the project activity. This parameter should be monitored annually as per page 17 of the methodolog

s are not assessable. (CER Calculation spreadsheet, Illustration of logfile consolidation SD_01 Olmeca 2009-11 to 2010-11 - Full raw, SD_02
ethod of the carbon content and the density in the ER spreadsheet considering that no formula has been mentioned to calculate carbon c

the monitoring plan? (VVM v.1.2 para 184 (a) (ii) & EB 52 Annex 60)Issue: The DOE has only included in the VR the verification of the calib

mperature of the flare was always above 500 °C (Spreadsheet “2635-ER Sheet1 ”page: “Month 11 2009 ”cells D3077 to D3129), and the sa
the verification report, the monitoring period date is 01/02/2011 to 30/0/2010, but should be 01/02/2010 to 30/04/2011. It is also wrong

ase of 24.5% over the projected emission reductions from the project activity. The DOE is requested to   explain whether the increase in pr
n. (EB48 - Annex 68 paragraph 10 (a) (iv) & EB 54 Annex 34)Issue: The calibration details for the monitoring equipments are available in se
The number of CERs is inconsistent between the documents and the verification report2.Scope: The submitted documentation are dated

sible to trace the emission reduction calculation. Particularly, with respect the provided results of MDy (Total Methane destroyed). See the

aselines, or the other applied methodological regulatory documents and, if there is, determine whether the deviation complies with the re

he Request for Issuance form states a CER amount (previous amount) that is not consistent within the other documents - Verification & Ce

e of biogas sent to the flaring system for flaring; (ii) Volume of biogas sent to the generator for power generation; (iii) Methane concentrati

ommissioning, continued operation periods, etc.) during the monitoring period under consideration. (EB48 - Annex 68 paragraph 10 (a) (i)
e 5 reports 42 micro hydro power plants which are included in this monitoring period; however, both the table 2 of monitoring report and

/or the monitoring plan (VVS v2, para 243)Issue: The Verification Report and the Monitoring Report do not provide information of the calib

pril 2015, entered into force version 09.0 of the "CDM project standard" (PS), "CDM validation and verification standard" (VVS) and "CDM
calibration are available), the DOE may conclude its verification, provided the conservative approach is adopted in the calculation of GHG e

een carried out in accordance with the formulae and methods described in the monitoring plan and the applied methodology document. (
he 9th monitoring period. During the 10th monitoring period (01 Jul 19 - 11 Oct 19), the DOE has verified the number of SAVE80 systems in

lled capacity of Sol Plaatje unit is 2.5MW and that of Merino unit is 3.6 MW, i.e., total installed capacity of the project is thus 6.1MW. The

d clarification (AM_CLA_0047)Issue: The DOE is requested to provide information on how it has verified that the conditions in AM_CLA_00

how the monitoring has been in accordance with the registered monitoring plan and the approved methodology, as the registered monito
n H) values is missing.2: Scope: The verification report does not provide a conclusion on the verified amount of emission reductions achiev
s the IPCC default value was applied.2. The DOE is requested to clarify how it verified that the PP estimation of gas consumption during th

on delay for the main meter measuring EG_PJ,h (Electricity displaced by the project activity in hour, h) has been taken into account for the

“the plant was operated as per as the registered PDD ”. The PP shall provide information on installation and start of the operation of the CD

ency of total sum of the Net electricity export to grid between the Emission reduction spreadsheet ( 21280995) and the monitoring report

a generation, aggregation, recording, calculation and reporting), organizational structure, roles and responsibilities of personnel, emergen

sue: The submitted spreadsheet are only for the month of May, July and September. Kindly clarify.2.Scope: The number of Certified Emiss
VVS track, while the project view page indicates the VVM track.

erature is met. As per flare manufacturer s’ specifications mentioned in Annex 5 of registered PDD, the combustion temperature at flare sh

y how the proposed corrections are in accordance with paragraph 215 of PS version 05 and paragraph 257 of VVS version 05, and do not r
he provision of the original document to be necessary for the purposes of transparency.Issue: Spreadsheet UNV Topi Flare Tool V2 26 5 11

aph 4(k) of “Guidelines on accounting of specified types of changes in A/R CDM project activities from the description in registered project

o the finalization of the Verification Report (03/08/2012)

Calorific Value of biomass residues  has to be measured at least every six months, taking at least three samples for each measurement.The

regated". However, the monitoring report does not contain the monitored data of this specific parameter.

d operated the proposed CDM project activity as per the registered PDD or the approved revised PDD. (VVM v.1.2 para 196)Issue: The DO

is used in the calculation in the monitoring report, which was not in line with the PDD. The DOE is required to clarify how the DOE verifie
tead of VVM as indicated in the project view page.

a log book", however only daily recordings have been referred in the verification report. 2: Scope: The verification report does not provide

spreadsheet is not consistent with the project view page and all other submitted documents.

ng requirements stated on p. 47 of the PDD; ii) Compliance with turning of compost piles as required by the monitoring plan (PDD, p. 41) a

he spreadsheet indicates the claimed CERs for this monitoring period to be 12,578. However, the Request for Issuance form, the Monitorin
n. (EB48 - Annex 68 paragraph 10 (a) (iv) & EB 54 Annex 34)Issue: The PP is required to provide further information about the calibration o
uctions.Issue: Baseline and project emissions are not consistent between the Monitoring report, spreadsheet,Verification as well as the C

ommissioning, continued operation periods, etc.) during the monitoring period under consideration. (EB48 - Annex 68 paragraph 10 (a) (i)

25/07/2010 and this is prior to the Monitoring Report , which is dated 09/05/2011.

n Development Mechanism Project Standard, Validation and Verification Standard and Project Cycle": Starting from 1 Februrary 2013, DO

84 (a) (ii) & EB 52 Annex 60)Issue: The DOE is requested to clarify how the calibration frequency for the parameter Qy,ww, to be performe
h 10 (a) (vii))Issue: The monitoring report states page 28 that Caprolactam production was behind the permitted range. In this case (case 1)

page is dated 02 June 2009 and is version 6, however the Certification statement states that the PDD "was registered on 25 February 2009
n page 2 of the VR that the monitoring plan is in accordance with the applied approved CDM methodology ,i.e. . And so is stated througho
he ER calculation spreadsheet (20,380 CO2) and the rest of the documents submitted (20,131 CO2). Please note that the parameter 'Net e

VM v.1.2 para 208 (a) and (b))Issue: The DOE is requested to include further information on the method of cross-checking the monitored d

report provided by the DOE makes reference to a different Project Activity "Phu Mau Hydropower Project". The certification report must

mission reductions amount. The request for issuance form refers to total emission reductions achieved 288,286 (149,633 achieved before

monitoring period is incorrect, being indicated as 21 Oct 2009 - 25 Apr 2011 , while the monitoring period on the project view page is: 21
ject emissions and leakage have been followed as per VVS version 09.0 paragraphs 403 (c) and 409 (j).Issue: Page 30 of the revised and ap

uction calculation spreadsheet has not been submitted though it is mentioned in the request for issuance form.
r the discussion at the direct communication, the request is sent back to you.

(viii)).Issue: the Monitoring Report does not contain information on how the PP computed the PDD Emission Reduction (ER) estimate for c

been carried out in accordance with the formulae and methods described in the monitoring plan and the applied methodology documen

5 October 2010. However, the following documents refer to the wrong monitoring period dates: Enclosure spreadsheet (Cell B18), Enclosu
the monitoring carried out for: a) methane concentration: daily monitoring by the concentration meters, optic and calorific, as per the mo

on 09.0 paragraph 388.Issue: The verification report on page 9 mentions that the team has verified the monitoring plan against the applie

ii)).Issue: The monitoring report should include a consistent comparison of the actual CERs claimed in the monitoring period with the estim

rt (page 42) refer to PDD version 9.1 whereas the registered PDD is version 9.

the monitoring plan? (VVM v.1.2 para 184 (a) (ii) & EB 52 Annex 60)Issue: (a) The DOE indicates that in order to meet monthly recalibratio

emainder of the monitoring period. The DOE considered it in line with the provision defined in the registered PDD as "any lost of data du
 fied the parameter, COD concentration of effluent entering the lagoons in the baseline (CODconc_in,baseline,m) and COD concentration o
track where as the verification was conducted as per VVS. Kindly re-submit through the VVS track.

with PCP version 9 para 222.Issue: 1. The verification and certification report, under section E.4., refers to "Post registration changes have b
ameters required to be monitored during historical campaigns. The historic data used to determine the permitted range of operation shou

25-30/11/2009 missing.

Project Campaign (GCProject) were not provided in the monitoring report. The project participant is requested to report these data.2: Sco
been carried out in accordance with the formulae and methods described in the monitoring plan and the applied methodology documen

n. (EB48 - Annex 68 paragraph 10 (a) (iv) & EB 54 Annex 34)Issue: The monitoring report has provided the date of the meter calibration (1

data generation, aggregation, recording, calculation and reporting), organizational structure, roles and responsibilities of personnel, emerg

.2.Scope: According to EB48 Annex 68 paragraph 8(b) a spreadsheet containing emission reduction calculation must be submitted with a r

the CERs are split across the first and the second commitment periods. (2) In the same section, the VR says "The monitoring period starts f

een carried out in accordance with the formulae and methods described in the monitoring plan and the applied methodology document. (
aigns were not provided either at time of registration, neither at time of verification. The project participant is requested to provide the sp

n the submitted Verification Report the number of Certified Emission Reductions (CERs) is inconsistent.

issued by the grid operator, whereas the DOE verified an annual energy balance prepared by the PP for cross check purpose. Please refer

values in the monitoring reports as per VVS version 09.0 paragraphs 393 and 409 (e).Issue: The DOE is required to list each parameter req

operated the proposed CDM project activity as per the registered PDD or the approved revised PDD. (VVM v.1.2 para 196)Issue: The DOE in

84 (a) (ii) & EB 52 Annex 60)Issue: i) ID1: The calibration frequency for the instrument is annually as stated in page 7 of the monitoring rep
curred during this monitoring period. However, both documents do not provided any information on the dates of stop of operation marke

page/signed form (58,331 CO2) and the monitoring report/verification/certification report/ER spreadsheet (57,889 CO2). Kindly clarify.

ommissioning, continued operation periods, etc.) during the monitoring period under consideration. (EB48 - Annex 68 paragraph 10 (a) (i)
5-5, HM00001007/2-3, 690553/2-2 and 696125/4-2 and maximum permissible error from the manufacturer was deducted from measured

een carried out in accordance with the formulae and methods described in the monitoring plan and the applied methodology document. (

ommissioning, continued operation periods, etc.) during the monitoring period under consideration as per PS version 09.0 paragraph 244.
G, NCSGBC, VSGBC, TSGBC, PSGBC shall be once every 2 seconds. However, the Monitoring Report states that the parameters are “scanned

h 253.Issue: It was found in the raw data that there were 4 days in which wastewater was treated with effective COD removal (i.e.,05/01/

meters,i.e. two mines had an additional meter and another mine was lacking one.
uested to explain how it verified the following parameters in accordance with the monitoring plan and monitoring report which require co
culation of emission reductions fall into a confidence level of 95% and with an uncertainty rate of +/-10% and how the estimation of emiss
B 55). However the project view page states VVS.

e monitoring data from 1st of December 2009.2.Scope: According to EB48 Annex 68 paragraph 8(b) a spreadsheet containing emission red

d date between the view page (22 Aug 09 - 11Jan 2011) and all other documents submitted (22 Aug 09 - 10 Jan 2011). You can request any

ess inconsistencies of findings discussed in the verification protocol (Appendix A), which are listed in "Table 2: List of Requests for Correcti

ction spreadsheet has been submitted.

track. However the Verification Report (page 6 and verification protocol) shows that the verification process is carried out in accordance w
n deducted from the total output in the period 07/01/2011 - 18/01/2011. In doing so, please provide the actual value of electricity deduct

o the PDD version 3 as the final PDD, where as the final PDD submitted is version 4.2.Scope: According to EB48 Annex 68 paragraph 9(f), th
M track whereas the verification was conducted as per VVS. Kindly re-submit through the VVS track.2.Scope: According to EB48 Annex 68

n. (EB48 - Annex 68 paragraph 10 (a) (iv) & EB 54 Annex 34)Issue: The PP is required to provide further information about the calibration o
011) was not submitted

n. (EB48 - Annex 68 paragraph 10 (a) (iv) & EB 54 Annex 34)Issue: The DOE shall provide more information how it confirmed that the read
parameter d and L are corrected; and (c) under section B.6.2 and section B.7.1 of the PDD, monitoring frequency and purpose of data are
ies regarding the version and date of the Monitoring Report: The Monitoring Report uploaded for this request for issuance is version 6, da

d, although reference is made to version 2, dated 11/7/2011, in the Certification and Verification report.

tion described in cell E2 of tab “Standard Values shall be corrected accordingly.

Report: "There is no request for deviation applied to this monitoring period". However, please note that along with this request for issuanc

/or the monitoring plan? (VVM v.1.2 para 184 (a) (ii) & EB 52 Annex 60) Delays in the calibration of some equipment are noted in the moni

m the project activity as described in the registered PDD as per EB 48 Annex 66 prior to requesting subsequent issuance of CERs. The DOE

d on this value is 10.97W/m2, therefore the PP/DOE stated that there was no need to take project emissions into account. This, however

quency, date of calibration and validity), as per the registered monitoring plan. However, the monitoring report does not provide informa
ng report version 2 dated 15.07.2011 which has not been submitted.

n 01.1, pages 5, 9, 11, 24, 29 refer to the monitoring period 01 March 2010 - 31 October 2011. However, this request for issuance is for the

owever, the monitoring report, certification, verification reports and CER Calculation spreadsheet indicate the number of 36,296 CERs. Ple

on status of Phase II has been verified for the following reasons: a) There are inconsistencies in the information in the Monitoring Report a

ile the project view page states 68, 869.

tion and certification report refers to VVS version 3. Kindly clarify. .Issue:2.Scope: Cross-referencing and versioning within and between th
 -La Langdu River 4th Level Hydropower Station" where as all other documents refer to "Shangri-La Langdu River 3rd Level Hydropower St
ubmit the clean final version.

mission reductions ”. Further clarification is required on how the consumption of diesel by the utilitarian trucks was not for the operation of

he Monitoring Report are not consistent throughout the documentation submitted. Particularly the Verification Report states version 3.0,

he recovered CMM is ultimately supplied to households in two cities as city gas. The DOE/PP shall provide more information on the end us

ions, however, the PP did not report this parameter and the DOE did not verify it.2: Scope: The verification report does not state that the m
activity.

he auxiliary fuel used by project activity (Qi) which is required by the applicable methodology ACM0004 version 2. Clarification is required

t activity was operated according to the PDD, noting that the 14% over-generation (as compared to the PDD) took place even when there w
 ified the implementation schedule against the initial schedule at the time of the investment decision for the missing equipment, in particu

tation or operation of the CDM project activity does not conform with the description contained in the registered PDD, the DOE shall cond

eadsheet for the 21 Nov 08 - 31 Mar 10 monitoring period has not been submitted. (It has been submitted the master spreadsheet for only

ring Report refers to version 01 dated 12/01/2012. However, the Verification Report refers to the revised Monitoring Report version 02 fro

ng period has been reduced by 3 tCO2e (12 957 to 12 954 tCO2e) from that reported/stated in the version 1 of the monitoring report due

uctions.Issue:The submitted spreadsheet does not contain the calculation of the emission reductions.

ara 208 (d) & (e))Issue: The DOE shall: i) further clarify how the baseline emission factor, EFbl, (0.0822 tN2O/tHNO3) has been recalculated

refers to the wrong monitoring report (version 1 dated 15.04.2011 instead of version 3 dated 4.8.2011) on page 2.

ed. 2.Scope: According to PCP for Project Activities version 2.0, para 199, a valid CDM-VCR-FORM shall be submitted.Issue: The Board agre

ulation and reporting) for these parameters including the values in the monitoring reports (VVS v2, para 236, 284 (e)).Issue: The DOE is req
refers to the monitoring report version 5 dated 25.07.2011 (page 2) where as version 5 is dated 3.8.2011.

a generation, aggregation, recording, calculation and reporting), organizational structure, roles and responsibilities of personnel, emergen

ommissioning, continued operation periods, etc.) during the monitoring period under consideration. (EB48 - Annex 68 paragraph 10 (a) (i)

ov 2010 and 30 Jan 2011. However the verification report does not indicate how the DOE has verified the following information: * There is

submitted monitoring report is for a different project.2.Scope: A spreadsheet containing emission reduction calculation has not been subm

sion reductions claimed for this monitoring period is 20,324 tCO2e. However, Monitoring Report (page 2) indicates 20,540 tCO2e.

by an energy balance to check the consistency of the measurements. However, no information (either on the monitoring report or the em

TJ), whereas it should be calculated as (electricity generation (MWh) / power plant efficiency (%))x upstream CH4 emission factor (tCH4/TJ

within 0.5%.  An industry standard gas analyser (Landtec GEM-500 or equivalent) will be used when measuring methane content of the bio
data generation, aggregation, recording, calculation and reporting), organizational structure, roles and responsibilities of personnel, emerg

n. (EB48 - Annex 68 paragraph 10 (a) (iv) & EB 54 Annex 34)Issue: The Monitoring Report does not contain information about the manufac

toring of EGy and EGaux was conducted as per the monitoring plan considering that the EGy is measured using 4 meters in different lines

e of operation for each site. For CDM project activities with phased implementation, the report shall state the progress of the proposed CD

tricity generation (MMelec). This calculated daily value was used in the calculation of emission reductions. This is not in accordance with t
ered monitoring plan. (PS v1, para 191, 192 (a)(c )(d)(e)(f))Issue: The revised monitoring plan requires the monitoring of “Electricity expor
monitoring plan requires to monitor total electricity generated from the other wind turbines attached to the common MSEDCL meter at the

in page 30 to the PDD version 07, dated 05/08/2008. However, the PDD shown in the project view page refers to version 08, dated 30/11

50,086 CERs has been certified for this request for issuance. However, according to the project view page a total of 450,087 CERs is claimed

analyzer. The process is described in the Monitoring Plan. The measuring equipment is calibrated in accordance withthe manufacturer sp
yzer. The process is described in the Monitoring Plan. The measuring equipment is calibrated in accordance with the manufacturer specifi
6, dated 07.12.2010, whereas the validation report exclusively refers to the older PDD version 3, dated 29.05.2008.
DOE is also requested to verify the magnification factor of 88000 applied on M1 meter readings for calculating the electricity imported a

es whereas the monitoring report and the verification report confirms that the project activity consists of only one flare;ii. the registered P

e BECH4,y is (1-OXtop_layer) * (FCH4,PJ,y-FCH4,BL,y) * GWPCH4, which is not in line with the provision reported in the monitoring report

as version 1.2, dated 10 January 2014. However, the Verification/ Certification Report refers to the Monitoring Report version 1.2, dated 13
ment states:'' In DNV s’ opinion the GHG emissions reductions of the “Liuzhou Chemical Industry Co., LTD N2O Abatement Project ”in China

the OM and for the BM. Furthermore, the submitted spreadsheets only provide the incomplete name of the plants (in abbreviations).

ara 208 (d) & (e))Issue: The DOE is requested to explain how it has determined if the assumptions used in emission calculations have been
 the monitoring plan (VVS v2, para 243)Issue: The DOE (p 34) states that all the calibration certificates concluded to be compliant with the

ent in the biogas is within 0.5%. Nevertheless, the Verification Report page 8 indicates that the accuracy of the equipment used to measu

e request for issuance.

t cannot be postponed since a delay on performing the mandatory on-site visit for the project activity will impact a delay in CERs delivery

290 (e))Issue: The DOE is required to provide further information on why it did not raise a FAR to revise the PDD to reflect the actual N2O

version 3 of ACM0009 (available version at the time of registration); however, version 3.2 was already available at the time of verification

Report version 2, dated 12 September 2012. However, the latest Monitoring Report submitted with the request for issuance has version 2

owever, the Monitoring Report page 11 mentions that it was measured and sourced from the gas supplier. If the parameter was sourced f

84 (a) (ii) & EB 52 Annex 60)Issue: The DOE has not provided information regarding how it validated the maximum permissible error of the
fy how the total
‘ electricity generation by all windmills ’has been monitored, as this parameter is not included in the monitoring plan. 2).Th

metered energy and choosing lower of the two for emission reductions was complied with.3. How the DOE verifies that the applied meth

uires to calculate CO2 emission directly from the fossil fuel consumption. 2. The DOE is requested to clarify how it verified that the applica
25 Feb 08 to 24 Feb 18 (Fixed), however page 49 of the verification report is shown as 25 Feb 08 - 24 Feb 17 (Fixed)
ature of the flare and methane concentration were made every 15 minutes whereas the Tool states that the default value of flare efficien
e monitoring report is not complete.2.Scope: According to EB48 Annex 68 paragraph 9(e), cross-referencing and versioning within and be

itoring period of the electricitysupplied and consumed by the project, as in the monitoring report (Pg. 9) the PP state the 26th February as

n the HCFC22 market and possible developments of the w-factor is important to be further reported and verified by DOEs.The PP is reques
ara 208 (d) & (e))Issue: The PP/DOE are to requested to i) report the baseline emission factor,EFBL, before and after the recalculation for b
ained in the request for issuance for the monitoring period 01 Jul 2016 –02 Mar 2020. The DOE is requested to ensure the compliance of t

he date of submission of the request for issuance.

t "The delivered Energy (wh) at ex- bus is metered by energy meters installed on 132 KV side of generator transformer by project propone

he amount of Total Project Activity Direct Emissions in the Excel Spreadsheet "1234-MONITORING REPORT TABLES" is inconsistent with th

wing inconsistencies: i. The MR (pg. 21) indicates that the parameter “consumption of diesel by the LPG plant ”due to the project activity
the monitoring plan? (VVM v.1.2 para 184 (a) (ii) & EB 52 Annex 60)Issues: 1) The Verification Report should provide information regardin

plain how they have been applied. In particular, 1. What's the difference between the sheets for Period 1 and Period 3? 2. What's the diffe
data generation, aggregation, recording, calculation and reporting), organizational structure, roles and responsibilities of personnel, emerg

OE are requested to clarify how they took account of and treated the delayed calibration in accordance with EB52- Annex 60 guidelines, wh

f operation for each site. For CDM project activities with phased implementation, the report shall state the progress of the proposed CDM
prior to the use of Landtec meter, it should be calibrated. Therefore the DOE is required to further clarify whether GM11592 had a valid c

nconsistencies between the Amount of CER's requested in the Signed Form/Project view page and the amount in the Excel Sheets attachm
Request for Issuance corresponds to Project 1154, instead of project 1164. Kindly revise the reference number and title of the project activ

ion 3.3 dated 30/11/2007, whereas the latest approved PDD is version 4 of 04/09/2012.

hat the project is implemented in accordance with the PDD. Ref: para 320 CDM validation and verification standard for project activities ve
1 July 2008) during the monitoring period and prior to making the monitoring report publicly available (06 May 2009). The DOE shall clarify

the "Issuance - Information and Reporting Checklist", the spreadsheet must contain "formulae of calculation". Furthermore, according to
time period when measurements of NAP for plant N2 are outside of valid calibration period. Correction had been done in line with EB52 A

specifies an annual frequency for conducting the calibration.

ted 27 May, 2013. However, the submitted Monitoring Report is dated 23 September, 2013, version 3.2.Scope: Cross-referencing and vers

h Panel through AM_CLA_0046, 5 June'07, that this tool is not applicable to stockpiles because  anaerobic conditions are not ensured beca
he project view page the VVM track is indicated.

ssions from the use of wood and cortices. The DOE is also further requested to clarify why a notification or approval of changes to the pro

ded data of methane concentration of landfill gas and traceable calculations to obtain the final reported values. 2: Scope: The verification

g report dated 15.09.2014 and page 22 (CAR A4) and 39 to version 7, whereas the submitted monitoring report is version 6 dated 26.6.20
- Verification of the requirement of representative sampling for COD measurements as per AMS III.F ver 3, paragraph 9. - Verification of th

nt of the methodology. Further information is required.

t concluded that the monitoring has been carried out in accordance with the registered monitoring plan, considering the monitoring plan r
eakage calculation has applied only one value (129 gCO2/t km) for the heavy vehicles. The DOE shall provide information on how it verified

n. (EB48 - Annex 68 paragraph 10 (a) (iv) & EB 54 Annex 34)Issue: The monitoring report does not contain information on whether the inst

achieved on or after 1 January 2021 (paragraph 8 of the EB 108th meeting report). The DOE is required to raise a forward action request (F

s not been submitted.

VS v3, para 239(a))Issue: It has been noted that "Due to calibration delay, S-301 data from 01/01/2009 –16/02/2009 and 07/01/2012 –12/0

page (97,263 CO2) and the rest of the documents submitted (96,732 CO2).
para 208 (d) & (e))Issue: The parameter CEFBl,therm (CO2 emissions intensity for thermal energy generation) is reported as 75.5 t CO2/T

measurement of NCSG and VSG in the time period from 10/06/2010 to 01/07/2010 has been outside valid AST status, thus a conservative
uired on how the DOE verified the emission reduction as per the registered PDD.2)Carbon fraction actually oxidized in combustion was no
from 05 November 2007 to 30 November 2007. 2: Scope: The spreadsheet does not contain all parameters required to be monitored and

tatement" of the verification and certification report mentions "monitoring period 16.0 of 28/11/2014" whereas in the summary page it is

y consumption are installed in 9 different sections, however the value of only 2 meters were reported. Clarifications are required on how

0/08-23/10/09) for this request for issuance is 12 months. Further clarification is required.

sion Reductions (CERs), within and between the documents is not consistent.Issue: There is an inconsistency in the cross-referencing of th
 .2 is dated 22/06/07. However, the certification and verification reports, pages 26 and 27 refer to the date of the registered PDD as of 17/
y January 2009 in revised monitoring report, which has more than two-year gap following previous calibration conducted in August and Se
of the turbine and for some periods (for example, from 13/08/2009-29/08/2009, 17/09/2009-19/10/2009, among other periods) after it w

ow the DOE verified the parameter "EGy net electricity supplied to the grid".2) There was a gap of 6 months in the period covered by calib
eters (excluding meter M26) have been reported in the monitoring report as per the methodology and registered PDD.2: Scope: The sprea
alculate BECH4,y is (1-OXtop_layer) * (FCH4,PJ,y-FCH4,BL,y) * GWPCH4, which is not in line with the provision reported in the monitoring
ECH4,y is (1-OXtop_layer) * (FCH4,PJ,y-FCH4,BL,y) * GWPCH4, which is not in line with the provision reported in the monitoring report pag

dicate the amount of CERs inconsistently.

M v.1.2 para 208 (a) and (b))Issue: The verification report indicates that it is "not applicable" to cross check the reported data with other av

counted for as per the methodology.

/2010) the parameter NAP was calculated instead of monitoring as required by the methodology, the PP/DOE did neither make the "most
s which is required by the revised monitoring plan and the DOE did not crosscheck the sum of thecorrected biogas flows with the total bio

cope: The monitoring report does not contain calculations of baseline emissions, project emissions, leakage (if any), and/or emission reduc

n. (EB48 - Annex 68 paragraph 10 (a) (iv) & EB 54 Annex 34)Issue: The monitoring report does not provide information on calibration frequ
ducted as per VVM. Please note that if you wish to submit a post registration change, the Verification and the Monitoring report have to b

of seven years;2. The measurement of monthly calorific value of petcoke was conducted in accordance with the methodology.
estroyed by the project activity; and (ii) the methane emissions calculated ex ante using the amount of the waste or raw material that wou

ement on page 18 of the Verification/Certification Report the date of the monitoring report version 02 is once wrongly mentioned as 18 F

data generation, aggregation, recording, calculation and reporting), organizational structure, roles and responsibilities of personnel, emerg

data generation, aggregation, recording, calculation and reporting), organizational structure, roles and responsibilities of personnel, emerg

ered monitoring plan as per PS version 09.0 paragraphs 247 and 248 (a) (c) (d) (e) (f).Issue: The values for the quantity of rice husks (QAF)

sue: The DOE shall substantiate the appropriateness of considering the measurements which were beyond the calibration range in the cal

ery five minutes and aggregated monthly; however, it is not clear how the aggregated value can be considered appropriate. The DOE shou

t confirms that the monitoring has been carried out in accordance with the monitoring plan contained in the revised approved monitoring
een carried out in accordance with the formulae and methods described in the monitoring plan and the applied methodology document. (

f diesel by a DG set to meet emergency power requirement.

s increased in 10.5% with respect to those estimated in the PDD. The DOE is requested to clarify how it has verified that the project activit

use of compressor rated capacity during outage period. However, the DOE did not provide information on 1) what was the reason of the o
nsistencies between the values for parameter PGy in the spreadsheet and in the internal record. The CAR 14 also questioned the inconsist

burned. The DOE is requested to provide further clarification  on this new project (including timeline), in particular, whether this new proje
hane. The DOE shall clarify how it assessed that   the accuracy of the Landtec gas analyzer used to monitor the methane content of the bio

e (a) PEBR=GPWCH4*EFCH4,BR*SUM(BRPJ,n,y*NCVn,y) and; (b) PETR=SUM (Df,m * FRf,m * EFCO2 * 10^-6). However, as per the submitte
the monitoring plan (VVS v2, para 243)The validation report (page 26) states that the calibration of power meters were done once in two

data generation, aggregation, recording, calculation and reporting), organizational structure, roles and responsibilities of personnel, emerg

m3/hr ensures a temperature of 850°C.2. The DOE shall clarify how the assumption of 50% of flare efficiency is justified when the flare tem
 on that order. Further clarification is required how the DOE verified that this requirement was met.
tional and there was no coal consumption during this monitoring period. Further clarification is required on how the DOE closed the FAR2

toring of the project activity parameters has been carried out in accordance with the approved revised monitoring plan, approved by the U

measuring parameter MGy (molten glass produced in the furnace).2. Clarification is required on the calibration for the equipment(s) meas

team measurement since the spreadsheet concerning the monitoring of stream production contains only one reading per day. 2. The valid

ethodology AMS-III.B. v10 .

(Annex 1) of the monitoring report on page 13 does not correspond with the data in the CER calculation spread sheet (generation sheet).

the sites , since the verification report (p.9) states that only “for a sample of sites, the list of equipment considered in the calculation was
e emission factor has been calculated, in doing so, please provide the excel spreadsheet for emission factor calculation.
of parameters (e.g. Qproejct plant, y, and energy efficiency of the boiler that would be used in the absence of the project activity) related

parameters including Power Generation in Gas Turbine and Fuel Consumption in Gas Turbine, will be monitored. However, these two para

ng period in consideration (i.e. the results of delayed calibration are available), referring to the illustrative examples in the appendix below

f operation for each site. For CDM project activities with phased implementation, the report shall state the progress of the proposed CDM
alues in the monitoring reports as per VVS version 09.0 paragraphs 393 and 409 (e).Issues: i. For the parameter “total amount of landfill ga
uired by the applied methodology.
Issue: The amount of CER indicated in the signed form is 16,680 where as all other documents indicate the amount of CER as 16,674.2.Sco
a generation, aggregation, recording, calculation and reporting), organizational structure, roles and responsibilities of personnel, emergen

ng period. However, Section D.2.1.3 of the PDD states that the EFOM,Y and EFBM,Y will be calculated “yearly ”. The DOE is requested to cl

monitoring report version 1 (27/04/2009). Paragraph 62 of the Modalities and Procedures of the CDM stipulates that a DOE may only cond

n section E.5 of the monitoring report ("Actual values reached during the monitoring period"), the CER amount is not correctly indicated.
or calculations of equivalent coal replaced without taking into account the efficiency of boiler in different scenarios.

The revision of the monitoring plan to reflect actual monitoring of total amount of LFG captured and flared is required prior to the next re
wo production lines started operation in 1993 and 1997. This does not fully match with the dates of the certificates provided in the verifica

ergy is being generated with no additional CO2 emissions. ”However, neither monitoring report nor verification report contains this inform

generation by Santa Edwiges I and III.2: Scope: The verification report does not provide an assessment on whether the calibration of meas

ct title is inconsistent in the submitted documents (project view page: "Switching of fuel from Low Sulphur Waxy Residue fuel oil to natura
M v.1.2 para 208 (a) and (b))Issue: The approach verified by the DOE to adjust the data for the delays on testing COD ww,untreated and CO

ue to the equipment installed. However, this parameter is not present in the Monitoring plan and Monitoring Report.2: Scope: The verifica
the current monitoring period or is highly likely to increase the estimates of emission reductions in the future monitoring periods (VVS v2,
Emission reduction sheet in the Calculation RIL Recron spreadsheet refers to the total CO2 Reduction by project activity as 5851 CO2, whe

n Sec. E.6.1. Data and parameters fixed ex-ante (p. 11), states "Plant Name is fixed ex-ante defined in registered PDD. This was checked an
ty thatconducted the calibration and the relevant results). Further information is required.

eters have been changed for the following parameters:EG_GENCPP, EG_AUXCPP, T_WHR-2, T_WHR-1, P_FBC and was found as a part of th
fication Report the information and calculations contained in the excel spreadsheet submitted.

84 (a) (ii) & EB 52 Annex 60)Issue: The monitoring report has indicated that the calibration of energy meters for EG(gross, project plant,y)

a generation, aggregation, recording, calculation and reporting), organizational structure, roles and responsibilities of personnel, emergen

e and in the signed form is from 01 May 2007-06 Apr 2009, while the end date is different in the most recent version of the monitoring rep

lidation and Verification Manual version 1.2. The DOE should clarify whether the parameters were monitored in line with methodology re

Validation report, Monitoring Period and Calculation excel sheet specify a CER amount (24,397) that is not consistent with the amount of

een carried out in accordance with the formulae and methods described in the monitoring plan and the applied methodology document. (
data generation, aggregation, recording, calculation and reporting), organizational structure, roles and responsibilities of personnel, emerg

n. (EB48 - Annex 68 paragraph 10 (a) (iv) & EB 54 Annex 34)Issue: The monitoring report does not contain information on calibration of mo

g report (19/12/2012) which has not been submitted.

n. (EB48 - Annex 68 paragraph 10 (a) (iv) & EB 54 Annex 34)Issue: There is no information on the calibration of equipments used to monito
at the amounts of CaCO3 rejected and calcium phosphate additions were not included the amount of CaCO3 used for the calculation of th

xplain whether the flare was operated according with the manufacturer s’ recommendations, according with the monitoring methodology
e registered PDD is in accordance with the applied methodology, as the monitoring plan will calculate the parameter daily consumption o
OE/PP if necessary, shall also submit the revised monitoring report and verification report.

2: Scope: The verification report does not state that the monitoring plan is in accordance with the applied methodology. (VVM v.1.2 para

nt refers to "150 MW GRID CONNECTED WIND POWER BASED ELECTRICITY GENERATION PROJECT IN GUJARAT, INDIA" instead although t
data generation, aggregation, recording, calculation and reporting), organizational structure, roles and responsibilities of personnel, emerg

as validated that the change of PLF is a permanent change considering that the PLF varies from 45.3% to 59.7% from 2007 to 2010 and the

pecification.
AP/KRIS/I/3). Further clarification is required on how the DOE verified the electricity and diesel consumptions of 13 sites of the project acti
een carried out in accordance with the formulae and methods described in the monitoring plan and the applied methodology document. (
he version of the PDD. In particular verification report refers to the PDD version 3 which was not submitted. The submitted PDD is version 2
data generation, aggregation, recording, calculation and reporting), organizational structure, roles and responsibilities of personnel, emerg

he PGC Train B calculation spreadsheet since: (i) the heading for parameter "HOT OIL MEAN SP HEAT J/g-K" is missing, and (ii) the heading
The DOE is requested to clarify how it verified the project implementation in accordance with the registered PDD as per VVM v. 01.2 (para

er shall be included in the ER spreadsheet.In doing so, refer to VVS version 03.0; paragraph 364.

that the operating hours exceeded 8,000 hours/yr and the percentage of electricity exported to the rice mill and steel plant exceeded 40%
erification Opinion page 27, (20/11/10) is prior to the finalization of the Verification Report, Monitoring Report and submitted signed form

ption as required by the monitoring plan.

resented in the documents; 2) The increased emission reductions for each of the relevant project measures as compared to the PDD estim
due to an environment regulation that ensures a minimum water flow of 10m3/s to the project activity, however, this figure was not men

t in the biogas will provide an accuracy of 0.5%. However, the Verification Report page 10 states that the accuracy of the equipment used
The CER Calculations sheet - Introduction page in the submitted Spreadsheet shows the number of CERs to be 171,052.2.Scope: Accordin

data generation, aggregation, recording, calculation and reporting), organizational structure, roles and responsibilities of personnel, emerg

rtificates which were issued on 13/12/2006. Further clarification is required on how the DOE has verified that the calibration is still valid up
es, does the verification report detail the actions taken by the DOE to ensure that the most conservative assumption theoretically possible
heater. Further clarification is required.
84 (a) (ii) & EB 52 Annex 60)Issue: The DOE closed CAR#4 by stating that the PP has applied the most conservative approach for the delaye

mum between (i) and (ii) above. Further clarification is required.

ara 208 (d) & (e))Issue: The monitoring report on page 24 states that the allometric equations used for the estimation of tree volume are s
he amount of CERs is not correctly indicated in the Project view page and the Request for issuance form.

ember 2007, the plant was running for a period of 30 minutes only, but quantum of electricity exported to the grid was 236.625 MWh.ii)Fo

s-referencing and versioning within and between the document must be correct and accurate.Issue:The Doe should report the correct me

et "Accounting eligible HFC-23 Dongyang MP17" within the specified two (2) days of the receipt of the request. please refer to PCP v 2.0 pa
een the CER_BC6a and CER_BC6b spreadsheets (2,649,681 CO2) and the monitoring report/verification/certification report/project view p
n the HCFC22 market and possible developments of the w-factor is important to be further reported and verified by DOEs.The PP is reques

version was only available on 28 March 2011; b) it is not clear whether the revised IOA-531-005 was applied to the entire monitoring per

uired to provide details of electrical leakage including the number and rated capacity of all relevant electrical equipment.

the monitoring plan? (VVM v.1.2 para 184 (a) (ii) & EB 52 Annex 60)Issue: The DOE shall specify if the calibration frequency of biogas flow

by PP/DOE and approved by the Executive Board. (EB 54 Annex 34)Issue:The Validation Opinion for the Notification/Requesting approval o
en measured by a gas quality analyzer (methane content in exhaust gas) and an hour counter (operating hours). However, the CERs calcula

n without making the most conservative assumption. 2. Clarification is required on whether the DOE has verified all of the data, as the VR
nitoring plan and the applied methodology document. (VVM v.1.2 para 208 (c) & 221 (h))Issue: In particular, the verification report does n
ent uncertainty range".However, the Verification Report (page 9) states that  "the accuracy of the Landtec Biogas Check gas portable gas a

plied methodological regulatory documents: Responding to CAR 02 concerning parameter “Import Electricity ”, the PP explained that the Im

(EB48 - Annex 68 paragraph 10 (a) (iv) & EB 54 Annex 34)Issue: According to Section A.4 of the Monitoring Report, details of four energy m

a generation, aggregation, recording, calculation and reporting), organizational structure, roles and responsibilities of personnel, emergen

(EB48 - Annex 68 paragraph 10 (a) (iv) & EB 54 Annex 34)Issue: the accuracy of the meter installed at source 3 and source 4 are 1% and 0.0

h 10 (a) (vii))Issue: the Monitoring Report does not contain reference to the formula used for the calculation of "PEflare,y - inefficiencies in

ation Manual version 1.2

ge 12) that the monitoring has been carried out in accordance with the registered monitoring plan. However, there has been a revised mo
rt and in the certification report, reference is made to Project Monitoring Report version 04, although the version submitted is version 03.

ing the values of monitored parameters and calculation of ERs and another containing the 95% confidence level calculation. However, no
h is   3% for CO2 contents above 15% in line with the specifications for the equipment by the supplier, represents in DOE ’s opinion good m
ed in the revised monitoring plan, considering the measurements conducted in the monitoring period, and how it confirmed that the moni

' stipulates that the first step in the verification shall be to make the monitoring report publicly available..."the designated operational enti

t ”method of volumetric analysis involving chemical absorption of a sample gas.   The equipment and test procedures will provide an accu

tion D.4. states that the "Accuracy of the flow meters utilized exceeds 99 percent across the entire measured rate curve with an uncertaint

ment in the verification report.

he CER amount, reference number, title is not consistent throughout the other documentation.2.Scope: According to EB48 Annex 68 para

KW turbine mentioned in the verification report and whether the electricity generation from this turbine has been included for emission r

refers to VVS 9 and pages 7, 14, 22, 24, 26, 29 and 34 refers to VVS 7. 2.Scope: The number of Certified Emission Reductions (CERs), shall

ct activity the CER sheet presents a value without formula or calculations whereas, as per revised monitoring plan, the parameters is calcu

ation is required on how the DOE verified that the project was implemented in accordance with the PDD. In particular the DOE is requeste

hat calibration of the instruments utilised for the measurement of the monitoring variables is done on a monthly basis (PDD, page 15) Plea

fication and Monitoring Reports refer to the methodology AMS-I.D. ver. 6. However, project activity 0481 was registered with the methodo

water in the river as compared to the historical average flow rate of 67 years. Considering that the additionality of the project activity was
 monitoring report submitted refers to a different monitoring period.2.Scope: A verification report has not been submitted with a request

dated values of all the required monitored parameters for the entire monitoring period whereas the revised monitoring plan (page 19-22)

ed PDD version 4.0, therefore not in accordance to the latest approved PDD.

to ensure that GHG emission reductions or net anthropogenic GHG removals will not be overestimated as a result of the deviation. Please

track. As per the information note version 3 dated 31 October 2012 on the implementation timeline "Any requests for registration/issuan
at the portable gas analyser is being sent annually for manufacturer calibration (p.8 of verification report) while the PP indicates that the f
rthermore considering the actual number of days during the monitoring period of 333 days and the annual average emision reduction in
ver, the revised monitoring plan (p3) requires that operational status of all project equipment be checked weekly. Further clarification is re

equency of gas analyser defined by PP is six months; however, the DOE verified that the gas analyser is sent annually for manufacturer cal

permanently, a FAR should be raised to ensure that a revision of monitoring plan is submitted prior to next request for issuance.
R spreadsheet as there is no link between the new monitoring basis sheet and the emissions sheet.

1. Production levels of HCFC22 (monthly) from January 1, 2000 to present;2. Records of sales of HCFC22 (monthly) from January 1, 2000
ue of an inconsistency of project emission due to transport between the monitoring report ( 268.13) and the verification report as well as

n. (EB48 - Annex 68 paragraph 10 (a) (iv) & EB 54 Annex 34)Issue: The REVMP specifies that for the back-up diesel electricity generators op

ductions are calculated in accordance with the methodology for those days when the production was beyond the ±5% range of re verified

on on how the values of specific gravity of LDO were verified.

at the monitoring was conducted in line with the revised monitoring plan and the reasons for not raising a FAR (Forward Action Request), i

OE states that the portable gas analyser is being sent annually for manufacturer calibration (p.8 of verification report) while the PP indicat

s to 282301 CO2 whereas the actual CER for this monitoring period according to the submitted documents is 281,501 CO2.2.Scope: The su

only presents the aggregated annual values for 2008, 2009 and 2010.2: Scope: The verification report does not contain information on all C

t refers to an updated version of the Monitoring Report (version 2.0, dt., 19/06/2012) which has not been submitted.2.Scope: The submitt

there are no PRC documents submitted with this request for issuance. Kindly clarify.

L is calculated as EGexport –EGimport, and EGexport is calculated as EGgross –EGaux. Therefore, EGBL equals EGgross –EGaux –EGimpo
e monitoring period 01/04/2007-16/08/2008 has not been submitted.
 is no monitoring report submitted with this request for issuance.

ng the monitoring period is a renewable biomass

he project, since there have been a number of new suppliers.

or those days when there was steam generation and therefore the project activity was operational (for example: 19 May 2008, 31 May 20

n accordance with the methodology for those days when theproduction was beyond the ±5% range of the name plate capacity, since the d
tual values for the parameters monitored for the monitoring period. The PP/DOE shall revise the monitoring report to contain the acutal m
n. (EB48 - Annex 68 paragraph 10 (a) (iv) & EB 54 Annex 34)Issue: The PP is required to provide calibration records of all the meters covere

ng the feed water quantity;2. The PDD has mentioned that the steam demand of the process in the crediting period would remain same. H

d operated the proposed CDM project activity as per the registered PDD or the approved revised PDD. (VVM v.1.2 para 196)Issue: It was o
nd net electricity supplied to the grid.

ara 208 (d) & (e))Issue: The verification report does not include information on how the DOE verified during on site visit that the value of t

n the HCFC22 market and possible developments of the w-factor is important to be further reported and verified by DOEs.The PP is reques
n the HCFC22 market and possible developments of the w-factor is important to be further reported and verified by DOEs.The PP is reques

has been identified for the following period: ICE main meter: Start date of delay: 01/09/2016; End date of delay: 31/03/2017. ”The DOE is

to the grid.

VM v.1.2 para 208 (a) and (b))Issue: The amount of bagasse consumed in the project activity is calculated based on amount of steam used

n of this VR/CR is 29/02/2012 and this is prior to the Monitoring Report , which is dated 26/03/2012.
es "It is projected to have a nominal installed capacity of 520 kW" and the other page (page 4) of the PDD states "Installed capacity: 660 kV

d to the grid.
es was the supply of electricity during all years and not only on harvest season. Further clarification is required.
 is dated on 30.8.12 and the MR on 6.9.12. on the other hand, the VR refers to a MR final version (13.8.12) which has a different date from
stated that 833 solar cookers were installed. Further clarification is required.

e and/or the monitoring plan as per VVS version 09.0 paragraph 400. Issue 1: The DOE has confirmed (Verification report p.26) that for the

(EB48 - Annex 68 paragraph 10 (a) (iv) & EB 54 Annex 34)Issue: The monitoring report provides, on section D.2, two frequencies of calibrati

n. (EB48 - Annex 68 paragraph 10 (a) (iv) & EB 54 Annex 34)Issue: The monitoring report provides, on section D.2, two frequencies of calib

rgy contribution share of natural gas and naphtha fuel in the boiler is 79.44% and 20.56%, respectively, while the monitoring report states

form has not been submitted

ulation and reporting) for these parameters including the values in the monitoring reports (VVS v2, para 236, 284 (e)).Issue: The DOE is req
anges.2.Scope: A monitoring report using the Form and guidelines for completing the monitoring report form (F-CDM-MR -)has not been s

08 to 05:05 on 15 July 2008 but the power generation on 14 July reached over 90% of the daily average in the month. 2) Why there were

the monitoring plan (VVM v.1.2 para 184 (a) (ii))Issue: The DOE shall specify if the calibration frequency of biogas flow meters and Bachar
agram in page 5 of the monitoring report. In doing so, the monitoring report shall provide line diagrams (graphical schemes) showing all re

nitoring period 01 Jan 10 - 31 Dec 12 refers to a revised PDD version 03, dated 12 July, 2013. However, kindly note that the above mention

ured after the setting of the meters and comparing it with the gross generation, and with the recommendation of the manufacturer of the

adings that were read by a person and then transferred to the spreadsheet. If invoiced values were cross-checked against meter readings,

required on how the emission reduction has been calculated for those days when the events "Incomplete communicationCARS (remote m

pon re-submission.
quired calibration and shall determine whether the project participants have calculated GHG emission reductions or net anthropogenic G
provide information on the validity of the pattern gases used to calibrate the CH4 content gas analyzer, as per the requirements of para. 2

ission factor as per the applied methodology.

mr.pdf; the DOE is kindly requested to submit the PDD applying the latest version approved by the Board. Please refer to EB 68, Annex 43
anges to the project design; b) whether the proposed change in the LFG collection efficiency has an impact on the electricity generation th
19, 29/09/2019, 01/10/2020; MP1006: 06/08/2019, 03/09/2019, 03/10/2020; and others. In doing so please refer to VVS paragraph 365 a
ain the assessment on when the changes occurred, reasons for these changes taking place and whether the changes would have been kno

s to project plant/unit for captive purpose in year y. In doing so, the DOE is requested to explain: (i) whether there is electricity generated

d MR p.10 have the provision that annual calibration testing is scheduled to be performed by an independent third party, whereas the actu
ect participants have operated the project activity as per the registered PDD or any approved revised PDD (paragraph 355 of VVS for PA ve

ted. However, it does not provide how WCH4,y of 41.926% (in column C8 of "summary" sheet) has been calculated while 1) the DOE (p 15

he relevant requirements in the “CDM project standard for project activities ”(paragraph 296 of VVS for PA).The monitoring report states

a) How this approach is in line with the apportioning method in the monitoring plan which requires apportioning based on daily generatio

e reason why it concluded section E.10 of the verification report as "Not applicable for the present monitoring period", considering this mo

ction due to the Covid-19 pandemic as well as the PP's commitment to deliver CERs before December 2021 and applied alternative measu

% has been applied due to delay in calibration from 01-Apr-2017 to 08-Jun-2019." The DOE is required to provide further information on t

uance request.
ect cycle procedure for project of activities, for issuance track, the DOE shall submit a request for approval of changes (PRC) to the secreta

n factor (0.3800 tCO2/MWh) without providing full details for OM calculation (See Cell C2 of the sheet “EF Analysis ”); •Three excel calcu

Sheet ”) include parameter "Maximum LFG Methane fraction in DEVIATION" in sheet "Assumptions" which is used to determine "LFG Meth

sed PDD reflects the implementation, operation and monitoring of the modified project activity.3: Paragraph 309(b) of VVS-PA: The valida
dy biomass, and the emission reductions are claimed for both types of biomass. However, the monitoring report has not specified the sour
ding a validation opinion, by the DOE shall be submitted.Issue: The duly completed validation report for post-registration changes is missin

ested to clarify why it has not verified monitoring parameters listed in the MR (section D.2) such as i) number of baseline trees, ii) total nu

ude its verification, provided the following conservative approach is adopted in the calculation of GHG emission reductions or net anthropo

s correspond to data for the entire month. Refer Para 373 (b) of VVS-PA, version 3.0.

The formula applied to calculate the stem volume of trees and the formula described in the submitted documents (monitoring report and

,y was adjusted due to caliibration delays, however the monitoring report does not indicate which were the calibration dates and the com

ates are not consistent between the monitoring report and the verification report. For example, the verification report (p 27-29) indicates

tion plan for new CDM regulations, If a request for registration or issuance following the old regulatory framework was submitted by 28 M

rameter, the project participants shall: Provide the values of the monitored parameter for the purpose of calculating GHG emission reducti

tivities connected to the main metering point.2: As per paragraph 372 of VVS-PA, the DOE shall assess the data and calculations of GHG em

tion on how it validated.2: The DOE states that "justification of non-calibration of WTG controller found appropriate and same was confirm

uipments identified as “¨D10¨, ¨D70¨, ¨D12¨, ¨10EKG20CP002¨, ¨10EKG20CP003¨ and ¨10EKG20CT002¨; and whether the actual error is be
 Losses,y. However, it is found that the net EGPJ,facility,y (spreadsheet JMR Data, column P) is calculated only based on deduction of the E

d the conservative approach is adopted in the calculation of GHG emission reductions: For the meters measuring the auxiliary consumption

E is requested to explain how it has complied with the CDM VVS (ver 2.0) para. 391-392, which requires that for the stakeholder consultati

rate of methane for leak (j, z) from the leaking component) and taver,i (Average bag fill time for leak i) while the monitoring report (p 18-1
e Annex 1 of the monitoring report and the verification report (p 11) showed that there were calibration delays at K-523 from 15/05/2017

s and the submission does not include a post-registration change and there are no related documents submitted. Please note that if you w

ments submitted (31,301 CO2). Please note that the Project emissions and leakage is only indicated in the verification/certification report.2
Project emissions and leakage is only indicated in the verification/certification report.
delivered to the grid minus the auxiliary electricity consumption, technical losses and electricity imports from the grid to each project pow
activity is 10/06/2014 and the electricity generation commenced on 06/10/2015. Please refer to paragraph 354 of VVS for project activitie

sion page refers to 12/03/2015 –31/05/2015 whereas the revised documents refer to 12/03/2015 –30/04/2018. In addition, the PDD refe
2014 to 31 December 2017, it is observed that data vintage 'y' is used to calculate ex-post OM. However, for the current monitoring perio

g period starts on 06/01/2014. It is not clear how the DOE has assessed the validity of calibration of instruments used in conformity with th

36, 284 (e)).Issue: The DOE is requested to explain how it concluded the calculation of EFgrid,CM,y, in particular EFsimple,OM,y, is in line w
cess in response to the request for review.
for post-registration changes. Kindly clarify.2.The validation report for post-registration changes is missing. Kindly clarify.3.The track chang

sheet, the delay in calibration has been applied from 23/09/2013 to 09/02/2017 while the meters were calibrated only on 15/02/2017 and

ad of the ones with diameters higher than 2.5 cm. While the assessment opinion, monitoring report and verification report documents refe

n is 01/08/2013 to 31/12/2020. DOE is therefore requested to explain, how it confirmed that meter was calibrated between period 01/08
The monitoring report (version 2 dated 31/01/17) as referred to in the verification and certification report was not submitted. 2.Scope: A

s and responsibilities of personnel, and emergency procedures for the monitoring system. (PS v7 para 250)Issue: Page 57 of the revised PD
t for issuance for the project activity.

of the monitoring report provide the monitored values of EG export,y, EG import,y and EG facility, y for the whole monitoring period (04/0

not allow the secretariat to upload the attached PRC documents. The incompleteness is classified as Other
“ issues, to analyze system-wide
for project activities, version 02.0. However, there is no information on the error identified in the delayed calibration test or confirmation

ied methodology document. (VVS v2, para 246 (c), 284 (i))Issue: The DOE is requested to explain how the emission reductions have been c

gistered monitoring plan. Please refer to VVS PA v1.0 paragraph 297.In page 15 of validation report, the DOE has validated that a default v

anges are not consistent among the submitted documents.Issue: There is an inconsistency in the type of PRC changes between the project

ved on or after 1 January 2021 (paragraph 8 of the EB 108th meeting report). The DOE is required to raise a forward action request (FAR) i

08.2.Scope: The cross-referencing and versioning within and between the document are not correct and accurate.Issue:The MR submitte
ized baseline and 4. changes to the project design of a registered project activity) whereas the rest of the documents refer to (1. changes t
C NO.2165) as net payable amount after deducting O&M charges, RkVAh Penalty, Negative Energy Charges AMR meter reading charges is n
monitoring plan as per the applied methodology (i.e. AMS III.AH version 1, paragraph 18).2: Scope: The verification report does not determ

The DOE is requested to explain how it has verified the correctness of apportioning calculation for parameter EGexport,PP in the spreadsh
ce number:9467)". However, it did not provide any information as per paragraph 394-395 of VVS for PA version 2 since E.10. Global stakeh

oach is adopted in the calculation of GHG emission reductions (para 366 of VVS for PA version 3).The DOE (p 14) states that " A delayed ca
(c).The emission reduction calculation spreadsheet (workbook “ER calculations ”) shows that the individual WTG electricity exports/import

dsheet do not provide how this specific parameter was monitored and 2) the verification report does not contain information on how the
monitoring period by applying conservative assumptions or discount factors to the calculations to the extent required to ensure that GHG e
OE is requested to explain how it has complied with the CDM VVS (ver 2.0) para. 391-392, which requires that for the stakeholder consult

2015 by the Board. However, the monitoring report does not provide the information required by the instructions for filling out the monito
2015 by the Board. However, the monitoring report does not provide the information required by the instructions for filling out the monito

vativeness of the proposed approach applied during the temporary deviation period. It is noted that the required quarterly
“ ”sampling of

paragraph 385 (a).Issue: The DOE is requested to explain how it confirmed that the information provided in the monitoring report is in ac
rterly in accordance with the registered PDD, but only two analysis were made in 2015. The DOE states that it checked the KenGen Lab rep

ontain a full translation of relevant sections into English as per instructions for filling out the monitoring report form in line with PS version

ontain a full translation of relevant sections into English as per instructions for filling out the monitoring report form in line with PS version

methodology ACM0002 version 12 and the registered PDD (p 22) , for rehabilitation projects, the EGPJ,y shall be determined considering th

bmit this request with PRC documents by logging into your CDM account and uploading directly to the record for this project.
mitted.3.Scope: According to PCP version 9 para 161(c), PS version 9 para 270 a revised PDD (in both clean and track changes version) sha

e applicable methodological tool “Project and leakage emissions from road transportation of freight ”parameter table 2 which requires the
level of accuracy and completeness in the monitoring of the project activity; d) the additionality of the project activity; e) the scale of the p

ure mentioned in the registered PDD requires use of daily export and import reading from main and check meter for periods where verific
paragraph 385 (a).Issue: On page 2 of the verification and certification report it is stated that "The geographical coordinates of the dam an

nd 257.Issue: The DOE is requested to provide more information on the actual emission reductions in comparison with estimated emission
t of CERs: 56,769 ER and 56,759 ER.
uctions as stated in the PDD as per VVS version 09.0 paragraph 326 (b).Issue: Regarding the change in the reservoir volume from 50,000 to
provide information on whether the value available on SIC website is for the full month or for only 19 days considered under the current m

337. Please note that no final monitoring report is submitted.2.Scope: The monitoring period throughout the documentation is not consist
VVS-PA Para 361(e)As per the registered PDD, for parameter FCdiesel,y, the data estimated based on the operational hours will be verified

ER for emission reductions achieved on or after 1 January 2021 (paragraph 8 of the EB 108th meeting report). The DOE is required to raise
he DOE is requested to explain how it verified parameter TDLgr,y. As per the description, the parameter is the average technical transmiss

sheet, worksheet “Baseline data ”, notes 2 –4, require the monitoring of actual gravity weekly and to apply this gravity correction factor to
or approval PRC is not submitted as the PRC contains the revision of monitoring parameters2: Scope: The monitoring report does not conta
web interfaces. For consistency purposes along the project cycle, requests for post registration changes are allocated by a process code; e

y exported to the grid (EGexport,y), there is a difference between the actual monitored values (50,487,155 kWh in total) and sales invoice
oviding clear line diagrams (graphical schemes) which show all relevant monitoring points for each sub-buddle (Kasari SHP & Dhom SHP). P

ports indicate 209,766 tCO2. The PP/DOE are requested to address this inconsistency

y exported to the grid (EGexport,y), there is a difference between the actual monitored values (48,797,160 kWh in total) and sales invoice

rification Report page 18 states that there are no changes in the registered monitoring plan due to the third party sale. However, the as sh
ort, Tucheng 13 and Songhe Caisan power plants have two gas pipelines each. Though each gas pipeline is equipped with a flow meter, onl

ing report, the gas analyzers with serial numbers 5660 (C2), 4106 (C3) and 4028 (C4), there was a delay between 13/08/2017 and 18/08/2
d under additional documents of the issuance request. 2.The verification/certification report on page 7 section E.4.1 and monitoring repor

was found the same to be correct. However, the spreadsheet (worksheet “Rathkuriya ”) shows that the net export value per invoice for Fe
mation from the testing laboratory shall be collected to justify the outcome or additional measurements shall be conducted. The registered

23,24,25,26,29 PE_Flare 2017" of "8288 ER sheet" show that flare efficiency of 50% were applied where there were no reported tempera

ersion is 1.1 dated 03/02/2021 whereas the monitoring report is version 1.2 dated 05/05/2021. Kindly clarify. 2. There is an inconsistency
nformation on the request for approval of temporary deviation and its date of approval for period 01/10/2014 - 06/12/2014, during which
formation along the submission for the request for issuance "Shuanghekou 120MW Hydro Power Project in Guizhou Province China" (834

ted to explain how it verified parameter Wsite, in particular: (a) as the parameter is determined annually by sampling survey, the DOE nee
ration frequency or practice for monitoring equipment not within the control of project participants or the coordinating/managing entity;

d standardized baselines and the other applied methodological regulatory documents (para 259 of PS for PA ver. 3)The monitoring plan re

sistency of information.2.Scope: The cross-referencing and versioning within and between the document are not correct and accurate.Iss
e progress of the proposed CDM project activity achieved in each phase under verification). (VVS v2, para 228 (a)) Scope: The verification r

36, 284 (e)).Issue: The monitoring parameter "Electricity generated at WEG Controller during the year y (EGWEG)" listed as one of the mo

uitability of the allometric equation for the project activity as per section III, a.2 of AR-AM0002 v3 methodology, which states in
“ the abse

e verification report why the site visit cannot be postponed .

nsibilities of personnel, emergency procedures for the monitoring system, and/or line diagrams showing all relevant monitoring points). (P
g report which states that i) "A DOE may postpone site visits for onsite inspections required by the CDM
“ validation and verification standa

e submission does not include a post-registration change and there are no related documents submitted. Please note that if you wish to su

es from September 2020 to December 2020 as a correction measure. The DOE is requested to clarify how this maximum error has been co
ring plan in the registered PDD. Furthermore, for the parameter Pn,j,y, the VCR states that the DOE was able to verify that the size and freq
 The final Monitoring Reports has not been submitted.2.Scope: The cross-referencing and versioning within and between the document ar

ed by the assessment team in ER sheet version 02)". It is observed in the spreadsheet which has the electricity generation data on monthly
the monitoring period starts from 1 November 2013. 2: Scope: The verification and certification report does not provide a statement on w
connection to an single recipient named as “enclosed flare/Boiler system ”. It is not clear how many recipients of the biogas are combustin

, considering that two new parameters, one formula have been added, which are not included in Appendix 1 of PS version. 5. Furthermore

design) whereas the Post-registration form, view page and the assessment opinion only refer to Permanet changes from monitoring plan a
n of waste type i) are to be monitored as per a sampling plan with the following requirements (in line with page 27 of AM0025, v.12): the s
nsibilities of personnel, emergency procedures for the monitoring system, and/or line diagrams showing all relevant monitoring points). (P
PDD template form is no longer valid. The DOE is kindly requested to submit the revised PDD using the latest template version approved b

t / EG import, project) in the total electricity supplied from all wind turbines connected to substation (∑ EG controller, i, feeder) as measur
demonstrated using investment analysis.2: Paragraph 355 of VVS-PA: There is no info how the DOE verified the methane capture system, p

monitored parameters: Mbiomass,i, NCVc,y and NCVbiomass,i, as required by para. 261 of the PS-PA v.03.0. Based on these information, t
t be postponed, including the demonstration of a significant impact of delaying the site visits on the DOE, or project participants or coordin

ory on-site inspection against the para 29(b) and para 30 which is for for the validation of the project activity. The DOE is required to prov
ines, or other methodological regulatory documents and changes to project design whereas there are no documents submitted for post-re
nte while the methodology (page 12) states that if either option 1 (BM) or option 2 (CM) are selected, they will be estimated ex post, as de

thropogenic GHG removals; (b) For all measured values taken during the period between the scheduled date of calibration and the actual
explain how crosschecking has been conducted as per this provision, line with paragraph 376(b) of VVS-PA (version 01.0).
ragraphs 320 and 326 (c).Issue: The DOE validated the tariff of 7.01 INR/kWh for the sale to third party by stating that "This is the applicab
project activity comply with the relevant requirements of the “CDM project standard for project activities .” Also, as per paragraph 359 (c) o
s (p 5) that "Boryeong small hydroelectric power project installed nominal capacity of 7.5MW small hydroelectric power which is below th

s value reported in this 3rd monitoring period 19,799 tCO2e is calculated based on the net electricity generated till the 08 January 2017; h

not been monitored as per PDD due to the fact that the electricity company has signed a contract with the project owner to take the mon
s digesters and stoves. ”The DOE (verification report Section E.3) has confirmed that the project has installed 796 biogas units. The DOE is

7, show two transmission lines for each of the sites with each line having one meter. The DOE is requested to: (a) clarify the number of m

erification report did not contain information on CERs delivery commitment/timeline as per para 26 (b) of EB 106 meeting report and the
hall provide information on how it is ensured that the electricity meters are reliable and calibrated considering that the proposed revision

h is no longer valid since 7 October 2021. Please submit in VVS version 3.

is Missing" and "Year 2017 - Invoices for the month Jan, Feb are missing" while the verification report (p 22) states that there were the mi
erified by the DOE.Issue: We observed that for this request for issuance, the PPs do not wish to claim CERs for the part of the monitoring p

refer to ER 31,332 whereas the issuance request page refers to 31,333.

how the meter accuracy of 1.0 (meter M7) and 2.0 (meter M8) complies with the regulation of Lao PDR.
registration changes have been identified and are assessed in detail in the subsequent steps E.4.1 to E.4.7". However, there is no request
worksheet "calculation", the parameters [Stack gas volume flow QAL2 corrected] and [Mass flow of N2O in tail gas] contains negative valu
selines or other methodological regulatory documents) with approval date 07/06/2013 whereas section E.4.5. of the verification and certifi

ts submitted ( 403,960 CO2). Also the breakdown for 2012 is inconsistent between the signed form and project view page (106,114 CO2) a
8 and 20) and the ER spreadsheet, given the fact the registered PDD (page 30, 39 and 76) and the validation report (page 39) states the gri

UNFCCC secretariat

version 7.4.1) require direct measurement thorough weighing feeders. However, the monitoring plan (page 61 of the PDD) states that the

on and expected implementation dates in the verification report. The DOE is requested to rectify the inconsistency.2: Scope: The verificati
 to “40,965 ”whereas cell D48 refers to “40,964.58 ”.

page 19 of AMS I.C version 18 requires measurement of NCV in laboratories according to relevant national/international standards. The DO
hat the dates of calibrations certificates covered the entire first (1st) monitoring period.". However the DOE is requested to further explain

eet refers to CER of 42,195.02 CO2 whereas the rest of the submitted documents refer to 42,194 CO2.3.Scope: The monitoring period thro

report and verification report do not report when the topographic survey was conducted in order to demonstrate the compliance with th
nsibilities of personnel, emergency procedures for the monitoring system, and/or line diagrams showing all relevant monitoring points). (P

g plan as per PS version 09.0 paragraphs 247 and 248 (a) (c) (d) (e) (f).Issue: The monitoring report has not reported information of the foll
of the meters, in particular as there is no information on the calibration date of: (a) the most recently installed meters in Tamil Nadu (i.e.

for biomass consumed (Qsawdust,boiler and Qsawdust,thermic) will be crosschecked with the biomass procurement data. However, the m
D (i.e. inclusion of the parameter "NCVcoal,y" in the monitoring plan) is to be regarded as a permanent change from the registered monito

d up randomly from each category. ”. The DOE is requested to explain how districts and villages and different biogas plants sizes have been
d up randomly from each category. ”. The DOE is requested to explain how districts and villages and different biogas plants sizes have been
tioned about citing a third party report in the monitoring report and verification report. However, the relevant data sets together with tra

were available at the time of PDD submission. The DOE is requested to clarify how it verified that a weighted average was used for the ca
ility have had overproduction of nitric acid during the monitoring period.

n: (a) The DOE checked the precision level from the survey data and confirmed that precision level achieved for all parameter is within the
Opinion for PRC is incorrect on page 11.3.Scope: The monitoring period throughout the documentation are not consistent.Issue: The mon

grid company correspond to data for the entire month. Refer Para 373 (b) of VVS-PA, version 3.0.

is requested to explain under which paragraph of Appendix 1 of the PS version 09.0 the change falls (paragraph 4 or paragraph 5). If the c
”(Verification report, page 14) and “24/10/2018-20/11/2018, 01/01/2019-06/11/2019, 01/01/2020-20/11/2020 ”(emission reduction sprea

r itself or a particular equipment or system. In addition, explanation is required for cells highlighted in red for which no explanation has be
e progress of the proposed CDM project activity achieved in each phase under verification). (VVS v2, para 228 (a)) Scope: The verification r

ment by project participants), with reliance on applicable force majeure provisions in the validation or verification contracts, if needed, in l

re).2: Scope: The verification report does not provide an assessment on whether the calibration of measuring equipments was conducted
nt factor used for baseline emission calculation in line with the requirements of para 4(a) of Appendix 1 to the Project Standards.2: Scope:
elayed calibration. Refer to paragraphs 364 and 365 of VVS-PA (version 02.0).

and certification report using the latest version (version 3.0).

ges from the registered monitoring plan are in line with the types of changes that do not require prior approval by the EB, as contained in

, 284 (e)).Issue: The monitoring report (page 28) states that for monitoring parameters CODoutflow,y and CODww,discharge,PJ,y "the num

ermanent change from the monitoring plan.2: The validation opinion does not clearly mention the monitoring period to which the deviatio
 described in the registered monitoring plan and the applied methodologies."EGPJ,y"in the sheet of "Summary_ER_Sheet 2012-13" includ

tion opinion does not contain a confirmation that the changes do not require prior approval of the Board and the provisions of Appendix 1

project design". However, the permanent changes have been made to the section of the monitoring plan which are not included in the app
ervative values of 0.51 (Pinus caribeaea) and 0.55 (Pinus oocarpa), on basic density (dry matter) are applied sourced from the IPCC Table 4

heet are not in English.2.Scope: The submitted documents are not internally and mutually consistent.Issue: There is an inconsistency of pr

ng temporary deviations, corrections, permanent changes to the monitoring plan and changes specific to an afforestation or reforestation

atrol man have supported the illegal cutting of the trees. Therefore it is demonstrated that the project area is routinely assessed." It is not

uction of 413,750 tCO2e considering 4,264 leaks monitored in the current monitoring period, which accounts for 101.14 % of the estimate

eriod of 01/07/2014 to 31/08/2014 for all Kilns.2: Scope: The verification report does not provide findings and conclusions as to whether: i

e result of the sampling survey ”, b) the MR (pg. 9) _ “measured by the project monitoring team ”, and VR (pg. 24) _ measured by the samp
e result of the sampling survey ”, b) the MR (pg. 9) _ “measured by the project monitoring team ”, and VR (pg. 24) _ measured by the samp
 1 February 2013 DOEs shall submit PDD and PDD track changes in VVS form. Please also consult the Sixteenth conference call with DOE/A
“Quantity of chemical oxygen demand available for degradation in the open lagoon in month m-1 (CODavailable,m-1) ”of Oct 14 2014 is re
ied methodology document. (VVS v7, paragraphs 290 (c) and 291 (c))Issue: The net quantity of electricity generated during the most recen

alues. However, it is observed from pages 19-21 of the verification report that the calibrations conducted in 2017 are for the new meters.
od as 10/01/2012 - 09/07/2012, whereas the submitted documents show it as 10/01/2012 - 10/07/2012. Furthermore, the previous monit

stamp 7:56 is missing.2: The DOE is requested to explain how it verified the determination of flare efficiency in line with the PDD and vers
how the values of EGExport,y (14101.152 MWh) and EGImport,y (78.612 MWh) were reached.
of post-registration change is also applicable for temporarily deviation. The only difference, as per para 128 of PCP-PA, version 2.0, is that f

the calibration of energy meters at Line 1 and Line 2 at substation meters. Accordingly PP has adjusted the value of transmission loss by ap

f the monitoring report (MR), in table 2, it is provided that a total of 77 sample plots were installed that were distributed over three strata
en the document is not correct and accurate.Issue: The Validation Report, page 41 refers to the PDD version 2.6., dated 7 June, 2011. The

suring parameters required for calculating emission reductions are calibrated appropriately (page 29) and reviewed the calibration certific

s the replacement date of thermocouples attached to the flares.2: The DOE shall determine whether a complete set of data for the specifi

ncluded in the formula mentioned in the registered PDD ( page 25) as well as  the "cover" worksheet highlighting the formulae of emission

nth to 0:00 Hr of last day of month and with deductions of 12% Electricity based on JMR. However, the ER spreadsheet does not demonstr

espond to data for the entire month. In the excel sheet, cell E20 now shows an addition of four values for meter reading for M11. As per t

eport states that the annex 3 of the report contains the monitored data such as “Date of planting ,” Check
“ for survival i,j,k ,” Area
“ cleanin
o refers to PDD s’ provision that “Trunk, support as well as feeder line locations, distances and routings might still change as the current in

est for isssuance. The DOE is requested to submit the request for issuance under the "Post-Registration Changes".
erified by the DOE.Issue: There is an inconsistency of CER between the project view page and the signed form (total reductions 609,566 CO

uploaded through the PRC interface by selecting PRC option.

provided documents also refer to the amount of CERs achieved in the first monitoring period (30,043tCO2e) the amount which should be

poration Private Limited- I, - II and –III); (2) The 17 clusters as mentioned in the monitoring report; (3) The other clusters of the other proj
ibilities of personnel, emergency procedures for the monitoring system, and/or line diagrams showing all relevant monitoring points). (EB4

arify how it crossed-checked the values of EGfacility,y with the ETN values as the values provided in the spreadsheet are not independent
ort the correct application of this paragraph.2: The DOE shall provide verification opinion on the information of power density 160.7 W/m

m average during the monitored period which resulted in a 32 % higher river flow. However, river flows were mainly higher in those mont
under additional documents of the issuance request. The post-registration changes request form has not been submitted. The post-regist

ith respect to the unit conversion method from mass (Ton) to volume (Nm3) of Natural gas, in accordance with para 193 of VVM version 1

erification Statement is dated 13 July, 2014 which is prior to the finalization of the Verification Report dated 15 July, 2014. Please note tha
ge 28, the VR states-"The monitoring system and all applied procedures are not completely in compliance to the approved revised monitor

ied methodology document. (VVS v2, para 246 (c), 284 (i))Issue: The DOE shall further verify the elimination of leakage due to competing u
te visit variations were observed in spacing. EB 66 Annex 24 para 4 indicates these changes do“ not require prior approval from the CDM E
o provide further information on how it verified the calibration of the meter as per the para. 366 of VVS for PA v0.3.02: The DOE stated th

registered with ASB0050-2020 version 1. For application of ASB0050-2020 version 1, please refer to the requirements specified under par

ring report in accordance with the “CDM project cycle procedure for project activities, and paragraph 392, which requires the DOE to take

the project activity.2: Scope: The verification report does not provide an assessment on whether the calibration of measuring equipments

-checked the values of EGfacility,y with the ETN values as the values provided in the spreadsheet are not independent variables but linked
on number and completion date. 2: Page 32 (i.e. section 2.2 of the monitoring methodology) of AR-ACM0001 / Version 03 requires the tar

bmitted with this request for issuance.

ing report using the Form and guidelines for completing the monitoring report form (F-CDM-MR -)has not been submitted with a request

1. Section C of the monitoring report states "A gas flow meter was installed between the blower and generating facility". Section D.2 from

al amount of CERs achieved in 2012 and 2013 should be separated in all documents submitted.
revised PDD was not submitted.3.Scope: According to PCP v2 para 138(d) supplemental documentation(e.g. emission reduction workshee
iving biomass.2: Scope: The verification report does not provide a conclusion on the verified amount of emission reductions achieved and/

and coal as fuel. The MR (p. 15) confirms that no coal was used during the current monitoring period. However, the DOE has not provided

directional meter used to monitor the electricity imports and exports. The last invoicing period presented for the imported electricity goes

wer purchase agreement, while the registered monitoring plan in the registered PDD does not mention the use of line loss to determine the

ethodology.

s per EB49 Annex 28 footnote 1: "if the DOE identifies an on-site generator for emergency which was not included in the monitoring plan d
tes that the parameter FCi,y refers to the use of fossil fuel for start up, thus the DOE/PP are requested to clarify if there was any use of co

The DOE has provided a verification assessment on the temporary deviation (section E.4.1, page 10 of 92 of the Verification Report). How

M0002 version 12 requires that the monitoring parameter “APJ ”(Area of the reservoir measured in) the surface of the water, after the imp

n BJ (average CH4 density in LFG sent to generator in hourly (kg-CH4/m3)). Further, there are 10 columns (i.e. from BJ to BS) represent the

istencies in the calibration dates between the monitoring report and the verification report. For example, the monitoring report states tha

e further verification opinion on the data which has been used in the emission reduction calculation out of these two measurement metho
rt (p.2) shows that Phase I was put into operation since 05/10/2010. The verification report (p.7) confirms that Phase II has not been put in

shall provide validation opinion on how the changes would impact the additionality of the project activity. In doing so, the DOE shall subm

e: According to EB48 Annex 68 paragraph 9(e), cross-referencing and versioning within and between the document must be correct and ac

itted (13.01.2011-31.12.2011).2.Scope: According to EB48 Annex 68 paragraph 9(f), the crediting period throughout the documentation m
uction of 598,346 tCO2e for the current monitoring period is 114% higher than the estimated amount (279,956 tCO2e) in the registered PD

the first monitoring report and the same is 23/02/2012 (with due date as 22/02/2013) in the monitoring and verification reports for this m
ers to 314.35 gce/kWh.
 v.1.2 para 196)Issue:It is not clear whether the power generated by the project activity is supplied to the grid or for captive use given tha

NMHC concentration is below 1%, it must be included in the approved monitoring plan. The DOE is requested to clarify why it verified that

nsibilities of personnel, emergency procedures for the monitoring system, and/or line diagrams showing all relevant monitoring points). (E

rvals (page 33 of the verification report), the monitoring plan states that that the parameter will not be monitored (see page 38, footnote
nt of remaining issues from the previous verification period as per VVS version 09.0 paragraph 409 (g) (h).Issue: In CAR01 the DOE identifie
31.07.2011) where as the monitoring period is from 13.12.2010-13.07.2011.

wn of the CER in 2012 should be for the current monitoring period which is according to the Monitoring report 19,393 CO2 and not 39,099

of project site #1 and project site #2 is 300KW and 95 KW, respectively through the meter s’ register issued by KEPCO and the meters which

to 2 x 1.063 MW in the project description in section A.1. of the revised PDD, whereas the other sections of the PDD still states the capacit
nsibilities of personnel, emergency procedures for the monitoring system, and/or line diagrams showing all relevant monitoring points). a

ogy and applicable tool which require continuous measurement, as there were periods/gaps identified without measuring equipment in p

he historical highest value during the monitoring period (02/12/2017 –30/06/2021) was applied for the non-confirming monitoring period

onitoring reports submitted for verification. The PP has provided the best estimates and reasons for SF6 inventory increases and decreases
ng from 1 Februrary 2013, DOEs shall submit all requests for registration/issuance under new rules: If requests for registration/issuance fo

n reduction of 911,269 tCO2e for the current monitoring period is 78.5% higher than the estimated amount (510,569 tCO2e) in the registe

some of the households selected at random... ". However, the DOE is requested to explain how the verification process has been in accor
ng the electricity supplied to the grid and the electricity supplied to internal loads', as well as parameter "PEFC,j,y = CO2 emissions from fo

l area and emergency was not included in the monitoring plan of the registered PDD, in line with VVM paragraph 204 and 206. Also, pleas

ing and Huangang, each having a bidirectional main meter as well as a meter for back-up import. The spreadsheet does not report the mo

- Grid connected renewable electricity generation. The DOE is kindly requested to apply the version of the registered methodology throug
document are not correct and accurate.Issue: VR refers to the monitoring report version 4.2 dated 06.12.2013 where as the submitted mo

laced in service and operating and CFL failure rate taken by the PP for this monitoring period is in line with the registered monitoring plan

nsibilities of personnel, emergency procedures for the monitoring system, and/or line diagrams showing all relevant monitoring points). (E

he PDD) requires annual examination of the electricity meters. However, no information has been reported regarding the compliance of a
d operational under normal conditions, which is higher than the average calculated value (62.55%), is applied to the 4 days for which this d

, 284 (e)).Issue:a) The DOE is requested to provide information how it has verified that the information flow for the parameter ndy (numb
for the baseline emission calculation. It does not report if it was determined ex-ante or monitored, the value, or how it has assessed it to

olumetric fraction of H2O in time interval t on a dry basis (vH2O,t,db) ”is estimated using equation (8) of the “Tool to determine the mass

Tay Mo landfill and Phase II of Nam Son landfill.

nsibilities of personnel, emergency procedures for the monitoring system, and/or line diagrams showing all relevant monitoring points). a
as the methodology (p.16) requires that the lower emission factor between the grid emission factor and the emission factor of the captive
ort is version 4 dated 05.04.2012.
entire month. Refer Para 373 (b) of VVS-PA, version 3.0.

ally. However the monitoring report and the verification report do not provide any information on when the measurement was done. Furt

report does not show that the the Lamp Failure Rate has been determined for each type of the lamp. The DOE is requested to explain how

The DOE is required to provide further information on how it verified the calculation of the EGy (Net electricity exported to the grid by the
heet, MR, verification report and PDD. In doing so, please confirm the source provided (1996 IPCC guidelines) in the ER spreadsheet.2: Sco

documents shall be submitted in EnglishThe ER sheet contains information not in english, particularly sheet "Plot Num" cells A3,B3,C3,D3
ii) reduction of the Water Reclamation Plants supplying sludge to the project from 6 to 4; and iii) operational parameters relevant to the v
g plan requires the sampling for Pn,i,,y and FCresidual be carried out four times per year at minimum. However the verification report pag

on the expected value of the parameter or expected variance (or standard deviation) as required by paragraph 13(b) and 13(c) of the stan

or issuance.Issue: Please note that the verification/certification report refers to VVS version 2 where as the VVS version on the view page is

dix 1 para 4.

The submitted monitoring report is for a different project.2.Scope: A spreadsheet containing emission reduction calculation has not been

ease refer to EB68, Annex 43 available under: https://cdm.unfccc.int/Reference/Notes/Reference/Notes/reg/reg_note43.pdf

, 284 (e)).Issue: The DOE shall clarify how it has verified the parameters, Biogas Flow Rate and Biogas burned (BGburnt) to be in line with t
from 1 Februrary 2013, DOEs shall submit all requests for registration/issuance under new rules: If requests for registration/issuance for a

bmitted, it is not shown how the stand volume values have been estimated. The DOE is requested to submit additional calculations of the s

ntative of the daily monitored value. These parameters have not been monitored in accordance with the monitoring plan, however the DO
therefore requested to provide information on calibration of the controller meters.2: VVS-PA Para 373(b): As shown in the ER spreadshee

ue 2: The submitted Monitoring Report, version 01.2, dated 10 September, 2013 refers to the monitoring period "01 March 12 - 28 Feb 13"

oject site ”. However, the DOE has verified that the electricity supplied by the project activity to the grid was obtained based on the metho
 report mention ACM0078 while the monitoring report shows AM0078.

of request for issuance submission.Issue: The Verification Report is dated 9 September 2013 and the Certification Report is dated 4 Septem

cates that the electricity generated by the project activity is calculated based on the monitoring of the net electricity measured at individu

cation report.

eadsheet namely 3177_ER_Wuliji.xls. Correction is requested. 2: Scope: The verification report does not list each parameter required by th

Annex 68 paragraph 10 (a) (i) & EB 54 Annex 34).Issue: The monitoring report (p.2) states that "The Project involves 52 wind energy conve
0 under References section. The Verification Report makes no reference to the actual final monitoring report submitted in this request for
ates that the monthly monitored values of parameters EGJMR,export, EGJMR,import, EGexport and EGimport are zero for the period Febr
nsibilities of personnel, emergency procedures for the monitoring system, and/or line diagrams showing all relevant monitoring points). (E

he reasons and present the expected implementation dates; (b) The actual operation of the registered CDM project activity; Please refer t

vided in the monitoring report/emission reduction spreadsheet as per the requirement of para 208(b) of VVM v.1.2 given that the values o
nnex 68 paragraph 10 (a) (i) & EB 54 Annex 34).The Monitoring Report (page 4) mentions that "There was no significant malfunction or any

e uploaded through the PRC interface by selecting PRC option. 2.Scope: According to PCP v2 para 138(b) an assessment opinion by the DO

report states that the PP has applied the maximum permissible error of the instrument to the measured values taken during the period be

he respective verification and certification report and the validation report for post-registration changes using the valid version of the appl

ogy' rather than a 'correction' type post registration change. The DOE is requested to verify the change of meter accuracy in line with PS v
e revised monitoring plan defines the spot check frequency for 0.2s ammeter as 3 times per month, whereas the monitoring report page 6
the Monitoring Report is dated 6 March, 2014, version 4.0. 2) The Certification Statement, page 3 states a monitoring report "June 06, 200

port and the verification report are same as the latitudes of the individual WTG and are different from the registered PDD. The DOE is requ
nt of CERs and resubmit a request for issuance.

nsibilities of personnel, emergency procedures for the monitoring system, and/or line diagrams showing all relevant monitoring points). (E

R".3.Scope: According to EB48 Annex 68 paragraph 9(e), cross-referencing and versioning within and between the document must be corr

h. Refer VVS-PA Para 373 (b) of VVS-PA, version 3.0.

ction of hydraulic lime for the construction industry through the addition of non-calcined mineral components and additives. –Cementos A

ibilities of personnel, emergency procedures for the monitoring system, and/or line diagrams showing all relevant monitoring points). (EB4

n 8 requires that the monitoring parameter “APJ ”(Area of the reservoir measured in) the surface of the water, after the implementation o

eter is not provided in the monitoring report. 2: Scope: The verification report does not provide an assessment on whether the calibration

e progress of the proposed CDM project activity achieved in each phase under verification). (VVM v.1.2 para 198 (a)).Issue 1: The facilities
 cope: According to EB48 Annex 68 paragraph 9(e), cross-referencing and versioning within and between the document must be correct an
n 06 dated 18 April 2011. Certification report must confirm the verification of final Monitoring Report, in this case Version 07, dated 30/06/

Certification Report state it as 13 Feb 2010 - 31 Dec 2010.

opinion of the Verification Report (page 3) it is stated once correctly and once incorrectly (2-12-09).

. Please refer to EB68, Annex 43 available under: https://cdm.unfccc.int/Reference/Notes/Reference/Notes/reg/reg_note43.pdf

 reasons for the phased-implementation delay and/or does not present the expected implementation dates. (VVM v.1.2 para 198 (a)).Issu

uploaded through the PRC interface by selecting PRC option.

al electricity produced by the project activity in year y" as a separate parameter. However, the monitored data for this parameter has not

uired to further explain how it has verified and crosschecked the following: (a) the gas consumption from Sabarmati station in the month o

aded under additional documents

at this parameter is calculated. Further information is required how the DOE verifies the monitoring of CEO as per the monitoring plan.
PDD indicate the change to the monitoring plan. However, the DOE has not validated the proposed permanent changes to the registered m

monitoring report for this request for issuance is 04/12/2009 to 10/03/2011.

pe: The cross-referencing and versioning within and between the document are not correct and accurate.Issue: The certification/verificati
paragraph 9(e), cross-referencing and versioning within and between the document is correct and accurate.Issue: Certification report refe
ration details that cover the monitoring period for monitoring parameters Fs, Ff and Ts.

cumentation. Validation Report, Certification Statement, Signed Form, Monitoring Report version 2, 04/01/2012, Calculation spreadsheet

ross check to the electricity generation as a consequence of FAR (Forward Action Request) is part of Appendix I of the Project Standard.2:

er page 17 of the methodology ACM0002 v7 but it is not reported. 2: Scope: The verification report does not state that the monitoring pla

1 to 2010-11 - Full raw, SD_02 Olmeca 2009-11 to 2010-11 - server export)

entioned to calculate carbon content and density using the compositional data. 2. The DOE is requested to clarify the volume of total gas m

VR the verification of the calibration certificates on 25/02/2011 and 02/08/2011 for both meters (Revenue Meter and Cross-Check Meter)

s D3077 to D3129), and the same happened to flare 2 (before called flare 3) from the 13 to the 16 November 2009 (Spreadsheet 2635-ER
“
o 30/04/2011. It is also wrong on p. 63 of the verification report.2.Scope: According to EB48 Annex 68 paragraph 9(e), cross-referencing an

ain whether the increase in production is within the maximum design capacity of the plant,  and if so, whether such increase  could have 
 equipments are available in section B.1.2 of the MR along with meter number, calibration due date and location. However, the actual calib
tted documentation are dated prior to the date of request for issuance submission.Issue: the signed form dates (16.7.12) much earlier than

l Methane destroyed). See the sheet "Data Summary Table", cells k11 to k24. In doing so, please include how were considered the manufa

deviation complies with the relevant requirements in the “CDM project standard for project activities ”(Paragraph 281 of VVS for PA v 03.0

documents - Verification & Certification / Monitoring Report.

tion; (iii) Methane concentration in biogas; (iv) Temperature of biogas combusted; (v) Pressure of biogas combusted; (vi) Temperature of

Annex 68 paragraph 10 (a) (i) & EB 54 Annex 34).Issue: The PP/DOE are requested to report and verify when the plant started operating a
ble 2 of monitoring report and spreadsheet 2016 demonstrate 43 micro hydro power plants operated in the monitoring period. b. Table 1 o

rovide information of the calibration of the moisture meter.2: Scope: The verification report does not provide a conclusion on the verified

on standard" (VVS) and "CDM project cycle procedure" (PCP). At the time of re-submission, the DOE is kindly requested to submit the requ
ted in the calculation of GHG emission reductions (paragraph 366 and 367 of VVS for PA ver 2).The validation report (p 12-13) states that

ied methodology document. (VVM v.1.2 para 208 (c) & 221 (h))Issue: The general guideline for sampling and survey for small-scale CDM p
number of SAVE80 systems in use as 4,017.93 based on the drop-out rate (8.35%) for the 8th monitoring period and the drop-out rate (8.

he project is thus 6.1MW. The DOE is therefore requested to clarify how it has verified total installed capacity of the project.2: VVS-PA, par

t the conditions in AM_CLA_0047 are met by the project's flare. In particular, the DOE is requested to provide the information on how it ve

logy, as the registered monitoring plan and methodology require to calculate the energy savings using the metered energy consumption d
of emission reductions achieved and/or determine that calculations of baseline emissions, project emissions and leakage as appropriate h
 of gas consumption during the flow meter down time which is based on the specific fuel gas consumption is considered the most conserv

een taken into account for the period between 19/02/2011 to 17/06/2011. The generation in the concerned worksheets 'WS-09', 'WS-10'

tart of the operation of the CDM project activity (i.e. introduction of the methane recovery system in the existing sludge treatment system

95) and the monitoring report (21284281).

ibilities of personnel, emergency procedures for the monitoring system, and/or line diagrams showing all relevant monitoring points). (EB4

The number of Certified Emission Reductions (CERs), within and between the documents are not consistent.Issue: There is an inconsistenc

ustion temperature at flare should be between 1,000 –1,200 0C. It is not evident from either monitoring report or verification report if the

f VVS version 05, and do not require prior approval by the board, given that equation number 7 introduced by the PP in the MR (page 24)
UNV Topi Flare Tool V2 26 5 11 amounts cannot be seen.2.Scope: According to EB48 Annex 68 paragraph 9 (e), the number of Certified Em

escription in registered project design documents ”(Version 2). Paragraph 4(k) of the guidelines allows the changes in stratification for sam

es for each measurement.Therefore, the DOE is request to clarify how it verified that at least three samples were taken to monitor NCV of

v.1.2 para 196)Issue: The DOE is requested to justify the difference of the design flow of the project activity. The PDD mentions it as 5.29

to clarify how the DOE verified the monitoring of the net electricity delivered to the grid as per the approved monitoring plan.
ation report does not provide an assessment on whether the calibration of measuring equipments was conducted at a frequency specified

monitoring plan (PDD, p. 41) and the methodology (AMS III. F ver. 5, p. 4) iii) Values reported for Oxygen levels in the MR (p.8)

r Issuance form, the Monitoring Report, Certification and Verification Report indicate 13,396 tonnes of CO2 equivalent. Further, the amou
mation about the calibration of the meters for measuring the operating hours (e.g. date of calibration and validity) as the monitoring repo
et,Verification as well as the Certification Reports.

Annex 68 paragraph 10 (a) (i) & EB 54 Annex 34).Issue: The monitoring report does not contain information on relevant dates for the proj

ng from 1 Februrary 2013, DOEs shall submit all requests for registration/issuance under new rules: If requests for registration/issuance fo

ameter Qy,ww, to be performed every 2 years as per the revised monitoring plan has been assessed, as the latest calibration reported was
tted range. In this case (case 1), the baseline does not have to be recalculated. However it is also stated on the same page that "therefore,

egistered on 25 February 2009" and the Verification Report says that the PDD "is dated 20 February 2009". Both Certification statement an
 .e. . And so is stated throughout the documentation. However, page 32 of the VR, item 5.5. Compliance with the monitoring methodology
note that the parameter 'Net electricity to the grid by the project activity' also differes between the monitoring report (24853.45) and the

ross-checking the monitored data, specifically; (a) the determination and selection method of the sample size for on-site verification, i.e. 4

The certification report must refer to the correct project name.

286 (149,633 achieved before 1 January 2013 and 138,653 achieved from 1 January 2021) and the verification/certification report refers to

n the project view page is: 21 Oct 2009 - 25 Apr 2010.

Page 30 of the revised and approved PDD (v.6) has required to apply both factors 0.9979 and 1.0021 respectively to calculate EGout and E
n Reduction (ER) estimate for comparison (i.e. 6,222 tCO2e), considering that: i) the registered PDD estimates annual ER of 6,291 tCO2e fo

pplied methodology document. (VVM v.1.2 para 208 (c) & 221 (h))Issue: The DOE is required to provide further information on why the mo

preadsheet (Cell B18), Enclosure 1 spreadsheet (Cell B18) and Enclosure 2 spreadsheet (Cell B19) where 24/10/2009 to 11/05/2010 was re
tic and calorific, as per the monitoring plan; and b) Non Methane Hydrocarbon: annual monitoring by the concentration meters, optic and

itoring plan against the applied monitoring methodology ACM0002 version 06, however the methodology used and applied for this projec

onitoring period with the estimate in the PDD for the same period. However the estimate in the PDD was provided on a yearly basis and th

r to meet monthly recalibration requirement the meters measuring q_HFC23y are shifted from time to time (page 31 of Verification Repo

d PDD as "any lost of data due to equipment failure will be reconstructed from former and subsequent series measurements up to 6 mo
 e,m) and COD concentration of effluent out of bio-digester to lagoons (CODconc_dig_out,m) in line with the approved revised monitoring

ost registration changes have been identified and are assessed in detail in the subsequent steps E.4.1 to E.4.7" and under section E.4.2., re
mitted range of operation should be provided in full.

ed to report these data.2: Scope: The monitoring report does not contain calculations of baseline emissions, project emissions, leakage (if
pplied methodology document. (VVM v.1.2 para 208 (c) & 221 (h))Issue: The DOE is requested to provide information on how it has verifie

ate of the meter calibration (15 October 2010 and 14 October 2011). However, as the monitoring period started on 21 September 2010, th

nsibilities of personnel, emergency procedures for the monitoring system, and/or line diagrams showing all relevant monitoring points). (E

on must be submitted with a request for issuance.Issue: The spreadsheet refers to project activity 2331.3.Scope: According to EB48 Annex

The monitoring period starts from 01 December 2012", whereas elsewhere in the VR (and everywhere in the MR), the monitoring period i

ied methodology document. (VVM v.1.2 para 208 (c) & 221 (h))Issue: The DOE is requested to clarify how it determined that the calculatio
is requested to provide the spreadsheets containing the monitored data of the historical campaigns.

s check purpose. Please refer to paragraph 233, 234, 248 and 249 of VVS version 4.0.

ired to list each parameter required by the monitoring plan and state how the DOE verified the information flow from data generation, ag

1.2 para 196)Issue: The DOE indicated that the PP has monitored each one of the 17000 operating solar cookers as follows: 5 monitoring t

n page 7 of the monitoring report, whereas it is stated every 3 years in the verification report. ii) ID 5: The calibration frequency for the ins
tes of stop of operation marked in red in the worksheet “Data ”, table LOI. The DOE is requested to provide further information on the eve

57,889 CO2). Kindly clarify.

Annex 68 paragraph 10 (a) (i) & EB 54 Annex 34).Issue: The PP/DOE are requested to report the plant design capacity and when the secon
was deducted from measured data, since it is more conservative. However, there is no information on when the delayed calibration of tho

ied methodology document. (VVM v.1.2 para 208 (c) & 221 (h))Issue:The spreadsheet provides monthly values of flare efficiency (a month

S version 09.0 paragraph 244.Issue: It is stated in the “Assessment Opinion for Post Registration Changes ”that the biogas generator had n
t the parameters are “scanned ”ever 1 second but “recorded by 1 minute interval ”. Information is required on how the methodology requ

ctive COD removal (i.e.,05/01/2015, 30/03/15, 18/04/15 and 05/01/16). These days were also counted as operation days in the emission r

oring report which require continuous measurement, as there were gaps without measuring equipment identified as per the Appendices
d how the estimation of emission reductions is conservative as per paragraph 10 of EB 22 annex 2.
dsheet containing emission reduction calculation must be submitted with a request for issuance.Issue: The spreadsheet does not include m

an 2011). You can request any changes that you wish to make to the published Monitoring Report during the Verification process by raisin

2: List of Requests for Corrective Action (CAR) and Clarification (CL)" and the related parameter assessed in verification report page 15. E.g

s is carried out in accordance with the VVM. As the request for issuance contains PRC, the verification process has to be carried out under
tual value of electricity deducted in the referred period and the related evidences.

48 Annex 68 paragraph 9(f), the crediting period throughout the documentation must be consistent.Issue: Verification report refers on pa
: According to EB48 Annex 68 pargraph 8(e) a request for issuance form must be submitted with a request for issuance.Issue: The uploade

mation about the calibration of the meters (e.g. date of calibration and validity) as the monitoring report does not include this information

ow it confirmed that the readings of the flow meter(FI65) used for measuring biogas sent to the engine between the commissioning and d
uency and purpose of data are added. In validating those changes, the DOE has simply confirmed compliance with paragraph 307-311 of V
 st for issuance is version 6, dated 01.08.2011; the Certification Report refers to Monitoring Report version 5, also dated 01.08.2011; the V

g with this request for issuance the DOE has submitted a request for post registration changes "Temporary deviations from the monitoring

uipment are noted in the monitoring report. The DOE shall provide further validation opinion on how it has verified that the calibration has

ent issuance of CERs. The DOE is requested to clarify how it verified that the project activity was implemented as described in the PDD con

ns into account. This, however, is not in line with the revised monitoring plan (submitted in December 2009 after the provincial certificatio

port does not provide information required as above on meters used for measurement of parameters EGVCB and EGWEG.2: VVS-PA, parag
 request for issuance is for the monitoring period 01 May 10 - 31 October 11. Kindly address these inconsistencies throughout the concern

he number of 36,296 CERs. Please note that according to the web interface and signed form, this request for issuance was submitted for 3

tion in the Monitoring Report and the Verification Report. According to the Monitoring Report, phase 2 was installed in September 2008 bu

sioning within and between the document is not correct and accurate.Issue:2. There is an inconsistency in the cross-referencing of the PDD
River 3rd Level Hydropower Station". 2.Scope: According to EB48 Annex 68 paragraph 9(f), the monitoring period throughout the documen

s was not for the operation of the geothermal plant. 2. The DOE has not verified how the fossil fuel emission factor was measured
“ ”as pe

tion Report states version 3.0, 15/10/201 of the Monitoring Report which is different from version 2.1.1, 12/06/2012 of the submitted fina

ore information on the end use of the gas supplied to households and confirm whether the use of CMM by household involves household

eport does not state that the monitoring has been carried out in accordance with registered or the accepted revised monitoring plan. (VVM

ion 2. Clarification is required on how the DOE concluded that the monitoring plan was in accordance with the applicable methodology.

) took place even when there was 59 days overhaul time (from 27 July 2010 to 25 September 2010) during this monitoring period and that
missing equipment, in particular, how it has assessed the likelihood of installation of the remaining equipment according to the revised sc

tered PDD, the DOE shall conduct an assessment on the potential impacts and submit a notification or a request for approval of changes.

e master spreadsheet for only the month of December as an example).

onitoring Report version 02 from 28/02/2012. Kindly address this inconsistency throughout the submitted documentation.

of the monitoring report due to adjustment in the electricity generation data to account the discounting due to delay in calibration of ene

tHNO3) has been recalculated as mentioned in the verification report whereas the (re)calculation of this parameter was not shown in the

bmitted.Issue: The Board agreed at EB 108 (December 2020), as temporary measures pending CMP guidance at CMP 16, to process reque

, 284 (e)).Issue: The DOE is requested to explain how it verified the following: (a) Parameter pn,j,y, (weight fraction of the waste type j). In
 ibilities of personnel, emergency procedures for the monitoring system, and/or line diagrams showing all relevant monitoring points). (EB4

Annex 68 paragraph 10 (a) (i) & EB 54 Annex 34).Issue: The PDD states (page 3) that the design capacity is 270 metric tonnes of HNO3 (10

lowing information: * There is not electricity going through the anmeter EM1 which is connected to all three generators during the overha

calculation has not been submitted with a request for issuance.Issue: The CER spreadsheet submitted is for a different project.3.Scope: A

dicates 20,540 tCO2e.

e monitoring report or the emission reduction calculation sheet) on the energy balance is provided.

m CH4 emission factor (tCH4/TJ) x conversion factor (TJ/MWh), considering that the formula used resulted in overestimation of leakage ass

ng methane content of the biogas to determine the efficiency of the flaring process. The unit will be calibrated to an accuracy of  ±1 perce
nsibilities of personnel, emergency procedures for the monitoring system, and/or line diagrams showing all relevant monitoring points). (E

nformation about the manufacturer's specifications with respect to the weekly on-line calibration of the gas analyzers.2: Scope: The verific

ing 4 meters in different lines and EGaux is measured using a set of meters, whereas the monitoring plan specify 2 meters for EGy and 2 m

e progress of the proposed CDM project activity achieved in each phase under verification). (VVM v.1.2 para 198 (a)).Issue: the DOE has no

his is not in accordance with the applied methodology and the monitoring plan. The DOE is requested to provide further clarification on h
onitoring of “Electricity exported by the each WTG at site ”and “Electricity imported by each WTG at site .” However, the PP did not report
common MSEDCL meter at the sub-station. However, the DOE verified that this value was calculated from the difference of the total electr

ers to version 08, dated 30/11/2010.

otal of 450,087 CERs is claimed for the request.

ance withthe manufacturer specifications. The equipment is accurate to within 0.5%."  However, the Verification Report (pages 7 and 8) st
with the manufacturer specifications. The equipment is accurate to within 0.5%."However, the Verification Report (pages 6 and 7) states:a

ting the electricity imported and exported in KWh

ly one flare;ii. the registered PDD (section B.3) indicates that a pump system with 30kW would be used for extracting and pumping the lan

rted in the monitoring report page 36 as well as the ACM0001 v18 para 31 equation 2, which is BECH4,y = ((1-OXtop_layer) * FCH4,PJ,y –F

ng Report version 1.2, dated 13 January 2013.2.Scope: The cross-referencing and versioning within and between the document are not cor
O Abatement Project ”in China (UNFCCC Registration Reference No.1481) for the period 5 June 2008 to 30 September 2008 are fairly state

plants (in abbreviations).

mission calculations have been justified and/or emission factors, default values and other reference values have been correctly applied in li
uded to be compliant with the requirement and all verified calibration dates are as stated in the monitoring report. Further information is

he equipment used to measure the methane content in the biogas is from +/-0.3% to +/-3.0%. Please clarify.

mpact a delay in CERs delivery as there is an ERPA signed in between the parties. However, the verification report did not contain informati

PDD to reflect the actual N2O Emission factor for baseline period that was verified at the first request for issuance as per para 28 of EB 31

able at the time of verification. Please note that according to the EB guidelines, the latest editorial version of the methodology should be u

uest for issuance has version 2.1, dated 1 July 2013.2.Scope: The submitted documentation are dated prior to the date of request for issua

f the parameter was sourced from IPCC 2006, the Verification Report lacks information on why the preferred source as per applied metho

ximum permissible error of the flow meter to engines (SN ending in 5375) applied to the calibration gap. In particular, the DOE has not pro
d in the monitoring plan. 2).The DOE is also requested to clarify how the EGm,y is monitored considering the verification report (p.9) state

verifies that the applied methodology AMS I.C.v.11 is applicable to the power generation system of the project activity(gas engines).4. Ho

how it verified that the application of the grid emission factor is in line with the applied methodology, ACM0002 version 06, considering th

e default value of flare efficiency is determined by monitoring the number of minutes where the temperature of the exhaust gas is above o
and versioning within and between the document must be correct and accurate.Issue: The version and date of the monitoring report is n

PP state the 26th February asstarting date, while it should be the 22nd February.

ified by DOEs.The PP is requested to provide and the DOE to verify the following information:1. The (monthly and annual) production leve
nd after the recalculation for both baseline and project scenarios, ii) provide details of the data (values, dates ) on the five historical campa
 to ensure the compliance of this request for issuance in accordance with the applicable updated and approved PDD.

ansformer by project proponent". The DOE is required to provide further explanation on how the monitoring has complied with the monit

ABLES" is inconsistent with the amount of ERs claimed in the Monitoring Report in pages 19 and 20.

nt ”due to the project activity (Mfuel,y) is measured from stock changes and delivery. However, the verification report (pg. 30) has validate
d provide information regarding the error identified during the delayed calibration test. Moreover, the DOE/PP shall conservatively deduct

d Period 3? 2. What's the difference between the Graph 9 and its associated table for PT04 Errors in Period 1 and Period 2?
nsibilities of personnel, emergency procedures for the monitoring system, and/or line diagrams showing all relevant monitoring points). (E

EB52- Annex 60 guidelines, while calculating the emission reductions.

progress of the proposed CDM project activity achieved in each phase under verification). (VVM v.1.2 para 198 (a)).Issue: Section 3.2 state
hether GM11592 had a valid calibration when reading was taken at site 21902 on 20 April 2009. If the meter did not have a valid calibratio

nt in the Excel Sheets attachments, Certification Report, Verification Report and Monitoring Report.
er and title of the project activity. 2.Scope: According to EB48 Annex 68 paragraph 9 (e), the number of Certified Emission Reductions (CER

andard for project activities version 1.02: The verification report mentions that calibration for the energy meters were conducted on 29th
 ay 2009). The DOE shall clarify why it has not conducted the verification in accordance with the requirements of paragraph 62 of the Mod

n". Furthermore, according to EB54 Annex 34, section E.1 and E.2, the monitoring report "shall include all formulae used and description to
been done in line with EB52 Annex60. There were also period of time when NAP measurement for plant N1 was not available at all (p25-2

pe: Cross-referencing and versioning within and between the document is not correct and accurate.Issue: The request for issuance for the

onditions are not ensured because they are exposed to higher aeration due to a larger surface area to volume ratio. The PP/DOE shall clari

pproval of changes to the project description as per para 197 of VVM version 01.2 was not required.

ues. 2: Scope: The verification report does not indicate that the information provided in the monitoring report has been cross-checked with

port is version 6 dated 26.6.2014.

aragraph 9. - Verification of the requirement of proper soil application of the compost to ensure aerobic conditions for further decay as pe

nsidering the monitoring plan requires the accuracy of 0.01 kWh for electricity meters and 0.01 Nm3 for gas flow meters, whereas the actu
 information on how it verified that only heavy vehicles delivered the biomass consumed in the project activity for the entire 4 years cover

formation on whether the instrument used to monitor the temperature of the exhaust gas was replaced or calibrated within the frequenc

se a forward action request (FAR) in its verification report as per para 8(c) of the EB 108 meeting report, that requires the project participa

2/2009 and 07/01/2012 –12/01/2012 was adjusted by maximum error of 3% as per EB52, Annex 60". However, the applied adjustment do

n) is reported as 75.5 t CO2/TJ in the monitoring report and emission reductions calculations but as 77.37 in the registered PDD and verific

ST status, thus a conservative manner (by applying the maximum permissible error of the instruments) had been followed on the NCSG an
oxidized in combustion was not used in emission reduction calculation as per the formula stated in registered PDD. Further clarification is r
required to be monitored and/or reported at the intervals required by the monitoring plan and the applied methodology?Issue: The sprea

ereas in the summary page it is stated as "12th monitoring period, 04/11/2014 to 30/06/2016 (both days included)". (b) In "Section H. Certi

fications are required on how the DOE verified the correct number of electricity-meters installed.

y in the cross-referencing of the CER. The project view page refers to emission reduction 610,810 CO2 whereas the rest of the documents s
 f the registered PDD as of 17/08/07.
on conducted in August and September 2006, according to the verified monitoring report in previous verification. Further clarification is re
mong other periods) after it was commissioned. The DOE is required to clarify how it verified the monitoring and calculation of potential p

in the period covered by calibration. According to the EB52 Annex 60, a correction should be made to both the exported (-0.5%) and the i
tered PDD.2: Scope: The spreadsheet does not contain all parameters required to be monitored and/or reported at the intervals required
on reported in the monitoring report page 36 as well as the ACM0001 v18 para 31 equation 2, which is BECH4,y = ((1-OXtop_layer) * FCH4,
d in the monitoring report page 36 as well as the ACM0001 v18 para 31 equation 2, which is BECH4,y = ((1-OXtop_layer) * FCH4,PJ,y –FCH

e reported data with other available data for many monitored parameters such as EGGEN, EGAux, FCi,j,y, EFCO2,i,y The DOE shall docume

E did neither make the "most conservative assumption theoretically possible ”, nor requested a deviation in accordance with VVM v.1.2 pa
biogas flows with the total biogas flow. Further clarification is required as to1) how the DOE verified the amount of biogas used for the em

if any), and/or emission reductions, including reference to formulae and methods used. (EB48 - Annex 68 paragraph 10 (a) (vii))Issue: The

formation on calibration frequency and accuracy of the electricity meters. 2: Scope: The verification report does not provide an assessmen
e Monitoring report have to be conducted as VVS track.

the methodology.
waste or raw material that would decay anaerobically in the absence of the project activity) considering that the methodology requires com

ce wrongly mentioned as 18 February 2011 and once correctly as 2 May 2011. The same applies for the list of CARs, where CAR 3 mention

nsibilities of personnel, emergency procedures for the monitoring system, and/or line diagrams showing all relevant monitoring points). (E

nsibilities of personnel, emergency procedures for the monitoring system, and/or line diagrams showing all relevant monitoring points). (E

e quantity of rice husks (QAF) indicated on monitoring report (page 14) are different from those in the emission calculation spreadsheet (c

he calibration range in the calculation of emission reductions, i.e. the parameters NCSG and VSG. In doing so, the DOE shall provide more

ed appropriate. The DOE should provide the monitored values of flare temperature and operation time.

revised approved monitoring plan, considering: (a) parameter EGExp(Export), as per the revised monitoring plan and monitoring report, i
ied methodology document. (VVM v.1.2 para 208 (c) & 221 (h))Issue: The DOE (VR page 15) states that during the present monitoring peri

erified that the project activity was operated as per the PDD as required by paragraph 196 of the VVM (version 01.2) considering that the

) what was the reason of the outage of the in-line air compressor for 2,965 hours for this monitoring period and 2) how it has validated th
 also questioned the inconsistencies between the values for parameter PGy in the spreadsheet and in the sales receipts. The CAR 12 was c

ticular, whether this new project represent a change in the project design and operation. Please refer to VVM version 01.2 Paragraph 197.
he methane content of the biogas complies with the requirement specified in the monitoring plan.   Please refer to VVM version 01.2 para

However, as per the submitted spreadsheet TAG ¨ER Calculation¨, it is found that: (1) The PEBR has been calculated considering the avera
meters were done once in two years (relevant calibration dates : 05/07/2008 and 15/04/2010) whereas the revised monitoring plan requir

nsibilities of personnel, emergency procedures for the monitoring system, and/or line diagrams showing all relevant monitoring points). (E

is justified when the flare temperature is between 500°C and 850°C is in accordance with the revised monitoring plan which does not spec
how the DOE closed the FAR2 considering that one stand-by coal fired boiler can generate steam for future monitoring period.

toring plan, approved by the UNFCCC on 17/02/2010." Further information is required by the DOE as the monitoring plan contained the r

tion for the equipment(s) measuring cullet %.

e reading per day. 2. The validation report (p 10) raised NIR 13 regarding the determination of historical annual heat generation from firin

ead sheet (generation sheet).

sidered in the calculation was cross-checked with the equipment installed at the site …” Other Issues3. The monitoring report shall contai
calculation.
of the project activity) related to heat generation in page 14 of the Verification Report; b) how the PP/DOE carried out the annual energy b

ored. However, these two parameters are missing from the monitoring report.2: Scope: The verification report does not list each paramete

xamples in the appendix below, the DOE may conclude its verification, provided the following conservative approach is adopted in the calc

progress of the proposed CDM project activity achieved in each phase under verification). (VVS v2, para 228 (a)) Scope: The verification rep
ter “total amount of landfill gas captured/measured (LFGtotal,y) ”the monitoring report (page 25) indicates a measured value of 257,162,3
 mount of CER as 16,674.2.Scope: According to EB48 Annex 68 paragraph 9(e), cross-referencing and versioning within and between the d
ibilities of personnel, emergency procedures for the monitoring system, and/or line diagrams showing all relevant monitoring points). (EB4

y ”. The DOE is requested to clarify how it verified that the monitoring has been conducted in accordance with the approved monitoring pl

ates that a DOE may only conduct verification activities after it has made the monitoring report publicly available. The DOE shall clarify why

nt is not correctly indicated.

s required prior to the next request for issuance.

 ficates provided in the verification report. Please clarify when each of the production lines started commercial operation and why the regi

on report contains this information. Further clarification is required.2. The monitoring report stated that meter for net electricity exported

hether the calibration of measuring equipment was conducted at a frequency specified in the applied monitoring methodology, EB guidan

Waxy Residue fuel oil to natural gas at Gangnam branch Korea District Heating Corporation Project", PDD: "Switching of fuel from Low Sulp
ng COD ww,untreated and COD ww, treated (VR page 13) is not the same that is explained by the PP in the MR (page 13, footnote 3). The

g Report.2: Scope: The verification report does not provide a conclusion on the verified amount of emission reductions achieved and/or de
e monitoring periods (VVS v2, para 228 (c))Issue: From the previous incompleteness raised on 23/05/2013 the PP/DOE have not responde
oject activity as 5851 CO2, where as according to the submitted documents the total CO2 should be 5846 CO2.2.Scope: According to EB48

red PDD. This was checked and verified from power source/ plants for the OM and confirmed there is no change in plant name". The VR a

C and was found as a part of the internal audit. However the DOE is requested to provide further information on the 1. Reason for change
 for EG(gross, project plant,y) and EG(Aux, project plant,y) were delayed (page 14 and page 16/17 of the monitoring report) and EB 52 Ann

ibilities of personnel, emergency procedures for the monitoring system, and/or line diagrams showing all relevant monitoring points). (EB4

version of the monitoring report, the certification and the verification report, ie. 06 Apr 2010.

ed in line with methodology requirement (i.e. Local or national data should be preferred. Default values from the IPCC may be used alte

onsistent with the amount of CER requested.2.Scope: According to the EB 48, Annex 68, paragraph 10 (a) vii, the Monitoring Report conta

ied methodology document. (VVM v.1.2 para 208 (c) & 221 (h))The DOE has not informed how the periods of time when the flares were n
nsibilities of personnel, emergency procedures for the monitoring system, and/or line diagrams showing all relevant monitoring points). (E

formation on calibration of monitoring instruments used for monitoring the net calorific value of charcoal fines in line with EB48 - Annex 6

of equipments used to monitor the following parameters: M11 Percentage of methane in the biogas at biodigester outlet, M15 Fraction o
used for the calculation of the baseline emission.

the monitoring methodology in case of enclosed flares.2: Scope: The verification report does not list each parameter required by the mon
arameter daily consumption of combustion air in primary reformer (furnace), whereas the methodology requires the metering the energy
ethodology. (VVM v.1.2 para 200, 203 & 221(d))Issue: The applied methodology requires calculating the energy savings using the metered

AT, INDIA" instead although the correct project title is: “12 MW Bundled Wind Power project in Tenkasi, Tamilnadu ”.2.Scope: According t
nsibilities of personnel, emergency procedures for the monitoring system, and/or line diagrams showing all relevant monitoring points). (E

7% from 2007 to 2010 and the highest actual data is applied for the change. Please clarify. 2)The DOE is requested to clarify how it has det

s of 13 sites of the project activity.

ied methodology document. (VVM v.1.2 para 208 (c) & 221 (h))Issue: In the calculation of the actual average of HFC 23/ HCFC 22 to calcula
The submitted PDD is version 2 dated 30.12.2012.
nsibilities of personnel, emergency procedures for the monitoring system, and/or line diagrams showing all relevant monitoring points). (E

is missing, and (ii) the headings used for the parameters "HOT OIL FLOW RATE (MT/HR)" RUNNING HOURS" "Specific Heat (kJ/kg/C)" are m
PDD as per VVM v. 01.2 (para 196 & 197) and clarify why a request for notification/change in PDD has not been submitted prior to the req

l and steel plant exceeded 40% during the last three years, as compared to the 7,008 hours/yr of operating hours and 20% of electricity e
ort and submitted signed form. Kindly address this inconsistency.

as compared to the PDD estimate, considering that the overall emission reductions well exceed the PDD estimates (by about 8%) while se
wever, this figure was not mentioned in the PDD. Further, the PDD specifies 70% plant capacity factor, while the actual capacity factors we

curacy of the equipment used to measure the methane content in the biogas is 3 % for methane contents above 15 %.
be 171,052.2.Scope: According to EB48 Annex 68 paragraph 9(e), cross-referencing and versioning within and between the document is co

nsibilities of personnel, emergency procedures for the monitoring system, and/or line diagrams showing all relevant monitoring points). (E

t the calibration is still valid up to 30/04/2008.

umption theoretically possible has been made.Issue: The verification report states that between 18/12/2012 and 15/01/2013 there was n

vative approach for the delayed calibration of the steam flow meter for the months of May and June 2011. However, the DOE is required

stimation of tree volume are sourced from the Guangxi forest inventory manual, and are appropriate based on the A/R Methodological To
e grid was 236.625 MWh.ii)For December 2008, 551.375 MWh of electricity was exported to the grid while the plant was running was a p

e should report the correct methodology title (AMS-I.D) in the Monitoring Report

st. please refer to PCP v 2.0 para 189.

tification report/project view page (2,649,682 CO2). Please note that as stated by you in responding to minor issue raised in response to th
ified by DOEs.The PP is requested to provide and the DOE to verify the following information:1. The (monthly and annual) production leve

d to the entire monitoring period; and c) the DOE confirmed that the difference of monthly measurements between the invoices issued by

l equipment.

ation frequency of biogas flow meters complies with paragraph 17 (c) of the General Guidelines to SSC methodologies (EB 61 Annex 21).

fication/Requesting approval of changes from the project activity states that the changes were effective from 13th August 2008 (Page 1). G
urs). However, the CERs calculation spreadsheet only includes the value of FE for each month during the MP. It is not included an explanati

ified all of the data, as the VR (p.10) states that there

“ were verified 33% of the available data and all were in accordance with the monito
the verification report does not provide an assessment on why: (a) in the calculation of the baseline emissions the volume of biogas used
iogas Check gas portable gas analyser is according to the specifications for the equipment by the supplier (i.e. 0.5% for methane contents

y ”, the PP explained that the Import Energy meter is under the custody of MSEDCL, and DLHPPL has no access to meter and therefore the

eport, details of four energy meters such as the model type and serial numbers are reported. However, information provided in Section D

ibilities of personnel, emergency procedures for the monitoring system, and/or line diagrams showing all relevant monitoring points). (EB4

3 and source 4 are 1% and 0.075% respectively in the PDD, while they are 0.1% and 0.75% in the verification report. The DOE/PP shall clar

of "PEflare,y - inefficiencies in flare"2: Scope: The verification report does not contain reference to the revision of monitoring plan request

, there has been a revised monitoring plan that was approved on 04-10-2009. The DOE shall provide information on how it verified the pr
ersion submitted is version 03. Please also note that in the submitted Monitoring Report version 03, there is an error on pages 12, 15 and 1

evel calculation. However, no explanation was provided on why the values of CH4 between the files are different - for example, for site 242
sents in DOE ’s opinion good monitoring practice even if less than what was specified in the monitoring plan. The secretariat has noted tha
ow it confirmed that the monitoring has been conducted in accordance with the monitoring plan. Please refer to VVM version 01.2 paragr

he designated operational entity contracted by the project participants to perform verification shall make the monitoring report publicly a

rocedures will provide an accuracy with a + ½ percent uncertainty range."However, the Verification Report (pages  9 and 11) states:a) "The

rate curve with an uncertainty range of less than + 1 percent" and regarding the methane gas analyzer, that "The equipment and test pro

ording to EB48 Annex 68 paragraph 8(b) a spreadsheet containing emission reduction calculation must be submitted with a request for iss

s been included for emission reduction calculations;3. That only 3173 Nm3/day of biogas would have been destroyed in boiler –
1 in absen

ssion Reductions (CERs), shall be broken down for the respective commitment period. Reference to EB 62 meeting report para 71.Issue:Th

g plan, the parameters is calculated.2: Scope: The verification report does not describe the implementation status of the project. (For proje

particular the DOE is requested to expliain in detail what the impact of these higher production levels would have been on the assessment

nthly basis (PDD, page 15) Please refer to paragraph 184 (b) (iv) and paragraph 216 of the VVM v.1.2, and EB 52 Annex 60.

s registered with the methodology AMS-I.D. ver. 8. Kindly address this inconsistency and its related impact on information throughout the

lity of the project activity was demonstrated by means of a benchmark analysis and that neither the sensitivity analysis nor the financial
een submitted with a request for issuance.Issue: The verification report submitted refers to a different monitoring period.3.Scope: A certifi

monitoring plan (page 19-22) and the methodology AM0001 v3 (page 7 to 9) require data to be recorded/reported monthly. Kindly provid

result of the deviation. Please refer to paragraph 283 of the VVS for PA version 3.0.The project participants applied the proposed arrange

equests for registration/issuance submitted under the VVM Track before 31 January 2013 but “kicked out ”from the process resulting from
hile the PP indicates that the frequency of manufacturer recalibation is every 6 months (p.13 of monitoring report). Clarification is require
average emision reduction in the registered PDD of 26,499 tCO2e, the estimated CERs would be even lower at 24,176 and the increase w
eekly. Further clarification is required on 1) how the DOE closed the FAR; and 2) how the DOE verified that the reported emission reductio

annually for manufacturer calibration. Clarification is required.

equest for issuance.

monthly) from January 1, 2000 to present; 3. Record of amounts not sold (monthly), if any, and account for any unsold amount; 4. Deman
e verification report as well as the CER spread sheet transport and CER sheet (267.45). Please address this issue accordingly.

diesel electricity generators operational time (Hdiesel) and Biomass steam boiler operational time (Hbiomass), meters will be subject to re

nd the ±5% range of re verified name plate capacity. 2. The DOE is requested to correct the date of issue of verification report i.e. 31/12/2

AR (Forward Action Request), indicating that the monitoring of these  two parameters will be included in a post-registration change reques

on report) while the PP indicates that the frequency of manufacturer recalibration is every 6 months (p.13 of monitoring report). Clarificati

s 281,501 CO2.2.Scope: The submitted documentation are dated prior to the date of request for issuance submission.Issue: Signed form is

ot contain information on all CARs, CLs and FARs and/or provide an assessment and close out of any CARs, CLs or FARs issued. (VVM v.1.2

ubmitted.2.Scope: The submitted documentation are dated prior to the date of request for issuance submission.Issue:The Certification Rep

als EGgross –EGaux –EGimport. However, from the ER spreadsheet it is observed that the values of EGBL are not calculated values and th
mple: 19 May 2008, 31 May 2008, 14 Jul 2008, 25 April 2009, 28 June 2009, 30 Aug 2009); 2) the PP shall correct cell X17 from the MER sp

ame plate capacity, since the data for the days when the production is below 95% of the nominal output of BTX is included.
report to contain the acutal monitoring values for the parameters of the monitoring plan.2: Scope: The spreadsheet does not contain all p
ecords of all the meters covered for the entire monitoring period of 02 Sep 08 - 30 Jun 11.2: Scope: The verification report does not provid

period would remain same. However, the quantity of steam increased considerably from 42,287 tons in base year 2000-01 to 74,392 tons

v.1.2 para 196)Issue: It was observed that: 1) the type of alternative fuels (i.e. Murner, NEG, Paddy husk, wood chips, coco chips and SBE)

on site visit that the value of the grid emission factor (0.834 tCO2/MWh) is appropriate considering that this value was not mentioned in t

fied by DOEs.The PP is requested to provide and the DOE to verify the following information:1. The (monthly and annual) production leve
 fied by DOEs.The PP is requested to provide and the DOE to verify the following information:1. The (monthly and annual) production leve

elay: 31/03/2017. ”The DOE is required to provide further information on how it verified the application considering that 1) the appendix 6

sed on amount of steam used in project turbine (G3) and the project boiler efficiency. The project boiler efficiency is calculated based on t

ates "Installed capacity: 660 kVA with 0.8 power factor (660 * 0.8 = 528 kW)". The PP is required to correct the inconsistency of the installe
 hich has a different date from the MR uploaded on the view page (6.9.12)

ation report p.26) that for the natural gas flow meters with delayed calibration the maximum permissible error has been applied in a cons

D.2, two frequencies of calibration (i.e. yearly and valid for 18 months). The correct calibration frequency must be in accordance with guida

n D.2, two frequencies of calibration (i.e. yearly and valid for 18 months). The correct calibration frequency must be in accordance with gu

e the monitoring report states that energy contribution share of natural gas and naphtha fuel in total energy is 82.89% and 17.11%. Furthe

, 284 (e)).Issue: The DOE is requested to clarify how it has verified the correctness of the operating margin calculation provided in the CER
m (F-CDM-MR -)has not been submitted with a request for issuance.Issue: No post-registration changes are mentioned in the monitoring re

he month. 2) Why there were no meter reading changes on the date (11 June 2008) when the calibration for all the meters (generation m

biogas flow meters and Bacharach Fyrite gas analyzers complies with paragraph 17 (c) of the General Guidelines to SSC methodologies (EB
phical schemes) showing all relevant monitoring points. Please refer to “CDM project standard for project activities ”version 1.0, paragrap

note that the above mentioned PDD has not been approved by the Board in accordance with the procedures of request for Post Registra

on of the manufacturer of the equipment, choosing the most conservative values. ”Further clarification is required on how the DOE verifie

ecked against meter readings, the data with ten places of decimal should not have appeared in the spreadsheet.

ommunicationCARS (remote monitoring system)" occurred.

ctions or net anthropogenic GHG removals conservatively using the approach mentioned in paragraph 366 above (paragraph 369 of VVS fo
er the requirements of para. 260 (b) of the CDM Project Standard for Project Activities version 02.0.

ease refer to EB 68, Annex 43 available under: https://cdm.unfccc.int/Reference/Notes/Reference/Notes/reg/reg_note43.pdf

on the electricity generation that was estimated prior to the PRC and therefore the additionality and; c) how the proposed change in the L
e refer to VVS paragraph 365 and 371. 2: The DOE shall note that the Verification Opinion section (p.24 in the Verification Report) mention
changes would have been known prior to the registration of the CDM project activity as per the paragraph 309 (b) of VVS for PA version 3.

there is electricity generated by the project activity that is supplied to the grid; (ii) whether the electricity to the HZL mining complex is su

t third party, whereas the actual calibration has been conducted every two years. b) There is a lack of information about the "actual errors
paragraph 355 of VVS for PA version 2).The DOE states (p 6) that "The commission date of the Solar Power plant was verified from the com

culated while 1) the DOE (p 15) verified that WCH4 is the average weighted by hourly flow rates of LFG and that "raw data" sheet of the sp

The monitoring report states that "At project start, meter 1 and meter 2 were installed at the main distribution 30 kV delivery point and m

oning based on daily generation values; (b) How the use of invoice value for the baseline emission calculation for period 1/12/20-31/12/20

g period", considering this monitoring period is the first of the project activity.

and applied alternative measures of validation in place of mandatory on-site inspections. The DOE states that the location of the project a

ovide further information on this discrepancy between the verification report and the submitted spreadsheet.2: The DOE states that the si
f changes (PRC) to the secretariat through a dedicated interface on the UNFCCC CDM website. 2.Validation report for post-registration cha

Analysis ”); •Three excel calculation files were mentioned in Verification Report (page 4) i.e. “10236 Sogamoso 2019-2020_CER_BM_Janu

used to determine "LFG Methane fraction (%)". However, there is no explanation what this parameter is and why it is used in the calculati

h 309(b) of VVS-PA: The validation report for PRC does not contain anassessment on when the changes occurred, reasons for these chang
port has not specified the source of the woody biomass and the DOE has not provided information on how it has verified the woody bioma
-registration changes is missing.3.Scope: According to PCP version 9 para 161(c), PS version 9 para 270 a revised PDD (in both clean and tr

r of baseline trees, ii) total number of possible sample plots with the project boundary, iii) relative weight of the area of stratum i, and iv)

on reductions or net anthropogenic GHG removals: (a) Applying the maximum permissible error 39 of the instrument to the measured val

ments (monitoring report and ER sheet) are not consistent, e.g. (1) for species Lagerstroemia
“ parviflora ”: (a) the formula described in pa

calibration dates and the comparison between the delayed calibration and the maximum permissible error of the instruments.2: The verifi

tion report (p 27-29) indicates that HPU 05976 (Main meter) & HPU05977 (Check meter) were calibrated on 03/01/2020 and 10/11/2020 a

ework was submitted by 28 March 2018 and is resubmitted on or after 29 March 2018 after the completeness check or the information an

culating GHG emission reductions or net anthropogenic GHG removals. Where data are measured continuously, they shall be presented u

ata and calculations of GHG emission reductions achieved by from the registered CDM project activity. For Jan to Oct 2016, in the cells of E

ropriate and same was confirmed with service provider during verification remote audit & interviews for PRC validation." The DOE is requi

whether the actual error is beyond the maximum permissible error as per VVS for PA para 366 (b) and; (3) How the delayed calibration of
y based on deduction of the EGimport (column L) and it has not included the deduction of the EGLosses,y (column O) for the monitoring p

ring the auxiliary consumption, the DOE stated in the verification report that since result of delayed calibration is within permissible limit o

t for the stakeholder consultation conducted after the publication of the first monitoring report, the DOE shall take due account of all auth

the monitoring report (p 18-19, 20) indicates that the measuring frequency of FCH4, j/FCH4, z/ is "At least once per monitoring period" an
ays at K-523 from 15/05/2017 to 16/12/2017 and from 19/11/2020 to 25/11/2020. The DOE is require to provide further information on h

tted. Please note that if you wish to submit a post-registration change along with this request you must submit the relevant post-registrati

ification/certification report.2.Scope: Cross-referencing and versioning within and between the document is not correct and accurate.Issu
m the grid to each project power plant .”However, there is a lack of information in the MR/VR to confirm whether the auxiliary consumptio
354 of VVS for project activities (version 02.0).3: Parameter EGi,j,y as per the meth/PDD is "Quantity of electricity supplied to the recipient

2018. In addition, the PDD refers on page 63 to proposed temporary deviation from “March 2015 to May 2018 .3.Scope:
” The cross-referen
the current monitoring period, 1 January 2018 to 30 June 2019, ex-post OM is calculated with the SIN electricity data generated in 2018.

nts used in conformity with the requirements as the delay in calibration was applied only for the apportioning procedures for the month o

ular EFsimple,OM,y, is in line with the Tool to calculate the emission factor for an electricity system version 3. For ex-post option of simple
Kindly clarify.3.The track change version of PDD version 5.1 is missing. Kindly clarify. 4.Scope: According to PCP for Project Activities para 1

rated only on 15/02/2017 and 16/02/2017 (for U-1854). The DOE is therefore requested to clarify how it has confirmed that the error has

fication report documents refer to three changes due to sampling framework as permanent change; stratification factors (tree age and pla

brated between period 01/08/2013 to 23/03/2015 as no details on calibration have been provided in the monitoring report or the verifica
was not submitted. 2.Scope: A spreadsheet containing emission reduction calculation has not been submitted with a request for issuance a

sue: Page 57 of the revised PDD describes energy meters of Me1

“ ,” Me2A
“ ,” Me2B
“ ,” Me2D
“ ,” Me3A
“ ”and Me3B
“ ”in the monitoring sys
whole monitoring period (04/04/2013-30/04/2016). However, the unit for the parameters (p 8-10) is "MWh/annum". Please rectify the inc

ssues, to analyze system-wide gaps and improve classification ”and the weighted rating is zero
“ ”for the DOE performance.
alibration test or confirmation that the results of the delayed calibration do not show any errors or the error is smaller than the maximum

mission reductions have been correctly calculated and claimed for the period of 11/03/2013 to 13/06/2013, especially considering that the

E has validated that a default value of 0.5 has been applied by the parameter CCshrub.i as per AR-AM Tool 14. However, as per AR-AM Too

C changes between the project view page (changes to the project or programme design) and the monitoring report, verification/certificatio

forward action request (FAR) in its verification report as per para 8(c) of the EB 108 meeting report, that requires the project participants t

curate.Issue:The MR submitted is version 7 dated 17.10.16, however the VCR reports on page 4 indicated the date of the MR as 27.05.16 a
cuments refer to (1. changes to the start date of the crediting period, 2. permanent changes from registered monitoring plan, monitoring
MR meter reading charges is negative. Also, as per page 14 and 15 of the verification report, cross checking was not possible for that perio
cation report does not determine if the assumptions used in emission calculations have been justified and/or emission factors, default val

er EGexport,PP in the spreadsheet for period 02 Jan 2013 to 31 Jan 2013 (cell C8 of sheet "CER Calculation").
ion 2 since E.10. Global stakeholder consultation in the verification report (p 17) states "Not applicable for the present monitoring period"

14) states that " A delayed calibration is observed for energy meters and weighbridge used. Delayed calibration is addressed in line with p
WTG electricity exports/imports data is sourced from the JMR whereas the monitoring report (page 7) indicates that the data will be from a

ntain information on how the DOE verified these data value as per the paragraph 372 of VVS-PA ver. 3.
required to ensure that GHG emission reductions or net anthropogenic GHG removals will not be over-estimated as a result of the deviatio
at for the stakeholder consultation conducted after the publication of the first monitoring report, the DOE shall take due account of all au

ctions for filling out the monitoring report form which requires to provide the approval date and reference number in cases where the pos
ctions for filling out the monitoring report form which requires to provide the approval date and reference number in cases where the pos

uired quarterly
“ ”sampling of W(steam, co2) and W(steam, CH4) have been established consistently through the averaging of the sampling

the monitoring report is in accordance with that stated in the registered PDD in particular for measurement device for parameter PPJ,y. T
it checked the KenGen Lab reports, confirmed that the maximum values measured during the monitoring period were applied for the seco

rt form in line with PS version 9 para 260.Issue: 1. The submitted IRR spreadsheet contains information which are not in English. 2. The tra

rt form in line with PS version 9 para 260.Issue: 1. The submitted IRR spreadsheet contains information which are not in English. 2. The tra

be determined considering the annual average historical net electricity generation delivered to the grid by the existing renewable energy

d for this project.

nd track changes version) shall be submitted.Issue:4.Scope: According to PCP version 9 para 161(f) supplemental documentation(e.g. emi

eter table 2 which requires the monitoring frequency as To

“ be updated whenever the distance changes .2:
” The registered PDD (page 6) id
 ct activity; e) the scale of the project activity, as per PS version 09.0 paragraph 292. 2: Scope: The revised PDD does not contain details on

meter for periods where verification period dates and billing cycle dates (JMR dates) do not coincide. The DOE is therefore requested to cla
hical coordinates of the dam and the powerhouse are east longitude 103.7808°and north latitude 33.6131° and east longitude 103.9206°an

arison with estimated emission reductions in the PDD, given the fact that only 50% of the installed capacity was in operation during the cu
ervoir volume from 50,000 to 53,463 m3, the DOE states that "the power density remains far below the 4W/m2." The DOE is requested to
onsidered under the current monitoring period. If the SIC website value is for the full month of December, the DOE/PP shall clarify how th

documentation is not consistent.Issue: Please note that page 1 of the verification/certification report should mention the monitoring peri
erational hours will be verified with the diesel purchase receipts. However, no information on this cross-check has been provided in the m

). The DOE is required to raise a forward action request (FAR) in its verification report as per para 8(c) of the EB 108 meeting report, that r
he average technical transmission and distribution losses for providing electricity to the grid "in year y", and this parameter is used to calcu

his gravity correction factor to the monitored Vf,y values. However, the Vf,y values reported in the cells B10-B12 (i.e. the monitored value
nitoring report does not contain the implementation status of the project (including a brief description of the installed technology and/or
allocated by a process code; e.g. PRC-8599-1. Therefore, it is important to submit both, processes using the web interfaces available to th

Wh in total) and sales invoice values (50,500,595 kWh in total) during this monitoring period ”and Regarding
“ the value of electricity impo
le (Kasari SHP & Dhom SHP). Please refer to the PS-PA ver. 03 paragraph 258.

Wh in total) and sales invoice values (48,804,719 kWh in total) during this monitoring period ”and Regarding
“ the value of electricity impo

party sale. However, the as shown in the revised PDD section B.7.1 and page 63, and the Verification Report page 18, the QA/QC procedu
uipped with a flow meter, only two out of four pipelines are equipped with gas analyzers. However, the DOE/PP has not provided the met

een 13/08/2017 and 18/08/2017. However, there is no assessment in the Verification Report on how the requirements from paragraphs 3
on E.4.1 and monitoring report on page 4 section B.2.1 refer to post-registration changes "Temporary deviations" however, no PRC is subm

export value per invoice for Feb 2016, Dec 2016, Aug 2017 and Jan 2019 is lower than the JMR value. The DOE is requested to explain how
 be conducted. The registered monitoring plan states that If“ CIE data is not available, local fuel test sheets will be applied. Eventually if no

ere were no reported temperature values, i.e. "-", in the column G (ID29 Thermocouples). The DOE is required to provide further informati

y. 2. There is an inconsistency in the cross referencing of the version and completion date of the ER spreadsheet. The validation report for
14 - 06/12/2014, during which electricity import and export have been measured not in accordance with the registered monitoring plan a
Guizhou Province China" (8341).

sampling survey, the DOE needs to explain why the value of the parameter for year 2013 in this monitoring period is not the same as the v
oordinating/managing entity; (b) Change of accuracy/type/model of meter(s) as per a power purchase agreement (PPA); or (c) Change of

ver. 3)The monitoring plan requires the monitoring of combined margin CO2 emission factor for grid connected power generation as per

e not correct and accurate.Issue: The submitted documentation refers to a Monitoring Report version 3.6, dated 8 November, 2013. Howe
8 (a)) Scope: The verification report does not describe the reasons for the phased-implementation delay and/or does not present the expe

WEG)" listed as one of the monitored parameters in the registered PDD has not been reported in the monitoring report and verification re

ogy, which states in

“ the absence of local allometric equations, if allometric equations developed from biome-wide data are considered, s
relevant monitoring points). (PS v07 para 250)Issue: The MR (p. 7) states that the
“ project has two collection lines and shares the same tra
idation and verification standard for project activities"(VVS-PA) and ii) "If the site visits cannot be postponed, a proper justification should

ase note that if you wish to submit a post-registration change along with this request you must submit the relevant post-registration chan

s maximum error has been correctly applied as the ER sheet shows that the applied error is 0.2 (or 20%).
to verify that the size and frequency of sampling are statistically significant with a maximum uncertainty range of 20% at a 95% confidenc
and between the document are not correct and accurate.Issue: The verification/certification report refers to the monitoring report version

ty generation data on monthly basis, from 1st of a month till the 1st of the consecutive month, reports the electricity generation in March
not provide a statement on whether post-registration changes to the registered PDD have been approved by the Board or will be submitte
ts of the biogas are combusting biogas and how many are flaring biogas, as well as the corresponding monitoring points. In accordance wi

1 of PS version. 5. Furthermore, please note that the excel spreadsheet of ER calculation is required for PRC submission.

hanges from monitoring plan and corrections.

age 27 of AM0025, v.12): the size and frequency of sampling should be statistically significant with a maximum uncertainty range of 20% a
relevant monitoring points). (PS v1 para 190)The PP/DOE has not reported the locations of exported electricity meter and imported electr
t template version approved by the Board. Please refer to VVS Ver. 7, para. 81, EB67 Annex 4 para 11 (c) available at (http://cdm.unfccc.in

ontroller, i, feeder) as measured at common metering point at substation using formula provided in section B.7.3 of the PDD. EG export, p
he methane capture system, particularly the wells and piping system.3: Paragraph 260(b) of PS and paragraphs 365-366 of VVS-PA: The DO

Based on these information, the DOE is to provide the verification opinions on the verification report. 3: The submitted spreadsheet (TAG
project participants or coordinating/ managing entity (e.g. commitment/ timeline as per the validation or verification contract, CER delive

y. The DOE is required to provide its verification opinion against the correct requirement of the VVS for the verification ; and 2) The verifica
cuments submitted for post-registration changes. Kindly clarify.2.Scope: The number of Certified Emission Reductions (CERs), within and b
will be estimated ex post, as described in Tool
“ to calculate the emission factor for an electricity system .2:
” Scope: The verification report d

e of calibration and the actual date of calibration. In particular, the DOE is requested to explain how it has verified that the error factor has
version 01.0).
ating that "This is the applicable HT tariff thus maximum value that can be received by the PP for sale to third party." The DOE is required t
Also, as per paragraph 359 (c) of the VVS-PA (version 1.0), the DOE shall report the information (data and variables) provided in the monito
ectric power which is below the 15MW limit for small scale CDM projects. It uses a renewable source of energy, such as small hydro electri

ated till the 08 January 2017; however, this 3rd monitoring period as indicated in the monitoring report ends on 31 Dec 2016. It is not clear

project owner to take the monthly imported electricity amount as pre-agreed amount instead of monitored amount .”However, the VR (pg
d 796 biogas units. The DOE is required to provide further information on how it verified (i) the introduced biogas stoves and (ii) that the b

o: (a) clarify the number of meters installed and transmission lines for each of these sites; (b) provide the single line diagrams in the monit

B 106 meeting report and the appendix 3 of the verification report included ERPA
“ ”as reference 17 which did not include any date . ”
ng that the proposed revision of monitoring plan specifies that the project owner has no right to calibrate the meter VIITangcun which is u
states that there were the missing invoices in the month January, February & July. The DOE is required to provide further information on h
or the part of the monitoring period of 09/05/2012-31/12/2012. In accordance with paragraphs 59, 61 and 64 of the annex to decision 3/C
However, there is no request for post-registration submitted with the issuance request. Kindly clarify.
tail gas] contains negative values (e.g. cell references H14006, H14007 & H14008, and AG14006, AG14007 & AG14008) which have been in
5. of the verification and certification report does not mention the approval date.2.Scope: According to PCP for Project Activities para 196

ect view page (106,114 CO2) and the rest of the documents submitted (160,114 CO2).
report (page 39) states the grid emission factor to be 0.7707 tCO2e/MWh. The DOE shall determine and explain whether appropriate grid

61 of the PDD) states that the amount of clinker produced is calculated based on the monitored raw material intake in the kiln and the cl

istency.2: Scope: The verification report does not list each parameter required by the monitoring plan and does not provide an statement
nternational standards. The DOE is requested to provide information on how it has verified the compliance of the monitoring plan with the
is requested to further explain how the calibration of fuel dispensers covers the entire first monitoring period, as: (i) SN 64769 and SN 647

pe: The monitoring period throughout the documentation are not consistent.Issue: Page 2 of the MR as well as the Certification report and

strate the compliance with the monitoring frequency.

relevant monitoring points). (PS v7 para 250)Issue: The MR (pg. 7) and the VR (pg. 10) have provided the monitoring diagram which indica

eported information of the following parameters in line with project standard version 09.0, paragraph 248: (a) The source and the fate in t
ed meters in Tamil Nadu (i.e. Serial numbers TN905613, TN905614, TN905615, TN905611, TN905619, TN905621, TN905622, TN905623, T

urement data. However, the monitoring report does not provide information on biomass procurement data, and the results of cross-chec
ge from the registered monitoring plan (as also mentioned in section 3.2 of the verification report). The DOE validation opinion on the PRC

biogas plants sizes have been considered when picking up the samples following such provision in the sampling plan; (b) In the verificatio
biogas plants sizes have been considered when picking up the samples following such provision in the sampling plan; (b) In the verificatio
ant data sets together with traceable calculation, which should demonstrate the compliance with the relevant versions of the "tool to calc

d average was used for the calculation of OM as the ex-ante CER calculation at the time of registration (file 5239
“ CER Calculation )”shows
for all parameter is within the limit of 10%. However, neither the monitoring report, verification report or the ER sheet provides the figure
not consistent.Issue: The monitoring period in the Validation Opinion is incorrect on page 2.4.Scope: The cross-referencing and versioning

raph 4 or paragraph 5). If the change falls under paragraph 4, the DOE is requested to explain how the adjustment due to the difference in
020 ”(emission reduction spreadsheet; B76). The DOE is required to provide correct intervals for the I-REC issuance which were excluded fr

r which no explanation has been provided.2: Scope: The verification report does not describe the implementation status of the project.Iss
8 (a)) Scope: The verification report does not describe the reasons for the phased-implementation delay and/or does not present the expe

ation contracts, if needed, in line with EB 106 meeting report para. 26 (b).The DOE stated that the site visit for this project activity was not

g equipments was conducted at a frequency specified in applied monitoring methodology or EB guidance if applicable, and/or the monitor
e Project Standards.2: Scope: The validation opinion does not contain information on how the DOE validated that the changes from the re
oval by the EB, as contained in Appendix 1 from the Project Standard.

ODww,discharge,PJ,y "the number of samples conducted by the project proponent is insufficient to meet 90/10 confidence level". Howeve

ng period to which the deviation is applicable. The DOE shall provide more information why they have considered this Post Registration Ch
ary_ER_Sheet 2012-13" includes the values from the column J6 to J20 of "Electricity Data" and "EGPJ,y"in the sheet of "Summary_ER_Shee

d the provisions of Appendix 1 of Project Standard apply to those corrections. (VVS v2 para 248).Issue: DOE shall provide a validation opnio

ich are not included in the appendix 1 of project standard. Further clarification is required by the DOE on 1) how it verified the change as p
ourced from the IPCC Table 4.13" by closing CAR 09. However, the wood density for each species for GHG removals calculation in working

There is an inconsistency of project title between the monitoring report/certification/verification report/revised PDD/Assessment opinion/

afforestation or reforestation project activity and further the revised PDD (v8) section B6.4 includes the changes of ex ante estimations of

s routinely assessed." It is not clear how and why is illegal cultivation, illegal cutting of trees and the patrol personnel supporting the illega

s for 101.14 % of the estimated 409,083 tCO2e emission reductions in the registered PDD considering an estimated 8,749 leaks. The VR (p

d conclusions as to whether: i)The project activity has been implemented and operated in accordance with the registered PDD or any app

. 24) _ measured by the sampled users (i.e. sampled

“ users would note the daily usage time for the solar cooker ).” The PP/DOE are reques
. 24) _ measured by the sampled users (i.e. sampled
“ users would note the daily usage time for the solar cooker ).” The PP/DOE are reques
th conference call with DOE/AIE coordination forum, para 17 -https://cdm.unfccc.int/extranet/OE/teleconference/cc16_mr.pdf
able,m-1) ”of Oct 14 2014 is reported as 1587 tCOD/month in ER spreadsheet fT,y
“ ”cell J12, this is not consistent with the number used fo
nerated during the most recent three years (EGhistoric, 3yr) has been reported as follows: i) 98,960.4 MWh in the revised PDD (pages 41/8

2017 are for the new meters. The DOE is requested to explain how this approach is in accordance with paragraph 366 of VVS-PA, as there
thermore, the previous monitoring period ended on 10/01/2012, whereas the current monitoring period also started on 10/01/2012.

in line with the PDD and version 2 of tool Project

“ emissions from flaring .”The PDD and the tool require the determination of flare efficie
f PCP-PA, version 2.0, is that for temporarily deviation the project participants are not required to prepare a revised PDD, but shall describ

alue of transmission loss by applying maximum permissible error of the meter for the concerning month as per § 238 of VVS. The verificati

e distributed over three strata. Thus, the number of plots and the number of strata mentioned in the VR are not consistent with these num
 2.6., dated 7 June, 2011. The DOE is kindly requested to clearly display dates and versioning of the registered PDD (2.6.1) and revised PDD

viewed the calibration certificates dated 08/06/2009 and 20/07/2011. The PP has applied a 2% discount for the generation between 15/0

lete set of data for the specified monitoring period is available. If only partial data are available because activity levels or non-activity para

hting the formulae of emission reduction calculation whereas the actual calculation did not include it. Please refer to Paragraph 208 (c) of V

preadsheet does not demonstrate this procedure of deduction as: (i) Values under column C, D and E in worksheet "Baseline Emissions" ar

eter reading for M11. As per the verification report, the value is cross checked using total invoice for Electricity export issued by the EVN f

or survival i,j,k ,” Area

“ cleaningi,j,k ”and etc. However, the monitoring report does not contain annex 3.2: Scope: The verification and certi
t still change as the current information is based on planning data and projections. These are constantly updated based on the actual expe
m (total reductions 609,566 CO2, reductions for 2012 (0) and for 2013 (609,566 CO2)) and the rest of the documents submitted ((total redu
) the amount which should be deducted from the total amount for the current monitoring period. Please revise the documents and the pr

other clusters of the other projects; (4) The four main meters also known as revenue meter at Wind World (India) Limited substation at Sad
evant monitoring points). (EB48 - Annex 68 paragraph 10 (a) (ii) & EB 54 Annex 34).Issue: The PP is requested to provide details of the orga

adsheet are not independent variables but linked to the data reading records cells. For example, regarding the period 26/01/2013-25/02/2
n of power density 160.7 W/m2 as reported in the monitoring report page 10 as per the paragraphs 372 –374 of VVS version 03.0.3: As pe

e mainly higher in those months where the river flow was anyhow above the maximum rated flow capacity of the turbines (26.8 m³/s PDD
een submitted. The post-registration changes request form in the section 2: Type of Changes F(a) Changes to project or programme design

ith para 193 of VVM version 1.2 which states that "the DOE shall raise a FAR during verification for actions if the monitoring and reporting

15 July, 2014. Please note that the Monitoring Report version 2.1 was finalized on 13 July, 2014.2.Scope: The submitted documents are no
the approved revised monitoring plan of PDD version 11 approved by UNFCCC EB on 2012-12- 21. Therefore a revision for parameter EG f

of leakage due to competing use of rice hulls as the monitoring report (page 16) mentions that during the current monitoring period the p
prior approval from the CDM EB .”It is further noted that the PRC assessment opinion (pg.14) has indicated that A“ revision of the PDD is n
PA v0.3.02: The DOE stated that the site visit for this project activity was not conducted due to the COVID-19 pandemic and the site visit c

uirements specified under para 263, PS-PA, version 3.2.Scope:Issue: There is an inconsistency in the cross-referencing of the applicable VV

which requires the DOE to take due account of all authentic and relevant comments in the verification for the first request for issuance of C

tion of measuring equipments was conducted at a frequency specified in applied monitoring methodology or EB guidance if applicable, an

ependent variables but linked to the data reading records cells. For example, for the period 01/01/2013-31/01/2013 the cell for value from
1 / Version 03 requires the targeted precision level for biomass estimation within each stratum is ±10% of the mean. However, the achieve

een submitted with a request for issuance.Issue: Please note that the latest monitoring report should be submitted under additional docum

ating facility". Section D.2 from the monitoring report indicates that three meters were used (two main and one sub) and the table indicati
emission reduction worksheet, financial calculations) must be submitted.Additional documentation was not submitted.4.Scope: A spreads
sion reductions achieved and/or determine that calculations of baseline emissions, project emissions and leakage as appropriate have bee

er, the DOE has not provided information on how it verified that no coal was combusted during the current monitoring period.

r the imported electricity goes beyond the monitoring period, which would not be conservative in regard to the exported electricity.

se of line loss to determine the parameter. The DOE is requested to explain why it did not make any Post Registration Changes request in a

luded in the monitoring plan during the verification process , the monitoring of fuel consumption of this generator should be included in t
arify if there was any use of coal for purposes of start- up during this monitoring period2: Scope: The verification report does not state that

the Verification Report). However, it has not confirmed that the temporary deviation does not require prior approval of the Board, and th

ace of the water, after the implementation of the project activity, when the reservoir is full) shall be yearly measured from topographical

e. from BJ to BS) represent the values of average or individual CH4 density in LFG sent to 8 generators in hourly (kg-CH4/m3). It is not clear

e monitoring report states that 06675056(Main Meter) & 06675061(Check Meter) were calibrated on 10/02/2012 and 28/05/2014 while t

hese two measurement methods. Furthermore, please clarify the cross checking of the clinker inventories through an external party given
at Phase II has not been put into construction and is still under consideration by the project developer. However, information on the reaso

doing so, the DOE shall submit a spreadsheet with revised IRR calculation which includes the key parameters impacted by the claimed cha

ument must be correct and accurate.Issue: Certification report as well as verification report refer to monitoring report version 2 dated 28

oughout the documentation must be consistent.Issue: There is an inconsistency of crediting period between the project view page (01.01.2
956 tCO2e) in the registered PDD for an equivalent number of days. The VR (pg. 20) has explained that the higher value for the current MP

d verification reports for this monitoring period. The DOE is therefore requested to clarify how it cross-checked the calibration date and co
id or for captive use given that page 31 of the verification report indicates that the power generated is for captive use (the electricity gene

d to clarify why it verified that the monitoring plan is in compliance with the applied methodology and why it did not issue a FAR to the pr

relevant monitoring points). (EB48 - Annex 68 paragraph 10 (a) (ii) & EB 54 Annex 34).Issue:The monitoring report dose not contain inform

itored (see page 38, footnote 40 of the PDD) which is not in accordance with the applied methodology.   The DOE is requested to clarify h
ue: In CAR01 the DOE identified typo error in the rated capacity of the generator. The DOE is requested to explain why no correction was
ort 19,393 CO2 and not 39,099 CO2.

y KEPCO and the meters which has more accurate class (1.0 Class) than the required meter (2.0 Class, Category: 500kW and below) accord

the PDD still states the capacity to be 2 x 1 MW; and (2) provide a validation opinion on the impact of such change in the capacity of the ga
relevant monitoring points). as per PS version 09.0 paragraph 246.Issue: The monitoring report does not include diagram of the monitorin

out measuring equipment in place as per the Appendices 2 and 3 of the monitoring report: (a) MMFL: - For T trans1 in 1# flare, the equipm

-confirming monitoring period. The DOE is requested to clarify 1) why the PP/DOE did not apply for temporary deviation as per the PS-PA

ntory increases and decreases, however, the DOE has not provided any verification opinion based on which it could conclude that the rea
“
sts for registration/issuance for any PDDs/MRs submitted under current rules cannot be submitted by 31 January 2013, they have to be mo

(510,569 tCO2e) in the registered PDD for an equivalent number of days. The VR (pg. 20) has explained that the higher value for the curre

tion process has been in accordance with the EB65 Annex 2 paragraphs 22-26.2: Scope: The verification report does not provide an assessm
FC,j,y = CO2 emissions from fossil fuel combustion in process ". However, no monitored data have been submitted. Kindly provide the req

graph 204 and 206. Also, please further explain the term used 'residual area' and the reference to the 'emergency event'.

dsheet does not report the monthly monitored values obtained from the two main meters and back-up import meters, installed at individu

egistered methodology throughout the submitted documentation.2.Scope: The submitted documentation are dated prior to the date of re
13 where as the submitted monitoring report is version 4.3 dated 13.2.2014. MI

he registered monitoring plan which states a simple random sampling method will be used (PDD page 33).2: Scope: The verification report

relevant monitoring points). (EB48 - Annex 68 paragraph 10 (a) (ii) & EB 54 Annex 34).Issue:The line diagrams in the monitoring report (pa

regarding the compliance of actual monitoring in line with the registered monitoring plan. Further information should be provided regard
d to the 4 days for which this deviation is proposed. By applying the high value instead of the average, the project emission have increased

for the parameter ndy (number of days in year where the treatment plan was operational) is in line with paragraph 29 of applied methodo
e, or how it has assessed it to be appropriate.

e “Tool to determine the mass flow of a greenhouse gas in a gaseous stream ”version 3.0. For wet gaseous stream, the DOE is requested to

relevant monitoring points). as per PS version 09.0 paragraph 246.Issue: The monitoring report does not include diagram of the monitorin
emission factor of the captive power plant should be used as a conservative simplification. Please refer to ACM0014 version 3 page 16.
measurement was done. Further it is not clear how the DOE verified the reservoir surface area as the letter referred by the DOE was not in

OE is requested to explain how it confirms that the monitoring has been carried out in accordance with the monitoring plan in the register

city exported to the grid by the project activity) as per the equations referred in the PDD (Ver: 4.0, Date: 23/05/2012, p 34-37) section Ap
“
) in the ER spreadsheet.2: Scope: The verification report does not state that the monitoring has been carried out in accordance with regist

"Plot Num" cells A3,B3,C3,D3 is in chinese. The sheet "area by strata&county" cell A17-A19 and the last sheet is entirely in chinese. The sh
l parameters relevant to the volume of dried sludge and wet sludge, the characteristics of the sludge, the N2O emissions and the residual
ver the verification report pages 12 and 17 show that in 2013 the sampling was carried out only three times (05/03/2013, 02/07/2013, 23/

ph 13(b) and 13(c) of the standard Sampling

“ and surveys for CDM project activities and programmes of activities ”(version 08.0) in order t

VS version on the view page is version 3. Also please note that the verification and certification statement on page 41 does not mention th

ction calculation has not been submitted with a request for issuance as required in the completeness check checklist for requests for issua

g/reg_note43.pdf

d (BGburnt) to be in line with the registered monitoring plan given that the PLC control system for Sitio I stopped working during the perio
for registration/issuance for any PDDs/MRs submitted under current rules cannot be submitted by 31 January 2013, they have to be modi

additional calculations of the stand volumes based on allometric equations and monitored data. In doing so, the DOE may provide the com

nitoring plan, however the DOE has not assessed whether most conservative values approach is applied to the parameters in accordance
s shown in the ER spreadsheet, for Suzlon site, net electricity values from the credit notes are used for calculation of the emission reductio

iod "01 March 12 - 28 Feb 13". However, the submission for request for issuance displays the monitoring period 01 Sep 11 - 28 Feb 13.

obtained based on the method of apportionment on a pro rata basis and it has verified that the project shares a 220kV substation and tra
ation Report is dated 4 September. Kindly update the Certification Report date.

ectricity measured at individual machine (M2) and the installed at 66 KV side (M3) as The
“ reading through Meter M3 is considered as the

each parameter required by the monitoring plan (VVM v.1.2 para 206)Issue: The verification report does not list the following parameters

involves 52 wind energy converters (WECs) of Enercon make E-40 (600 kW) and 53 WECs of Enercon make E-48 (800 kW) totaling to 105 W
t submitted in this request for issuance, which is Version 03.1 dated 22/06/2012.
rt are zero for the period February to April 2022 and the emissions reduction for this period (Feb-Apr 2022) are claimed based on MSEDCL
relevant monitoring points). (EB48 - Annex 68 paragraph 10 (a) (ii) & EB 54 Annex 34).Issue: the PP is requested to include a description of

project activity; Please refer to VVS PA v1.0 paragraph 359.Page 5 of the monitoring report has indicated that as Phase 4, 322,243 CFLs we

M v.1.2 given that the values of the sale's records are calculated values in cell C05 to C10 and C15 in the "summary" worksheet.2: Scope: T
 significant malfunction or any emergency occurred for the Project during this monitoring period from 01/11/2010 to 30/09/2011 (both d

assessment opinion by the DOE must be submitted.Issue: There is an inconsistency of crediting period between the Validation Opinion (01

ues taken during the period between the scheduled date of calibration and the actual date of calibration. However, the DOE is requested t

g the valid version of the applicable verification and certification report form, taking into account the grace period of the form if it has bee

eter accuracy in line with PS v.1, Appendix 1, para 4 and ensure that the PDD includes a description of how the adjustment factor is applie
s the monitoring report page 6 states "Spot check frequency for 0.2s meter would be once three months."
monitoring report "June 06, 2002 to September 09, 2012" However, the monitoring report for this request for issuance is from 04 June, 201

egistered PDD. The DOE is required to provide actual longitudes of individual WTGs which were obtained during the site visit.
relevant monitoring points). (EB48 - Annex 68 paragraph 10 (a) (ii) & EB 54 Annex 34).Issue: As per EB54 Annex 34, Form and guidelines fo

en the document must be correct and accurate.Issue: The methodology AMS-I.D. ver. 13 is not mentioned in the monitoring repport, versi
ts and additives. –Cementos Avellaneda S.A. Olavarría, Buenos Aires. Argentina."2.Scope: According to EB48 Annex 68 paragraph 9(e), cro

evant monitoring points). (EB48 - Annex 68 paragraph 10 (a) (ii) & EB 54 Annex 34).Issue: the monitoring report does not contain descripti

er, after the implementation of the project activity, when the reservoir is full) shall be yearly measured from topographical surveys, maps,

ent on whether the calibration of measuring equipments was conducted at a frequency specified in applied monitoring methodology or EB

198 (a)).Issue 1: The facilities for supplying electricity to PICL have not yet been installed. Additional information is required on how the D
document must be correct and accurate.Issue: In the verification report on page 8 the monitoring report date of version 6 is indicated as
case Version 07, dated 30/06/2011.

/reg/reg_note43.pdf
 (VVM v.1.2 para 198 (a)).Issue: The verification report (page 62) states that the PP's response to CAR 9 was: "There was a delay in the imp

ta for this parameter has not been reported in the spreadsheet. Kindly provide the required information.

barmati station in the month of December 2009, in particular how the value corresponds to the daily Joint Meter Reading, as the spreadsh

as per the monitoring plan.

nt changes to the registered monitoring plan.2: Where there are changes to the project design of a registered CDM project activity, the pr

ue: The certification/verification report refers to the monitoring report version 2 dated 01.06.2016 (pages 2, 4, 46) and on page 39 to the m
ssue: Certification report refers to the PDD version 7 dated 2.12.2012 where as the submitted PDD is version 7 dated 3.11.2009.3.Scope: A
2012, Calculation spreadsheet and Project view page.

ix I of the Project Standard.2: Scope: The monitoring report does not contain calculations of baseline emissions, project emissions, leakage

state that the monitoring plan is in accordance with the applied methodology. (VVM v.1.2 para 200, 203 & 221(d))Issue: The Verification

arify the volume of total gas measured by the totalizer C2 (for Parameter VC2), which has been used to measure the parameter starting fr

Meter and Cross-Check Meter). Taking into account that the current monitoring period is from 21/12/2010 to 25/12/2011. The DOE is requ

2009 (Spreadsheet 2635-ER

“ Sheet1 ”page: Month
“ 11 2009 ”cells M1732 to M2243). Clarification is required on how the temperature c
raph 9(e), cross-referencing and versioning within and between the document must be correct and accurate.Issue: In the certificaton repo

her such increase  could have  been anticipated by the PP and might have required an upgrading of the baseline treatment system. Further
tion. However, the actual calibration date for monitoring equipments is not mentioned in the MR. 2: Scope: The verification report does no
es (16.7.12) much earlier than both the Monitoring report (15.5.12) and the verification report (24.10.12)

w were considered the manufacturers specification of the flare to estimate the CFEww.

graph 281 of VVS for PA v 03.0). The DOE validated that 1) Parameter of vCH4,RG,m (volumetric fraction of component methane in the res

mbusted; (vi) Temperature of the exhaust gas at the flare stack, reported the following: " Please refer to the CERs calculation sheet of the

n the plant started operating at the current plant capacity of 830-850 tHNO3/day.2: Scope: The verification report does not determine if th
monitoring period. b. Table 1 of MR is to provide information about those 53 initiated projects. Further the footnote 2 describes that The
“

e a conclusion on the verified amount of emission reductions achieved and/or determine that calculations of baseline emissions, project e

y requested to submit the request for issuance applying the approved version of the VVS. Kindly refer to "Major revisions to the regulatory
n report (p 12-13) states that No
“ AST was done during this monitoring period, which is considered as calibration delay. From the 5th of Ja

d survey for small-scale CDM project activities used by the DOE requires 90/10 confidence/precision criteria for reliability of sampling effor
riod and the drop-out rate (8.27%) for the 10th monitoring period by stating that Since,
“ for both 9th and 10th the monitoring period, PP

y of the project.2: VVS-PA, para 360: The DOE is requested how it verified the compliance with the monitoring plan as the following have b

e the information on how it verified compliance with the second condition in the clarification (i.e. requirement indicating that the methan

metered energy consumption data obtained, however neither the monitoring report nor the spreadsheet calculates the energy savings.
s and leakage as appropriate have been carried out in accordance with the formulae and methods described in the monitoring plan and th
 considered the most conservative assumption theoretically possible as per para 208(a) of the Validation and Verification Manual version

d worksheets 'WS-09', 'WS-10', 'WS-11' and 'WS-12' does not reflect the formula used to adjust the readings by the maximum permissible e

sting sludge treatment system of the WWTP) and the DOE provide information which describes how it verified the actual operation of the

evant monitoring points). (EB48 - Annex 68 paragraph 10 (a) (ii) & EB 54 Annex 34).Issue: According to the PPD Monitoring Plan, the Moni

Issue: There is an inconsistency in the amount of CER between the spreadsheet (May 32,406.67 CO2, July 35,250.23 CO2, September 32,3

port or verification report if the combustion temperature at flare is measured. Details of thermo couple (serial number, model, accuracy, c

by the PP in the MR (page 24) is neither mentioned in the registered PDD nor in the registered ER spreadsheet. Furthermore, the paramete
e), the number of Certified Emission Reductions (CERs), within and between the documents must be correct and accurate.Issue: CER Calcu

anges in stratification for sampling, whereas the revised PDD now does not prescribe any stratification for sampling. Refer to paragraph 30

were taken to monitor NCV of biomass residues as required by the methodology. Please refer to ACM0006 version 6, VVM 1.2 paragraph 2

. The PDD mentions it as 5.29 m3/s, whereas the monitoring report mentions it as 4.83 m3/s.2: Scope: The verification report does not pro

d monitoring plan.
ducted at a frequency specified in applied monitoring methodology or EB guidance if applicable, and/or the monitoring plan? (VVM v.1.2 p

els in the MR (p.8)

equivalent. Further, the amount of ER for the month of December 2009 in the spreadsheet table and the table in the Monitoring Report is
alidity) as the monitoring report does not include this information.2: Scope: The verification report does not provide an assessment on wh

on relevant dates for the project activity as construction, start of operation of the project and each of the two flares installed.2: Scope: Th

sts for registration/issuance for any PDDs/MRs submitted under current rules cannot be submitted by 31 January 2013, they have to be mo

atest calibration reported was performed on 18/09/2007.

he same page that "therefore, the baseline is recalculated". The project participant is requested to clarify this inconsistency.2: Scope: The s

Both Certification statement and Verification Report refer to version 7.

h the monitoring methodology states that the monitoring system is in compliance with the applied methodology AMS I.D (version 10): Grid
ng report (24853.45) and the ER calculation spreadsheet (24854.58).2.Scope: The submitted documentation are dated prior to the date of

e for on-site verification, i.e. 4 out of 13 permanent sample plots. (b) discrepancies observed between the PP's record and the DOEs recor

on/certification report refers to 149,633 whereas the issuance submission page refers to 149,632. 2.Scope: The cross-referencing and versi

tively to calculate EGout and EGin due to the propagation of meter errors (M5 and M6). However the VR does not provide information to
s annual ER of 6,291 tCO2e for the period 2008-2009 and of 11,393 tCO2e for the period 2009-2010; and ii) the monitoring period runs fro

er information on why the monitored value (0.0405 TJ/t) of NCV of fuel oil was not used for the calculation of the project emission.2: Scop

10/2009 to 11/05/2010 was referred to.

ncentration meters, optic and calorific, as per the monitoring plan   for which the actual monitoring conducted are as follows: i) methane

sed and applied for this project activity is ACM0010 version 02

ovided on a yearly basis and the actual CERs claimed on the basis of 274 days. The project participant is requested to clarify this inconsiste

(page 31 of Verification Report). However no information is provided with respect to the precise date for each equipment to ensure that

ies measurements up to 6 months after the equipment failed", and confirmed that the assumption taken was conservative. The DOE shall
 approved revised monitoring plan, given that it states that both the parameters are required to be monitored daily whereas, they are bei

7" and under section E.4.2., refers to "A related post registration change is submitted along with this issuance request. Please refer to the

project emissions, leakage (if any), and/or emission reductions, including reference to formulae and methods used. (EB48 - Annex 68 para
ormation on how it has verified that the calculation of baseline emission factor was in line with the methodology, given that the methodol

ted on 21 September 2010, the monitoring report has not provided information about the calibration that covers the period prior to 15 O

relevant monitoring points). (EB48 - Annex 68 paragraph 10 (a) (ii) & EB 54 Annex 34).Issue: the data collection procedure and the emerge

ope: According to EB48 Annex 68 paragraph 8(c) a verification report must be submitted with a request for issuance.Issue: The verification

e MR), the monitoring period is noted to be 31 July 2011 to 30 June 2015.

determined that the calculation of EFma has been carried out in accordance with the formulae and methods described in the monitoring p
flow from data generation, aggregation, to recording, calculation and reporting for these parameters. In the Verification Report, the DOE h

kers as follows: 5 monitoring teams (2 persons per team) visited an average of 100 households per day during a period of 30 days in a geo

libration frequency for the instrument is annually as stated in page 10 of the monitoring report, whereas it is stated as every 2 years in the
urther information on the events occurred on those dates.

n capacity and when the secondary catalyst was installed.2: Scope: The verification report does not determine if the assumptions used in e
n the delayed calibration of those thermocouples was conducted. For example: Calibration of thermocouple with SN 685196-1 expired on

ues of flare efficiency (a monthly average) and biogas flow per each site. However, the verification report does not contain an explanation

hat the biogas generator had not been in operation for a long time and when the biogas generator resumed operation on 3 February 2014
on how the methodology requirement on 2 seconds "recording frequency" has been met.2: Scope: The spreadsheet does not contain the f

eration days in the emission reduction calculation. However, the monitored data for biogas flow for these four days were reported to be z

ntified as per the Appendices 2 and 3 of the monitoring report: (a) MDFL/MMFL: - For Flare gas T, the equipment was removed for calibrati
preadsheet does not include monitoring data from 1st of December 2009. Also in the spreadsheet "% error main & check meter" dates are

e Verification process by raising the corresponding Corrective Action Request in the Verification report. Once this is done, you may request

erification report page 15. E.g., A FAR 1 is raised in the verification protocol (Appendix A) regarding the lack of evidence to crosscheck the

ss has to be carried out under VVS track.

erification report refers on page 46 (CL 2) to the crediting period 24 Dec 2009-31 Oct 2011 where as it should be 24 Dec 2009-23 Dec 2019
or issuance.Issue: The uploaded signed form is not complete.

es not include this information.2: Scope: The verification report does not provide an assessment that all physical features of the proposed

ween the commissioning and date of factory calibration (i.e. 18/04/2009 to 25/04/2009) are correct.2: Scope: The monitoring report does
e with paragraph 307-311 of VVS version 7, without any specific explanation. The DOE shall provide information on how it has validated th
, also dated 01.08.2011; the Verification Report inconsistently refers to Monitoring Report version 5 and Monitoring Report version 6, bot

deviations from the monitoring plan or the monitoring methodology" and "Applicable period for proposed deviations (inclusive): 01 Jul 201

erified that the calibration has been carried out in line with the monitoring plan and relevant guidelines.2: Scope: The verification report d

d as described in the PDD considering that the turbine was changed during the actual project implementation and why the DOE did not su

after the provincial certification was issued) that states the surface area of reservoir at full level is 5.68 km2, and therefore project emission

B and EGWEG.2: VVS-PA, paragraph 363: As per page 41 of the registered PDD, and page 10 of the monitoring report, all main and check m
encies throughout the concerned document.

issuance was submitted for 39,296 CERs.

nstalled in September 2008 but was excluded from the calculation of emission reductions as suitable methane concentration analyser has

e cross-referencing of the PDD. The verification and certification report as well as the monitoring report refers to PDD version 5 dated 28/
 riod throughout the documentation must be consistent.Issue: Page 32 of the Verification report refers to the monitoring period 21.9.2010

factor was measured

“ ”as per the registered monitoring plan and methodology. Clarification is required. 3. The DOE shall clarify how the

06/2012 of the submitted final Monitoring Report.

household involves household heating and cooking. 2: Scope: The verification and certification report does not state that the monitoring p

revised monitoring plan. (VVM v.1.2 para 206 & 221(d))Issue: The DOE (VR page 32) states that the monitoring system and all applied pro

he applicable methodology.

his monitoring period and that the sensitivity analysis was based on +/- 10%.2) It is noted that the final version of the monitoring report (ve
ent according to the revised schedule (by the end of 2012), considering the financial situation of the project owner and the availability of C

uest for approval of changes. However, the DOE did not submit a notification or a request for approval of changes prior to the conclusion

ocumentation.

e to delay in calibration of energy meters. However, it is not clear how the PP applied the discount since the CERs calculation spreadsheet

ameter was not shown in the submitted spreadsheet. In addition the version 6 of this spreadsheet as referred by both final monitoring rep

e at CMP 16, to process requests for issuance of CER for emission reductions achieved on or after 1 January 2021 (paragraph 8 of the EB 1

raction of the waste type j). In particular how the figures shown in spreadsheet Summary
“ of waste type percentage, 2014 for Annex 2 ”w
evant monitoring points). (EB48 - Annex 68 paragraph 10 (a) (ii) & EB 54 Annex 34).Issue: The DOE/PP are requested to clarify if adequate

70 metric tonnes of HNO3 (100%) per day and that the design operating time is 330 days a year. However the Monitoring report states (pa

e generators during the overhaul period; * The spreadsheet shows no electricity output through anmeter EM2 in the periods 26 Nov-25 De

a different project.3.Scope: A verification report has not been submitted with a request for issuance.Issue: The certification report submitt

overestimation of leakage associated with baseline fuel thus resulted in underestimation of overall leakages applied for emission reductio

ed to an accuracy of  ±1 percent." The accuracy of the Landtec Biogas Check gas analyzer used to measure the methane content has been
relevant monitoring points). (EB48 - Annex 68 paragraph 10 (a) (ii) & EB 54 Annex 34).Issue: The monitoring plan requires that the monitor

analyzers.2: Scope: The verification report does not describe the reasons for the phased-implementation delay and/or does not present th

ecify 2 meters for EGy and 2 meters for EGaux.OTHER ISSUES:The DOE shall clarify how it has verified that the measurement of electricity g

198 (a)).Issue: the DOE has not reported when the project started operation and whether the project activity was implemented on phase

ovide further clarification on how it has verified the calculation of baseline emissions from the methane sent to electricity generation, MM
owever, the PP did not report the monitored values of each WTG in the monitoring report.2: Scope: The spreadsheet does not contain all
e difference of the total electricity generation by all wind mills including project activity and the electricity generation from the project acti

ation Report (pages 7 and 8) states:a) "The PDD does not specify the accuracy. The type of flow meter applied represent good monitoring
Report (pages 6 and 7) states:a) The PDD does not specify the accuracy. The type of flow meter applied represent good monitoring practic

xtracting and pumping the landfill gas whereas the monitoring report indicates that two blowers have been installed.

1-OXtop_layer) * FCH4,PJ,y –FCH4,BL,y) * GWPCH4.

een the document are not correct and accurate.Issue: The PA is registered under the methodology AMS-I.D. ver. 11- Grid connected renew
eptember 2008 are fairly stated in the monitoring report (version2.0) dated 11 April 2011.'' However, the monitoring report submitted wit

ave been correctly applied in line with the requirement of para 208 (d) & (e) given that the ex-ante values determined in the PDD and used
report. Further information is required by the DOE how it verified the calibration of meters as the reference of the verification report (p 38

port did not contain information on CERs delivery commitment as per para 26 (b) of EB 106 meeting report.

uance as per para 28 of EB 31 meeting report.

the methodology should be used for the request for issuance.2: Scope: The certification report does not indicate the monitoring period u

o the date of request for issuance submission.Issue: The Monitoring Report is dated 1 July 2013. However, the Verification/ Certification R

d source as per applied methodology was not used.

articular, the DOE has not provided information regarding which is the "full scale" for which the 0.5% error applies (including details on th
e verification report (p.9) states contradictory statement of how the monitoring is done, and considering that the EGm,y is to be sourced f

ect activity(gas engines).4. How the fossil fuel consumed in the boilers were measured as required by the applied methodology.

002 version 06, considering that the grid emission factor for year 2007 was applied for year 2009 while the methodology requires to use th

e of the exhaust gas is above or below 500ºC and where the manufacturer's specifications are being met.   Please refer to Paragraph 208
e of the monitoring report is not consistent between the monitoring report (Version 0102 Date 0502/1203/20112012) and the certification

y and annual) production levels of HCFC22 at the plant after January 2000 up to today;2. Describe the demand of HCFC22 in the market sin
s ) on the five historical campaigns used to determine the historical campaign length, CLnormal , and iii) provide the value of the plant des
g has complied with the monitoring plan, given the parameter is now measured by the ABT meters (which according to the PDD page 55 a

tion report (pg. 30) has validated that the same parameter is measured via a weigh bridge and contains information related to LPG producti
PP shall conservatively deduct the largest between the maximum permissible error and the actual error found in the delayed calibration, a

1 and Period 2?
relevant monitoring points). (EB48 - Annex 68 paragraph 10 (a) (ii) & EB 54 Annex 34).Issue: the relevant monitoring points (the meters) ha

98 (a)).Issue: Section 3.2 states that three sites (26352, 26552 and 27032) have not yet completed construction. However, the reasons for
did not have a valid calibration then adjustment should be applied to the emission reductions as per Guidelines of EB52 Annex 60.

tified Emission Reductions (CERs), within and between the documents must be correct and accurate.Issue: The number of CERs included in

ters were conducted on 29th May 2007 and 30th April 2016. The DOE mentions that neither the methodology nor the PDD specify freque
ts of paragraph 62 of the Modalities and Procedures of the CDM.

mulae used and description to calculate the project emissions applying actual values. A table may be used and included in this monitoring
was not available at all (p25-26 of MR). NAP value was calculated based on other process data. These calculation /correction processes w

he request for issuance for the monitoring period 01 Jan 12 - 31 Dec 12, refer to a date and version of the PDD which are not consistent wi

e ratio. The PP/DOE shall clarify how did they deem appropriate to apply  “Tool to determine the methane emissions avoided from dumpi

rt has been cross-checked with other sources such as plant log books, inventories, purchase records, laboratory analysis. (VVM v.1.2 para 2

ditions for further decay as per AMS III.F ver 3, paragraph 10.

flow meters, whereas the actual meters have accuracy of 0.2s (electricity meters) and 0.5 (gas flow meters).
ity for the entire 4 years covered by the current monitoring period.2: The DOE shall address the following inconsistencies in the emission r

calibrated within the frequency specified by the "Tool to determine project emissions from flaring gases containing methane".2: Scope: Th

t requires the project participants to update their monitoring reports: (i) To apply any global warming potential values that may be adopte

er, the applied adjustment does not result in fewer claimed emission reductions, noting that the S_LP inflates due to the adjustment of S_

the registered PDD and verification report.2: Scope: The verification report does not contain information on all CARs, CLs and FARs and/or

been followed on the NCSG and VSG measurements during this period. The Verification Report (page 20) also states that "The delay from
d PDD. Further clarification is required.
methodology?Issue: The spreadsheet does not provide values for the parameters EGy, EGexport, EGimport and TE for the period from 05

uded)". (b) In "Section H. Certification statement", some text is missing after the text "monitoring plan contained in the registered"

as the rest of the documents submitted refer to the emission reduction 610,809 CO2. Kindly clarify.
tion. Further clarification is required.
and calculation of potential project emissions due to the consumption of energy to operate the boilers before and during some periods a

the exported (-0.5%) and the imported (+0.5%) electricity. Clarification is required as to why the EB52 Annex 60 guidance has not been ap
orted at the intervals required by the monitoring plan and the applied methodology?Issue: Regarding the monitoring of EGGEN and EGAUX
4,y = ((1-OXtop_layer) * FCH4,PJ,y –FCH4,BL,y) * GWPCH4.
Xtop_layer) * FCH4,PJ,y –FCH4,BL,y) * GWPCH4. 2: It is not clear how the DOE verifies information of the project activity implementation

CO2,i,y The DOE shall document how it has cross-checked monitored parameters in accordance with VVM v.1.2 para 208 (a) and (b).

accordance with VVM v.1.2 para. 208 (a); and ii) there appears to be inconsistency in the number of the NAP flow meters in the N3 plant c
ount of biogas used for the emission reduction as per para 204 (a) ofVVM; and 2) why the PP/DOE did not report the parameter ID11 (tota

aragraph 10 (a) (vii))Issue: The monitoring report / spreadsheet do not contain calculations MDproject,y (the amount of methane destroye

does not provide an assessment on whether the calibration of measuring equipments was conducted at a frequency specified in applied m
the methodology requires comparison of the monitored amount of methane and calculated methane using IPCC tier 2 approach during th

of CARs, where CAR 3 mentions date 2 May 2011 for v. 2 of the monitoring report and CAR 4 mentions date 18 February 2011.

relevant monitoring points). (EB48 - Annex 68 paragraph 10 (a) (ii) & EB 54 Annex 34).Issue: Monitoring points for gross electricity generati

relevant monitoring points). (EB48 - Annex 68 paragraph 10 (a) (ii) & EB 54 Annex 34).Issue: The ER spreadsheet contains a column called "

sion calculation spreadsheet (cells N26-N29). The PP/DOE are requested to address this inconsistency.2: Scope: The verification and certifi

o, the DOE shall provide more details on how it has concluded that the accuracy of these values have no material impact over the total em

plan and monitoring report, is measured, whereas the spreadsheet shows that the parameter is calculated from parameters EGImp(Impo
ng the present monitoring period, the EGGEN was 27,908.078 MWh, the EGAUX was 3,177.535 MWh and thus, the result of the net electri

on 01.2) considering that the sensitivity analysis in the PDD was conducted assuming a variation of only 5% in the electricity output.

and 2) how it has validated the rated capacity and actual operation of any stand-by air compressor used during project implementation.
les receipts. The CAR 12 was closed as the values of the parameter are now consistent with the monthly report. However, CAR 14 was also

M version 01.2 Paragraph 197.2) The DOE assessed the sludge removal reports for sites 32452 (August and October 2009) and 2000024 (Ju
efer to VVM version 01.2 paragraph 205 (c).

lculated considering the average of the measured NCV values (CELL F251) times the total quantity of biomass used during the monitoring
evised monitoring plan requires to calibrate the meters annually. Hence, the maximum permissible error of 0.5% has been deducted to th

relevant monitoring points). (EB48 - Annex 68 paragraph 10 (a) (ii) & EB 54 Annex 34).Issue: The monitoring report does not include a desc

oring plan which does not specify this requirement and/or the requirement of the Tool
‘ to determine project emissions from flaring gases c
monitoring period.

onitoring plan contained the revised PDD approved on 5 March 2012 contains the changes (metering point number of "Metering Point num

ual heat generation from firing biomass residues in boiler to review the boiler efficiency again during verification. However, it is not clear

monitoring report shall contain the reference data, such as emission factor and IPCC default values, used in the emission reductions calcul

arried out the annual energy balance as required by the methodology; c) the function of each of the listed energy meters in Appendix 5 of

rt does not list each parameter required by the monitoring plan (VVM v.1.2 para 206)Issue: The VR has not provided any information with

pproach is adopted in the calculation of GHG emission reductions or net anthropogenic GHG removals.The monitoring plan requires the a

(a)) Scope: The verification report does not describe the reasons for the phased-implementation delay and/or does not present the expect
a measured value of 257,162,385 Nm3 whereas a calculated value 260,899,961.1 Nm3 was applied for emission reductions calculations. Th
ing within and between the document must be correct and accurate.Issue: Page 2 of the verification report refers to MR version 1.3 dated
evant monitoring points). (EB48 - Annex 68 paragraph 10 (a) (ii) & EB 54 Annex 34).Issue: i) according to the monitoring methodology, enc

th the approved monitoring plan and why it did not raise a FAR to the project participant for revising the monitoring plan to remove the in

able. The DOE shall clarify why it has not conducted the verification in accordance with the requirements of paragraph 62 of the Modalitie
ial operation and why the registration certificates are from 2002 if the plant started operation earlier.

eter for net electricity exported to grid was changed during the monitoring period. Further information is required on why the meter was c

oring methodology, EB guidance, and/or the monitoring plan (VVM v.1.2 para 184 (a) (ii) & EB 52 Annex 60).The DOE is requested to valid

witching of fuel from Low Sulphur Waxy Residue fuel oil (LSWR) to natural gas at heat-only boiler in district heating system"; in the monito
MR (page 13, footnote 3). The MR explains that the emission reductions have been adjusted by applying the maximum permissible error of

reductions achieved and/or determine that calculations of baseline emissions, project emissions and leakage as appropriate have been ca
he PP/DOE have not responded to or only partially responded to the following issues: a) The DOE has confirmed that a correction has been
2.2.Scope: According to EB48 Annex 68 paragraph 9(f), the crediting period throughout the documentation must be consistent.Issue: Verifi

ange in plant name". The VR also concludes: "Value of parameter reported in the monitoring report and corresponding emission reduction

n on the 1. Reason for change of meters and impact of this change . 2. QA/QC procedures followed to ensure that the monitoring paramet
nitoring report) and EB 52 Annex 60 has been applied for calculation of emission reductions. However, the DOE does not provide the relev

evant monitoring points). (EB48 - Annex 68 paragraph 10 (a) (ii) & EB 54 Annex 34).Issue: The MR does not contain description of the eme

m the IPCC may be used alternatively) and whether the most up-to-date default values are applied as per requirement of EB48 Annex 34

, the Monitoring Report contains calculation of baseline emissions, project emissions, leakage (if any) and emission reductions.Issue: Calcu

of time when the flares were not operational (power outages and other events) have been taken into account when calculating the methan
relevant monitoring points). (EB48 - Annex 68 paragraph 10 (a) (ii) & EB 54 Annex 34).Issue: The DOE is requested to describe how the slud

nes in line with EB48 - Annex 68 paragraph 10 (a) (iv) & EB 54 Annex 34.2: Scope: The verification report does not provide an assessment o

igester outlet, M15 Fraction of time gas is combusted in the flare; B2: Flow rate of raw effluent at digester inlet. The PP shall provide more

arameter required by the monitoring plan or monitoring methodology (VVM v.1.2 para 206)Issue: The Verification Report does not provide
uires the metering the energy use of the industrial facility, processes or the equipment affected by the project activity. Furthermore, the m
ergy savings using the metered energy. However, this parameter is not included in the registered monitoring plan and the monitoring repo

milnadu ”.2.Scope: According to EB48 Annex 68 paragraph 9(e), cross-referencing and versioning within and between the document must b
relevant monitoring points). (EB48 - Annex 68 paragraph 10 (a) (ii) & EB 54 Annex 34).Issue: The line diagrams showing all relevant monito

ested to clarify how it has determined the operation period is 365 days and how it has taken into account the scheduled maintenance and

e of HFC 23/ HCFC 22 to calculate the eligible HFC23, the generated HFC23 waste stream (without adjustment of the purity) has been used

relevant monitoring points). (EB48 - Annex 68 paragraph 10 (a) (ii) & EB 54 Annex 34).Issue: The monitoring report does contain neither a

"Specific Heat (kJ/kg/C)" are misleading2: Scope: The verification report does not determine if the assumptions used in emission calculatio
een submitted prior to the request for issuance as per EB48 Annex 66. 2) The DOE indentified that three quarters of monitored data for m

hours and 20% of electricity exported to the rice mill and steel plant assumed in the PDD.
mates (by about 8%) while several project measures have not claimed emission reductions during this period. Explanations shall be provid
the actual capacity factors were calculated as 95%, 89% and 95%, for 2007, 2008, and 2009 respectively. As this may be considered as pe
d between the document is correct and accurate.Issue: The version and the date of the registered PDD (version 4 of April 2006) does not c

relevant monitoring points). (EB48 - Annex 68 paragraph 10 (a) (ii) & EB 54 Annex 34).Issue:The PP/DOE is requested to provide an explana

2 and 15/01/2013 there was no measurement of the electricity consumption from the grid by the project activity. Further, it states that the

However, the DOE is required to further substantiate how the application of the maximum error of the meter was the most conservative a

on the A/R Methodological Tool, Demonstrating

“ appropriateness of allometric equations for estimation of above-ground tree biomass in
the plant was running was a period of 21hrs only.iii)It was further noted that although the plant was not running for the months of January

r issue raised in response to the inconsistency of the CER, the total CER is (2,649,681 CO2), however the project view page displays (2,649,
y and annual) production levels of HCFC22 at the plant after January 2000 up to today; 2. Describe the demand of HCFC22 in the market si

etween the invoices issued by COMGAS and the internal records of the project participant is less than 1%; however the spreadsheet subm

odologies (EB 61 Annex 21).

m 13th August 2008 (Page 1). Given that the current Monitoring Period is from 1st May 2008-31st August 2008, please clarify why the notifi
 It is not included an explanation with regard to application of formulae in the spreadsheet to calculate the flare efficiency. The DOE is req

n accordance with the monitoring plan. ”

ns the volume of biogas used in the heating equipment has been calculated as the volume of biogas entering the boiler, and does not inclu
e. 0.5% for methane contents of less than 5% and 3% for methane contents above 15%). Although the accuracy for measuring methane co

ss to meter and therefore the calibration details pertaining to the same. Hence, the calibration records are not maintained by DLHPPL for t

rmation provided in Section D of the Monitoring report does not allow proper identification of the energy meters that are reported.

evant monitoring points). (EB48 - Annex 68 paragraph 10 (a) (ii) & EB 54 Annex 34). The secretariat has raised an IRC minor issue requestin

n report. The DOE/PP shall clarify the inconsistency.

on of monitoring plan requested and approved by the Executive Board. (VVM v.1.2 para 203)Issue: The verification report does not contai

ation on how it verified the project monitoring against the approved revised monitoring plan and provide its verification statement as per
an error on pages 12, 15 and 17, referring to "Error! Reference source not found".

rent - for example, for site 24242 CH4 values metered in June were equal to 69.4% (paramaters and ERs calculation file) and 70.9% (confid
The secretariat has noted that according to Sec. D.2.1.3 of the PDD, the parameter % CH4 in biogas (ID#21) is to be measured periodically
er to VVM version 01.2 paragraph 204.

e monitoring report publicly available, and..."

pages  9 and 11) states:a) "The PDD does not specify the accuracy. The type of flow meter applied represent good monitoring practice."b)

t "The equipment and test procedures will provide an accuracy with a + 1⁄2 percent uncertainty range". However, the verification report do

bmitted with a request for issuance.CER calculation sheet is not correct (belongs to another project).

estroyed in boiler –
1 in absence of the project activity;4. That the methane analyser has been calibrated regularly as no information is pro

eeting report para 71.Issue:There is no breakdown of CERs to be issued up to 31 December 2012 and CERs issued from 01 Jan 2013, in cer

tatus of the project. (For project activities that consist of more than one site, the report shall clearly describe the status of implementation

have been on the assessment of additionality at the moment of registration of the project.2. Other issue: The calibration dates for all mea

52 Annex 60.

on information throughout the submitted documentation.

vity analysis nor the financial analysis spreadsheet were provided at the time of registration, the DOE should explain whether the increas
toring period.3.Scope: A certification report has not been submitted with a request for issuance.Issue: The certification report submitted r

eported monthly. Kindly provide the required monitored parameters at the required recording interval.

applied the proposed arrangements for missing data of LFG flow and methane concentration from Table 1 of the Appendix of the "Tool to

rom the process resulting from a completeness check or information and reporting check would have to be modified to comply with the re
report). Clarification is required.
at 24,176 and the increase would be higher at 35.1%. Following the same calculation method, the previous two monitoring periods would
he reported emission reductions were adequately discounted for period where the flare ignition was not working.2. The monitoring report
any unsold amount; 4. Demand in the market relevant for the registered project activity since year 2000;5. In cases where any production
sue accordingly.

s), meters will be subject to regular maintenance and testing regime to ensure accuracy. However, the Monitoring Report does not provid

verification report i.e. 31/12/2008, since the final monitoring report assessed was dated 17/01/2009.

ost-registration change request. Please refer to VVM version 1.2 - paragraphs 205 and 216.2) Based on the data submitted every 2 minute

monitoring report). Clarification is required.

bmission.Issue: Signed form is dated 23.12.2013 where as the monitoring report (dated 17.02.2014), certification report and verification re

Ls or FARs issued. (VVM v.1.2 para 192, 194)Issue: The DOE has not justified why the following corrective action requests were closed: - C

ion.Issue:The Certification Report is not dated.

e not calculated values and the values do not equal EGgross –EGaux –EGimport. The DOE is requested to clarify: (a) how it verified the ba
rect cell X17 from the MER spreadsheet, as the formula was not correctly applied (the calculation formula was not copied for the emission

BTX is included.
adsheet does not contain all parameters required to be monitored and/or reported at the intervals required by the monitoring plan and t
fication report does not provide an assessment of the compliance with EB 52 Annex 60 'Guidelines for assessing compliance with the calibr

e year 2000-01 to 74,392 tons in 2005-06.

ood chips, coco chips and SBE), as well as the type of fossil fuels (i.e. metcoke, ecocoal) are different from the types mentioned in the regis

value was not mentioned in the PDD.

y and annual) production levels of HCFC22 at the plant after January 2000 up to today; 2. Describe the demand of HCFC22 in the market si
y and annual) production levels of HCFC22 at the plant after January 2000 up to today; 2. Describe the demand of HCFC22 in the market si

sidering that 1) the appendix 6 of the verification report states indicates that the ICE meter were calibrated in 2011 and 2) the verification

ciency is calculated based on total steam generated for G3 and G4 turbines with total quantity of bagasse consumed in boilers. The DOE ha

he inconsistency of the installed capacity in the revised PDD.2: Scope: The validation opinion does not describe the nature and extent of th
ror has been applied in a conservative manner so that the adjusted measured values due to the delayed calibration result in fewer claimed

st be in accordance with guidance from EB52 - Annex 60 (Paragraph 8). If the calibration is found to be delayed, the requirements from EB

must be in accordance with guidance from EB52 - Annex 60 (Paragraph 8). If the calibration is found to be delayed, the requirements from

is 82.89% and 17.11%. Further clarification is required. 3. The verification report stated that the
“ guidance provided in the deviation requ

alculation provided in the CER calculation spreadsheet using simple average approach instead of weighted average as required by the app
mentioned in the monitoring report.3.Scope: A verification report has not been submitted with a request for issuance.Issue: According to t

r all the meters (generation meter, auxiliary meter, and net electricity export meter) took place. OTHER ISSUE(S)3) The number of total o

nes to SSC methodologies (EB 61 Annex 21).

ctivities ”version 1.0, paragraph 259. 2: The DOE shall clarify on how it has concluded that the calibrations are conducted at the frequency

es of request for Post Registration Changes of the monitoring period 01 Jan 07 - 30 Sep 08 which has been sent back to the DOE as incomp

quired on how the DOE verified the correct calculation of the net electricity generation for the period of March - July 2007 as per the appr

bove (paragraph 369 of VVS for PA version 2).The DOE raised CAR 01 on the calibration on meters and closed by accepting a correction fac

g/reg_note43.pdf
the proposed change in the LFG collection efficiency is in line with the methodology ACM0001 version 19 (table 6, page 27), as it requires
e Verification Report) mentions "second monitoring period", which is not correct as this is the first monitoring period. Please refer to VVS p
09 (b) of VVS for PA version 3.

o the HZL mining complex is supplied directly from the project activity or wheeled through the grid; (b) As per the TOOL05 - Baseline, proje

ation about the "actual errors" of meters identified in the delayed calibration test and what the "maximum permissible error" is. Although
ant was verified from the commissioning certificates and found that project was commissioned on 31/03/2017." However, 1) the monitor

hat "raw data" sheet of the spreadsheet contains hourly as well as daily average weighted values. The PP/DOE is required to provide clear

tion 30 kV delivery point and meter 3 and meter 4 at the substation, of which the latter two were moved to the delivery point on 13/12/20

n for period 1/12/20-31/12/20 is appropriate as it is not clear whether the invoice value include data for 01/01/2021, considering the billin

at the location of the project activity by checking the Google Earth using the geo coordinates of 28 01 22
’ ”N, 73 04 05
’ E.
” The DOE is requir

t.2: The DOE states that the site visit cannot be postponed since a delay on performing the mandatory on-site visit for the project activity,
eport for post-registration changes has not been submitted.3.A revised PDD has not been submitted.4.According to PCP for Project Activiti

oso 2019-2020_CER_BM_January 25 2022.xlsx ”

, “
10236 Sogamoso 2019-2020_OM Dispatch_May 28 2021.xlsx ”and “
10236 Sogamoso 2

d why it is used in the calculation; (iii) On page 8, the monitoring report concluded that the estimate presented is conservative since it doe

rred, reasons for these changes taking place, whether the changes would have been known prior to the registration of the CDM project ac
 has verified the woody biomass is renewable biomass.2: Scope: The verification and certification report does not state that the monitorin
ised PDD (in both clean and track changes version) shall be submitted.Issue: The revised PDD in clean and track changes version is missing

the area of stratum i, and iv) and variance of tree biomass per ha in stratum i, in accordance with the registered PDD. Please refer to para

strument to the measured values taken during the period between the scheduled date of calibration and the actual date of calibration, if t

a) the formula described in page 23 of the monitoring report is V=

“ 0.10529-1.68829*D+10.29573*D2 ,”while the formula described in tab

of the instruments.2: The verification report does not contain an opinion on the cause of any increase in the actual GHG emission reductio

03/01/2020 and 10/11/2020 and X0377326 (Main meter) & X0377327 (Check meter) were calibrated on 18/06/2019 while the monitoring

ss check or the information and reporting check by the secretariat, the request may still follow the old regulatory framework, provided tha

usly, they shall be presented using an appropriate time interval (e.g. monthly for a monitoring period of six months or more; weekly for a m

an to Oct 2016, in the cells of Export and Import as per JMR, there are factors that are not explained or verified by the DOE. For example, i

C validation." The DOE is required to provide further information on how it validated the calibration of WTG controller since there no evide

How the delayed calibration of equipments identified as 12010EKG20CP002¨, ¨10EKG20CP003¨ and ¨10EKG20CT002¨ have been considere
olumn O) for the monitoring period from April 2016 to January 2017. (b) In the spreadsheet JMR Data submitted, EGimport,y (column L) is

on is within permissible limit of accuracy class, PP applied maximum error factor of 0.5% as per requirement of paragraph 366(a) of VVS v

all take due account of all authentic and relevant comments received in the verification for the first request for issuance of CERs.

nce per monitoring period" and 2) the spreadsheet shows that some of leaks were not monitoring during this monitoring period. The PP/D
ovide further information on how it verified the calibration of the meter as per the monitoring plan and the para 365 and 366 of VVS for PA

mit the relevant post-registration change documents. 2.Scope: The cross-referencing and versioning within and between the document ar

not correct and accurate.Issue: Verification/certification report refers on page 26 to registered PDD v.1.5 dated 15.8.2014 whereas the re
ether the auxiliary consumptions are existed and how they are monitored. 2: The PP/DOE is requested to address the issues below as per
ricity supplied to the recipient j by the generator, which in the absence of the project activity would have sourced from ith source during t

18 .3.Scope:
” The cross-referencing and versioning within and between the document are not correct and accurate.Issue: There is an incon
ricity data generated in 2018. With this approach, for year 2018 it is considered that data vintage 'y' is used to calculate ex-post OM, wher

ng procedures for the month of January 2014.Refer to VVS v3.0 paras 365, 366 and 3672: The DOE shall explain how it has verified the em

3. For ex-post option of simple OM, the emission factor is determined for the year in which the project activity displaces grid electricity (To
CP for Project Activities para 196 a duly completed CDM-ISS-FORM shall be submitted.Issue: The issuance request form does not refer to p

s confirmed that the error has been applied to all measured values taken during the period between the scheduled date of calibration and

ation factors (tree age and plantation density) as temporary deviation and total planted area as changes to the project design. The PP/DO

onitoring report or the verification report. Refer Para 365 of VVS-PA, version 3.0.2: VVS-PA Para 374(b)As per the registered PDD, net elect
d with a request for issuance as required in the completeness check checklist for requests for issuance in line with PCP version 9 para 222.

Me3B
“ ”in the monitoring system, whereas the monitoring point related to those energy meters are not illustrated in the diagram of the
annum". Please rectify the inconsistency.2: Scope: The monitoring report does not contain a description of the equipment used to monito

E performance.
 is smaller than the maximum permissible error of the measuring equipment.2: As per VVS para 374, DOE shall provide a description of how

especially considering that the plant was operated as open cycle between 16/11/2012 and 13/06/2013 and that the methodology applies

4. However, as per AR-AM Tool 14 v04.2 page 22, the default value of 0.5 is applicable when the land is subjected to periodic cycles. The D

report, verification/certification, assessment opinion and PRC signed form (change to the start date of the crediting period of the project a

uires the project participants to update their monitoring reports: (i) To apply any global warming potential values that may be adopted by

e date of the MR as 27.05.16 and on page 22 with the right date of 17.10.16.3.Scope: Cross-referencing and versioning within and betwee
d monitoring plan, monitoring methodology or standardized baseline and 3. changes to the project design of a registered project activity.
was not possible for that period as no invoices was raised. The DOE is therefore requested to explain how it verified/cross-checked param
r emission factors, default values and other reference values have been correctly applied. (VVS v7, para 290 (d))Issue: It is noted that a set

he present monitoring period".

tion is addressed in line with para 366 (a) of the CDM

“ validation and verification standard for project activities, Version 03 ”as the observe
tes that the data will be from apportioning procedure. The PP/DOE to clarify.2: The DOE shall list each parameter required by the registere
mated as a result of the deviation; or (b) apply the following most conservative values approach when alternative monitoring arrangements
hall take due account of all authentic and relevant comments received in the verification for the first request for issuance of CERs.

umber in cases where the post-registration changes are approved prior to the submission of the motioning report for the request for issua
umber in cases where the post-registration changes are approved prior to the submission of the motioning report for the request for issua

the averaging of the sampling values collected by analyzers at each of the production wells on various sampling dates whereas it is obser

device for parameter PPJ,y. The registered PDD mentions the device being Toledo whereas the monitoring report mentions it as Weighte
eriod were applied for the second and fourth quarter of 2015, and assessed the calculation as conservative. The DOE is requested to provid

h are not in English. 2. The track changes of the revised PDD (v. 5 dated 02/05/2017) are not in English. 3.Scope: The number of Certified E

h are not in English. 2. The track changes of the revised PDD (v. 5 dated 02/05/2017) are not in English. 3.Scope: The number of Certified E

the existing renewable energy plant that were operated at the project site prior to the implementation of the project activity (EGhistorical
ental documentation(e.g. emission reduction worksheet, financial calculations) shall be submitted as appropriate.5.Scope: The types of po

The registered PDD (page 6) identified fly-ash as the one of the key raw material ingredients for the manufacture of the project activity bl
D does not contain details on the effect on additionality as a result of the changes as per PS version 09.0 paragraphs 294 and 295.Issue:3:

E is therefore requested to clarify how it has confirmed that the monitoring has been carried out in accordance with the registered monito
nd east longitude 103.9206°and north latitude 33.5603° respectively." According to the locations thus cited, there is a distance of approx 1

was in operation during the current monitoring period i.e. block 1 (363.3 MW) started operation from 04/01/2014 and block 2 (remaining 3
/m2." The DOE is requested to provide further information as per para 4 of the applied methodology (AMS-I.D version 17).2: Scope: The sp
he DOE/PP shall clarify how the measured values for period of 1 –19 December 2019 have been appropriately cross-checked in line with th

d mention the monitoring period and crediting period of the project as a whole and not breakdown in unit. 3.Scope: The cross-referencing
ck has been provided in the monitoring report or the verification report. The DOE is therefore requested to explain how it has verified tha

EB 108 meeting report, that requires the project participants to update their monitoring reports: (i) To apply any global warming potentia
this parameter is used to calculate project emissions from electricity consumption "in year y" (PEEL,y). However, as shown in the ER sprea

B12 (i.e. the monitored value as per the note 3) are the same as the values listed in the cells D10-D12 (i.e.the corrected value as per note
e installed technology and/or equipments, relevant dates of project activity e.g. date of construction, commissioning, continued operation
web interfaces available to the DOE.

g the value of electricity imported from the grid (ECimport,y), there is a small difference between the actual monitored values (263,200 kW
g the value of electricity imported from the grid (ECimport,y), there is some difference between the actual monitored values (424,320 kW

t page 18, the QA/QC procedure has been revised to provide further procedure in the case of third party sale. Please clarify why the chang
E/PP has not provided the methane concentration of the two pipelines with no gas analyzer as required by the paragraph 1, page 15, of th

quirements from paragraphs 369 to 372 of version 01.0 of the VVS for project activities were met in situations where there is a delay in th
tions" however, no PRC is submitted with this request for issuance. 3.Scope: According to PCP for Project Activities para 196 a duly comple

OE is requested to explain how it verified the JMR value used for ER calculation for these months considering the value in the invoice is low
will be applied. Eventually if none of the mentioned sources are available, IPCC default values at the upper limit of the uncertainty at a 95%

d to provide further information on how it verified the flare efficiency as per the applied tool.

eet. The validation report for post-registration changes (page 16) and verification/certification report (page 29) refer to ER spreadsheet ve
e registered monitoring plan and out of the applicable period of the approved temporary deviation PRC-8405-001.2: Scope: The verificatio
period is not the same as the value for year 2013 for the previous monitoring period; (b) how it concluded that the confidence of 90% and
ement (PPA); or (c) Change of location of meter(s) as per a PPA; (d) Change of location of electricity meters if the transmission loss is taken

cted power generation as per Tool

“ to calculate the emission factor for an electricity system .”The PP/DOE is required to submit the ex-po

ated 8 November, 2013. However, the revised Monitoring Report was not submitted along with the request for issuance for the monitorin
d/or does not present the expected implementation dates. (VVS v7, para 273 (a))Issue: The VR (pg. 9) has used references IRL #22 and IRL#

ring report and verification report. 2: Scope: The certification report does not indicate the monitoring period under verification and/or the

me-wide data are considered, such equations should be verified by comparing the biomass estimates of destructively harvested trees of diff
lines and shares the same transmission line with other collection lines from other project of the same project owner .”The line diagram o
, a proper justification should be provided by the DOE as to why the site visits cannot be postponed, including the demonstration of a sign

elevant post-registration change documents.

nge of 20% at a 95% confidence level by checking the statistical analysis of the sample measurements, which was presented in the submitt
the monitoring report version 2 dated 25.08.2016, however no monitoring report has not been submitted.

lectricity generation in March 2015 as 30,600 kWh (Export) and for October 2015 as 51,960 kWh (Export). The DOE is requested to clarify h
y the Board or will be submitted together with the request for issuance as per VVS version 09.0 paragraph 409 (f).Issue: The verification re
oring points. In accordance with paragraph 258 of PS for PA version 2, the project participants shall describe the monitoring system and pr

submission.
m uncertainty range of 20% at a 95% confidence level.  The PP/DOE are requested to provide this sampling information and the verificati
ity meter and imported electricity meter mentioned in the registered PDD.2: Scope: The monitoring report does not contain a description
ilable at (http://cdm.unfccc.int/Reference/Notes/gov/info_note02.pdf)

B.7.3 of the PDD. EG export, project and EG import, project parameter is further used for calculation of net electricity supplied to the grid
phs 365-366 of VVS-PA: The DOE stated that there were delayed calibrations for thermal flow meter (Serial # 411850) and temperature me

submitted spreadsheet (TAG NCV and Enthalpy-Column O) multiplies the measured NCV of coal with a factor of 0,95 which has not been
rification contract, CER delivery commitment by project participants) reliance on applicable force majeure provisions in the validation or v

erification ; and 2) The verification report (p 6) states that "In accordance with the above mentioned requirement, for this project activity,
eductions (CERs), within and between the documents is not consistent.Issue: There is an inconsistency in the cross-referencing of the ER a
cope: The verification report does not provide a conclusion on the verified amount of emission reductions achieved and/or determine tha

rified that the error factor has been applied to all the measured values with the delayed calibration in the ER calculation spreadsheet. In p
d party." The DOE is required to provide further information on how the HT tariff is the maximum value for the sale to the third party by re
iables) provided in the monitoring report that is different from that stated in the registered PDD or any approved revised PDD. Issue: As pe
gy, such as small hydro electricity generation which can generate electricity. This is considered clean technology because there is the gree

on 31 Dec 2016. It is not clear how the net electricity generated during the period 01 –08 January 2017 as reported in the revised spread

amount .”However, the VR (pg. 13) and the assessment opinion (pg.2) state that The
“ meters monitoring the electricity imported from the
iogas stoves and (ii) that the biogas units were installed in households owning at least 2 zero-grazing cows in order to conclude that the im

ngle line diagrams in the monitoring report which reflect all the transmission lines and installed meters; (c) provide information of all the m

d not include any date . ”

e meter VIITangcun which is used to measure the exported
“ electricity ”and imported
“ electricity".
ovide further information on how it verified the amount of electricity import and export for the months of which the invoices were missin
4 of the annex to decision 3/CMP.1 and as reaffirmed in the EB 85 meeting report, para. 66, the certified amount of emission reductions s
AG14008) which have been included in the calculation of project emissions. However, information related to why these negative gas volu
for Project Activities para 196 a duly completed CDM-ISS-FORM shall be submitted.The "Risk acknowledgement and acceptance form"(CD
lain whether appropriate grid emission factor has been correctly applied as per paragraph 402 (e) of the VVS version 09.0.

al intake in the kiln and the clinker factor. The DOE shall provide further information on how it has verified the compliance of the monitor

oes not provide an statement on how the DOE verified the information flow (from data generation, aggregation, to recording, calculation
of the monitoring plan with the applied methodology (AMS I.C version 18), in particular on the measurement methods and procedures for
d, as: (i) SN 64769 and SN 64768 were only calibrated on 17/11/2012, 18/11/2012, 19/11/2012; (ii) SN 1001294 was only calibrated once

as the Certification report and Verification report on page 22, refer to the breakdown of the monitoring period of (08/02/2012-31/03/201
nitoring diagram which indicates that the proposed project activity is connected together with other two projects (project 1_ 49.5 MW an

a) The source and the fate in the absence of the project activity for parameter "Biomass residues categories and quantities used in the pro
5621, TN905622, TN905623, TN905620, TN905617, TN905610, TN905624); (b) meters TNU04947 (HTSC No. 3370), installed on 29/09/201

, and the results of cross-checking; and ii. The VR (pg. 24) has reported that the total energy input was calculated based on fuel consumpti
 validation opinion on the PRC does not contain information on how the DOE concluded that the change is in accordance to para 4 and 5 o

pling plan; (b) In the verification report the DOE states that a separate calculation spreadsheet demonstrating actual confidence/precision
pling plan; (b) In the verification report the DOE states that a separate calculation spreadsheet demonstrating actual confidence/precision
nt versions of the "tool to calculate the emission factor for an electricity system", have not been submitted. Kindly please submit the relev

5239
“ CER Calculation )”shows that operating margin was calculated as a simple average of operating margin for years 2005-06, 2006-07 a
e ER sheet provides the figures of the actual precision for each parameter. Please refer to appendix 4 of Guidelines for sampling and surve
oss-referencing and versioning within and between the document are not correct and accurate.Issue: The monitoring report date is incorr

tment due to the difference in the accuracy class of meters compared with the registered monitoring plan is taken into account in the calc
suance which were excluded from the baseline emission since three referred documents refer to the different period.2: The DOE conducte

tation status of the project.Issue: The PDD (pg. 11) and the monitoring report (Section B.1) indicate that the installed flare is an enclosed fl
d/or does not present the expected implementation dates. (VVS v2, para 228 (a))Issue: The DOE is requested to explain how it concluded t

or this project activity was not conducted due to the COVID-19 pandemic and the site visit cannot be postponed since a delay on performi

applicable, and/or the monitoring plan (VVS v2, para 243)Issue: The verification report, page 24 indicates that the calibration of the biogas
d that the changes from the registered monitoring plan are in accordance to para 4 and 5 of the Appendix 1 of Project Standard which do n
/10 confidence level". However, the verification report does not contain information on how the DOE assessed the implementation of the

dered this Post Registration Change as a temporary deviation. 3: The monitoring report specifies that a temporary deviation is requested fr
e sheet of "Summary_ER_Sheet 2013-18" includes the values from the column J22 to J91 of "Electricity Data". Therefore, column J 21 of "E

hall provide a validation opnion of the corrections made in the revised PDD about the CO2 emission factor for the fossil fuel fired in the po

how it verified the change as per para 248 of VVS version 2 and 2) why it did not submit a request for approval by the Board prior to the su
emovals calculation in working sheet "4. DBH, height and stem biomass" shows that 0.51 is applied for Pinus oocarpa and 0.55 is applied fo

sed PDD/Assessment opinion/signed form for PRC (Haouma Wind Farm Project) and project view page/signed form for issuance request (H

nges of ex ante estimations of net anthropogenic removals in the crediting period from 97,223.78 tCO2e to 122,525 tCO2e. However, the P

ersonnel supporting the illegal cutting can be taken as evidence that "the project area is routinely assessed." (ii) On p.42 of VR, against ent

timated 8,749 leaks. The VR (pg. 20) has explained that the higher value for the current MP can be attributed to (i) focus on the repair and

the registered PDD or any approved revised PDD; ii)The monitoring plan complies with the monitoring methodology and the actual monito

oker ).” The PP/DOE are requested to correct these inconsistencies; ii. The MR (pg. 7) states that the
“ quality of data was checked by the R“
oker ).” The PP/DOE are requested to correct these inconsistencies; ii. The MR (pg. 7) states that the
“ quality of data was checked by the R“
rence/cc16_mr.pdf
stent with the number used for previous monitoring period, i.e. 1506tCOD/month, as indicated in ER spreadsheet 2013-2014 fT,y
“ ”cell F3
in the revised PDD (pages 41/80) based on generation from 2004-2006 ii) 17,593.83 MWh in the MR (page 37) based on monitored genera

graph 366 of VVS-PA, as there is no information when the delayed calibration test of the old meters was carried out and what was the resu
o started on 10/01/2012.

e determination of flare efficiency for each minute m. However, the efficiency as shown in the each monthly spreadsheet is calculated each
 revised PDD, but shall describe the proposed changes in the monitoring report.2.Scope:Issue: The verification and certification on page 5

per § 238 of VVS. The verification team confirms that the error has been applied correctly and conservatively." Further information is requ

not consistent with these numbers mentioned in the MR. (b) On page 43 of the VR, under the table CAR ID 13, it is mentioned at a few pla
d PDD (2.6.1) and revised PDD (2.6.2) applicable to the request for post registration changes for the monitoring period 16 Jun 11 - 15 Jun 1

the generation between 15/06/2011 to 20/07/2011, however the DOE did not provide information regarding the calibration delay and wh

vity levels or non-activity parameters have not been monitored in accordance with the registered monitoring plan, the DOE shall assess th

refer to Paragraph 208 (c) of VVM v1.2.

ksheet "Baseline Emissions" are all given values; (ii) It is not clear which values from column C, D and E are sourced from the invoice.2: VVS

ity export issued by the EVN for the entire August 2018 and the quantity of electricity accounted for during last monitoring period for the

ope: The verification and certification report does not state that the monitoring has been carried out in accordance with registered or the
ated based on the actual experience gained with the first BRT lane recently inaugurated as well as based on normal city development ,”ho
cuments submitted ((total reductions 609,566 CO2 reductions for 2012 (281,864 CO2) and for 2013 (327,702)). 2.Scope: The cross-referenc
vise the documents and the project view page and resubmit the request for issuance.

ndia) Limited substation at Sadodar, which are also connected to wind turbines installed by other project owners; (5) The GETCO main met
d to provide details of the organization chart, and roles and responsibilities of concerned people for data collection and recording in the m

he period 26/01/2013-25/02/2013 the cell for value from ETN (cell E7) is linked with the cell for value from Power Export(Data reading rec
74 of VVS version 03.0.3: As per decision from EB106 report para 26b, if the site visits cannot be postponed, a proper justification should b

of the turbines (26.8 m³/s PDD p. 4, 56.3 m³/s PDD p. 5). The resulting increase of the plant load factor may thus be result of a permanent
project or programme design - For a project activity, has an option None of the above (please describe the type of changes) to be ticked.2

the monitoring and reporting require attention and/or adjustment for the next verification period". In doing so, the DOE shall clearly repo

e submitted documents are not internally and mutually consistent.Issue: The calculation of the emission reductions for the monitoring per
e a revision for parameter EG facility,y i s required. Refer to Annex 3 assessment attached to this report". i)There is no Annex 3 in the repor

urrent monitoring period the plant used more coal as there was limited supply of rice hulls while as the DOE demonstrates that the surplus
hat A“ revision of the PDD is not required (in case of temp. Changes and A/R specific changes (defined as minor)) .”However, in accordance
9 pandemic and the site visit cannot be postponed to a later date. The DOE is required to provide further information as per the para 26 o

ferencing of the applicable VVS version. The verification and certification report on page 23 refers to VVS version 2 whereas the applicable

first request for issuance of CERs. In doing so, the DOE is also requested to clarify how it has determined that the global stakeholder cons

or EB guidance if applicable, and/or the monitoring plan (VVS v2, para 243)Issue: The DOE is requested to explain how it concludes that the

01/2013 the cell for value from ETN (cell F5) is linked with the cell for value from Power Export (data reading records)/Electricity export (M
e mean. However, the achieved precision of each stratum is not calculated and reported separately. The DOE is requested to provide info

mitted under additional documents.3.Scope: The cross-referencing and versioning within and between the document are not correct and

one sub) and the table indicating the values of the parameter LFGburnt,y contains the columns #1 and #2. The PP shall provide a clear desc
 submitted.4.Scope: A spreadsheet containing emission reduction calculation has not been submitted with a request for issuance.Issue: No
akage as appropriate have been carried out in accordance with the formulae and methods described in the monitoring plan and the applie

monitoring period.

the exported electricity.

gistration Changes request in accordance with the CDM Project Standard version 01.0 paragraph 203, or why it did not raise any FAR to re

erator should be included in the monitoring plan via this procedure". Thus, the DOE shall provide the information on how the monitoring
tion report does not state that the monitoring has been carried out in accordance with registered or the accepted revised monitoring plan

approval of the Board, and the provisions of Appendix 1 of Project standard apply to the deviation. Kindly please provide information on t

measured from topographical surveys, maps, satellite pictures, etc, after the implementation of the project activity, when the reservoir is f

rly (kg-CH4/m3). It is not clear how the value(s) of CH4 density in LFG sent to generator would be selected from the applied spreadsheets

/2012 and 28/05/2014 while the verification report states that they were calibrated on 09/02/2012 and 27/05/2014. These inconsistencie

rough an external party given that, as per the MR, it has been done once in two months from Feb 2011 to May 2011 and once in a month
ever, information on the reasons for the implementation delay and expected implementation dates has not been provided.

rs impacted by the claimed changes. In addition, the DOE shall explain 1) why the change in the amount of biomass consumption has not b

ing report version 2 dated 28 November 2012 whereas the submitted monitoring report is version 2 dated 13.12.12.

the project view page (01.01.2011-31.12.2017) and the rest of the documents submitted (13.01.2011-12.01.2018).
gher value for the current MP can be attributed to (i) more leaks found (11,504) than assumed in the ex-ante model (6,375), (ii) focus on t

ked the calibration date and confirmed that calibration of the measuring equipment is conducted by the project participants at the freque
aptive use (the electricity generated is supplied to the manufacturing facility of the corporation), not exporting to the grid, which is not con

t did not issue a FAR to the project participant for revising the monitoring plan to include the monitoring of this parameter. Please refer to

eport dose not contain information on 1) operating hours as it is used for Qcrs calculation 2)the standard used for chromatography to mo

e DOE is requested to clarify how it verified that the monitoring plan is in compliance with the applied methodology and why it did not issu
xplain why no correction was made, or FAR raised to correct this in the future.
ory: 500kW and below) according to the regulation were installed by KEPCO." However, the validation report (p 19) prepared by the same

hange in the capacity of the gas engines on the investment analysis in line with para 6 (b) of Appendix 1 of Project Standard version 07.0. I
ude diagram of the monitoring system and the information flow as required in the instruction under the section 2.C of the Attachment of

T trans1 in 1# flare, the equipment was removed for calibration on 19/05/2014 but it was only installed back on 21/05/2014. It was again r

ry deviation as per the PS-PA ver.03 paragraph 231 and VVS for PA ver. 3. Para 281 for the non-confirming monitoring period and 2) how i

it could conclude that the reasons

“ were reasonable .”Information must be provided with regard to how the DOE verified this.
uary 2013, they have to be modified to comply with new rules. In this case, re-publication of PDDs/MRs is not required, but modified PDD

the higher value for the current MP can be attributed to i) focus on repair and monitoring of leaks with gas emission rates on the higher sc

rt does not provide an assessment that all physical features of the proposed CDM project activity proposed in the registered PDD are in pl
mitted. Kindly provide the required monitoring results for this required parameter.

gency event'.

ort meters, installed at individual substations.

re dated prior to the date of request for issuance submission.Issue: The Verification and Certification Reports display the final revision/app
Scope: The verification report does not contain information on all CARs, CLs and FARs and/or provide an assessment and close out of any

s in the monitoring report (page 6) and verification report (page 15) are not consistent with the line diagram in page 36 of the PDD. Furthe

on should be provided regarding this mater.

oject emission have increased slightly, reducing the overall emission reductions claimed hence it is considered a conservative approach an

agraph 29 of applied methodology AMS-III.D version 14 which states that "The number of days that the animal manure management syst
ream, the DOE is requested to substantiate how this parameter is estimated during the monitoring period as per the provisions defined un

ude diagram of the monitoring system and the information flow as required in the section C of the Instructions for filling out the monitorin
ACM0014 version 3 page 16.
referred by the DOE was not included in the references.

monitoring plan in the registered PDD.2: Scope: The verification report does not list each parameter required by the monitoring plan and d

05/2012, p 34-37) section Apportioning

“ Procedure Implemented by Enercon and Certified by MSEDCL ”as (1) The spreadsheet Emission
“ R
d out in accordance with registered or the accepted revised monitoring plan. (VVM v.1.2 para 206 & 221(d))Issue: The DOE should verify w

et is entirely in chinese. The sheet "Summary" cell K21-K31 uses graphics instead of text.3.The spreadsheet is in the correct formatThe calc
2O emissions and the residual carbon in ash. However, a revised PDD which describes the nature and extent of the changes is not prepared
(05/03/2013, 02/07/2013, 23/10/2013 for Pn,i,y and 27/03/2013, 20/06/2013, 22/10/2013 for FCresidual).2: Scope: The verification and c

vities ”(version 08.0) in order to calculate the sample size; (b) The calculation of the reliability which includes the data obtained from each

n page 41 does not mention the project title, instead the following text is appearing: Fehler!
“ Kein Text mit angegebener Formatvorlage im

checklist for requests for issuance in line with PCP version 9 para 222.Issue: The submitted emission reduction spreadsheet is for a differen

pped working during the period from 21 April 2011 to 16 May 2011 and the same was replaced by the PLC of Nest I; however, the DOE has
ry 2013, they have to be modified to comply with new rules. In this case, re-publication of PDDs/MRs is not required, but modified PDDs/M

the DOE may provide the complete calculation method for the stand volume of at least one age class (Vijk,m) appearing in the TARAM mo

he parameters in accordance with the provisions relating to temporary deviation from the registered monitoring plan, or whether alternati
lation of the emission reductions. However, it is observed that for some months (example: July 2017), invoice values are lower than the ne

riod 01 Sep 11 - 28 Feb 13.

res a 220kV substation and transmission lines with three other wind farms (all are CDM projects, UNFCCC reference number PA2216, 1825
Meter M3 is considered as the energy received by GETCO of the entire farm connected to that particular transformer. ”However, the PP di

list the following parameters required by the revised monitoring plan: electricity generation export to the grid by project activity (Wuliji P

-48 (800 kW) totaling to 105 WECs." while the section A.3 (p. 3-9) of the monitoring report have listed 106 WECs. Further clarification is re
are claimed based on MSEDCL Credit Note. The DOE is required to provide further information on how it verified the monitoring is conduc
ted to include a description of the electricity meters used to monitor the electricity exported by Heiyupao II project to the grid, a descriptio

at as Phase 4, 322,243 CFLs were distributed from January 2010 to December 2014, and the distribution was monthly recorded. However,

mmary" worksheet.2: Scope: The verification report does not contain information on all CARs, CLs and FARs and/or provide an assessment
1/2010 to 30/09/2011 (both days included)", however, the spreadsheet submitted shows that there was no electricity generation during th

en the Validation Opinion (01.06.2006-31.05.2013) and the rest of the documents submitted (26.04.2010-25.04.2017). 3.Scope: According

wever, the DOE is requested to explain how the requirement of the paragraph 395 of the VVS version 09.0 has been complied with in the a

period of the form if it has been revised as per VVS version 9 paragraph 293 and 406. 2.Scope: A monitoring report using the form and guid

he adjustment factor is applied.2: Scope: The monitoring report does not contain the implementation status of the project (including a br

r issuance is from 04 June, 2012 to 28 September, 2012.

ring the site visit.

 ex 34, Form and guidelines for completing the monitoring report form, section C, the Monitoring Report shall "include line diagrams show

n the monitoring repport, version 3, while the Certification and Verification correctly mentions the 2 applicable methodologies for this proj
8 Annex 68 paragraph 9(e), cross-referencing and versioning within and between the document must be correct and accurate.Issue: The su

ort does not contain description of the emergency procedures for the monitoring system

topographical surveys, maps, satellite pictures, etc, after the implementation of the project activity, when the reservoir is full. However, t

monitoring methodology or EB guidance if applicable, and/or the monitoring plan. (VVM v.1.2 para 184 (a) (ii) & EB 52 Annex 60)Issue: The

ation is required on how the DOE verified that the installation of the facilities supplying electricity to PICL it is only delayed and it has not b
te of version 6 is indicated as 5/5/2012, but it should be 3/5/2012.3.Scope: According to EB48 Annex 68 paragraph 9(e), cross-referencing
"There was a delay in the implementation of cooking systems in relation to the anticipated time schedule." However, the verification rep

eter Reading, as the spreadsheet shows that the value was apportioned from the 15-day period invoice; (b) the parameter MCHO tfh, as t
ed CDM project activity, the project participants shall prepare a revised PDD that describes the nature and extent of the proposed or actua

4, 46) and on page 39 to the monitoring report version 2 dated 07.07.2015 however, no monitoring report has been submitted.
n 7 dated 3.11.2009.3.Scope: According to EB48 Annex 68 paragraph 9(e), cross-referencing and versioning within and between the docum
ons, project emissions, leakage (if any), and emission reductions, including reference to formulae and methods used (PS v1, 194 (a)(b)(c)(d

221(d))Issue: The Verification Report on page 12 (sections 3.3) does not provide information on how the DOE verified that the monitoring

sure the parameter starting from 03/11/2010; however, the initial reference point of the totalizer has been set from 22/12/2010 onwards

o 25/12/2011. The DOE is requested to clarify how it was verified the calibration validity of the Revenue and Cross-Check Meters during th

red on how the temperature can be maintained so high when there was no biogas flow into the burner.
.Issue: In the certificaton report the monitoring report date is 05/05/2012, but should be 03/05/2012.3.Scope: According to EB48 Annex 6

ine treatment system. Furthermore, considering that the increase in FFB processing has been observed for the most part of this monitorin
The verification report does not describe the reasons for the phased-implementation delay and/or does not present the expected implem

omponent methane in the residual gas on a dry basis in minute m) has not been measured continuously as per the monitoring plan, but m

CERs calculation sheet of the project." However, the submitted CERs calculation spreadsheet does not include information on the mention

eport does not determine if the assumptions used in emission calculations have been justified and/or emission factors, default values and
ootnote 2 describes that The
“ plant is in operation but not reported in this MR .”There is a lack of information to describe what are those

f baseline emissions, project emissions and leakage as appropriate have been carried out in accordance with the formulae and methods d

ajor revisions to the regulatory documents" available at: https://cdm.unfccc.int/Reference/index.html2.Scope: The submitted documentati
 tion delay. From the 5th of January, 2019 to end of the monitoring period, calibration delay has been duly considered by PP and readings

or reliability of sampling efforts. However, the DOE has not verified whether the monitored average operation hour of CFLs has met 90/10
0th the monitoring period, PP have conducted the monitoring activity simultaneously, the consideration of resultant operational stoves (N

ng plan as the following have been observed: (a) As per Annex 5 of the PDD, for Sol Plaatje, the electricity production will be measured by e

ent indicating that the methane composition throughout the sampling section has to be uniform).

ulates the energy savings.

in the monitoring plan and the applied methodology document. (VVM v.1.2 para 208 (c) & 221 (h))Issue: The DOE is asked to clarify how d
d Verification Manual version 1.2. The DOE should further clarify if other means to define conservativeness are possible and if so provide j

by the maximum permissible error of the meter.2: Scope: The verification report does not provide an assessment of the compliance with E

ed the actual operation of the project activity during the current monitoring period (please refer to PS-PA ver. 02 para 257(b) and VVS-PA

PD Monitoring Plan, the Monitoring Report will present data

“ of electricity generated and consumed by the Project Activity, the waste hea

,250.23 CO2, September 32,389.34 CO2) and the monitoring report (May, 32,594.56 CO2, July 35,489.25 CO2 and September 32,450.01 C

al number, model, accuracy, calibration dates) to measure combustion temperature at flare are not available in the monitoring report. Als

et. Furthermore, the parameters added in the revised PDD (EGpalm plant and EGy,grid(in)) are being used in equation 7 which were not m
and accurate.Issue: CER Calculation Spreadsheet is not consistent with the total request for issuance of 75,262 CER's3.Scope: According to

ampling. Refer to paragraph 300 of VVS-PA.2: The verification report on page 8 states that the GHG removals are based on the areas plant

ersion 6, VVM 1.2 paragraph 205 (a) (b).

erification report does not provide a conclusion on the verified amount of emission reductions achieved and/or determine that calculatio
monitoring plan? (VVM v.1.2 para 184 (a) (ii) & EB 52 Annex 60)Issue: Errors due to calibration delay for meters including HPB 00259&260

ble in the Monitoring Report is different.

provide an assessment on whether the calibration of measuring equipments was conducted at a frequency specified in applied monitoring

wo flares installed.2: Scope: The monitoring report does not contain the values of the monitored parameters. (EB 54 Annex 34)Issue: The m

uary 2013, they have to be modified to comply with new rules. In this case, re-publication of PDDs/MRs is not required, but modified PDD
s inconsistency.2: Scope: The spreadsheet does not contain all parameters required to be monitored and/or reported at the intervals requ
logy AMS I.D (version 10): Grid Connected Renewable Electricity Generation, which is inconsistent with the registered version of the meth
are dated prior to the date of request for issuance submission.Issue: The verification/certification report (29.02.2016) is dated prior to the

P's record and the DOEs record (tree height and DBH) (c) further explanation of the ''expected range observed in sample plots'' in relation

he cross-referencing and versioning within and between the document are not correct and accurate.Issue: There is an inconsistency in the

es not provide information to clarify: (1) Why the CER calculation provided in the MR does not apply both factors to calculate EGout and E
the monitoring period runs from 5 May 2009 to 30 April 2010.2: Scope: The verification report does not provide an assessment that all phy

of the project emission.2: Scope: The certification report does not indicate the monitoring period under verification and/or the correspond

ted are as follows: i) methane concentration: monitored continuously by "Methane concentration sensor"; and ii) Non Methane Hydrocar

uested to clarify this inconsistency.

ch equipment to ensure that throughout the entire monitoring period an equipment with valid calibration was used. (b) The DOE indicate

as conservative. The DOE shall clarify how it confirmed that the assumption taken is the most conservative assumption theoretically possib
ed daily whereas, they are being monitored once in a month (page 15/51 of validation report).

e request. Please refer to the related PRC report submitted along with this issuance request for further details w.r.t. the assessment of the

ds used. (EB48 - Annex 68 paragraph 10 (a) (vii))Issue:The monitoring report states (p 35) that the design capacity of the plant is 450 t/day
logy, given that the methodology requires that any N2O baseline data measured during the hours where the operating conditions were ou

overs the period prior to 15 October 2010.2: Scope: The verification report does not provide an assessment on whether the calibration of

on procedure and the emergency procedure have not been included.2: Scope: The spreadsheet does not contain all parameters required

ssuance.Issue: The verification report refers to project activity 2331.4.Scope: According to EB48 Annex 68 paragraph 8(d) a certification rep

described in the monitoring plan and the applied methodology document, considering that the previous project campaign emission facto
 Verification Report, the DOE has provided only a generic statement on page 12 and 13 referring to the monitoring report. 2: Scope: The ve

ng a period of 30 days in a geographical area of 1,365 Km2. Nevertheless, there is an inconsistency on how the DOE verified the PP assump

s stated as every 2 years in the verification report. iii) ID9: The DOE has not provided a validation opinion on how it has considered that the

ne if the assumptions used in emission calculations have been justified and/or emission factors, default values and other reference values h
with SN 685196-1 expired on 05/06/2010 and the thermocouple was used until 12/11/2010. The verification report in page 35 states that

es not contain an explanation on the determination of the monthly value of flare efficiency (FE) is in line with the applied methodology, "To

operation on 3 February 2014 (items 4.1 and 4.2 of the document). However, electricity generation is recorded for January 2014 and the v
adsheet does not contain the formulae of calculation that are shown in the spreadsheet cells whenever possible. (EB48 - Annex 68 paragra

ur days were reported to be zero.2: Scope: The verification and certification report does not provide a conclusion on the verified amount

ment was removed for calibration on 19/05/2014 but it was only installed back on 23/05/2014. It was again removed for calibration on 13
main & check meter" dates are not correct (March 2008-November 2008).3.Scope: According to EB48 Annex 68 paragraph 9(e), cross-refer

this is done, you may request the Secretariat to change the dates of the Monitoring Period confirming that the corresponding CAR has be

of evidence to crosscheck the monitored parameter "number of trips", while the FAR 1 listed in Table 2 relates to the two additional gen-s
d be 24 Dec 2009-23 Dec 2019.

sical features of the proposed CDM project activity proposed in the registered PDD are in place and/or that the project participant has imp

: The monitoring report does not contain a comparison of the actual CERs claimed in the monitoring period with the estimate in the PDD,
tion on how it has validated those changes will not compromise accuracy and conservativeness. Please refer to VVS version 7, paragraph 30
nitoring Report version 6, both dated 01.08.2011 (p. 5, p. 8); the Emission Reductions Spreadsheet refers to Monitoring Report version 5,

eviations (inclusive): 01 Jul 2011 - 31 Dec 2012". The DOE is kindly requested to ensure consistency of information submitted in the reques

cope: The verification report does not provide an assessment of the compliance with EB 52 Annex 60 'Guidelines for assessing compliance

on and why the DOE did not submit notification or request for approval of changes from the project activity as described in the registered P

and therefore project emissions should be taken into account. The DOE is requested to provide clarification on this issue. 2. Paragraph 207

g report, all main and check meters are tested for accuracy every calendar quarter with reference to a portable standard meter are of acc
ne concentration analyser has not been identified while according to the Verification report it is currently being implemented. b) The DOE

ers to PDD version 5 dated 28/04/2017, whereas the validation report form for post-registration changes refers to revised PDD version 6 d
e monitoring period 21.9.2010-11.5.2012 where as all other documents refer to monitoring period 21.9.2010-25.6.2011.3.Scope: Accordin

The DOE shall clarify how the implementation of the well AMF-8 and the potential electricity generation from this well is as per the PDD w

ot state that the monitoring plan is in accordance with the applied approved methodology and, where applicable, the applied approved st

ring system and all applied procedures are completely in compliance to the registered monitoring plan. However, the PP has monitored th

on of the monitoring report (version 1.1) incorporating the DOE's Correction Action Request (CAR1) was dated on 30 October 2010, which
owner and the availability of CMM, thus unlikely to result in permanent change of the project design. In doing so, please provide data and

hanges prior to the conclusion of the verification / certification. Clarification is requested.2) The DOE (Verification Report, page 27) states

CERs calculation spreadsheet doesn´t include an explanation concerning this matter.2: Scope: The verification report does not provide an

ed by both final monitoring report and verification report have not been submitted and ii) confirm the conservativeness of the calculated e

2021 (paragraph 8 of the EB 108th meeting report). The DOE is required to raise a forward action request (FAR) in its verification report as

centage, 2014 for Annex 2 ”were obtained in relation to the three selected sampling days per quarter and four times per year. Furthermor
 quested to clarify if adequate monitoring system and procedures have been put in place as the MR (page 5) mentions that "the company w

e Monitoring report states (page 7) that NAP is compared against nameplate capacity based on 365 days/year. It also states (page 30) tha

M2 in the periods 26 Nov-25 Dec 2010 and 26 Jan-25 Feb 2011; and * the spreadsheet shows a reduced electricity generation from EM2GS

The certification report submitted is for a different project.4.Scope: A certification report has not been submitted with a request for issuan

applied for emission reduction calculations.

he methane content has been checked by the DOE as per the specifications for the equipment by the supplier i.e. 0.5% for methane conte
plan requires that the monitoring of the flare efficiency will be based in the continuous check of compliance with the manufacturer s ’speci

ay and/or does not present the expected implementation dates. (VVM v.1.2 para 198 (a)).Issue: According to the registered PDD, the proj

e measurement of electricity generated, consumed and supplied is conducted as per the applied methodology, considering that ammeter

ty was implemented on phase.2: Scope: The verification report does not state that the monitoring plan is in accordance with the applied m

to electricity generation, MMelec, of each mine.

eadsheet does not contain all parameters required to be monitored and/or reported at the intervals required by the monitoring plan and
eneration from the project activity. Further clarification is required.

d represent good monitoring practice."b)  "The PDD does not specify the accuracy. The accuracy of the Landtec portable gas analyzer is ac
esent good monitoring practice.b) The maximum error rate for methane with volume between 15 and 100% as per the operating manual o

installed.

ver. 11- Grid connected renewable electricity generation, However, the Monitoring Report and the Verification Report refer to AMS-I.D. v
onitoring report submitted with this request for issuance is version 2.1 dated on 27 May 2011.

termined in the PDD and used in the emission reduction calculations are not reported in the verification report.
of the verification report (p 38) indicates that it only checked the calibration certificate issued in 2010 while the monitoring period is betw

icate the monitoring period under verification and/or the corresponding number of CERs requested by the DOE. (EB48 Annex 68 para 10 (

he Verification/ Certification Report is dated 15 January 2013.

applies (including details on the temporal basis e.g. hourly/daily/etc. in which it should be applied).
 t the EGm,y is to be sourced from Enercon India Limited.

plied methodology.

methodology requires to use the data from the year in which project generation occurs or the year previous to generation.

Please refer to Paragraph 208 - VVM version 1.2.

0112012) and the certification as well as verification report (version 2 date 02.03.2012).3.Scope: According to EB48 Annex 68 paragraph 9

nd of HCFC22 in the market since 2000 and specify the sales (monthly and annually) of HCFC22, produced by the registered project activity
vide the value of the plant design capacity used to compare the NAP used to calculate the emissions reductions.
 cording to the PDD page 55 are provided by STU/GETCO, and according to the verification report page 31 are also called SLDC ABT meters

mation related to LPG production, and ii. The MR (pg. 21) lists some parameters (Time, Temperature, pressure, and flow rate) which need
d in the delayed calibration, as per EB 52 Annex 60 paragraph 4. 2) The Verification Report should provide information regarding assessme

nitoring points (the meters) have not been illustrated in the line diagram in page 12 of the monitoring report.2: Scope: The spreadsheet do

on. However, the reasons for delay and the expected implementation dates for those sites were not reported.
ines of EB52 Annex 60.

he number of CERs included in the signed form does not correpond to the number of CERs shown in the project viewpage (13,891 CERs).

gy nor the PDD specify frequency for calibration of meters. However, paragraph 76 (c) of the CDM project standard for project activities , v
nd included in this monitoring report or include references to spreadsheet". It is noted that the submitted spreadsheet only contains the c
ation /correction processes were not included in the spreadsheet. Given the impact of these parameters on the CERs, please transparently

D which are not consistent with the registered PDD version 03, dated 30 August, 2007. The submitted Monitoring Report version 3, dated

missions avoided from dumping of waste at a solid waste disposal site ” to calculate  baseline emissions due to decay of EFB.  Please refer

ory analysis. (VVM v.1.2 para 208 (a) and (b))Issue: The verification report does not provide an assessment on how the DOE crosschecked
consistencies in the emission reduction excel sheet (energy balance workbook): i. The energy balance (Cell M18) indicates a calculated ann

taining methane".2: Scope: The spreadsheet does not contain all parameters required to be monitored and/or reported at the intervals re

tial values that may be adopted by the CMP; and (ii) In accordance with any requirements of the CMP guidance. 2. The Risk acknowledgem

es due to the adjustment of S_HP. The DOE is requested to clarify how it has verified the adjustment of delayed calibration to flow meters

all CARs, CLs and FARs and/or provide an assessment and close out of any CARs, CLs or FARs issued. (VVM v.1.2 para 192, 194)Issue: The p

o states that "The delay from annual calibration period second AST test were reflected by application of maximum permissible error of the

and TE for the period from 05 November 2007 to 30 November 2007.

ained in the registered"

ore and during some periods after the commissioning of the turbine.

x 60 guidance has not been applied to the imported electricity.

onitoring of EGGEN and EGAUX, the DOE shall confirm that the monitored results of functional meters (excluding meter M26) have been re

oject activity implementation in accordance with the VVS-PA paragraph 357. First
“ Climate (Switzerland) AG ”is one of the PPs displayed o

.1.2 para 208 (a) and (b).

P flow meters in the N3 plant considering that the 4th monitoring period indicates that there are two NAP flow meters while as the curren
port the parameter ID11 (total biogas flow).

amount of methane destroyed / combusted during the year).

quency specified in applied monitoring methodology or EB guidance if applicable, and/or the monitoring plan? (VVM v.1.2 para 184 (a) (ii)
IPCC tier 2 approach during the monitoring period.

18 February 2011.

ts for gross electricity generation, auxiliary electricity consumption, power import (main and check meter), and power export (main and ch

eet contains a column called "The Net Eg (subtracted the line loss)", which calculates electricity discounted by 5.81% of transmission losse

pe: The verification and certification report does not describe the implementation status of the project as per VVS version 09.0 paragraph

erial impact over the total emission reductions. Please refer to paragraph 238 of VVS version 4.

from parameters EGImp(Import) and EGGENHTSC1; (b) parameter EGGENHTSC1, as per the revised monitoring plan and monitoring repor
us, the result of the net electricity exported should be (27,908.078 MWh - 3,177.535 MWh) 24,730.543 MWh that is 24% higher than the r

in the electricity output.

ing project implementation.

ort. However, CAR 14 was also closed as the values of the parameter are now consistent with the sales receipts. It is not clear with which o

ctober 2009) and 2000024 (July 2009) and confirmed that the sludge removal and disposal was done in accordance with the requirement

s used during the monitoring period (CELL F250) and (2) The PETR has been calculated considering the average of the measured return trip
0.5% has been deducted to the electricity data used in the ER calculation spreadsheet as the calibration validity of meters does not cover

report does not include a description of the quality control system, organisational structure, roles and responsibilities of personnel and a d

emissions from flaring gases containing methane which

’ specifies limit on temperature of the exhaust gas and not the flare temperature.
 umber of "Metering Point number" in Karma Energy - I and II and Weizmann - II) from the revised monitoring plan approved on 17/02/20

ation. However, it is not clear how the DOE reviewed this issue in the verification report. Further clarification is required.

the emission reductions calculation.4. The spreadsheet shall contain the formulae of calculation in the spreadsheet cells or explanation wi

nergy meters in Appendix 5 of the Monitoring Report and Verification Report (p.18-19); d) how the NCV (biomass) measurement was carr

provided any information with regard to parameters Power Generation in Gas Turbine and Fuel Consumption in Gas Turbine that are requ

monitoring plan requires the annual AST test for the monitoring parameters of FN2O, tail gas,h (Mass flow of N2O in the gaseous stream o

or does not present the expected implementation dates. (VVS v2, para 228 (a))Issue: The DOE is requested to explain how it confirmed tha
ion reductions calculations. The DOE has verified the application of calculated value due to some operational events. However, a measure
refers to MR version 1.3 dated 22.10.2011, where as the MR version 1.3 is dated 4.10.2011.
monitoring methodology, enclosed flares "shall be operated and maintained as per the specifications prescribed by the manufacturer", ho

nitoring plan to remove the inconsistencies in the PDD.

paragraph 62 of the Modalities and Procedures of the CDM.

 uired on why the meter was changed.

The DOE is requested to validate the calibration of all electricity meters. Specifically, calibration details for the principle and back up mete

eating system"; in the monitoring, certification, and verification reports, both of these project titles are used).
maximum permissible error of the instrument to the measured value. Meanwhile, the DOE explains that the PP has decreased the value o

e as appropriate have been carried out in accordance with the formulae and methods described in the monitoring plan and the applied me
med that a correction has been observed to the installed capacity of the boiler from 35t/h to 50t/h, however no such changes have been in
must be consistent.Issue: Verification report refers on page 2 to the crediting period 01.02.2009-31.12.2010 which is the monitoring perio

responding emission reduction calculations spreadsheet are consistent with the registered PDD. The applied values are correct and justifie

e that the monitoring parameters have been correctly monitored during this time period .2: Scope: The verification report does not provid
DOE does not provide the relevant assessment in this regard. Information is requested.

ontain description of the emergency procedures for the monitoring system.

equirement of EB48 Annex 34. Please refer to VVM 1.2 paragraph 208(e), ACM0006 version 3 - parameter ID7 and ID9, EB54 Annex 34.

mission reductions.Issue: Calculations in the MR and Excel sheet are not consistent with the CER amount requested

t when calculating the methane destruction efficiency in the flares. The impact of this interruptions on the estimated emission reductions
ested to describe how the sludge removed is disposed, in line with the provisions included in the registered PDD (p. 42).2: Scope: The verifi

s not provide an assessment of the compliance with EB 52 Annex 60 'Guidelines for assessing compliance with the calibration frequency re

nlet. The PP shall provide more information about calibration dates and describe whether the calibration of equipments covers the monito

cation Report does not provide the dates and results of the flare efficiency monitoring. It also does not explain how the DOE verified that t
ct activity. Furthermore, the monitoring report shows that Excess Air on Dry Basis (including the oxygen) is calculated based on the Flue ga
 plan and the monitoring report.3: Scope: The verification report does not provide a conclusion on the verified amount of emission reducti

between the document must be correct and accurate.Issue: Issue: In the submitted CER calculation spreadsheet, reference is made to "ver
ms showing all relevant monitoring points has not been provided in the section C of the monitoring report. Please also note that the param

he scheduled maintenance and shutdown. 3)The DOE is requested to clarify how it has closed CAR 10 and how it has verified the calculatio

nt of the purity) has been used. It is requested to correct this value by using the pure HFC23 incinerated.

report does contain neither a description of emergency procedures for the monitoring system nor a line diagrams showing all relevant mo

ons used in emission calculations have been justified and/or emission factors, default values and other reference values have been correct
arters of monitored data for methane content were not available and accepted the application of the lowest methane concentration moni
 d. Explanations shall be provided on the reasons for significantly increased energy savings for project measures such as F8B: the PDD estim
s this may be considered as permanent changes, the DOE should have requested a notification or approval of changes to the project descr
ion 4 of April 2006) does not correspond to the version and the date of PDD indicated under Verification and Certification Statement (PDD

quested to provide an explanation on Annex 1 (Single Line Diagram) in the Monitoring Report with clearly denoting the main metering poi

tivity. Further, it states that the average daily consumption during the monitoring period was calculated and then multiplied by the numbe

r was the most conservative approach as 1) the meter was not calibrated after the replacement and 2) the DOE did not have a result of de

above-ground tree biomass in A/R CDM project activities (Version 01.0.0)''. However, the DOE did not validate the appropriateness of the
ning for the months of January and April 2009, the electricity exported to the grid was 8 MWh and 118.625 MWh respectively.

ect view page displays (2,649,682 CO2). Please note that inorder for you to correct the CER on the project view page we are sending this r
nd of HCFC22 in the market since 2000 and specify the sales (monthly and annually) of HCFC22, produced by the registered project activit

owever the spreadsheet submitted shows that such difference is greater than 1% in March 2010, November 2010 and January  2011. Plea

08, please clarify why the notification or approval of changes is not relevant in the current monitoring period.2: Scope: The verification rep
flare efficiency. The DOE is requested to include an explanation with regard to application of formulae in the spreadsheet to calculate the fl

g the boiler, and does not include the volumes of biogas of stack gases 1, 2 and 3 entering the coal fired boilers and; (b) emissions from fla
acy for measuring methane content in biogas is thus less than specified in the PDD, the measurement accuracy of the Landtec BioGas Chec

ot maintained by DLHPPL for the import meter. The DOE is requested to explain: (i) how it verified the PP s’explanation that the PP has no

eters that are reported.

d an IRC minor issue requesting clarification for the installation dates for the meters from site 21092 as the monitoring report (pg 21, table

fication report does not contain reference to the the revision of monitoring plan requested to and approved by the Executive Board on 12

verification statement as per paragraph 203 of the VVM version 1.2.

culation file) and 70.9% (confidence level file).

is to be measured periodically with confidence level of at least 95%.   The DOE is requested to clarify which requirements in the PDD and r
 good monitoring practice."b)  "The PDD does not specify the accuracy. The accuracy of the Landtec portable gas analyzer is according to t

ever, the verification report does not indicate if this has been complied with.

ularly as no information is provided regarding the same in the verification report.

ssued from 01 Jan 2013, in certification and verification report.3.Scope: The cross-referencing and versioning within and between the docu

e the status of implementation and starting date of operation for each site. For CDM project activities with phased implementation, the re

he calibration dates for all measuring instruments are required to be provided.

ld explain whether the increase in PLF (of over 4 years out of the 10-years crediting period) raises concerns related to the additionality of
ertification report submitted refers to a different monitoring period.4.Scope: The submitted spreadsheet is not in an assessable unprotecte

f the Appendix of the "Tool to determine the mass flow of a greenhouse gas in a gaseous stream" version 03.0. However, this approach ca

modified to comply with the requirements under the VVS. Kindly resubmit all the documents (Monitoring report, verification report, certifi

two monitoring periods would also show significant increases of   33.0% and 12.9%. Given these significant increases, the DOE is request
rking.2. The monitoring report (p 10) indicated that the site of 20632 was not operational during two weeks (the week of 17 May 2009 and
n cases where any production levels of HCFC22 have increased above the market demand relevant for the registered project activity, prov

toring Report does not provide information on the calibration of the meters.2: Scope: The verification report does not state how the DOE

ata submitted every 2 minutes, the DOE is  requested to clarify how it has verified that the gas sent to the engine was destroyed and ERs w

ation report and verification report are dated 18.02.2014.

tion requests were closed: - CAR2: the classification of waste composition and decay rates in the revised monitoring report (p14) are not c

arify: (a) how it verified the baseline emission calculations as per the formula in the PDD; (b) the discrepancy between the values of EGexp
as not copied for the emission reductions calculation for the steam component for December 2009); 3) The DOE shall clarify how it verifi

d by the monitoring plan and the applied methodology?Issue: The spreadsheet does not present the actual values for the parameters mon
ing compliance with the calibration frequency requirements' for the calibration delay. (VVM v.1.2 para 184 (a) (ii) & EB 52 Annex 60)Issue:

e types mentioned in the registered PDD (i.e. PKS and coal petcoke, shale and diesel); and 2) the share of heat input from alternative fuels

nd of HCFC22 in the market since 2000 and specify the sales (monthly and annually) of HCFC22, produced by the registered project activit
nd of HCFC22 in the market since 2000 and specify the sales (monthly and annually) of HCFC22, produced by the registered project activit

n 2011 and 2) the verification report identified two delayed periods of 01/01/2013-31/05/2014 and 01/03/2016-31/03/2017 for CNFL ma

nsumed in boilers. The DOE has not stated in the verification report how the monitored steam flow data has been verified and cross-check

be the nature and extent of the actual changes, determine whether this description accurately reflects the implementation, operation and
bration result in fewer claimed emission reductions. The DOE also reported that the calibration certificates for several meters were not pr

ed, the requirements from EB52 - Annex 60 (Paragraphs 4 to 6) must be applied.

layed, the requirements from EB52 - Annex 60 (Paragraphs 4 to 6) must be applied.2: Scope: The verification report does not state that th

provided in the deviation request approved by EB in March 2008. However,

” the concerned deviation has been approved at EB35. Further

verage as required by the applied methodology ACM0002 version 02 (page 05) and the approved revised PDD version 06 (page 16 and 22)
issuance.Issue: According to the submitted verification report there are no post-registration changes.4.Scope: The submitted documentati

UE(S)3) The number of total outage hours is inconsistent between the verification report (p.6, 1033 hours 9 minutes) and the monitoring r
e conducted at the frequency as specified by the methodology and the monitoring plan (i.e. page 23 of the validation report), given the fa

nt back to the DOE as incomplete on 14 August, 2013.

rch - July 2007 as per the approved deviation considering the fact that the net
‘ production in MWh in
’ the spreadsheet was not calculated

d by accepting a correction factor of 0.004 for the period of November 2017- November 2018 without having delayed calibration referred

able 6, page 27), as it requires a project to apply either default 50% value or an efficiency based on the technical
“ specifications of the LFG
ng period. Please refer to VVS paragraph 398.
r the TOOL05 - Baseline, project and/or leakage emissions from electricity consumption and monitoring of electricity generation to which

permissible error" is. Although the Verification Report p.16, confirms that the maximum errors of meters are within ±0.4%, without having
17." However, 1) the monitoring report indicates that the commissioning dates were in December 2017 and 2) and the spreadsheet indica

OE is required to provide clearly how WCH4,y of 41.926% is calculated based on the monitored data in the spreadsheet.

he delivery point on 13/12/2017." However, the DOE has not provided any validation opinion on this as per the paragraph 296 of VVS for

01/2021, considering the billing period is until 01/01/2021.

73 04 05
’ E.
” The DOE is required to provide further information on how it verified the location and implementation of the project activity a

te visit for the project activity, will impact a delay in CERs delivery to its Annex-1 party, as there is an ERPA in place, signed in between the
rding to PCP for Project Activities version 2.0, para 199, a valid version of the CDM-MR-FORM shall be submitted.1. The verification and ce

xlsx ”and “
10236 Sogamoso 2019-2020_OM Summary_May 28 2021.xlsm .”However, only the 1st excel file has been provided to the sec

ed is conservative since it does not add the methane losses in the biogas purification process (D) to the result of methane concentration in

stration of the CDM project activity, how the changes would impact on the overall operation/ability of the CDM project activity to deliver
es not state that the monitoring plan is in accordance with the applied approved methodology and, where applicable, the applied approve
ack changes version is missing.4.Scope: According to PCP version 9 para 161(f) supplemental documentation(e.g. emission reduction work

ered PDD. Please refer to paragraph 390 b and 393 of VVS version 0.9.0. 2. As per the registered monitoring plan, the monitoring frequenc

e actual date of calibration, if the results of the delayed calibration do not show any errors in the measuring equipment, or if the error is sm

e the formula described in tab Parameter

“ ”of the ER sheet is (0.002565/D^2*H+0.0489814-0.00552*D^H)*D^2*H
“ .”(b) The actual formu

actual GHG emission reductions achieved by the registered non-A/R CDM project activity in the current monitoring period that was repor

/06/2019 while the monitoring report (p 22) shows that HPU 05976 (Main meter) & HPU05977 (Check meter) were calibrated on 18 June 2

atory framework, provided that the resubmission is made within 90 days.

months or more; weekly for a monitoring period of less than six months; daily for a monitoring period of one month or less). Please refer to

ed by the DOE. For example, in Oct-16 under Export and Import of "WTGs GF 24, GF26, GF 28, GF 32, GF 33, GF 36", there is a factor of 37.

controller since there no evidence on checking it with the manufacturer.3: Both the monitoring report (section B.2) and the verification re

0CT002¨ have been considered in the calculation of the emission reductions as per the requirements of VVS v.03 para. 366 and 367. To ad
tted, EGimport,y (column L) is calculated considering the GR (column J) and this formula applied in the EGinpurt,y is not explained in the M

of paragraph 366(a) of VVS version 02.0 for the delayed period in auxiliary consumption data. However, there is no information of the da

or issuance of CERs.

s monitoring period. The PP/DOE is required to provide further information on how the monitoring of these parameters are in line with th
para 365 and 366 of VVS for PA version 3.

nd between the document are not correct and accurate.Issue: There is an inconsistency in the cross-referencing of the monitoring report.

ated 15.8.2014 whereas the registered PDD is v.1.6 dated 15.9.2014.

dress the issues below as per paragraphs 366, 367 and the appendix of the VVS for PA. The PP in the MR p18 has the provision that the da
urced from ith source during the year y". As per the MR, this parameter is measured by meter installed after the generator. The DOE is req

curate.Issue: There is an inconsistency in the cross-referencing of the monitoring report. The verification/certification report on page 30 re
o calculate ex-post OM, whereas for year 2019 data vintage 'y-1' is used. The PP and DOE are requested to further justify the completenes

ain how it has verified the emissions reductions calculations in line with the requirements. The value of "TEGy" for the month of July 2014

ty displaces grid electricity (Tool page 10). However, the simple OM was calculated based on three years data. 2: Scope: The verification re
quest form does not refer to post-registration changes. Kindly clarify.

eduled date of calibration and the actual date of calibration.2: Refer VVS-PA Para 373(b): As per the ER spreadsheet, for 09/2013 and 08/2

he project design. The PP/DOE are requested to refer to the same changes in all the documents related to this request for issuance.2: Mo

r the registered PDD, net electricity supplied to the NEWNE grid by project activity will be cross checked against the invoice raised by the P
e with PCP version 9 para 222.Issue: The submitted ER spreadsheet is for project "42.5 MW Wind Power Project by VRL Logistics Ltd in Karn

strated in the diagram of the monitoring report (page 6). In addition, the description of Me3A
“ ”and Me3B
“ in
” the revised PDD (page 57)
he equipment used to monitor each parameter including details on accuracy class and calibration information (frequency, dates of calibra
all provide a description of how it cross-checked reported dataThe DOE is requested to clarify how it crosschecked the monthly measured

hat the methodology applies to project activities that convert one or several power units at one site from single-cycle to combined-cycle m

ected to periodic cycles. The DOE is requested to further substantiate how the condition is met.2: The DOE shall justify any assumptions in

rediting period of the project activity, changes to the project or programme design). 3.Scope: The number of Certified Emission Reductions

alues that may be adopted by the CMP; and (ii) In accordance with any requirements of the CMP guidance.

versioning within and between the document is not correct and accurate.Issue: The Revised PDD is version 10 dated 26.09.2016. Howeve
a registered project activity.
verified/cross-checked parameter EGy (Quantity of net electricity generation exported to the grid) for above periods in light of the invoice
(d))Issue: It is noted that a set of emission factors of the fossil fuels in project scenario has been reported in the emission reduction spread

es, Version 03 ”as the observed error of meters was within maximum permissible error. Value after application of maximum permissible e
meter required by the registered monitoring plan and state how it verified the information flow (from data generation, aggregation, to reco
tive monitoring arrangements are not proposed.In the first submission, the PP/DOE applied a conservative approach without filing the dev
for issuance of CERs.

eport for the request for issuance.2: Scope: The verification and certification report does not provide information on approaches, findings
 eport for the request for issuance.2: Scope: The verification and certification report does not provide information on approaches, findings

pling dates whereas it is observed that during the temporary deviation period, the highest values identified during the monitoring period w

report mentions it as Weightech WT211.2: Scope: The verification and certification report does not list each parameter required by the mo
The DOE is requested to provide further information on how it deemed this approach to be in line with paragraph 282 of VVS PA v02.2: Do

ope: The number of Certified Emission Reductions (CERs), within and between the documents is not consistent.Issue: The submitted ER sp

ope: The number of Certified Emission Reductions (CERs), within and between the documents is not consistent.Issue: The submitted ER sp

e project activity (EGhistorical) and the Standard deviation of the annual average historical net electricity generation delivered to the grid
riate.5.Scope: The types of post registration changes are not consistent among the submitted documents.Issue: The monitoring report (pa

cture of the project activity blocks. The post-registration change proposes to exclude this parameter (i.e. quantity of fly ash used by the pr
agraphs 294 and 295.Issue:3: Scope: The validation report does not contain an assessment on when the changes occurred, reasons for tho

nce with the registered monitoring plan 2: As per VVS para 368, If the results of the delayed calibration are not available, or the calibration
there is a distance of approx 14 km between the locations of the dam and the powerhouse. Some mention of this distance should have m

2014 and block 2 (remaining 363.3 MW) from 24/03/2015, whereas 86.3% (1,739,449 tCO2e) of the estimated emission reductions (2,014
.D version 17).2: Scope: The spreadsheet does not contain explanation with regard to application of formulae in the spreadsheet.Issue: Th
ly cross-checked in line with the procedures provided in the registered PDD considering the SIC website value does not cover the same nu

3.Scope: The cross-referencing and versioning within and between the document are not correct and accurate.Issue: The verification/certifi
explain how it has verified that quality assurance and quality control procedures have been applied in accordance with the registered mon

y any global warming potential values that may be adopted by the CMP; and (ii) In accordance with any requirements of the CMP guidance
ever, as shown in the ER spreadsheet, parameter PEEL,y for the entire monitoring period is calculated using average of TDLgr,y for 5 years,

e corrected value as per note 4), and these corrected values are said to be used for baseline emission calculation) for the period January t
issioning, continued operation periods, etc.) during the monitoring period under consideration. (PS v1 para 188 (a)(b)(c))Issue:1. The DOE
monitored values (263,200 kWh in total) and purchase invoice values (250,240 kWh in total) .”It further concluded that the
“ values of EGe
monitored values (424,320 kWh in total) and the purchase invoice values (415,440 kWh in total) .”It further concluded that the
“ values of E

e. Please clarify why the changes to the section B.7.1 of the PDD are not considered as permanent changes to the registered monitoring pl
he paragraph 1, page 15, of the applied methodology (which requires the installation of appropriate flow and concentration meters to dire

ns where there is a delay in the calibration of the monitoring instruments.

tivities para 196 a duly completed CDM-ISS-FORM shall be submitted.Issue: The request for issuance form refers to PRC submitted with the

g the value in the invoice is lower. Refer to paragraphs 361(e) and 373 (b) of VVS for PA, version 02.0.3: This verification covers the first mo
mit of the uncertainty at a 95% confidence interval as provided in Chapter 1 of Vol. 2 (Energy) of the 2006 IPCC Guidelines on National GH

29) refer to ER spreadsheet version 1.2 dated 05/05/2021 whereas the applicable version is 1.1 dated 03/02/2021. 2.Scope: The number o
5-001.2: Scope: The verification and certification report does not provide a statement on whether post-registration changes to the register
at the confidence of 90% and precision of 10% have been achieved (Verification Report page 30-31) in line with the Standard for Sampling
 the transmission loss is taken into account; (e) Change of location of substation not within the control of the project participants or the co

s required to submit the ex-post grid emission factor calculation used for the calculation of the baseline emission as per para 259 of PS for

for issuance for the monitoring period 19 Nov 12 - 31 Jul 13.

ed references IRL #22 and IRL#23 to evidence some activities related to the project implementation. However, details of these references

d under verification and/or the corresponding number of CERs requested by the DOE.Issue: The monitoring period in the certification state

uctively harvested trees of different diameter classes within the project area. If the biomass estimated from the harvested trees is within
ct owner .”The line diagram on MR (p. 5) and the registered PDD (p. 8) only show the particulars for the proposed project activity. The PP/
ng the demonstration of a significant impact of delaying the site visits on the DOE, project participants or coordinating/managing entity (e.
was presented in the submitted ER calculation spreadsheet. However, the ER calculation does not present a similar statistical analysis of t
he DOE is requested to clarify how it has verified the energy generation and export/import for specific days during March 2015 and Octobe
09 (f).Issue: The verification report (p 8) did not provide any statement on PRC while the monitoring report (p 6) provides the approved PR
the monitoring system and provide line diagrams (graphical schemes) showing all relevant monitoring points.2: Regarding the monitoring
information and the verification opinion in the submitted documentation.   Please refer to paragraph 261 of the VS-PA, v.03.0 and paragra
oes not contain a description of the equipment used to monitor each parameter including details on accuracy class and calibration inform

electricity supplied to the grid (EG net export, project). However, EG controller, project which is base parameter used for calculation of EG
 411850) and temperature meter (Serial # 1511891776), and the rule from paragraph 366 (a) of VVS-PA has been applied as the results of

or of 0,95 which has not been described in the monitoring report and in the verification report. Further clarification is required.4: The PP/D
rovisions in the validation or verification contracts, if needed."The DOE is asked to specify the ERPA and referred it in Appendix 3 of the Ve

ment, for this project activity, KBS has made commitment/timeline as per the validation contract. Hence, the site visit cannot be postpone
e cross-referencing of the ER amount. The submission page refers to 254,237 whereas the ER spreadsheet, monitoring report, verification a
chieved and/or determine that calculations of baseline emissions, project emissions and leakage as appropriate have been carried out in a

R calculation spreadsheet. In particular, to the measured values of electricity exports and imports for the period from Oct. 2015 to Aug. 20
he sale to the third party by referencing/providing relevant/official documents.2: Scope: The verification and certification report does not
oved revised PDD. Issue: As per Monitoring Report (page 9 and 11), the monitored values of the parameter Apj (km2) (i.e. the area of the
logy because there is the greenhouse gas emissions and the air pollutants in the power generation process."2: Scope: The spreadsheet do

eported in the revised spreadsheet can be considered, given that the 3rd monitoring period is from 09 December 2014 to 31 December 20

e electricity imported from the grid to the Phase j project were managed and recorded by the 8 projects owner.
’ The incompleteness and l
 order to conclude that the implementation and operation was conducted in accordance with the description contained in the registered

rovide information of all the meters, including the calibration, as required by paragraph 260 (b) of PS-PA, version 03.0.2: VVS-PA Para 373
which the invoices were missing.2: If, during the verification of a certain monitoring period, the DOE identifies that the calibration has been
ount of emission reductions shall be equal to the verified amount of emission reductions. The possible way forward could be to split the c
o why these negative gas volume flow are resulted, and why these negative N2O values in tail gas are taking into account in the project em
ent and acceptance form"(CDM-RAA-FORM) has not been submitted. Also please note that the RAA form should be referred to in section
S version 09.0.

he compliance of the monitoring plan with the applied monitoring methodology. 2: Scope: The verification and certification report does no

tion, to recording, calculation and reporting) for these parameters including the values in the monitoring reports (VVS v5, para 236, 284 (e
methods and procedures for biogas NCV.
294 was only calibrated once on in 14/10/2011 whereas the frequency is stated as annually (Verification Report page 28); (iii) SN 1001295

od of (08/02/2012-31/03/2012: 34,766 tCO2e, 01/01/2013-31/03/2013: 7,428 tCO2e) whereas the correct dates should be 08/02/2012-3
ojects (project 1_ 49.5 MW and project 2_ xx MW). The data generated from the three projects is used to estimate the emission reduction

and quantities used in the project activity"; (b) the equipment to monitor the parameter and information on calibration of parameter "ECP
3370), installed on 29/09/2010 and replaced on 03/11/2012 (used from 10/01/2012 to 03/11/2012 during this monitoring period) and TN

ated based on fuel consumption and average NCV and comparing it with total energy generated by project equipments. However, the sub
n accordance to para 4 and 5 of the Appendix 1 of the Project standard and do not require prior approval by the Board.

g actual confidence/precision was assessed. The DOE is requested to submit the spreadsheet which demonstrate the actual/achieved prec
g actual confidence/precision was assessed. The DOE is requested to submit the spreadsheet which demonstrate the actual/achieved prec
Kindly please submit the relevant data sets together with the relevant calculation in a traceable format.

n for years 2005-06, 2006-07 and 2007-08.

delines for sampling and surveys for CDM project activities and programme of activities (version 04) for the determination of the actual pr
onitoring report date is incorrect in the Verification Report.

taken into account in the calculation of the ER in the revised PDD.2: Scope: The verification and certification report does not determine if
nt period.2: The DOE conducted a remote audit due to COVID-19 pandemic and stated that the site visit could not be postponed as per the

installed flare is an enclosed flare and the default values, applicable for enclosed flares, are defined in the monitoring plan accordingly, ho
to explain how it concluded that the implementation and operation of the project activity is consistent with the registered PDD, in particu

ned since a delay on performing the mandatory on-site visit for the project activity, will impact a delay in CERs delivery as there is an ERPA

t the calibration of the biogas analyser was carried out by an accredited person or institution in accordance with the manufacturer s ’speci
of Project Standard which do not require prior approval of the Board (VVS v2, para 248,262)Issue: The validation opinion does not contain
ed the implementation of the sampling for COD parameters, in particular whether the number of samples meet the 90/10 confidence/pre

orary deviation is requested from the monitoring plan as the accuracy of ±0.5% for the flow meter installed for measuring thermal energy
". Therefore, column J 21 of "Electricity Data" was not included in the calculation of the baseline.2: The paragraph 376(g) of the validation

or the fossil fuel fired in the power plant used prior to the start of the implementation of the project activity and Net calorific value of foss

val by the Board prior to the submission of the request for issuance as per para 133 of project cycle procedure as there are the permanent
oocarpa and 0.55 is applied for Pinus caribeaea. The DOE is required to provide further information on the application of the correct value

ed form for issuance request (Haouma Wind Farm Project, developed by NAREVA HOLDING). 3.Scope: The number of Certified Emission Re

22,525 tCO2e. However, the PRC validation report does not provide the validation opinion for the following (VVS for PA (v2) paragraph 30

" (ii) On p.42 of VR, against entry of sample plot B3-12, it is mentioned that "The plot centre is moved because there were not trees in the

to (i) focus on the repair and monitoring of leaks with gas emission rates on the higher scale and ii) revision of GWP factor for CH4 from 2

odology and the actual monitoring complies with the monitoring plan, including compliance with any guidance provided by the Board rega

of data was checked by the RES

“ ”and project owner separately .”However, no information has been provided on the how the RES
“ and
” t
of data was checked by the RES
“ ”and project owner separately .”However, no information has been provided on the how the RES
“ and
” t
sheet 2013-2014 fT,y
“ ”cell F33. The PP/DOE is requested to clarify the inconsistency and make correction where applicable.2: Scope: The
7) based on monitored generation from 2009-2011 and iii) 98,960.4 MWh in the verification report (page 33). Further, the verification rep

ied out and what was the result of the delayed calibration test of the old meters.

spreadsheet is calculated each hour. It is also observed that the spreadsheets include a note Flare
“ efficiency in the hour h calculated whe
on and certification on page 5 refers to Error!
“ Reference source not found". Kindly clarify. 3.Scope: The cross-referencing and versioning w

y." Further information is required by the DOE on how it verified the delayed calibration as per para 238 a) and b) of VVSs as the validation

13, it is mentioned at a few places that "the plot centre is moved because there were no trees in the original one", or that "the plot centre
ing period 16 Jun 11 - 15 Jun 18. 3.Scope: The submitted documents are not internally and mutually consistent.Issue: The Validation Repo

g the calibration delay and whether the delayed calibration report meets the requirements of the Guidelines for assessing compliance wit

g plan, the DOE shall assess the most conservative values approach is applied to the parameter or alternative monitoring arrangements fo

urced from the invoice.2: VVS-PA, paragraph 366: The DOE is requested to explain how the requirements in paragraph 366 of VVS-PA is co

ast monitoring period for the month of august 2018. DOE is requested to explain what the four values added under cell E20 of the spread

ordance with registered or the revised monitoring plan as per VVS version 09.0 paragraph 392.Issue: The monitoring report states that the
normal city development ,”however this provision does not exist in the approved revised PDD; (ii) Technology used for trunk buses and su
)). 2.Scope: The cross-referencing and versioning within and between the document are not correct and accurate.Issue: The verification/c
ners; (5) The GETCO main meter at the EIL substation as stated in the PDD.2: As per paragraph 366 of VVS-PA, if, during the verification of
lection and recording in the monitoring report.

Power Export(Data reading records)/Electricity export (MWh) (cell D7).

a proper justification should be provided by the DOE as to why the site visits cannot be postponed, including the demonstration of a signifi

thus be result of a permanent change of the project activity which would require a request for approval of changes in accordance with in a
ype of changes) to be ticked.2.Revised PDD clean and track changes version have not been submitted.3.Scope: According to PCP for Proje

so, the DOE shall clearly report what approach will be used in the next verification in light of the FAR raised.

uctions for the monitoring period 01 Mar 12 - 31 Mar 14 is inconsistent throughout the submitted documentation.
here is no Annex 3 in the report. ii)The DOE should also clarify the inconsistency in the verification report where certain sections verify com

demonstrates that the surplus biomass in the region is 215%.

nor)) .”However, in accordance with paragraph 146(c) of the PCP ver 07.0, a request for approval of post-registration changes shall contain
ormation as per the para 26 of EB 106 meeting report since it did not provide a proper justification as to why the site visits cannot be post

rsion 2 whereas the applicable VVS is version 3. 3.Scope: The monitoring period throughout the documentation is not consistent.Issue: Th

at the global stakeholder consultation (GSC) is no longer required after having fulfilled the requirement for the timing of the GSC publicatio

plain how it concludes that the frequency of the calibration of gas chormatography has complied with the monitoring plan (i.e. monthly), a

g records)/Electricity export (MWh) (cell E5).

E is requested to provide information how it has verified the actual precision of each stratum.3: Page 5 and page 32 of the applied method

document are not correct and accurate.Issue: The verification/certification report refer to the monitoring report version 6 dated 04/02/20

e PP shall provide a clear description on how this parameter was monitored, indicating (i) the meaning of the columns #1 and #2; (ii) the n
 request for issuance.Issue: No CER calculation spreadsheet was submitted.
monitoring plan and the applied methodology document. (VVS v2, para 246 (c), 284 (i))Issue: Sampling is carried-out via permanent sampli

y it did not raise any FAR to revise the monitoring plan to be in line with the actual practice.

ation on how the monitoring plan complies with the EB 49 Annex 28 requirements and para 206 & 221(d) of VVM v1.2, and why revision o
epted revised monitoring plan. (VVS v2 para 235)Issue: The DOE is requested to further substantiate: (a) the difference of value of parame

ease provide information on the compliance of the temporary deviation against CDM Project Standard Appendix 1, and in particular, how

ctivity, when the reservoir is full. However, the monitoring report (section D.2) and verification report (p 16) state that " The reservoir are

om the applied spreadsheets to decide the value of FCH4,EL,y. 2: The DOE is requested to address the issues below as per paragraph 361 o

05/2014. These inconsistencies were identified for the replaced meters in the both reports; 2) Both the monitoring report and the verifica

ay 2011 and once in a month from June 2011 onwards whereas it is required to be once in a month as per the registered monitoring plan.
been provided.

iomass consumption has not been considered in the investment analysis; and 2) why the original price of rice husk and straws (241 RMB/t
e model (6,375), (ii) focus on the repair and monitoring of leaks with gas emission rates on the higher scale and iii) revision of GWP factor f

ject participants at the frequency specified in the registered monitoring plan. Refer Para 374 (b) and 365 of VVS-PA, version 3.02: VVS-PA P
ng to the grid, which is not consistent with the project description in the registered PDD (the net electricity generated will be exported to t

this parameter. Please refer to VVM version 1.2 paragraph 199.

ed for chromatography to monitor LHVwg,dwg,EFNG,P,y,EFFO,P,y.as required by the methodology 3)option used to determine ήwg,PR2: S

odology and why it did not issue a FAR to require the project participant to revise the monitoring plan to include the monitoring of this pa
 (p 19) prepared by the same DOE states that The
“ metering instruments will be calibrated in accordance with the national standard but a

roject Standard version 07.0. In doing so, the DOE shall reflect the analysis of the changes in a revised IRR calculation spreadsheet and in t
 tion 2.C of the Attachment of the CDM-MR FORM.2: Scope: The verification and certification report does not provide a conclusion on the v

on 21/05/2014. It was again removed for calibration on 06/05/2015 and only put back on 03/06/2015. - For T trans2 in 2# flare, the equip

monitoring period and 2) how it considered the application of the highest value during monitoring period was conservative considering tha

DOE verified this.

ot required, but modified PDDs/MRs have to be attached to validation/verification reports. Please also refer to Par: 17 of the Meeting Repo

emission rates on the higher scale than estimated ex-ante in the registered PDD, ii) increase in the GWPCH4 from 21 tCO2/tCH4 to 25 tCO2

in the registered PDD are in place and/or that the project participant has implemented and operated the proposed CDM project activity a
s display the final revision/approval date as of 23 October, 2012. However, the Monitoring Report version 2, states the completition date a
essment and close out of any CARs, CLs or FARs issued. (VVS v2, para 284(g)(h))Issue: The DOE is request to further substantiate how it clo

in page 36 of the PDD. Further, please also illustrate the auxiliary consumption demand of the project activity (the additional electricity co

ed a conservative approach and the deviation request deemed reasonable. However, the monitoring report and verification report do not

mal manure management system capturing methane and flaring/combusting or gainfully using methane was operational(ndy) shall be mon
s per the provisions defined under registered PDD. Further, the DOE is also requested to provide details about the period during which dry

ons for filling out the monitoring report form.2: Scope: The verification and certification report does not provide a conclusion on the verifie
d by the monitoring plan and does not provide an statement on how the DOE verified the information flow (from data generation, aggrega

1) The spreadsheet Emission

“ Reductions ”shows that the EGf1,y (column K) is calculated by aggregating the values directly from the sprea
ssue: The DOE should verify whether the monitoring of the NCV,i,y and EFCO2,i,y parameters is in accordance with the approved monitori

s in the correct formatThe calculator sheet and IPCC sheet of the ARWG30_SOC_Tool_Multizones_NW Guangxi spreadsheet are not replic
of the changes is not prepared by the project participants, as per requirement of paragraph 221 of the CDM Project Standard version 2.1.2
: Scope: The verification and certification report does not provide a conclusion on the verified amount of emission reductions achieved no

s the data obtained from each of the 10 households is not provided, and there is no information how the DOE verified whether the selecte

ngegebener Formatvorlage im Dokument. ”3.Scope: The request for issuance form does not correspond to the correct number of Certified

n spreadsheet is for a different project.3.Scope: A verification and certification report has not been submitted with a request for issuance

Nest I; however, the DOE has not confirmed how the flow meter located at Nest I functioned without the PLC control system and this situ
 equired, but modified PDDs/MRs have to be attached to validation/verification reports.

m) appearing in the TARAM model, in order to explain how the monitored data is being used in the calculation of emission reductions.

oring plan, or whether alternative monitoring arrangements for the non-monitoring period are described, whether they apply conservative
e values are lower than the net export values based on credit notes. The DOE is therefore requested to explain how it verified parameter

ference number PA2216, 1825 and 3264) and it shares the backup meter M3 with PA3264. The DOE shall clarify how the monitoring requ
nsformer. ”However, the PP did not report readings of M2 and M3 and the values of the other WTG connected to the same main meter at

rid by project activity (Wuliji Phase-1), electricity imports from the grid by project activity (Wuliji Phase-1), electricity generation export to

WECs. Further clarification is required.2: Scope: The verification report does not state that the monitoring has been carried out in accordan
ified the monitoring is conducted for the period Feb. to Apr. 2022 as per the monitoring plan which requires monthly monitoring measure
project to the grid, a description of the QA/QC procedures, the data collection procedures and the roles and responsibilities of the personn

monthly recorded. However, from Apr 2014 to Dec 2014 when the distribution is continuing, the number of CFLs account for emission re

and/or provide an assessment and close out of any CARs, CLs or FARs issued. (VVM v.1.2 para 192, 194)Issue: The DOE is requested to expl
electricity generation during the period 01/01/2011-31/01/2011. The DOE should explain the reasons why there is zero electricity generati

5.04.2017). 3.Scope: According to PCP v2 para 182 a signed "CDM project activity issuance request form" (F-CDM-ISS) must be submitted.I

as been complied with in the absence of: (i) confirmation that the results of the delayed calibrations were within the permissible error of t

report using the form and guidelines for completing the monitoring report form (CDM-MR-FORM) has not been submitted with a request

s of the project (including a brief description of the installed technology and/or equipments, relevant dates of project activity e.g. date of c
ll "include line diagrams showing all relevant monitoring points". However, Line Diagram in the Monitoring Report (on page 9) only indicat

le methodologies for this project, ie. AMS-I.D. ver. 13 and ACM0001 ver. 9.
rect and accurate.Issue: The submitted "Certification Report" refers to "the revised version of the Monitoring Report of 09/04/2012 ver. 4.

he reservoir is full. However, the monitoring report (p 10) and verification report (p 38) state that "the value of this monitoring parameter

i) & EB 52 Annex 60)Issue: The DOE states that the import watt-meter was calibrated in Feb 2008 and was later replaced on 14/07/2010 (p

s only delayed and it has not been canceled. Issue 2: Rice husk is transferred from neighbor NLRM by trucks and not by conveyor belt as de
agraph 9(e), cross-referencing and versioning within and between the document is correct and accurate.Issue: The date of the PDD is wron
However, the verification report does not describe the reasons for the phased-implementation delay, nor presents a clear assessment on

the parameter MCHO tfh, as there are differences in the value each month between the file "Sintex Emission Reduction Calculation" sheet
xtent of the proposed or actual changes. Please refer to PS PA v1.0 paragraph 241.In page 8 of the validation opinion, the DOE has stated t

has been submitted.

within and between the document must be correct and accurate.Issue: There is an inconsistency of methodology between the project view
ds used (PS v1, 194 (a)(b)(c)(d))Issue:The value of QOE,BL as per the submitted revised PDD is 105.58 GWh/yr.However in the current mon

E verified that the monitoring plan is in accordance with the applied methodology, in particular with regard to the required parameter Cap

set from 22/12/2010 onwards.2: Scope: The verification report does not describe the implementation status of the project. (For project ac

Cross-Check Meters during the period from 22/12/2010 to 24/02/2011.

e: According to EB48 Annex 68 paragraph 9(e), cross-referencing and versioning within and between the document is correct and accurat

he most part of this monitoring period, the DOE is requested to assess if this is a permanent change and why notification of changes in the
present the expected implementation dates. (VVM v.1.2 para 198 (a)).Issue: There are 2 anaerobic lagoons and the project participant had

per the monitoring plan, but monitored by the portable gas analyzer at least 4 times a day instead with 90/10 confidence/precision level ap

de information on the mentioned monitoring parameters.

on factors, default values and other reference values have been correctly applied. (VVM v.1.2 para 208 (d) & (e))Issue: The PP/DOE are req
on to describe what are those 53 initiated projects and why those operated plants are not reported. 2: The DOE is requested to address th

h the formulae and methods described in the monitoring plan and the applied methodology document. (VVS v2, para 246 (c), 284 (i))Issue:

e: The submitted documentation is dated prior to the date of request for issuance submission.Issue: The date provided in the signed form
onsidered by PP and readings were considered to be correctly recalculated using the correction factors from both QAL2 results, as applicab

on hour of CFLs has met 90/10 confidence/precision criteria or not. Further information is required.
esultant operational stoves (Ny,i) value of 4,379.95 as the basis for the both (9th and 10th) monitoring period is found appropriate. The
” D

oduction will be measured by electricity meter (main meter), installed at the Panorama substation. However, as per section B.1. of the MR

e DOE is asked to clarify how delayed calibration of grid electricity export/import meter has been accounted for throughout the period fro
are possible and if so provide justifications as to why these means are not considered the most conservative assumption.

ment of the compliance with EB 52 Annex 60 'Guidelines for assessing compliance with the calibration frequency requirements' for the ca

r. 02 para 257(b) and VVS-PA para 359(b)).2: The DOE verified that volumetric fraction of methane in biogas and volumetric biogas flow ra

Project Activity, the waste heat thermal energy used by the Project Activity as well as the records of calibration and maintenance of the m

2 and September 32,450.01 CO2 (page 47)). Kindly clarify.

e in the monitoring report. Also, the data on flare temperature and flare exhaust gas temperature is not mentioned in the monitoring repo

equation 7 which were not mentioned in the registered PDD. Please clarify.
62 CER's3.Scope: According to the EB 48, Annex 68, paragraph 10 (a) vii, the Monitoring Report contains calculation of baseline emissions,

s are based on the areas planted from 2006-2011. However, as evidenced from the spreadsheet, the GHG removals are calculated only bas

d/or determine that calculations of baseline emissions, project emissions and leakage as appropriate have been carried out in accordance
ers including HPB 00259&260 and HPB 00261&262 have been calculated based on 1 year calibration frequence. However there is discrepa

specified in applied monitoring methodology or EB guidance if applicable, and/or the monitoring plan? (VVM v.1.2 para 184 (a) (ii) & EB 52

. (EB 54 Annex 34)Issue: The monitoring parameter "Regulatory requirements relating to landfill gas projects"is not reported in the monito

ot required, but modified PDDs/MRs have to be attached to validation/verification reports. Please also refer to Par: 17 of the Meeting Repo
reported at the intervals required by the monitoring plan and the applied methodology?Issue: The spreadsheet provided does not contain
egistered version of the methodology AMS I.D. version 13
9.02.2016) is dated prior to the monitoring report (19.03.2016).

ed in sample plots'' in relation to variations found in the readings of the monitored parameters during on site verification (please refer to V

here is an inconsistency in the cross-referencing of the monitoring report version. The verification/certification report on page 92 refers to

ctors to calculate EGout and EGin as per the revised and approved PDD (v.6). (2) How both factors 0.9979 and 1.0021 could be still applica
vide an assessment that all physical features of the proposed CDM project activity proposed in the registered PDD are in place and/or that

fication and/or the corresponding number of CERs requested by the DOE. (EB48 Annex 68 para 10 (d))Issue: The monitoring report indicat

nd ii) Non Methane Hydrocarbon: Annually analyzed by external qualified laboratory.The DOE is requested to clarify  how it has verified th

was used. (b) The DOE indicates that the equipment measuring p_HFC23y was recalibrated on 1 January, February and March, 2011(page 3

ssumption theoretically possible as per VVM v.1.2 para 208 (a), in particular in calculating the heat to power ratio using the total heat inpu
ils w.r.t. the assessment of the PRC". However, there is no request for post-registration submitted with this issuance request. 2. There is n

acity of the plant is 450 t/day whereas the approved revised monitoring plan states (p 13) that the cap that should be used for calculation
e operating conditions were outside the permitted range must be eliminated from the calculation of the baseline emission factor whereas

on whether the calibration of measuring equipments was conducted at a frequency specified in applied monitoring methodology or EB gu

ntain all parameters required to be monitored and/or reported at the intervals required by the monitoring plan and the applied methodol

ragraph 8(d) a certification report must be submitted with a request for issuance.Issue: The certification report refers to project activity 23

oject campaign emission factor has not yet been approved.

toring report. 2: Scope: The verification and certification report does not describe how the reported data have been cross-checked with o

he DOE verified the PP assumptions about the number of householders monitored because with an average of 100 householders, during 3

how it has considered that the calibration frequency for the instrument has been met, as it is stated that annual calibration shall be perfor

s and other reference values have been correctly applied. (VVM v.1.2 para 208 (d) & (e))Issue:The PP/DOE shall further clarify how the ba
n report in page 35 states that the error in the calibration certificate for this equipment is -0.34%. However, there is no information when t

the applied methodology, "Tool to determine project emissions from flaring gases containing methane" and registed monitoring plan, wh

ed for January 2014 and the value is used in the calculation of ERs (please refer to cell C12 of the Electricity
“ sheet
” from the spreadsheet
ible. (EB48 - Annex 68 paragraph 10 (b) (ii)).Issue: The submitted spreadsheet does not give full traceability between the raw data sets and

usion on the verified amount of emission reductions achieved nor/or confirm that appropriate methods and formulae for calculating base

removed for calibration on 13/05/2015 and only put back on 19/05/2015. - For Flare thermal couples, the equipment for High and Low wa
68 paragraph 9(e), cross-referencing and versioning within and between the document must be correct and accurate.Issue:Verification re

the corresponding CAR has been raised prior to the submission of request for issuance. The Secretariat will then change the dates in the s

tes to the two additional gen-set being tested as observed in the site visit. The value for "number of trips" verified reported in verification
he project participant has implemented and operated the proposed CDM project activity as per the registered PDD or the approved revise

with the estimate in the PDD, and/or explanation on any significant increase. (EB48 - Annex 68 paragraph 10 (a) (viii)).Issue: The DOE shall
to VVS version 7, paragraph 308 and 311.2: The PP/DOE is requested to provide information on how the addition of capturing associated g
 Monitoring Report version 5, dated 02.05.2011.

mation submitted in the request for issuance and post registration changes for the monitoring period 01 Jul 11 - 31 Dec 12.2.Scope: The sub

ines for assessing compliance with the calibration frequency requirements' for the calibration delay. (VVM v.1.2 para 184 (a) (ii) & EB 52 A

as described in the registered PDD as per EB 48 Annex 66 prior to requesting subsequent issuance of CERs.

on this issue. 2. Paragraph 207 of the VVM requires the DOE to determine whether emission reductions have been correctly calculated ap

ble standard meter are of accuracy class of 0.1%. However, the monitoring report or verification report does not provide information abo
ing implemented. b) The DOE has not presented the expected implementation dates: The DOE has not provided information on how it ha

ers to revised PDD version 6 dated 15/11/2021 which has been submitted with the PRC. Kindly clarify. 3.Scope: The submitted documents
0-25.6.2011.3.Scope: According to EB48 Annex 68 paragraph 9(e), cross-referencing and versioning within and between the document mu

m this well is as per the PDD which only includes wells AMF-1,2,3,4,5,6,7.

cable, the applied approved standardized baseline as per VVS version 09.0 paragraph 388.Issue: In determining the project emissions from

ever, the PP has monitored the density of the crude oil, which is not included in the monitoring plan, in order to convert the volume of the

ed on 30 October 2010, which was prior to the start of the verification that was based on the first version of the monitoring report (version
ng so, please provide data and/ or evidence, such as the CMM extraction rates and demands by other activities.

cation Report, page 27) states that Surplus

“ power and power peaks over maximum Hydropower production which is needed on the mini

on report does not provide an assessment on whether the calibration of measuring equipments was conducted at a frequency specified in

rvativeness of the calculated emission reductions as it appears that the nitric acid production for the current project campaign (55,116 tHN

AR) in its verification report as per para 8(c) of the EB 108 meeting report, that requires the project participants to update their monitoring

our times per year. Furthermore, how the DOE verified that the result of the sampling has complied with the confidence/precision required
mentions that "the company will establish a CDM project management office and assign dedicated people responsible for the monitoring

ar. It also states (page 30) that 330 days of operating time per year are assumed. The project participant is requested to clarify these incon

ricity generation from EM2GS (2nd generator) during the overhaul time of the 1st generator.

tted with a request for issuance.Issue: The verification report submitted is for a different project.

er i.e. 0.5% for methane contents of less than 5% and 3% for methane contents above 15%.The DOE is requested to clarify how it has verifi
 with the manufacturer s ’specification of the flare device (temperature, biogas flow rate). However, the monitoring report does not contai

o the registered PDD, the project design consisted of 16 MW gas engine power generation capacity (8*0.5 MW) and 7 vocsidizer in 2007/2

ogy, considering that ammeters are used for measurement instead of energy meters.

accordance with the applied methodology. (VVM v.1.2 para 200, 203 & 221(d))Issue: The methodology requires to estimate 1) alternative
d by the monitoring plan and the applied methodology?Issue: The spreadsheet does not contain the monitored values of Electricity
“ expo
dtec portable gas analyzer is according to thespecifications for the equipment by the supplier 3% for methane contents above 15%.  The p
as per the operating manual of the LandTec Biogas Check portable gas analyzer is 3% and represent a good monitoring practice.The DOE i

tion Report refer to AMS-I.D. ver. 12. 3.Scope: The submitted documentation are dated prior to the date of request for issuance submissio
the monitoring period is between 19 April 2008 and 19 March 2011.

DOE. (EB48 Annex 68 para 10 (d))Issue: There are two different monitoring periods presented in the certification report. The DOE is reques
to generation.

to EB48 Annex 68 paragraph 9 (e), the number of Certified Emission Reductions (CERs), within and between the documents must be correc

y the registered project activity after January 2000; was all produced HCFC22 sold or has a part been stored, or destroyed?3. If the producti
e also called SLDC ABT meters). Furthermore, the DOE is required to explain why a Post Registration Changes request was not made in acc

re, and flow rate) which need to be monitored in case of an accidental event; and further reports that no accidents occurred during the cu
nformation regarding assessment of implementation of QA/QC procedures included in the Revised Monitoring Plan (Revised Monitoring Pl

t.2: Scope: The spreadsheet does not contain the formulae of calculation that are shown in the spreadsheet cells whenever possible. (EB48

ect viewpage (13,891 CERs).

andard for project activities , version1.0 requires that measuring equipment shall be calibrated in accordance with the international stand
preadsheet only contains the calculated results from another software. The hourly raw data (e.g. NCSG, VSG, NAP, etc.) presented in the sp
the CERs, please transparently present how these "conservative correction factors" and calculations have been applied in the calculation p

toring Report version 3, dated 29 September, 2013 and Verification Report dated 24 September, 2013; both files refer to a PDD version 05

to decay of EFB.  Please refer to VVM paragraph 208 (e).2) Leakage assessment has been carried out as per approach L2 for palm kernel sh

n how the DOE crosschecked and verified the flare operation in relation to other recorded parameters. The CER sheet (CERs 2009 - 2010 -
M18) indicates a calculated annual energy content of 1,506 TJ for the consumed biomass whereas the verification report (page 17) verifies

or reported at the intervals required by the monitoring plan and the applied methodology.Issue: The monitoring plan makes reference to

ce. 2. The Risk acknowledgement and acceptance form is not submitted.

ed calibration to flow meters for SHP in line with VVS version 3.0 paragraph 239.2: Scope: The verification report does not provide the des

.1.2 para 192, 194)Issue: The parameters CODc,dig-out (data #11, COD concentration in discharged effluent from digester) and CODa,out (

ximum permissible error of the instruments for NCSG (2.69%)and VSG (3.22% combined uncertainty for normalized stack flow) as it is requ
ding meter M26) have been reported in the spreadsheet as per the methodology and registered PDD.

”is one of the PPs displayed on the UNFCCC website; however, this PP has not been included in the monitoring report page 1 and the verifi

ow meters while as the current monitoring period indicates only one flow meter.

an? (VVM v.1.2 para 184 (a) (ii) & EB 52 Annex 60)Issue: The verification report has not provided information on calibration frequency and
nd power export (main and check meter) are not clearly indicated in the line diagrams.2: Scope: The monitoring report does not contain t

by 5.81% of transmission losses. However, the monitoring report does not contain any relevant explanations on the reasons for this discou

r VVS version 09.0 paragraph 385 (a). Scope: The verification report does not describe the reasons for the phased-implementation delay a

ng plan and monitoring report, is calculated, whereas the spreadsheet shows that the the value of the parameter is based on HTSC meter
h that is 24% higher than the reported value from meter M2 (19,901.379 MWh). The DOE shall provide information on why there is a diffe
pts. It is not clear with which one the values of the parameter are consistent. Furthermore, the DOE has not explained the reason why the

ordance with the requirements of the methodology and the PDD, and that the sludge is disposed of by applying to soil. However the verific

ge of the measured return trip distances (CELL F313) times the total mass (CELL F314) transported in the monitoring period. The PP/DOE i
dity of meters does not cover the entire monitoring period. However, the ER calculation spreadsheet (Tab Raw Data_Column H,I and J) doe

nsibilities of personnel and a diagram showing all the relevant monitoring points. 2: Scope: The spreadsheet does not contain the formulae

nd not the flare temperature.

 g plan approved on 17/02/2010 and the monitoring report (p3) reflects these changes from the revised monitoring plan approved on 17/0

n is required.

dsheet cells or explanation with regard to application of formulae.

mass) measurement was carried out, as the verification report (p.8) states that NCV were monitored by the plant site while under the sam

n in Gas Turbine that are required to be monitored as per registered PDD page 35.3: Scope: The verification report does not contain inform

N2O in the gaseous stream of the tail gas in the hour h), Vt,db (Volumetric flow of the gaseous stream in time interval t on a dry basis) an

o explain how it confirmed that the implementation of the project activity is in accordance with the registered PDD as: (i) there has been a
al events. However, a measured value is required by the registered PDD and the applied methodology (ACM0001 ver. 04, page 9). The DOE
ibed by the manufacturer", however the monitoring report neither describes the manufacturer's specifications nor confirms that these sp
he principle and back up meters for Santa Edwiges I SHPP and Santa Edwiges III SHPP are missing.3: Scope: The verification report does no

PP has decreased the value of COD inlet by the percentage difference in the COD inlet values between internal and external analysis. The

toring plan and the applied methodology document. (VVM v.1.2 para 208 (c) & 221 (h))Issue: With regard to the comparison between the
no such changes have been indicated in the monitoring report. The DOE is requested to address this inconsistency, especially in the regist
which is the monitoring period.

values are correct and justified." The MR also lists Plant Name, described as Identification of power source/ plant for the OM, as a parame

cation report does not provide a conclusion on the verified amount of emission reductions achieved and/or determine that calculations of
D7 and ID9, EB54 Annex 34.

stimated emission reductions has also to be reported.

PDD (p. 42).2: Scope: The verification report does not provide a conclusion on the verified amount of emission reductions achieved and/or

th the calibration frequency requirements' for the calibration delay. (VVM v.1.2 para 184 (a) (ii) & EB 52 Annex 60)Issue: The DOE is reques

equipments covers the monitoring period 03/06/2003-30/06/2008.2: Scope: The verification report does not provide an assessment of the

in how the DOE verified that the flare was operated according with the manufacturer s ’recommendations, according with the monitoring
alculated based on the Flue gas generated on wet basis by complete combustion (FLG). However, as shown in page 25 of the monitoring re
ed amount of emission reductions achieved and/or determine that calculations of baseline emissions, project emissions and leakage as ap

eet, reference is made to "version 2 dated 25/05/2010" and not to the most recent version of the Monitoring Report, which is version 4, d
ease also note that the parameter Fbase in the Section D.1 of the monitoring report is incorrectly described.2: Scope: The spreadsheet doe

w it has verified the calculation of Svent and its impact on the PLF, resulting a change from 85%(previous PRC submission) to 59.7%. The D

grams showing all relevant monitoring points. 2: Scope: The verification report does not determine if the assumptions used in emission cal

ence values have been correctly applied. (VVM v.1.2 para 208 (d) & (e))Issue: The verification report does not contain the explanation of th
methane concentration monitored (46.3%) among 200 samples for the three quarters, while the monitoring plan (page 15) requires "Qua
res such as F8B: the PDD estimates an annual saving of 75 000 kWh, whereas the actual savings reached 660 066 kWh; 3) The emission re
f changes to the project description as per para 197 of VVM version 01.2.
d Certification Statement (PDD, version 5 dated October 2006) in your Verification and Certification Report. Even though it has been stated

enoting the main metering points. In doing so the PP/DOE should also clearly indicate the impact of the 12 MW power plant and its releva

then multiplied by the number of missing days. However, the verification report does not contain adequate information on how the DOE h

DOE did not have a result of delayed calibration to confirm the application of the maximum error as per para 4 of Annex 60 of EB 52.

te the appropriateness of the equations as per the tool, and is requested to provide further information to justify the statement in the mo
MWh respectively.

ew page we are sending this request back as incomplete.

y the registered project activity after January 2000; was all produced HCFC22 sold or has a part been stored, or destroyed?3. If the produc

2010 and January  2011. Please refer to VVM v.1.2 para. 204-206.2) The DOE shall further explain whether any calibration delay occurred

.2: Scope: The verification report does not contain reference to the approved request for notification/request for approval of changes from
 spreadsheet to calculate the flare eficiency. 2: Scope: It is not clear how the DOE verified that the monitoring plan is in accordance with th

ers and; (b) emissions from flaring have not been accounted for.2: Scope: The verification report does not provide an assessment on whet
acy of the Landtec BioGas Check portable gas analyser represent good monitoring practise and allows determination of the methane conte

xplanation that the PP has no access to the meter and its calibration information, considering the PP has access to information on calibrati

monitoring report (pg 21, table D.1) shows that meter 531594 was installed on 10/26/2010 while in the Verification Report (pg 9) submitte

by the Executive Board on 12 February 2008.3: Scope: The verification report does not contain reference to the approved request for noti

requirements in the PDD and revised monitoring plan applies to the verification of this parameter, considering that sections D.2.1.3 and Se
e gas analyzer is according to the specifications for the equipment by the supplier 3% for methane contents above 15%.   The portable gas

g within and between the document are not correct and accurate.Issue: There is an inconsistency of methodology within the verification re

hased implementation, the report shall state the progress of the proposed CDM project activity achieved in each phase under verification

related to the additionality of the project activity. Please refer to Paragraph 197 of VVM v 1.2.
 ot in an assessable unprotected format.Issue: The ER calculations spreadsheet submitted refers to a different monitoring period.5.Scope:

.0. However, this approach can only be applied if the project complies with paragraph 3 of the Appendix. The DOE is requested to explain

port, verification report, certification report) using the VVS track.

increases, the DOE is requested to: (a) explain how it has verified that the project has been implemented in accordance with the registere
(the week of 17 May 2009 and 24 May 2009) while the spreadsheet of outage “ calculation indicates
” that outage days used for the calcula
egistered project activity, provide reasons if there are deviations from the baseline situation;6. Provide information regarding the develop

t does not state how the DOE verified the information flow for the listed parameters. (VVM v.1.2 para 206)Issue: The verification report do

ngine was destroyed and ERs were correctly accounted, as for a same time instant, records indicate that gas was being sent to the engine

nitoring report (p14) are not consistent with the registered PDD; -CAR5: the DOE has not explained if the method used to account for the

y between the values of EGexport that are measured and the values of EGgross –EGaux.
e DOE shall clarify how it verified that the project was operated as per the PDD which states that the diesel used at the plant is "for startu

alues for the parameters monitored for the monitoring period. The PP/DOE shall revise the spreadsheet to contain the acutal monitoring v
a) (ii) & EB 52 Annex 60)Issue: The DOE is requested to further clarify how it verified the delayed calibration of meters as per the EB 52 An

at input from alternative fuels was 12% during this monitoring period, while it was estimated to be 5% in the registered PDD. The DOE sha

y the registered project activity after January 2000; was all produced HCFC22 sold or has a part been stored, or destroyed?3. If the produc
y the registered project activity after January 2000; was all produced HCFC22 sold or has a part been stored, or destroyed?3. If the produc

2016-31/03/2017 for CNFL main meters. 2:

” The DOE raised CAR02 regarding the difference between measured electricity values between

been verified and cross-checked. 2: Scope: The verification report does not provide a conclusion on the verified amount of emission redu

mplementation, operation and monitoring of the modified project activity (VVS v.2 para 271)Issue: The validation opinion (page 4) clearly s
or several meters were not provided. Therefore, the DOE is requested to report how it has verified that the values measured with the met

report does not state that the monitoring has been carried out in accordance with registered or the accepted revised monitoring plan. (V

en approved at EB35. Further clarification is required.

D version 06 (page 16 and 22).

e: The submitted documentation are dated prior to the date of request for issuance submission.Issue: The signed form is signed prior to ve

minutes) and the monitoring report (p.4, 1021 hours 9 minutes). Clarification is required.
alidation report), given the fact that delay calibration is observed. For example, one of the flow meters (i.e. FT760CD) used to monitor QH

readsheet was not calculated using the gross

‘ production ’and the estimated loss (in percentage). (Other Issues)The DOE shall clarify how

g delayed calibration referred in paragraph 366, 367, 368 of VVS for PA version 2. The DOE is required to provide further information on: 1

nical specifications of the LFG capture system to be installed , ”whereas the revised value proposed by the PP is based on the historical/act
 ectricity generation to which the methodology refers to for monitoring of parameter EGPJ,y, the electricity generation (gross or net) shall

e within ±0.4%, without having this additional information, it is not able to confirm the compliance of the provisions specified in the VVS-PA
 2) and the spreadsheet indicates that there was no electricity generation in November 2017. Therefore, the DOE is required to provide fu

preadsheet.

the paragraph 296 of VVS for PA version 1 and paragraph 239 of PS for PA version 1 as it did not validate the reason of moving two meters

ntation of the project activity as per the PDD considering that 1) the Google Earth with the given geo coordinates of 28 01 22’ N,
” 73 04 05’

place, signed in between the parties. However, the ERPA referred in the Appendix 3 of the verification report did not contain the date. Th
tted.1. The verification and certification report refers to monitoring report version 1.2 dated 02/06/2022 however, the submitted monitor

has been provided to the secretariat. •In the excel calculation sheet ( BM
“ ),” CO2 emissions from bagasse plants, which could be conside

t of methane concentration in biogas. The DOE is requested to substantiate how this is conservative, considering that lower D (for not add

DM project activity to deliver emission reductions or net anthopogenic removals as stated in the PDD, and whether the revised estimation
pplicable, the applied approved standardized baseline as per VVS version 09.0 paragraph 388.Issue: (a) The applied methodology (page 15
(e.g. emission reduction worksheet, financial calculations) shall be submitted as appropriate.Issue: The emission reduction sheet is missing

plan, the monitoring frequency of parameters height of the tree and diameter at breast height of the tree is at the start of the project acti

equipment, or if the error is smaller than the maximum permissible error (paragraph 366 of VVS for PA).The DOE (p 27) states that "PP inc

*D^2*H .”(b) The actual formula applied is (0.002565/D^2*H+0.0489814-0.00552*

“ D^2*H)*D^2*H (i.e.
” e.g. cell I73 in tab Kalchiha
“ of
” t

nitoring period that was reported in monitoring report.The monitoring report indicates, in section E.6, that the measured ERs during the m

) were calibrated on 18 June 2019 and X0377326 (Main meter) & X0377327 (Check meter) were calibrated on 3 January 2020. 2) The verifi

month or less). Please refer to PS PA v1.0 paragraph 261(a).The project participant is requested to provide the values of NCV of project fu

GF 36", there is a factor of 37.3041%. The DOE is requested to explain these factors which are only applicable from Jan 2016 to Oct 2016 a

on B.2) and the verification report states that there was no PRC. However, the PRC was submitted along with this request for issuance. Th

v.03 para. 366 and 367. To address this issue, please submit the calculation sheet to demonstrate such calculations.
purt,y is not explained in the Monitoring Report. 2: The DOE is requested to address the issue below as per requirement of paragraphs 366

ere is no information of the date of the delayed calibration. The DOE/PP is requested to provide in the date of the delayed calibration of m

parameters are in line with the monitoring plan of the registered PDD.2: For each parameter, the project participants shall describe the eq
cing of the monitoring report. The verification and certification report on page 32 refers to monitoring report version 5 dated 3/3/2022 w
8 has the provision that the data measured during the non-calibrated period has been adjusted by applying the maximum error permissibl
the generator. The DOE is requested to explain how monitoring point of this parameter represents the quantity of electricity supplied to r

rtification report on page 30 refers to monitoring report version 3.1 dated 22/12/2019 whereas the monitoring report version 3.1 is dated
 urther justify the completeness of the data vintage applied to calculate ex-post OM for the current monitoring period. Please refer to Too
“

Gy" for the month of July 2014 was typed in the ER spreadsheet submitted (cell B10 in the worksheet "Gen Data") instead of being calculat

a. 2: Scope: The verification report does not provide an assessment on whether the calibration of measuring equipments was conducted a
adsheet, for 09/2013 and 08/2018, the total generation has been divided equally for all days to get the net units for monitored period in th

his request for issuance.2: Monitoring reportSection E.2 of the Monitoring Report describes the application of the formulae to calculate ca

nst the invoice raised by the PP towards the Discom. However, no cross-check mechanism has been discussed in the monitoring report or
ect by VRL Logistics Ltd in Karnataka State (India)" MP 01/02/2015 to 31/01/2016.

in
” the revised PDD (page 57) is not consistent with the description of Me3
“ in
” the monitoring report (page 11), since the revised PDD ind
on (frequency, dates of calibration and validity) as specified by the monitoring methodology and the monitoring plan as per PS version 09.0
ecked the monthly measured value against the invoices in particular as huge discrepancies are observed between the measured net gene

ngle-cycle to combined-cycle mode.

hall justify any assumptions in emission or removal calculations. Please refer to VVS PA v1.0 paragraph 376(d).The DOE is requested to fur

Certified Emission Reductions (CERs), within and between the documents is not consistent.Issue: There is an inconsistency of CER betwee

10 dated 26.09.2016. However, the Assessment opinion report on page 15 refers to Revised PDD Version 10 dated 17.10.2016. The MR re
e periods in light of the invoice values not being available. Refer Para 374 (b) of VVS-PA.
 the emission reduction spreadsheet (i.e. "CER Calculation Sheet", tab "ER Calculations"), whereas three of those reported values (i.e. EFCO

tion of maximum permissible error has been used for emission reduction calculations." However, "JMR Data" sheet of the submitted sprea
eneration, aggregation, to recording, calculation and reporting) for these parameters including the values in the monitoring report (VVS-PA
approach without filing the deviation with a justification. In this submission, the PP/DOE has requested a deviation but directly applied the
mation on approaches, findings and conclusions as to the requirements related to: (i) compliance of the monitoring report with the monito
mation on approaches, findings and conclusions as to the requirements related to: (i) compliance of the monitoring report with the monito

uring the monitoring period were applied only once to one well (instead of to all the operating wells) in Q1 2015 and the value has not be

parameter required by the monitoring plan and does not provide an statement on how the DOE verified the information flow for these pa
graph 282 of VVS PA v02.2: Does the spreadsheet contain the formulae for the calculation of emission reductions or net anthropogenic rem

nt.Issue: The submitted ER spreadsheet refers to the wrong number of CERs (352,106) whereas the rest of the request for issuance docum

nt.Issue: The submitted ER spreadsheet refers to the wrong number of CERs (352,106) whereas the rest of the request for issuance docum

neration delivered to the grid by the existing renewable energy plant that was operated at the project site prior to the implementation of
sue: The monitoring report (page 6) as well as the verification/certification report (page 8) refer to a PRC (changes to the project design of

antity of fly ash used by the project activity) in the registered monitoring plan and DOE validates/justifies this exclusion by stating that this
nges occurred, reasons for those changes taking place, whether the changes would have been known prior to registration of the project a

ot available, or the calibration has not been conducted at the time of the verification, the DOE, prior to finalizing the verification, shall req
of this distance should have made the description more transparent.2: Scope: The verification and certification report does not provide a d

ed emission reductions (2,014,528 tCO2e) have been achieved in this monitoring period.2: Scope: The verification and certification report
e in the spreadsheet.Issue: The spreadsheet called "ACT summary" provides the monthly meter readings and invoice. From May to Septem
e does not cover the same number of days. Refer VVS-PA Para 361(e)

e.Issue: The verification/certification report refers to monitoring report version 3 dated 08/11/2017 whereas no final monitoring report is
dance with the registered monitoring plan. Refer Para 361(e) of VVS-PA version 3.0.

uirements of the CMP guidance. Please note that the verification and certification report refers to both para 7c and 8c whereas only para 8
average of TDLgr,y for 5 years, instead of PEEL,y for each year being calculated using TDLgr,y of the respective year. Please refer to paragra

ation) for the period January to March 2020. Please provide information regarding the monitoring of the actual gravity monitored on a we
188 (a)(b)(c))Issue:1. The DOE/PP is requested to provide more information on the project implementation, a)the capacity of the diesel ge
cluded that the
“ values of EGexport,y and ECimport,y are correctly determined to be 50,500.595 MWh and 250.240 MWh, respectively.
oncluded that the
“ values of EGexport,y and ECimport,y are correctly determined to be 48,804.720 MWh and 415.440 MWh, respectively

o the registered monitoring plan, and how the changes can be considered as changes under Appendix 1 of the Project Standard.2: Scope:
d concentration meters to directly measure the amount of methane delivered to the project electric generator.). Further, the DOE/PP has
ers to PRC submitted with the issuance request. However, no PRC is submitted with this request for issuance. 4.Scope: The cross-referenc

verification covers the first monitoring period for the project activity; however, there is no information provided in the verification report (
CC Guidelines on National GHG Inventories shall be applied. The CIE data will be cross-checked against fuel test sheets and IPCC values to

/2021. 2.Scope: The number of Certified Emission Reductions (CERs), within and between the documents are not consistent.Issue: There i
tration changes to the registered PDD have been approved by the Board or will be submitted together with the request for issuance as per
with the Standard for Sampling and surveys for CDM project activities and programme of activities, version 04.1 paragraph 22(a). In doing s
e project participants or the coordinating/managing entity; (f) Change of calibration frequency or practice for monitoring equipment as pe

sion as per para 259 of PS for PA.2: For the stakeholder consultation conducted after the publication of the first monitoring report in acco
er, details of these references have not been listed in the submitted verification report.2: Scope: The verification report does not indicate t

period in the certification statement is incorrectly presented as 31/07/2013 to 10/07/2013 whereas the monitoring period in the rest of th

the harvested trees is within about ±10% of that predicted by the equation, then the selected equation can be considered suitable for the
posed project activity. The PP/DOE are requested to provide a complete line diagram which shows all the other power plants connected to
ordinating/managing entity (e.g. commitment/ timeline as per the validation or verification contract, CER delivery commitment by project
similar statistical analysis of the sampling measurement for the parameter FCFi. The DOE is requested to further clarify how it has validat
during March 2015 and October 2015 as K-505 was not in operation for most days of the month, in line with VVS V02, Para 395 (e).
p 6) provides the approved PRC. The DOE is required to to confirm the date of approval and reference number in cases where the request
s.2: Regarding the monitoring of three wastewater COD parameters (CODww,untreated,y, CODww,treated,y, CODww,discharge,PJ,y): (1)
the VS-PA, v.03.0 and paragraph 362 of the VVS, v.03.0.2) As per the Verification Report (page 25) and the spreadsheet  submitted TAG ¨P
cy class and calibration information (frequency, dates of calibration and validity) as specified by the monitoring methodology and the mon

eter used for calculation of EG net export, project is neither reported within the monitoring report nor in the excel sheet for emission redu
been applied as the results of the delayed calibration do not show any errors in the measuring equipment. However, there is no informati

fication is required.4: The PP/DOE are requested to provide information on how it has been verified that the third party lab who conducted
rred it in Appendix 3 of the Verification Report, since the appendix 3 shall include all documents reviewed or referenced during the verific

e site visit cannot be postponed for this PA." The DOE is requested to provide further information on the proper justification considering t
monitoring report, verification and certification report and issuance request for refer to 254,737. Kindly clarify.
ate have been carried out in accordance with the formulae and methods described in the monitoring plan and the applied methodology d

iod from Oct. 2015 to Aug. 2016 for SC 1347 and to the measured values of electricity imports for the same period from Oct. 2015 to Aug.
certification report does not state that the monitoring plan is in accordance with the applied approved methodology and, where applicab
Apj (km2) (i.e. the area of the reservoir measured in the surface of the water, after the implementation of the project activity, when the re
2: Scope: The spreadsheet does not contain explanation with regard to application of formulae in the spreadsheet.Issue: 1) The sheet call

mber 2014 to 31 December 2016.

ner. The incompleteness and loss of monitoring data for 8 projects from these meters in some months during this monitoring period were
n contained in the registered PDD (VVS-PA ver. 03 paragraph 354).2: The registered monitoring plan has listed monitoring of the paramet

sion 03.0.2: VVS-PA Para 373 (b): As shown in the ER spreadsheet, for Karnataka, Net export values calculated from the JMR records is use
s that the calibration has been delayed and the calibration has been implemented after the monitoring period in consideration (i.e. the res
orward could be to split the current monitoring period into different periods i.e. period for which the PPs wish to claim CERs and period fo
into account in the project emission calculations, have not been provided.2: Scope: The verification report does not list each parameter r
ould be referred to in section 2 of the issuance request form.3.According to PCP for Project Activities version 2.0, para 199, a spreadsheet
nd certification report does not state that the monitoring has been carried out in accordance with registered or the revised monitoring pla

orts (VVS v5, para 236, 284 (e)).Issue: The monitoring report page 28 has provided the information how the average trip distance of taxi w
port page 28); (iii) SN 1001295 was only calibrated on 27/05/2012; (iv) SN EVO3-673 was only calibrated on 02/08/2012; (b) The PDD page

dates should be 08/02/2012-31/12/2012: 34,766 tCO2e, 01/01/2013-31/03/2013: 7,428 tCO2e.

timate the emission reductions from the proposed project activity. However, the details (i.e. types of the other project activities, names an

calibration of parameter "ECPJ,y".3: Scope: The verification and certification report does not state that the monitoring has been carried o
his monitoring period) and TNU04922 (HTSC No. 3408), installed on 16/12/2010 and replaced on 13/02/2013 (used from 10/01/2012 to 1

equipments. However, the submitted monitoring report does not provide information on the cross-check with the energy balance and the
the Board.

trate the actual/achieved precision. Refer to paragraph 372 of VVS-PA.

trate the actual/achieved precision. Refer to paragraph 372 of VVS-PA.
determination of the actual precision. Furthermore, it is also noted that the worksheet Monitoring
“ survey in
” line 230 calculated what wo
report does not determine if the assumptions used in emission calculations have been justified as per VVS version 09.0 paragraph 403 (d)
d not be postponed as per the CER delivery commitment by PP. However, the verification report did not contain any reference related to t

onitoring plan accordingly, however the verification report refers to an open flare instead (pg17). Clarification is required (please refer to V
h the registered PDD, in particular as the geo-coordinates of the project activity described in the monitoring plan are different with those in

Rs delivery as there is an ERPA in place, signed in between the parties. However, the verification report did not contain detailed informati

with the manufacturer s ’specification for the calibration interval which is twice a year. However, the DOE has not provided information on
tion opinion does not contain information on how the DOE validated the accordance of the change with the requirement of para 4(a) of A
eet the 90/10 confidence/precision level specified in the monitoring plan and applied methodology.

for measuring thermal energy generated is different from the accuracy value of ±0.25% specified in the PDD. The PP has applied a factor o
graph 376(g) of the validation and verification standard for project activity (VVS for PA) requires the DOE to determine the pro-rata approa

and Net calorific value of fossil fuel fired in the power plant used prior to the start of the implementation of the project activity. DOE shall

re as there are the permanent changes to the monitoring plan.

application of the correct values as per paragraph 373(e) of VVS-PA. 2) Working sheet "4. DBH, height and stem biomass" only provides the

umber of Certified Emission Reduction and the breakdown of CERs to be issued up to 31 December 2012 and CERs issued from 01 Jan 2013

(VVS for PA (v2) paragraph 303 –

309): 1. The increasement of estimated net removals to 122,525 tCO2e resulted from the PRCs made. 2.

e there were not trees in the original one. It is not mentioned of how many meters has been moved." Moving of plots is also mentioned in

of GWP factor for CH4 from 21 to 25 for the second commitment period of Kyoto protocol. However, the DOE have not verified the actua

ce provided by the Board regarding deviations from the provisions of a registered plan and/or methodology; (iii) The data and calculation

ed on the how the RES

“ and
” the project owner checked the quality of the data measured by the households. Please clarify how the data q
ed on the how the RES
“ and
” the project owner checked the quality of the data measured by the households. Please clarify how the data q
here applicable.2: Scope: The verification and certification report does not determine if the assumptions used in emission calculations hav
). Further, the verification report (page 34) confirms that EGhistoric,
“ 3yr is” an ex-ante parameter which is in accordance to the registered

y in the hour h calculated when temperature of the exhaust gas of the flare (Tflare) is above 500 ºC for more than 40 minutes during the h
s-referencing and versioning within and between the document are not correct and accurate.Issue: There is an inconsistency in the cross-

nd b) of VVSs as the validation report did not contain information on checking "the results of the delayed calibration test".

one", or that "the plot centre is moved without providing any justification". It is not clear how this CAR was closed. Since the inventory w
ent.Issue: The Validation Report, page 2 displays the registration date as of 11 June, 2011. However, this project was registered on 16 June

s for assessing compliance with the calibration frequency requirements, EB 52, Annex 60.

e monitoring arrangements for the non-monitoring period (paragraph 373 (a) of VVS for PA version 2).The verification report (p 52) states

paragraph 366 of VVS-PA is complied with as there is no information about the error identified in the delayed calibration test.3: VVS-PA, p

d under cell E20 of the spreadsheet represent, how these were derived by PP and how the DOE cross-checked the reported data. Refer VV

nitoring report states that the annex 3 of the report contains the monitored data such as Date
“ of planting , ” Check
“ for survival i,j,k , ” Are
“
gy used for trunk buses and supporting routes being diesel bus, while the monitoring report mentions that buses on trunk routes are basic
urate.Issue: The verification/certification report refers to the monitoring report version 2 (p 1) however the submitted monitoring report i
A, if, during the verification of a certain monitoring period, the DOE identifies that the calibration has been delayed, conservative approach
 the demonstration of a significant impact of delaying the site visits on the DOE or PP. The DOE is requested to provide a proper justificatio

hanges in accordance with in accordance with section VI.B of the project cycle procedure. The DOE is requested to verify that project is im
pe: According to PCP for Project Activities para 196 a duly completed CDM-ISS-FORM shall be submitted.Issue: The issuance request form
ere certain sections verify compliance of the MR while certain sections report non-compliance.
istration changes shall contain a revised PDD in both clean and track-change version as part of the documentation. The PP/DOE are reques
y the site visits cannot be postponed, including the demonstration of a significant impact of delaying the site visits on the DOE or project p

tion is not consistent.Issue: There is an inconsistency in the cross-referencing of the monitoring period. The verification and certification re

he timing of the GSC publication as per the PCP paras. 186-187, as indicated in the Verification and Certification Report.

onitoring plan (i.e. monthly), as there were delays during the monitoring period, i.e.: (a) for ASAB: (1) The first calibration was on 12/03/20
page 32 of the applied methodology (AR-ACM0001 version 03) requires ex-post update of stratification due to forest management activiti

port version 6 dated 04/02/2015, however the DOE has submitted under confidential documents monitoring report version 8 dated 20/10

e columns #1 and #2; (ii) the number and location of the measuring points, (iii) the reasons why different meters were used in the same da
ried-out via permanent sampling plots in order to achieve a 10% precision at a 90% confidence (EB 68, Annex 31). However the DOE is req

VVM v1.2, and why revision of monitoring plan was not requested.
difference of value of parameter Qbiomass,y (Procured) and Qbiomass,y (Consumed) in the spreadsheet, and the use of Qbiomass,y (Con

endix 1, and in particular, how the DOE has justified that the deviation would not require prior approval by the EB.

state that " The reservoir area of the small hydropower plants was monitored through topographical data in the location of the project ac

below as per paragraph 361 of the VVS for project activity.MR page 27 reports the option A is applied to determine the flare efficiency, a

itoring report and the verification report do not provide calibration records for Main Meter(07033694) & Check Meter (07033704) in 2012

he registered monitoring plan. b) The DOE is requested to provide further verificaiton opinion on the parameters applicable to rule out lea
e husk and straws (241 RMB/ton) has not been applied in the investment analysis.
nd iii) revision of GWP factor for CH4 from 21 to 25 for the second commitment period of Kyoto protocol. However, the DOE have not ver

VVS-PA, version 3.02: VVS-PA Para 374 (b)The DOE is requested to explain how it cross-checked the reported data as: 1. As per the verifica
enerated will be exported to the grid).2: Scope: The verification report does not state that the monitoring has been carried out in accorda

used to determine ήwg,PR2: Scope: The monitoring report does not contain calculations of baseline emissions, project emissions, leakage

ude the monitoring of this parameter in accordance with the applied methodology.Section B.6 of the PDD states that the grid emission fa
th the national standard but at least once in 3 years and accuracy level of the meter is ± 0.5% and
” the monitoring plan (p 29) indicates the

lculation spreadsheet and in the additionality section of the PDD.

t provide a conclusion on the verified amount of emission reductions achieved nor/or confirm that appropriate methods and formulae for

T trans2 in 2# flare, the equipment with SN C3106879004031 was moved to Phase 2 on 20/10/2014. Hence it is not clear what equipmen

s conservative considering that there were monitored values during the 1st crediting period.

to Par: 17 of the Meeting Report of the Sixteenth conference call with DOE/AIE coordination forum (which is available at this link: https://c

from 21 tCO2/tCH4 to 25 tCO2/tCH4 for the 2nd commitment period and iii) identification of new leaks. However, the DOE have not verifi

oposed CDM project activity as per the registered PDD or the approved revised PDD. (VVM v.1.2 para 196)Issue: The Verification Report an
states the completition date as of 25 October, 2012.
further substantiate how it closed the FAR 1, raised during the validation stage; as the version of the methodology used to close the FAR w

ty (the additional electricity consumed due to the project activity) in the diagram.2: Scope: The verification report does not provide an ass

and verification report do not contain a description on how the deviation was applied in the calculation of MDy (Methane captured and de

operational(ndy) shall be monitored" and b) The DOE is requested to submit a calculation spreadsheet used to determine the lower and u
ut the period during which dry and wet conditions prevailed. 2) Registered PDD states that as per the of the "Tool to determine the mass fl

ide a conclusion on the verified amount of emission reductions achieved nor/or confirm that appropriate methods and formulae for calcu
rom data generation, aggregation, to recording, calculation and reporting) for these parameters including the values in the monitoring rep

values directly from the spreadsheet Generation

“ Details rows
” 8 to 10 which are the net electricity generated from those 3 WEGs belong
e with the approved monitoring plan. In doing so, please clarify why both parameters have been mentioned under section D.1 of the MR (

gxi spreadsheet are not replicable.

Project Standard version 2.1.2: Scope: The verification report does not provide a description of the actual operation of the project activity
mission reductions achieved nor/or confirm that appropriate methods and formulae for calculating baseline emissions, project emissions an

E verified whether the selected households were representative of the population. Refer paragraph 25 of the standard Sampling
“ and surv

he correct number of Certified Emission Reduction, specified by the DOE.Issue: There is an inconsistency between the number of CERs in t

ed with a request for issuance as required in the completeness check checklist for requests for issuance in line with PCP version 9 para 222

LC control system and this situation did not affect the data accuracy.
n of emission reductions.

hether they apply conservative assumptions or discount factors to the calculations, and whether the alterative monitoring arrangements h
ain how it verified parameter EG facility, y (Quantity of net electricity generation that is produced and fed into the grid) for this site in light

arify how the monitoring requirement by the monitoring plan and the methodology has been complied with.
ed to the same main meter at the substation used for apportioning the net electricity generation of the project activity.2: Scope: The sprea

lectricity generation export to the grid by theWuliji Phase-2 project, electricity imports from the grid by the Wuliji Phase-2 project, sum ele

s been carried out in accordance with registered or the accepted revised monitoring plan. (VVM v.1.2 para 206 & 221(d))Issue: The revised
monthly monitoring measured by dedicated meters.
responsibilities of the personnel involved in the monitoring of this parameter. The PP is also requested to include a diagram in the Monito

f CFLs account for emission reduction calculation in each month are constant (ER spreadsheet, export component 2, column F and G). The

: The DOE is requested to explain how it has closed CAR02 in line with the requirement of para 194 of the VVM (v.1.2) given that section D
here is zero electricity generation and only imports during such period.

CDM-ISS) must be submitted.Issue: Please note that the DOE is required to click yes for Post registration changes in section 2 of the signed

ithin the permissible error of the instruments; (ii) the information of when the delayed calibration of meter PT-0811A334-01 was conducte

een submitted with a request for issuance as required in the completeness check checklist for requests for issuance in line with PCP versio

of project activity e.g. date of construction, commissioning, continued operation periods, etc.) during the monitoring period under conside
Report (on page 9) only indicates stack monitoring parameters. Process monitoring parameters such as OT, OP, AFR, AIFR, and NAP have n
g Report of 09/04/2012 ver. 4."However, the submitted Monitoring Report is version 3, dated 26 April, 2012. The submitted Verification st

of this monitoring parameter was obtained as per the drawing of the reservoir and there has not been any change since the implementati

ter replaced on 14/07/2010 (page 10). However the DOE did not provide information on the new meter including the serial number and v

and not by conveyor belt as described in the registered PDD. Additional information is required on the implementation and operation stat
e: The date of the PDD is wrong in the certification statement in the verifcation report, p. 122 (18/10/2010, but should be 19/10/2009).
resents a clear assessment on whether further cooking systems will be implemented as to reach the total number of units expected in the

n Reduction Calculation" sheet "CER calculation" line 22, and file "Annexure A_Hourly and Daily Calculated Values DEC-09" "(to JUNE-10) sh
opinion, the DOE has stated that: "The estimated lost carbon stock removal due to that is about 178.05 tCO2e per year". This is not reflec

logy between the project view page ( AMS-I.D. version 13, AMS-I.C. version 13, AMS-III.Q) and the rest of the documents submitted (AMS
r.However in the current monitoring period, the value of QOEBL is taken as 124.20 Gwh/yr both in the Monitoring Perport as well the Ver

o the required parameter CapPJ (as per page 17 of the methodology) . Information should be provided.

of the project. (For project activities that consist of more than one site, the report shall clearly describe the status of implementation and

cument is correct and accurate.Issue: The date of the PDD in the certification statement is 13/11/2009, but should be 07/10/2009.

y notification of changes in the PDD was not submitted as per Procedures for notifying and requesting approval of changes from the projec
and the project participant had planned to cover both the anaerobic lagoons during the first crediting period however, currently one anaer

0 confidence/precision level applied; 2) the higher adjusted values were used for the calculation of project emissions; and 3) this approach

& (e))Issue: The PP/DOE are requested to report how the baseline emission factor (EFBL) was calculated as it appears that a lower value of
OE is requested to address the issues below related to meters and calibrations as per VVS for project activity section 9.2.6.The DOE is requ

v2, para 246 (c), 284 (i))Issue: The calculation of the leakage in the spreadsheet considers a figure of 0.01172024. Please explain what the

e provided in the signed form is not in accordance with the sign-off sequence in relation with the rest of the submitted documentation. Th
both QAL2 results, as applicable. The
” DOE is required to provide further information on how calibration delay has been duly considered b

d is found appropriate. The

” DOE is required to provide further clarification on how it has verified the increase in the number of system fro

, as per section B.1. of the MR, for Sol Plaatje site, for the period 01/03/2020 31/05/2020
– of the monitoring period, the source of data ge

for throughout the period from 02/04/11 to 31/07/11 in the emission reduction calculation spreadsheet.
 assumption.

ency requirements' for the calibration delay. (VVM v.1.2 para 184 (a) (ii) & EB 52 Annex 60)Issue: The DOE is requested to clarify if the app

and volumetric biogas flow rate are conducted on wet basis and stated that As
“ per registered PDD, considering that the measurement p

tion and maintenance of the meters . ”The DOE/PP are requested to further clarify how the waste thermal heat used by the project was me

tioned in the monitoring report. 2: Scope: The spreadsheet does not contain all parameters required to be monitored and/or reported at
 ulation of baseline emissions, project emissions, leakage (if any) and emission reductions.Issue: Project Emissions calculation in the ER Cal

movals are calculated only based on areas planted/strata 2007 and 2008, while there are areas planted in 2011 and 2012. The DOE is requ

een carried out in accordance with the formulae and methods described in the monitoring plan and the applied methodology document. (
ce. However there is discrepancy on the calibration frequency of net electricity meter: in the PDD it is every 6 months (p. 19) and in the ve

v.1.2 para 184 (a) (ii) & EB 52 Annex 60)Issue:The DOE is requested to justify how the test report for time accuracy dated 27-02-2008 is va

s"is not reported in the monitoring report and assessed by the DOE.3: Scope: The verification report does not describe the implementation

to Par: 17 of the Meeting Report of the Sixteenth conference call with DOE/AIE coordination forum (which is available at this link: https://c
eet provided does not contain the parameters related to the version 9 of the monitoring report. The project participant is requested to pr
e verification (please refer to Verification report, page 55). 2: Scope: The verification report does not determine if the assumptions used in

tion report on page 92 refers to monitoring report version 4 whereas the applicable monitoring report is version 3.

d 1.0021 could be still applicable to the project activity, given that the revised and approved PDD (v.6) states that accuracy of M5 and M6
d PDD are in place and/or that the project participant has implemented and operated the proposed CDM project activity as per the registe

The monitoring report indicates that the project emission is 3,275,860.3 tCO2 and the baseline emission is 3,316,940.8 tCO2 while the cer

to clarify  how it has verified that the actual monitoring is in compliance with the approved monitoring plan and why it did not issue a FAR

ruary and March, 2011(page 33 of Verification Report). Precise calibration dates are not provided for February and March to ensure that t

ratio using the total heat input and electricity produced in the period (e.g. instead of an average of a daily calculated heat to power ratio)
ssuance request. 2. There is no reference in the verification report whether the verification is based on version 09.0 or 01.0 of the VVS.2.S

should be used for calculation is 425 t/day. The project participant is requested to clarify this inconsistency.
eline emission factor whereas the PP appears to have excluded only the NCSG data for the relevant hours and the corresponding VSG data

nitoring methodology or EB guidance if applicable, and/or the monitoring plan? (VVM v.1.2 para 184 (a) (ii) & EB 52 Annex 60)Issue: The DO

lan and the applied methodology?Issue: The spreadsheet does not contain the raw data of auxiliary electricity consumption, which is not c

ort refers to project activity 2331.

ve been cross-checked with other sources as per VVS version 09.0 paragraph 403 (b).Issue: As the DOE has not listed any of the required m

of 100 householders, during 30 days and 5 monitoring teams the PP can monitor only 15,000 householders and not 17,000 as indicated by

nual calibration shall be performed, and the reported calibration dates are 18/04/2008 and 17/09/2009. iv) ID10: The DOE has not provide

hall further clarify how the baseline emission factor, EFbl, (0.00483 tN2O/tHNO3) was recalculated as mentioned in the monitoring report
here is no information when the delayed calibration which result is -0.34% was conducted in order to apply the provision in paragraph 36

d registed monitoring plan, which require the application of default values per hour instead of using a monthly average. Further, the sprea

y sheet
” from the spreadsheet submitted. Please clarify the discrepancy. 2: Scope: The spreadsheet does not contain the formulae of calcu
between the raw data sets and calculated CER result. For instance, 1) there is no formulae connecting the calculated result of EFbl and EF1

formulae for calculating baseline emissions, project emissions and leakage have been followed as per VVS version 09.0 paragraphs 403 (c

quipment for High and Low was removed for calibration on 19/05/2014 but it was only installed back on 23/05/2014. It was again removed
accurate.Issue:Verification report refers to monitoring report version 3 dated 26.08.2011 on page 2 where as the submitted monitoring re

hen change the dates in the system. Kindly refer to the general guidance approved in EB 41 Meeting, para. 78.

rified reported in verification report page 15 is 124 while the number reported in the verification protocol (Appendix A) is 111.11: Scope: T
ed PDD or the approved revised PDD. (VVM v.1.2 para 196)Issue: The PDD (p3) states that "The Visakhapatnam
“ (India) OSRAM CFL distrib

(a) (viii)).Issue: The DOE shall provide information whether the increase in the ratio of waste water to fresh fruit bunches that explains th
ition of capturing associated gas from an additional oil field out of the original project boundary has been considered as a change to proje
1 - 31 Dec 12.2.Scope: The submitted documents are not internally and mutually consistent.Issue: The submitted Verification Report displa

.1.2 para 184 (a) (ii) & EB 52 Annex 60) It is noted in the monitoring report that the calibration for some equipment are not valid during ce

e been correctly calculated applying the selected methodology. Equation 15b of the selected methodology requires the calculation of proj

s not provide information about meters being tested for accuracy every calendar quarter during the said monitoring period. The DOE is req
ded information on how it has assessed the timeline and how likely that the remaining equipment will be installed in the coming years an

pe: The submitted documents are not internally and mutually consistent.Issue:3. There is an inconsistency in the cross-referencing of the b
nd between the document must be correct and accurate.Issue: CER calculation spreadsheet is version 2 dated 2.2.2012 where as MR is ve

ng the project emissions from destruction of captured methane and un-combusted methane, ACM0008 version 8 (page 30) requires mon

r to convert the volume of the crude oil to the mass unit. Further information is required on why the DOE did not raise a FAR to revise the

the monitoring report (version 1, dated 18 October 2010) which was published on 25 October 2010. According to the DOE (page 4 of verifi
n which is needed on the mining complex is not any more generated by Diesel generators due to connection to public grid. At
” the same ti

ted at a frequency specified in applied monitoring methodology or EB guidance if applicable, and/or the monitoring plan? (VVM v.1.2 para

project campaign (55,116 tHNO3) has exceeded the plant design capacity (54, 553 tHNO3) for an equivalent number of 205 days.

nts to update their monitoring reports: (i) To apply any global warming potential values that may be adopted by the CMP; and (ii) In accor

confidence/precision required by the monitoring plan (i.e. 20% at a 95% confidence level), in accordance with the paragraph 22 of the St“
esponsible for the monitoring and reporting of the generation and emission reductions of the project activity" which appears to be the sam

equested to clarify these inconsistencies.2: Scope: The verification report does not provide an assessment that all physical features of the

sted to clarify how it has verified that the accuracy of the gas analyzer used to measure the methane content in biogas is as per the requir
 itoring report does not contain the manufacturer s ’specification of the flare device (temperature, biogas flow rate).2: Scope: The monitori

MW) and 7 vocsidizer in 2007/2008 and 2009, respectively. According to the monitoring plan and the verification report, up till now, 6 gas e

ires to estimate 1) alternative fuel reserve available in the region and 2) alternative fuel used by other users on yearly basis, while these tw
red values of Electricity
“ exported by the each WTG at site and
” Electricity
“ imported by each WTG at site which
” are required by the revi
e contents above 15%.  The portable gas analyzer represent good monitoring practice."The DOE is requested to further clarify how it asse
monitoring practice.The DOE is requested to further clarify how it assessed the consistency of the accuracy equipment (i.e. Roots flow me

equest for issuance submission.Issue: The Verification/ Certification Report is dated 08 January 2014 and the Monitoring Report is dated 1
tion report. The DOE is requested to correct the moniotring period under consideration in the certification report in line with the requirem
the documents must be correct and accurate.Issue: The Certified Emission Reductions (CER) are not consistent between the Monitoring re

or destroyed?3. If the production of HCFC22 has increased more or more rapidly than the average increase of the market demand, then p
s request was not made in accordance with the CDM Project Cycle Procedure version 2 paragraph 130(b).

cidents occurred during the current monitoring period and therefore these parameters were not monitored. However, it is noted that the
ng Plan (Revised Monitoring Plan, page 5).

cells whenever possible. (EB48 - Annex 68 paragraph 10 (b) (ii)).Issue: Please incorporate the electricity apportioning formula into the ER s

e with the international standard if there is no local standard or manufacturer specification. The DOE shall provide more information how
 NAP, etc.) presented in the spreadsheet are not linked with the result (e.g. "BL_Import_Access" page and "PC_Import_Access" page in sp
een applied in the calculation process.

files refer to a PDD version 05, dated 27 September 2013 which are not consistent with the registered PDD.

approach L2 for palm kernel shells (PKS). The proportion of total available PKS in the market that is used as boiler fuel (3.66%) and that use

CER sheet (CERs 2009 - 2010 - 2011) indicates that on 16.11.10 and 11.01.11 there was no electricity consumed by the project (in column
ation report (page 17) verifies an energy content of 1,633.08 TJ; and ii. The project activity boiler efficiency is indicated as 80% (PDD, page

ring plan makes reference to the "Tool to determine project emissions from flaring gases containing methane to
” describe how the param

eport does not provide the description of how the DOE cross-checked reported data (VVS v3, para 246 (b))Issue: The DOE is requested to p

from digester) and CODa,out (data #3, COD concentration of the effluent that leaves the lagoon) are presented as having the same averag

malized stack flow) as it is required by EB 52 annex 60 for the period from 10 June 2010 till 1 July 2010 (end of this monitoring period)". Ho
ng report page 1 and the verification report page 1. It is found that the page 1 of the monitoring report and page 1 of the verification repo

on calibration frequency and accuracy of electricity meters.

ring report does not contain the values of the monitored parameters. (EB 54 Annex 34)Issue: Section D of the Monitoring Report does not

on the reasons for this discount and the source of the transmission loos.2: Scope: The monitoring report does not contain the values of th

hased-implementation delay and/or does not present the expected implementation dates as per VVS version 09.0 paragraph 385 (a).Issue

meter is based on HTSC meter.

mation on why there is a difference between the value obtained by meter M2 and the result of the calculation using meters M4, M3a, b, c
 explained the reason why the values of the parameter should follow the monthly report or the sales receipts.

ing to soil. However the verification report does not indicate how the DOE confirmed that proper soil application of the sludge leaving the

nitoring period. The PP/DOE is requested to clarify the issues and to submit a revised documents, including the updated calculation sprea
aw Data_Column H,I and J) does not transparently show how the maximum permissible error of meters (0.5%) has been used to correct th

does not contain the formulae of calculation that are shown in the spreadsheet cells whenever possible. (EB48 - Annex 68 paragraph 10 (b
nitoring plan approved on 17/02/2010.

plant site while under the same section is also states that NCV of biomass has been measured annually at reputed laboratories (external a

report does not contain information on all CARs, CLs and FARs and/or provide an assessment and close out of any CARs, CLs or FARs issued

me interval t on a dry basis) and v i,t,db (Volumetric fraction of greenhouse gas i in a time interval t on a dry basis) and the monitoring repo

d PDD as: (i) there has been an increase of the length of the collection system which was not planned in the PDD; (ii) there has been other
0001 ver. 04, page 9). The DOE is requested to report how it concluded that the application of the calculated value is in line with the regist
ons nor confirms that these specifications were met during the monitoring period; ii) Annex I provides the results of the flare efficiency, bu
he verification report does not provide an assessment of the compliance with EB 52 Annex 60 'Guidelines for assessing compliance with th

nal and external analysis. The DOE is requested to clarify the inconsistency and to confirm the assessment of the compliance with the QA/

the comparison between the actual and estimated emission reductions, it is not clear how the DOE concluded that the nature of the depo
stency, especially in the registered PDD which clearly indicates the capacity of the boiler to be 35TPH (e.g. sections A.2 and A.4.3). b) The

plant for the OM, as a parameter fixed ex-ante. The MR also notes: Value(s) applied: Not applicable. The DOE is requested to explain how

determine that calculations of baseline emissions, project emissions and leakage as appropriate have been carried out in accordance with
on reductions achieved and/or determine that calculations of baseline emissions, project emissions and leakage as appropriate have been

ex 60)Issue: The DOE is requested to further explain how they have verified the compliance of VVM v.1.2 para 184 (a) and EB 52 Annex 60

provide an assessment of the compliance with EB 52 Annex 60 'Guidelines for assessing compliance with the calibration frequency requir

ccording with the monitoring methodology in case of enclosed flares.

n page 25 of the monitoring report, the FLG does not contain O2.2: Scope: The verification report does not state that the monitoring has b
 t emissions and leakage as appropriate have been carried out in accordance with the formulae and methods described in the monitoring p

ng Report, which is version 4, dated 24/05/2011.

2: Scope: The spreadsheet does not contain the formulae of calculation that are shown in the spreadsheet cells whenever possible. (EB48

C submission) to 59.7%. The DOE is further requested to substaniate how the Svent calculation is conservative under the context of additi

umptions used in emission calculations have been justified and/or emission factors, default values and other reference values have been c

t contain the explanation of the formulae used for emission reduction calculation in relation to the use of 0.66 kg/liter for the specific grav
g plan (page 15) requires "Quarterly (monthly, if necessary)" monitoring of the methane content of the biogas. However, it is not clear how
0 066 kWh; 3) The emission reductions achieved by each of the individual project measures such as TEM UT2, for which the baseline was e
Even though it has been stated in the verification report that this PDD version 5 is available only under the registration
” full history in
” the

MW power plant and its relevance to the project activity.2: Scope: The verification report does not indicate that the information provided in

information on how the DOE has verified the appropriateness of the estimation of the electricity consumption in accordance with VVS v07

4 of Annex 60 of EB 52.

ustify the statement in the monitoring report.

or destroyed?3. If the production of HCFC22 has increased more or more rapidly than the average increase of the market demand, then p

any calibration delay occurred during the monitoring period and how the seven-day tolerance has been applied to the flow meters installe

st for approval of changes from the project activity as described in the registered PDD. (VVM v.1.2 para 198 (d))Issue:The Validation Opinio
 g plan is in accordance with the applied methodology. (VVM v.1.2 para 200, 203 & 221(d))Issue: The DOE has stated that there is no differ

ovide an assessment on whether the calibration of measuring equipments was conducted at a frequency specified in applied monitoring m
mination of the methane content of biogas in an satisfactory manner."The DOE is requested to further substantiate how it assessed that th

ess to information on calibration of meters for parameter Electricity

“ Exported which
” calibration was also under the control of MSEDCL a

fication Report (pg 9) submitted with the Request for Issuance (dated 2 May 2012), this same meter was replaced on this date. (The meter

the approved request for notification/request for approval of changes from the project activity as described in the registered PDD. (VVM v

ng that sections D.2.1.3 and Section D4 of the PDD and the revised monitoring plan refer to different ways of measuring the methane cont
above 15%.   The portable gas analyzer represent good monitoring practice."The DOE is requested to further clarify how it assessed the co

ology within the verification report as page 29 and 31 refer to AMS.I.C. version 8 and AMS-III.C. version 8 as the applied methodology and

each phase under verification). (VVM v.1.2 para 198 (a)).Issue: The monitoring report (Section B.1, table B.1) indicates for the site "Granja
nt monitoring period.5.Scope: The monitoring period throughout the documentation are not consistent.Issue: There is an inconsistency in

e DOE is requested to explain how it has validated that the proposed arrangement complies with paragraph 3 of the Appendix of the meth

accordance with the registered PDD, and (b) assess if there is a permanent change and if so, why a notification or request of approval of c
utage days used for the calculation of the emission reduction were 7 days. Further clarification is required.
rmation regarding the development of the w ‐factor (ratio of HFC23 generated/amount of HCFC22 produced) since the start of productio

sue: The verification report does not state how the DOE verified the information flow for the following parameters: i) Hdiesel; and ii) Hbio

was being sent to the engine whereas no electricity was generated (e.g. on 01/04/2011 at  00:01:45, on 1/4/2011 at 00:40:04, amon seve

thod used to account for the delay in calibration of the oxygen analyzer (reduction of 3.42% of total CERs) complies with the guidelines of
used at the plant is "for startup and for emergency operation" (page 24 of PDD) and It“is anticipated that the plant will use these diesel ge

ontain the acutal monitoring values for the parameters of the monitoring plan.3: Scope: The spreadsheet does not contain the formulae o
of meters as per the EB 52 Annex 60 as 1) the verification report (p 25) states that The
“ correction factor, in accordance with Annex 60 EB

e registered PDD. The DOE shall clarify these two issues. In doing so, the DOE should also provide a further validation opinion on how para

or destroyed?3. If the production of HCFC22 has increased more or more rapidly than the average increase of the market demand, then p
or destroyed?3. If the production of HCFC22 has increased more or more rapidly than the average increase of the market demand, then p

ed electricity values between the ICE and CNFL meters during the month of August 2016 and closed it by stating that "It is confirmed that

fied amount of emission reductions achieved and/or determine that calculations of baseline emissions, project emissions and leakage as a

ation opinion (page 4) clearly states that 1040MWh of the average of the historical electricity delivered by the existing facility to the grid fo
values measured with the meters with delay calibration (where calibration certificates were not available e.g. meters at PA 3 and PA17) ha

ed revised monitoring plan. (VVM v.1.2 para 206 & 221(d))Issue: The Verification Report states, on Section 3.8, that "monitoring process ca

gned form is signed prior to verification/certification report and the signed form for PRC.
FT760CD) used to monitor QHNO3,cons,y was recently calibrated on 05/04/2016 and 29/06/2017 (page 34 of the monitoring report) wher

ues)The DOE shall clarify how it verified that the use of 2.5225%, maximum percentage of total energy loss of the facility, is in line with the

vide further information on: 1) How it has validated the a correction factor of 0.004 for the period of November 2017- November 2018 as

P is based on the historical/actual data (page 10 and 19 of the validation report) provided by Biotecnogas, the LFG implementer. Paragraph
generation (gross or net) shall be cross-checked with records of electricity sale (e.g. sales receipt). However, such provision is not included

ovisions specified in the VVS-PA ver. 2 paragraph 366 (a) and (b).
e DOE is required to provide further information on how it verified the commencement of the project activity.2: The DOE shall take due ac

e reason of moving two meters from substation to the delivery point on 13 December 2017.2: The DOE shall determine whether the calibr

nates of 28 01 22’ N,
” 73 04 05’ E”does not show any PV power plant and 2) it appears that there are many PV plants near the geo coordina

rt did not contain the date. The DOE is require to provide further information on timeline as per CER delivery commitment in the ERPA as
wever, the submitted monitoring report is version 1.2 dated 06/02/2022.

plants, which could be considered renewable, are also included; •

In the excel calculation sheet ( Plants
“ EF ),”4.6 is used as a CONSTANT

ering that lower D (for not adding methane losses in the biogas purification process) would result in higher volumetric fraction of CH4 in th

whether the revised estimation of emission reductions due to the change takes into account the applicable limits in accordance with the C
pplied methodology (page 15 of AMS I.D version 18) requires measuring net calorific value of biomass on dry basis. However, the monitor
sion reduction sheet is missing (if applicable).5.Scope: The types of post registration changes are not consistent among the submitted doc

at the start of the project activity and every five years i.e. 2012, 2017, 2022, 2027 and 2032. However, as per the MR (page 27 and 28), m

DOE (p 27) states that "PP included the calibration details in Annex 1 of the revised MR and accounted Maximum permissible error of 0.2

g. cell I73 in tab Kalchiha

“ of
” the ER sheet). (2) For species Acacia
“ catechu , ”the formula in page 23 of the monitoring report (i.e. V= (0.00

he measured ERs during the monitoring period were above the estimated in the PDD due to favorable hydrological conditions compared t

on 3 January 2020. 2) The verification report (p 27-28) shows that X0377326 (Main meter) & X0377327 (Check meter) were installed on 01

he values of NCV of project fuel at its monitoring frequency, i.e. fortnightly.3: For each monitoring period, the DOE shall report: The actua

le from Jan 2016 to Oct 2016 and how it verified them.3: As per paragraph 339 (a) of VVS-PA, it is mandatory for the DOE to conduct an on

h this request for issuance. The PP/DOE is required to update the monitoring report and the verification report.4: The PP shall provide the

ulations.
equirement of paragraphs 366 - 369 of the VVS version 02.0.The DOE shall provide the information on the actual results of the delayed cal

of the delayed calibration of meter for AUX 1 with serial number 34120540820 and meter for AUX 2 with serial number 34120540817 that

rticipants shall describe the equipment used to monitor each parameter, including details on accuracy class, and calibration information (
rt version 5 dated 3/3/2022 whereas the applicable monitoring report is version 5 dated 19/2/2022. Kindly clarify.
the maximum error permissible. Further the spreadsheet ER CALCULATION-V2 applies permissible error 0.2% to the Suba plant power gen
ntity of electricity supplied to recipient j which would have sourced the electricity from ith source (i.e. not to other recipients that would h

ng report version 3.1 is dated 22/12/2020.

ng period. Please refer to Tool
“ to calculate the emission factor for an electricity system , ”Version 7, paragraph 42(b) and VVS-PA, Version

ata") instead of being calculated. The DOE shall explain how it has assessed the applied calculations and results based on actual measured

g equipments was conducted at a frequency specified in applied monitoring methodology or EB guidance if applicable, and/or the monitor
nits for monitored period in these months. The DOE shall explain how it has cross-checked the net unit values for these months that are a

of the formulae to calculate carbon stocks. However, it is not clear how bTREE,j,p,i (tree biomass j in sample plot p of stratum i) is being ca

ed in the monitoring report or the verification report. The DOE is therefore requested to clarify how it cross-checked the reported data for
e 11), since the revised PDD indicates two meters whereas the monitoring report indicates one meter for the monitoring of in house electr
ing plan as per PS version 09.0 paragraph 248 (b).Issue: The annexure 1 of the monitoring report (p 15) provides the dates of calibration fo
ween the measured net generation and invoice and there is no explanation in the MR or verification report. For example, for the period fr

d).The DOE is requested to further substantiate how it has verified the appropriateness of allometric equation for Pinus caribaea, consider

n inconsistency of CER between the CER spreadsheet (42,107 CO2) and the monitoring report, certification/verification report, signed form

dated 17.10.2016. The MR report on page 7 refers to Revised PDD version 9 dated 09.05.16. The MR report on page 7 is also referring to P
hose reported values (i.e. EFCO2,HFO,Project,DG1 of 75.92 tCO2/TJ; EFCO2,HFO,Project,DG2 of 75.82 tCO2/TJ; and EFCO2,LNG,Project,DG

sheet of the submitted spreadsheet shows that Column J and C (measured Export) are used for the calculation of the net electricity gener
the monitoring report (VVS-PA ver. 01 paragraph 367)The PP/DOE are requested to address the following inconsistencies: (i) The monitori
iation but directly applied the above (b) option which causes an interference impact on the emission reductions when applying the concep
toring report with the monitoring report form; (ii) compliance of the project implementation with the registered PDD; (iii) compliance of t
toring report with the monitoring report form; (ii) compliance of the project implementation with the registered PDD; (iii) compliance of t

2015 and the value has not been applied to any wells in Q3 2015 before calculating the average value for 2015 as "most conservative". Ple

information flow for these parameters including the values in the monitoring reports as per VVS version 09.0 paragraphs 393 and 409 (e)
tions or net anthropogenic removals as required by the registered monitoring plan, the applied methodologies, the applied standardized b

he request for issuance documents refer to 360,993.

he request for issuance documents refer to 360,993.

rior to the implementation of the project activity(σhistorical), until the point in time when the existing equipment would need to be replac
anges to the project design of a registered project activity), however not PRC is submitted with this request.6.Scope: Cross-referencing and

s exclusion by stating that this parameter is not required for the emission reduction calculation. The DOE is requested to clarify how it con
to registration of the project activity as per VVS version 09.0 paragraph 326 (b).Issue:

izing the verification, shall request the project participants to conduct the required calibration and shall determine whether the project pa
on report does not provide a description of the actual operation of the project activity as per VVS version 09.0 paragraph 385 (b).Issue: Th

cation and certification report does not determine if the assumptions used in emission calculations have been justified as per VVS version
d invoice. From May to September 2014, the values in the invoice are higher than the net electricity generation based on the meter readin
s no final monitoring report is submitted. Kindly clarify.
7c and 8c whereas only para 8c is applicable for this submission.2.Scope: Are the number of CERs and, where applicable, the breakdown o
e year. Please refer to paragraph 360 of VVS for project activities (version 02.0).

ual gravity monitored on a weekly basis and how it has been applied to correct the monitored value of Vf,y in order to arrive at the final va
a)the capacity of the diesel generator and how it will meet the demand of emergency situation. b)the meter locations3: Scope: The monit
250.240 MWh, respectively. The
” DOE is required to provide further information on 1) how the actual monitored values were monitored;
nd 415.440 MWh, respectively. The
” DOE is required to provide further information on 1) how the actual monitored values were monitore

he Project Standard.2: Scope: The monitoring report does not contain the implementation status of the project (including a brief descriptio
or.). Further, the DOE/PP has not provided the data measured for each of these flow meters.
e. 4.Scope: The cross-referencing and versioning within and between the document are not correct and accurate.Issue: There is an inconsi

ded in the verification report (e.g. not applicable reported in the verification report section E.10) on how the DOE took due account of all
est sheets and IPCC values to assure consistency . However,
” the ER excel sheet submitted along with the issuance request indicates that t

e not consistent.Issue: There is an inconsistency in the cross referencing of the ER amount. The issuance submission page, issuance reques
he request for issuance as per VVS version 09.0 paragraph 409 (f).Issue: The Verification Report contains information on the temporary de
4.1 paragraph 22(a). In doing so, the DOE is also requested to mention what the actual precision is. Section D.3 of the monitoring report h
r monitoring equipment as per the applied methodology or national standard; or (g) Change of frequency of monitoring certain paramete

first monitoring report in accordance with the CDM

“ project cycle procedure for project activities , ”the requirements for and means of val
tion report does not indicate that the information provided in the monitoring report has been cross-checked with other sources such as pl

itoring period in the rest of the submission is 15/11/2012 to 10/07/2013.

be considered suitable for the project. If this is not the case, it is recommended to develop local allometric equations for the project use f
her power plants connected together with the proposed CDM project activity and relevant monitoring points.2: Scope: The verification rep
ivery commitment by project participants)." However, the verification report does not contain information required by para 26 of EB 106 r
rther clarify how it has validated that the the size and frequency of sampling for the parameter PCFi complies with all the requirements as
VVS V02, Para 395 (e).
er in cases where the request for post registration change have been approved by the Board prior to the submission of the request for issu
y, CODww,discharge,PJ,y): (1) The achieved precision of parameter CODww,treated,y (i.e. from 13.21% to 34.69%) and the achieved precis
preadsheet  submitted TAG ¨Project Emissions¨ CELLS-B16 to K16, the values for FCFi are fixed while as per pages 61-62 of the registered m
ing methodology and the monitoring plan. (PS v1, para 192 (b))The PP/DOE is requested to justify how it has verified that the conservative

excel sheet for emission reduction calculation. The DOE/project participant is requested to provide this information.
However, there is no information of: (i) Any calibration of this thermal flow meter, including when delayed calibration was conducted; (ii) T

third party lab who conducted the measurement of NCV,c,y would have similar quality standard to ISO17025, as required by the revised a
r referenced during the verification.

oper justification considering that the verification report referred to the validation contract.
nd the applied methodology document. (VVS v2, para 246 (c), 284 (i))Issue:The PP/DOE are requested to further substantiate how the calc

period from Oct. 2015 to Aug. 2016 for SC 1350.

hodology and, where applicable, the applied approved standardized baseline as per VVS version 09.0 paragraph 388.Issue: The spread she
e project activity, when the reservoir is full) were 1.10 (km2) and 1.05 (km2) during this monitoring period. However, these values are sign
dsheet.Issue: 1) The sheet called "ER Calculation" presents the monitoring period as "2012.10.01 ~2012.09.30" while the request for issua

g this monitoring period were reported by the project participants. The project participants were thus temporarily unable to monitor ESj, i
ed monitoring of the parameter statistically
“ adjusted drop out from total population of units in period (DOy) and
” the monitoring survey

ed from the JMR records is used for calculation of the emission reductions. However, it is observed that invoice values are lower than the
od in consideration (i.e. the results of delayed calibration are available), the DOE may conclude its verification, provided the following cons
sh to claim CERs and period for which the PPs do not wish to claim CERs. If you agree with this approach, please confirm with the return e
does not list each parameter required by the monitoring plan and does not provide an statement on how the DOE verified the information
n 2.0, para 199, a spreadsheet containing the calculations of emission reductions or net anthropogenic removals must be submittedIssue:
d or the revised monitoring plan as per VVS version 09.0 paragraph 392.Issue: The monitoring requirements of parameter FCPJ,k,y and FCP

average trip distance of taxi was determined based on survey method. However, the PP has not provided the information how the averag
02/08/2012; (b) The PDD page 58 prescribes the calibration of GPS, but the neither the Monitoring Report and Verification Report provide
her project activities, names and capacity for project 2) have not been provided.2: Scope: The verification report shall contain a confirmati

monitoring has been carried out in accordance with registered or the revised monitoring plan as per VVS version 09.0 paragraph 392.Issue
3 (used from 10/01/2012 to 13/02/2013 during this monitoring period).

th the energy balance and the results of the comparison. Please refer to the approved monitoring methodology (AMS-I.C ver 19 page 21).
in
” line 230 calculated what would have been the required sample size based on the result of the survey. For some parameters, it is observ
version 09.0 paragraph 403 (d).Issue: For parameter "Thermal efficiency of baseline coal fired boiler" which is used in the baseline emission
ntain any reference related to the commitment for delivery of CERs as per para 26(b) of EB 106.

on is required (please refer to VVS v.9 Para 271).3: Scope: The verification report does not list each parameter required by the monitoring p
plan are different with those in the registered PDD.2: Scope: The verification report does not state that the monitoring has been carried ou

not contain detailed information on CERs delivery commitment (i.e. timing of the delivery) as per para 26 (b) of EB 106 meeting report and

s not provided information on the relevant accreditation for the calibrations carried out on on 7 June 2012, 17 September 2012 and 24 No
requirement of para 4(a) of Appendix 1 to the Project Standard.3: Scope: The revised PDD does not contain a summary of impacts of the
. The PP has applied a factor of -0.25% to the measured value of EGthermal, though the calibration of meter identifies the maximum accur
determine the pro-rata approach was correctly applied to the calculations of GHG emission reductions or net anthropogenic GHG removal

the project activity. DOE shall confirm that corrections made in the revised PDD do not require prior approval of the Board.3: Scope: The D
em biomass" only provides the data for "Block 1" while the working sheets such as "5.Estimation and uncertainty" and "3.Area per stratum

d CERs issued from 01 Jan 2013, where applicable, in request for issuance form do not correspond to the number of Certified Emission Red

sulted from the PRCs made. 2. The conclusion made in the monitoring report section B.2.7 that the changes of species planted does not ha

ng of plots is also mentioned in case of several other plots. If a randomly located plot is shifted because at the randomly selected location

OE have not verified the actual higher leak rates compared with the values in the registered PDD (average leak rates section B.7.1 of the re

; (iii) The data and calculation of GHG emission reductions have been assessed to correctly support the emission reductions being claimed.

s. Please clarify how the data quality was checked by the RES
“ and
” the project owner; and iii. It is further noted that the MR (pg. 10) has r
s. Please clarify how the data quality was checked by the RES
“ and
” the project owner; and iii. It is further noted that the MR (pg. 10) has r
ed in emission calculations have been justified as per VVS version 09.0 paragraph 403 (d).Issue: The monitoring report page 37 has stated
n accordance to the registered monitoring plan (section B.6.2 of the registered PDD) and the applied methodology (page 50). It is also not

e than 40 minutes during the hour h which

” is not in line with the version 2 of the tool. Refer to paragraph 373 (c) of VVS-PA.
an inconsistency in the cross-referencing of the monitoring report version. The verification/certification report refers to monitoring repor

ibration test".

closed. Since the inventory was based on "a stratified random sampling (SRS) estimator", moving of a randomly placed sample plot for the
ect was registered on 16 June, 2011.

erification report (p 52) states that there was no data of quantity of electricity consumption by the project from April to Aug 2012 and the

ed calibration test.3: VVS-PA, paragraph 373(e):The DOE is requested to explain how it validated the parameter EFOM,y in accordance with

ed the reported data. Refer VVA-PA Para 373(b).

” Check
“ for survival i,j,k , ” Area
“ cleaningi,j,k and
” etc. However, there is no annex 3 of the monitoring report. The DOE is required to provi
uses on trunk routes are basically new diesel and Natural Gas (NG, CNG and LNG) and buses on supporting routes are new diesel and NG b
submitted monitoring report is version 3 dated 31/07/2017.
delayed, conservative approach is to be applied in the ER calculation. The DOE stated that a maximum correction factor (0.2%) has been ap
to provide a proper justification in the verification report why the site visit cannot be postponed.

ted to verify that project is implemented as described in the PDD.2) Publicly available information indicates that the Dongzhuan Reservoir
e: The issuance request form does not refer to post-registration changes.
tation. The PP/DOE are requested to submit a revised PDD.2: Scope: The monitoring report does not contain information on the sampling
visits on the DOE or project participants (e.g. commitment/ timeline as per the validation or verification contract, CER delivery commitme

verification and certification report on page 12 refers to period 20/05/2014 31/12/2021

– and the validation report for post-registration ch

tion Report.

st calibration was on 12/03/2011, yet the subsequent was on carried out on 15/04/2011; (2) The second calibration was on 15/04/2011, y
to forest management activities (e.g. harvesting). The updated planting/harvesting cycle (i.e. table 4 of the revised PDD) shows harvesting

report version 8 dated 20/10/2015. Please note that when the monitoring report and the PDD are revised the verifiction/certification rep

eters were used in the same date. 2. The monitoring report indicates that the calibration frequency is every 2 years, however the DOE exp
x 31). However the DOE is requested to provide further information on how it verified that the monitored carbon stock change in the livin
nd the use of Qbiomass,y (Consumed) for the emission reductions calculation; (b) the use of procurement data for parameter FCdiesel,j,y b

n the location of the project activity (made once during the project design) and the reservoir level, which is continuously monitored by pro

termine the flare efficiency, and therefore the default value 90% is used when the following two conditions are met, otherwise the flare e

eck Meter (07033704) in 2012 while both reports indicate that these meters were operated during 22/12/2012 to 21/06/2013 and the mo

eters applicable to rule out leakage as per approach L1 and L2 in line with the registered PDD (section B.6.1, page 50) and monitoring meth
owever, the DOE have not verified the actual higher leak rates compared with the values in the registered PDD (average leak rates section

d data as: 1. As per the verification report, the 6TPH boiler was not operational from 2013 to 2019, however, as per the ER Spreadsheet, 6T
as been carried out in accordance with registered or the accepted revised monitoring plan. (VVM v.1.2 para 206 & 221(d))Issue: it is not cl

ns, project emissions, leakage (if any), and/or emission reductions, including reference to formulae and methods used. (EB48 - Annex 68 p

tates that the grid emission factor was calculated ex-ante and would be fixed throughout the crediting period.  However, Section B.7 of th
toring plan (p 29) indicates the same requirement. Further information is required by the DOE on why it did not raise a FAR to revise the m
ate methods and formulae for calculating baseline emissions, project emissions and leakage have been followed as per VVS version 09.0 p

it is not clear what equipment measured this parameter from 20/10/2014 onwards. Furthermore, there is no information of equipment w

available at this link: https://cdm.unfccc.int/extranet/OE/teleconference/cc16_mr.pdf).

wever, the DOE have not verified the actual higher leak rates compared with the values in the registered PDD (average leak rates for gas re

sue: The Verification Report and Monitoring Report have not provided information and justification why the actual number of CFLs distribu
dology used to close the FAR was based on version 4 which is different from version 3 applied in the project activity.

report does not provide an assessment that all physical features of the proposed CDM project activity proposed in the registered PDD are

MDy (Methane captured and destroyed/gainfully used by the project activity) as it can be observed in the submitted CER spreadsheet, for 9

d to determine the lower and upper limit at 95% confidence level for the measurement of methane content in the bio-gas at each bio-dige
"Tool to determine the mass flow of a greenhouse gas in a gaseous stream , ”version 3.0, under normal operation conditions, the volumetr

ethods and formulae for calculating baseline emissions, project emissions and leakage have been followed as per VVS version 09.0 paragra
he values in the monitoring reports (VVS v2, para 236, 284 (e)).Issue: The Verification Report page 14 mentions "During on-site visit, verific

ed from those 3 WEGs belonging to the project activity, and (2) the values EGf1,JMR,export (spreadsheet Emission
“ Reductions column
” E
under section D.1 of the MR (i.e. parameters not monitored).

peration of the project activity (VVS v2, para 228 (b))Issue: The verification report does not provide information on the several operationa
missions, project emissions and leakage have been followed as per VVS version 09.0 paragraphs 403 (c) and 409 (j).Issue: The DOE is requ

e standard Sampling
“ and surveys for CDM project activities and programmes of activities (version
” 08.0).2: As per the verification report,

tween the number of CERs in the signed form and the project view page ( 21,148 CO2) and the rest of the documents (21,142 CO2).

e with PCP version 9 para 222.Issue: The submitted verification and certification report is for a different project.
ve monitoring arrangements have been approved by the Board under the prior-approval track or to be approved by the Board under the is
to the grid) for this site in light of the invoice values being lower than the JMR values.
ect activity.2: Scope: The spreadsheet does not contain all parameters required to be monitored and/or reported at the intervals required

Wuliji Phase-2 project, sum electricity generation export to the grid by project activity (Wuliji Phase-1) and Wuliji Phase-2 project, sum ele

06 & 221(d))Issue: The revised monitoring plan includes the monitoring parameter of EGy while the monitoring report does not provide th
clude a diagram in the Monitoring Report indicating all relevant monitoring points. 2: Scope: The monitoring report does not contain the v

onent 2, column F and G). The DOE is requested to further substantiate how it verified the implementation status and actual operation of

VM (v.1.2) given that section D.2 of the revised monitoring report shows that the second calibration date is 06/04/2010, whereas the verifi
nges in section 2 of the signed form in order to be able to submit through the PRC interface.

PT-0811A334-01 was conducted after the calibration on 18/09/2012. Also note that there are inconsistencies in the calibration date of: (i)

suance in line with PCP version 9 para 222.Issue: The DOE is requested to submit the respective monitoring report using the valid version

nitoring period under consideration. (PS v2 para 191 (a)(b)(c))Issue: The installed capacity of the wind power plant is inconsistently presen
OP, AFR, AIFR, and NAP have not been included. Kindly include the required information.2: Scope: The spreadsheet does not contain the fo
. The submitted Verification statement in page 30 states as well "the revised version of the Monitoring Report of 09/04/2012 ver. 4."Howe

change since the implementation of the project in the reservoir area". Further, it is observed that the applied value is the same as the valu

uding the serial number and validity of the calibration of the meter.

mentation and operation status of the conveyor belt. 2: Scope: The verification report does not provide a conclusion on the verified amou
but should be 19/10/2009).
mber of units expected in the PDD. 3: Scope: The verification report does not list each parameter required by the monitoring plan (VVM v

alues DEC-09" "(to JUNE-10) sheet "TFH" .

O2e per year". This is not reflected in the ex ante calculation in the revised PDD.

e documents submitted (AMS-III.Q version 2, ACM0012 version 3.1).4.Scope: According to EB48 Annex 68 paragraph 9(f), the crediting per
itoring Perport as well the Verification Report. The PP/DOE is requested to correct the inconsistencies in the value of QOE,BL and also corr

status of implementation and starting date of operation for each site. For CDM project activities with phased implementation, the report

should be 07/10/2009.

val of changes from the project activity as described in the registered PDD, EB48 Annex 66. Please refer to VVM v.1.2 para 197..
 however, currently one anaerobic lagoon has been covered. The utilization of the methane captured for renewable energy has not been

missions; and 3) this approach was in line with the applied methodology AMS-III.H, version 18.0 and conservative. The DOE is required to

appears that a lower value of baseline nitric acid production, NAPBC, (145,637 tHNO3) was considered instead of the actual total NAPBC o
y section 9.2.6.The DOE is requested to address the issues raised below: a. The calibration information reported in the table 3 of MR is diff

2024. Please explain what the figure is. 3: Scope: The verification report does not determine if the assumptions used in emission calculatio

submitted documentation. The signed form is dated 12 December, 2014.

lay has been duly considered by PP as per para 366 or 367 of the VVS for PA ver 2 considering that the correction factors derived from the

se in the number of system from the 9th to the 10th monitoring period considering that the DOE states in CL2 that no
“ new stoves have b

g period, the source of data generation records used was the Eskom-meter. In doing so, the DOE shall also explain why a PRC is not consid
 requested to clarify if the approach provided on page 21 of the Verification Report used to account for the meter calibration delay, result

ering that the measurement points of biogas flow and CH4 volumetric fraction are taken at a small distance between each other, the chara

at used by the project was measured and reported as part of the CDM activities.

monitored and/or reported at the intervals required by the monitoring plan and the applied methodology?Issue: The data on flare temper
ssions calculation in the ER Calculation Spreadsheet is not consistent with the Monitoring Report, Verification and Certification report

011 and 2012. The DOE is requested to provide explanation. Refer to paragraphs 354 and 356(a) of VVS-PA.3: The wood density for each s

ied methodology document. (VVM v.1.2 para 208 (c) & 221 (h))Issue: The DOE has not explained why a correction of 1.75% is applied to th
6 months (p. 19) and in the verification report (including p.43) is 1 year.

ccuracy dated 27-02-2008 is valid for this monitoring period (17/07/2009 - 30/10/2011) as the register monitoring plan requires a calibrati

t describe the implementation status of the project. (For project activities that consist of more than one site, the report shall clearly descr

available at this link: https://cdm.unfccc.int/extranet/OE/teleconference/cc16_mr.pdf). Please update the PDD (both clean and tracked c
participant is requested to provide a spreadsheet corresponding to the version 9 of the monitoring report. 3: Scope: The verification repo
ine if the assumptions used in emission calculations have been justified and/or emission factors, default values and other reference values

s that accuracy of M5 and M6 is 0.5, however now the MR page 8 shows that accuracy of M5, new M5 and M6 is 0.2.
oject activity as per the registered PDD or the approved revised PDD. (VVM v.1.2 para 196)Issue: During the monitoring period a DG set ha

,316,940.8 tCO2 while the certification report states that the baseline emission is "41,080 t CO2" and the project emission is "0 t CO2". Th

and why it did not issue a FAR to the project participant for revising the monitoring plan to reflect the actual monitoring practice. Please re

ary and March to ensure that the equipment was duly calibrated during the entire monitoring period. (c) The DOE indicated that the main

alculated heat to power ratio).ii. The DOE is required to further clarify how it verified the design operational parameters including rated st
 on 09.0 or 01.0 of the VVS.2.Scope: The cross-referencing and versioning within and between the document are not correct and accurate.

d the corresponding VSG data were kept in the calculation. 2: Scope: The verification report does not provide an assessment on whether t

& EB 52 Annex 60)Issue: The DOE appropriately validated the meter's calibration dates (15 October 2010 and 14 October 2011); however, a

ty consumption, which is not consistent with description in page 17 of the verification report ("the raw data and calculation processes are
not listed any of the required monitoring parameters, information is not provided as to how the DOE has cross checked the reported data

and not 17,000 as indicated by the DOE. Please clarify.

D10: The DOE has not provided a validation opinion on how it has considered that the calibration frequency for the instrument has been m

oned in the monitoring report whereas the (re)calculation of this parameter was not shown in the submitted spreadsheet.
the provision in paragraph 366 of VVS-PA; (b) The calibration of thermocouple for parameter Tflare with serial number HM00008728/1-2

hly average. Further, the spreadsheet is not very clear if the total biogas measured and reported each month includes the biogas that is no

contain the formulae of calculation that are shown in the spreadsheet cells whenever possible.Issue: The parameters CODinput and CODo
lculated result of EFbl and EF1 used in the ER calculation; 2) In cell F16 (EFbl) and F17(EF1), no formulae have been entered showing how

ersion 09.0 paragraphs 403 (c) and 409 (j).Issue: the DOE was requested to explain how it had verified the emission reductions for the fou

05/2014. It was again removed for calibration on 07/05/2015 but it was never installed back. - For Flare thermal couples, the equipment fo
as the submitted monitoring report is version 4 dated 23.11.2011.

Appendix A) is 111.11: Scope: The verification report does not provide an assessment on whether the calibration of measuring equipments
nam (India) OSRAM CFL distribution CDM Project involves
” the distribution of approx. 450.000 to 500,000 OSRAM Long life Compact Fluor

fruit bunches that explains the increased amount of emission reductions claimed (Section E.5 and E.6 of the MR) was unexpected and tem
onsidered as a change to project design that does not need prior approval from the Board. In particular, the DOE is requested to provide in
itted Verification Report displays the registration date of this project activity as 29 January, 2009. However, project "Methane Capture and

ipment are not valid during certain periods and therefore, adjustments in the calculations of emission were made accordingly. The DOE sh

equires the calculation of project emissions where the power density is greater than 4W/m2 but less than or equal to 10W/m2 with power

nitoring period. The DOE is requested to explain how it concluded that the monitoring has been carried out in accordance with the registe
stalled in the coming years and it is not likely to be a permanent change to the project design. Please provide supporting evidence to dem

the cross-referencing of the baseline emissions. The monitoring report on page 37 section E.4. refers to baseline emissions 607,903 wher
d 2.2.2012 where as MR is version 2 dated 20.2.2012.4.Scope: According to EB48 Annex 68 paragraph 9(e), cross-referencing and versioni

sion 8 (page 30) requires monitoring of the efficiency of methane destruction (i.e. parameter Effi,y). However, such parameter is determin

d not raise a FAR to revise the monitoring plan in order to reflect the actual monitoring activity.

ng to the DOE (page 4 of verification report), the preparation of verification started from 08 November 2010 and the on-site verification to
to public grid. At
” the same time, one of the applicability conditions of the AMS.I-A is that (Page 1) The
“ applicability is limited to househo

nitoring plan? (VVM v.1.2 para 184 (a) (ii) & EB 52 Annex 60)Issue (a): The DOE has verified the calibration of two energy meters for each a

t number of 205 days.

d by the CMP; and (ii) In accordance with any requirements of the CMP guidance. 3.Scope: The monitoring period throughout the docume

th the paragraph 22 of the Standard

“ for Sampling and Surveys for CDM Project Activities and Programme Activities (version
” 4.1); (b) The
y" which appears to be the same statement mentioned in the PDD (page 23) and the monitoring report does not report how this has been

hat all physical features of the proposed CDM project activity proposed in the registered PDD are in place and/or that the project participa

nt in biogas is as per the requirements of the monitoring plan.   Please refer to VVM version 01.2 paragraph 205 (a & c)..
w rate).2: Scope: The monitoring report / spreadsheet report do not contain all parameters required to be monitored and/or reported at t

tion report, up till now, 6 gas engines (12 MW) and 1 vocsidizer has been installed; the DOE has explained that the remaining are planned

on yearly basis, while these two parameters were reported on monthly basis (7,500 t/month and 4,411 t/month) in the annual biomass av
which
” are required by the revised monitoring plan.3: Scope: The spreadsheet does not contain the formulae of calculation that are shown
 d to further clarify how it assessed the consistency of the accuracy equipment (i.e. Roots flow meter and Landtec gas analyzer) used to mo
equipment (i.e. Roots flow meter and Landtec gas analyzer) used to monitor the volume of biogas and the methane content of the biogas w

e Monitoring Report is dated 10 January 2014.

eport in line with the requirement of EB48, Annex 68 para 10(d).
nt between the Monitoring report (23,759.66 23782.76 24062.23) and the rest of the documents submitted (23,759).

of the market demand, then provide proper justification and explain why this should not be considered as inflating the baseline.4. Provide
 However, it is noted that the VR (pg. 31) states that the
“ audit team checked the daily records and compared it with the ER spreadsheet,

ortioning formula into the ER spreadsheet instead of putting the apportioned amount of electricity into the spreadsheet directly as raw da

rovide more information how it verifies that PP complies with the requirement of paragraph 76 (c) of the CDM project standard for projec
PC_Import_Access" page in spreadsheet 1370- HC_N4_ER-Calc_No-04_Vers03_120607.xlsx) by appropriate formulae.2: Scope: The verific

oiler fuel (3.66%) and that used for other industrial applications (20%) is still based on the report 'Renewable Energy Resources by Anders

med by the project (in column "aggregated EGy") while values of aggregated LFG have been reported for these days ("LFGtotal, y / LFGflare
 indicated as 80% (PDD, page 6 and the verification report page 2) and 64.55% (energy balance workbook, Cell C2).

ne to
” describe how the parameter "Project emissions from flaring of the residual gas stream in year y" will be monitored. However, the sp

sue: The DOE is requested to provide the information on how it has cross checked the material and energy balance as required by the app

ted as having the same average value over the monitoring period (i.e. 17.74 kg/m3) which would result in no project emissions being acco

of this monitoring period)". However, this calculation process was not demonstrated in the submitted CER calculation spreadsheet. Given t
page 1 of the verification report only mention two PPs as Araúna
“ Participações e Investimentos Ltda and
” URBAM
“ Urbanizadora
– Muni
he Monitoring Report does not contain the parameter Surplus
“ biomass availability as
” per requirements of EB54 Annex34.3: Scope: The m

oes not contain the values of the monitored parameters. (EB 54 Annex 34)Issue: the monitoring report only provides the values of the net

n 09.0 paragraph 385 (a).Issue: The verification report (pg. 14) states that The
“ project activity consists in the partial substitution of traditio
on using meters M4, M3a, b, c, d.
ation of the sludge leaving the digesters in the project activity has been ensured and monitored, and whether the sludge has been treated

the updated calculation spreadsheet in line with the requirements of para. 265 of the PS-PA, v.03.0 and para. 373 (c )of the VVS-PA v.03.0
%) has been used to correct the values for parameter "El" (Electricity generated from the biogas collected in the anaerobic treatment facili

B48 - Annex 68 paragraph 10 (b) (ii)).Issue: the spreadsheet contains typed values for 'transmission loss'. 3: Scope: The spreadsheet does n
puted laboratories (external agency).

of any CARs, CLs or FARs issued. (VVM v.1.2 para 192, 194)Issue: (a) The calculation of EF gas turbine has been provided in response to CAR

basis) and the monitoring report indicates the delayed AST test by stating that QAL2 including AST was done on 31/08/2016 02/09/2016
–

PDD; (ii) there has been other improvements at the landfill (i.e. optimization of waste disposal, drainage systems, daily covering, equipme
value is in line with the registered monitoring plan and the applied monitoring methodology. ii. For the parameters methane
“ fraction in
sults of the flare efficiency, but the dates when the analyses were made were not reported;
r assessing compliance with the calibration frequency requirements' for the calibration delay. (VVM v.1.2 para 184 (a) (ii) & EB 52 Annex 6

f the compliance with the QA/QC procedures established in the Revised Monitoring Plan. In doing so, the PP is requested to include in the

ed that the nature of the deposit during this monitoring period was different with one considered in the registered PDD, as the DOE has n
ections A.2 and A.4.3). b) The PP was requested to provide a line diagram showing all relevant monitoring points including the existing 2.5

E is requested to explain how it has complied with the CDM VVS for PAs, version 3.0, paras 364 and 395(e), in particular, (a) how it has con

carried out in accordance with the formulae and methods described in the monitoring plan and the applied methodology document. (VVM
age as appropriate have been carried out in accordance with the formulae and methods described in the monitoring plan and the applied

ra 184 (a) and EB 52 Annex 60 for the period of delay in the calibration of weigh scale to measure the consumption of charcoal fines at the

e calibration frequency requirements' for the calibration delay. (VVM v.1.2 para 184 (a) (ii) & EB 52 Annex 60)Issue: There is no informatio

state that the monitoring has been carried out in accordance with registered or the accepted revised monitoring plan. (VVS v2 para 235)Iss
s described in the monitoring plan and the applied methodology document. (VVM v.1.2 para 208 (c) & 221 (h))Issue: The DOE is required t

ells whenever possible. (EB48 - Annex 68 paragraph 10 (b) (ii)).Issue: The ER spreadsheet contains incorrect links to the external spreadshe

ve under the context of additionality and baseline scenario determination in the request of post-registration change.

r reference values have been correctly applied. (VVM v.1.2 para 208 (d) & (e))Issue1: The verification report does not determine if emission

66 kg/liter for the specific gravity of hot oil during the periods 1 April 2009 to 31 May 2009 and 29-34 July 2009 for PGC Train A and 30 Apr
as. However, it is not clear how 46.3% was applied for three quarters within the submitted spreadsheet called ìMethane Content sampling
, for which the baseline was established based on a full year's (12 months, or 365 days) annual consumption while in the project scenario,
egistration
” full history in
” the UNFCCC webpage http://cdm.unfccc.int/Projects DB/SGSUKL1152286575.05/history; this PDD version 5 in p

hat the information provided in the monitoring report has been cross-checked with other sources such as plant log books, inventories, pur

on in accordance with VVS v07 paragraph 290 (a), in particular: (1) whether this is a temporary deviation from the monitoring plan in line w
of the market demand, then provide proper justification and explain why this should not be considered as inflating the baseline.4. Provide

lied to the flow meters installed at the boiler and the furnaces.  In doing so, the DOE shall also clearly report the "planned calibration date

(d))Issue:The Validation Opinion for the Notification /requesting approval of changes from the project activity stated "that the changes oc
 s stated that there is no difference between LFGtotal and LFGflare and has explained that the flow meter is positioned on the main pipe b

ecified in applied monitoring methodology or EB guidance if applicable, and/or the monitoring plan (VVM v.1.2 para 184 (a) (ii) & EB 52 An
antiate how it assessed that the monitoring of the  methane content in the biogas has been done as per the monitoring plan, and how it a

under the control of MSEDCL as described in appendix 2 of monitoring report; (ii) how the requirement in the monitoring plan that the imp

laced on this date. (The meter numbers appear to have been switched.) In response to this minor issue, the DOE has submitted a revised V

in the registered PDD. (VVM v.1.2 para 198 (d))Issue: the verification report does not contain reference to the approved notification of ch

measuring the methane content of biogas. Please refer to VVM version 01.2 paragraph 205 (c).
 clarify how it assessed the consistency of the accuracy equipment (i.e. Roots flow meter and Landtec gas analyzer) and method used to m

the applied methodology and AMS.I.C. version 8 and AMS-III.E. version 8 on pages 2, 6, 14, 24, 25, 36, 41, 42.

) indicates for the site "Granja CFM" its operation status as "site is stopped", however the verification report does not provide an assessme
e: There is an inconsistency in the monitoring period between the monitoring report, ER calculation sheet and certification/verification rep

3 of the Appendix of the methodological tool "Tool to determine the mass flow of a greenhouse gas in a gaseous stream" version 03.0.2:

on or request of approval of changes in the PDD was not submitted as per Procedures for notifying and requesting approval of changes f
ed) since the start of production of HCFC22 relevant for the registered project activity, and explain reasons for any change that may have o

meters: i) Hdiesel; and ii) Hbiomass 3: Scope: The verification report does not provide an assessment on whether the calibration of measur

/2011 at 00:40:04, amon several others). Please refer to VVM version 1.2 - paragraph 208.

omplies with the guidelines of EB 52 Annex 60; - CAR6: the monitoring report does not provide the error rate applicable to the weighbridg
e plant will use these diesel gensets for 2 weeks per annum during annual O&M of the EFB facility (page
” 9 of PDD) whereas it is noted tha

oes not contain the formulae of calculation that are shown in the spreadsheet cells whenever possible. (EB48 - Annex 68 paragraph 10 (b)
accordance with Annex 60 EB 52, has been applied for the month of January 2009, for both the sites Baramsar and Soda-Mada while” the

alidation opinion on how paragraph 197 of the VVM has been complied with.2: Scope: The verification report does not provide a conclusio

of the market demand, then provide proper justification and explain why this should not be considered as inflating the baseline.4. Provide
of the market demand, then provide proper justification and explain why this should not be considered as inflating the baseline.4. Provide

ating that "It is confirmed that ICE main meter is working properly (with an error below 0.2%) so the application of the maximum permissib

ect emissions and leakage as appropriate have been carried out in accordance with the formulae and methods described in the monitorin

he existing facility to the grid form 2000 to 2004 was deducted in the calculation of the emission reduction. However, this information is no
g. meters at PA 3 and PA17) have been adjusted as per VVS. Ver 9 para 395 which requires the comparison between the maximum permiss

.8, that "monitoring process carried out during the current period is deemed appropriate and consistent with the revised monitoring plan
of the monitoring report) whereas the monitoring plan requires annual calibration.

of the facility, is in line with the approved deviation whereas the monitored loss in February 2008 was 2.7907%.

mber 2017- November 2018 as per the paragraph 369 of VVS for PA version 2 as i) the para 369 of the VVS states that If“the DOE determin

e LFG implementer. Paragraphs 288(b) and 300 of VVS-PA.

such provision is not included in the monitoring plan and there is no information regarding any cross-check with records of electricity sale
y.2: The DOE shall take due account of all authentic and relevant comments in the verification for the first request for issuance of CERs (pa

determine whether the calibration of the measuring equipment that has an impact on the claimed GHG emission reductions or net anthro

plants near the geo coordinates.

y commitment in the ERPA as per 26(b) of EB106 meeting report.

 ),”4.6 is used as a CONSTANT value besides 3.6 (see Column H); •
In the excel calculation sheet ( Plants
“ EF ),”a very high CO2 emission fa

olumetric fraction of CH4 in the LFG and eventually higher BECH4,y which not conservative; (iv) The DOE is requested to substantiate how

mits in accordance with the CDM

“ project standard for project activities .4:
” Paragraph 309(c) of VVS-PA: The validation report for PRC doe
y basis. However, the monitoring report has not stated whether the reported value (2727.69 Kcal/kg of rice husk , 2979.54 Kcal/kg of woo
ent among the submitted documents.Issue: The monitoring report and the verification/certification report refer to 2 types of post registra

er the MR (page 27 and 28), monitoring of these two parameters has been done from 01 May 2016 to 06 June, 2016. The DOE is requested

imum permissible error of 0.2% has been considered for the non-calibrating period (10/02/2016 - 10/04/2016 & 11/10/2016 to 04/12/201

monitoring report (i.e. V= (0.00817/D^2*H + 0.29886)*D^2*H) is also not consistent with the formula described in the ER sheet (i.e. (0.008

logical conditions compared to the projected hydrological conditions used for the feasibility study. However, the DOE did not indicate, in t

ck meter) were installed on 01/01/2019 and removed on 11/11/2020 with the calibration record on 18/06/2019. However, the DOE did no

he DOE shall report: The actual operation of the registered CDM project activity. Please refer to VVS PA v1.0 paragraph 359.The DOE is req

y for the DOE to conduct an on-site inspection at verification for the registered CDM project activity if it is the first verification for the DOE

ort.4: The PP shall provide the monitoring line diagram (graphical scheme) showing all relevant monitoring points (including the controller
ctual results of the delayed calibration of the main and back-up meters, in order to confirm that the actual error identified in the delayed c

ial number 34120540817 that took place after 01/02/2017.2: As per VVS 2.0, para 391, if the monitoring report covers the first monitoring

, and calibration information (frequency, date of calibration and validity), if applicable as per the registered monitoring plan (paragraph 26
% to the Suba plant power generation for the period January 2016 to January 2017. However, the issues below are found: a) The factor 100
other recipients that would have sourced the electricity from different source). Please refer to paragraph 361(b) of VVS for project activiti
aph 42(b) and VVS-PA, Version 2.0, paragraph 361(b). 2: The DOE/PP are requested to further clarify the types of meters used to measure

ults based on actual measured electricity generation data.Please refer to VVS v3.0 paras 372, 374 (b) (c)

pplicable, and/or the monitoring plan (VVS v2, para 243)Issue: As per the monitoring plan, the frequency of the calibration is according to
es for these months that are apportioned based on the applicable number of days with other sources (e.g. daily figure from controller met

plot p of stratum i) is being calculated as the equation shown in page 27 [bTREE,j,p,i=13.619*ln(DBH)+17.891] of the monitoring report is

checked the reported data for net electricity supplied. Refer Para 374(b) of VVS-PA, version 3.0.
monitoring of in house electricity consumption.2: Scope: The verification report does not indicate that the information provided in the m
ides the dates of calibration for the main meters and the check meters as 20/12/2012, 20/12/2013, 20/02/2014, 24/02/2015, 24/02/2016
 For example, for the period from 1/3/2018 to 31/3/2018, the measured net generation as shown in sheet Baseline
“ Emission is” 26,075 k

on for Pinus caribaea, considering that two regression equations for the same specie with overlapping DAP range are used for Pinus cariba

verification report, signed form and the project view page (67,065 CO2). 4.Scope: The cross-referencing and versioning within and between

on page 7 is also referring to PRCV version 3 dated 27.05.16, but the PRCV is version 4 dated 28.10.16
TJ; and EFCO2,LNG,Project,DG2 of 52.46 tCO2/TJ) are lower than the values applied in the baseline scenario (i.e. EFCO2,HFO,Baseline,DG1

tion of the net electricity generation instead of Column D and K (Export after the application of error factor).2: The DOE shall determine wh
consistencies: (i) The monitoring report (page 6) indicates that the PP has entered into agreement with WTG supplier (Suzlon) to provide t
ons when applying the concept of annual capacity cap instead of daily cap to the calculation of baseline emissions, because part of the ac
ered PDD; (iii) compliance of the registered monitoring plan with the monitoring methodology including applicable tool(s) and the standar
ered PDD; (iii) compliance of the registered monitoring plan with the monitoring methodology including applicable tool(s) and the standar

15 as "most conservative". Please refer to the worksheet project

“ emissions , ”spreadsheet "ER Olkaria IV-V03".2: The validation report sha

0 paragraphs 393 and 409 (e).Issue: The DOE is requested to explain how it has verified YPJ the implementation of the sampling plan for p
ies, the applied standardized baselines and the other applied methodological regulatory documents?The spreadsheets containing the calc

ment would need to be replaced in the absence of the project activity (DATEBaselineRetrofit). Therefore, the DOE/PP is requested to furth
6.Scope: Cross-referencing and versioning within and between the document is not correct and accurate.Issue: The verification report refe

equested to clarify how it considers the revised monitoring plan to be in accordance with the applied methodology (AMS-III.Z ver. 4 para 2
ermine whether the project participants have calculated GHG emission reductions conservatively using the approach mentioned in paragra
9.0 paragraph 385 (b).Issue: The verification and certification report states on page 9 that "The control system at the power plant is autom

en justified as per VVS version 09.0 paragraph 403 (d).Issue: The DOE is requested to clarify the correctness of the GWP of methane (21 tCO
tion based on the meter readings (for example, P1 reading +P2 reading -P3 reading).The PP/DOE is required to provide the explanation.
e applicable, the breakdown of CERs for the period up to 31 December 2012 and for the period from 1 January 2013 ?Issue: 1. There is an
n order to arrive at the final value of Vf,y since it would participate in and have an impact on the calculation of emission reductions.
locations3: Scope: The monitoring report does not contain the values of the monitored parameters used to calculate baseline, project and
tored values were monitored; 2) why it verified only two meters (M01 and M02) while there are three meters mentioned in the monitorin
nitored values were monitored; 2) why it verified only two meters (M01 and M02) while there are three meters in the diagram in the mon

ect (including a brief description of the installed technology and/or equipments, relevant dates of project activity e.g. date of construction
urate.Issue: There is an inconsistency in the cross-referencing of the monitoring report date. The validation report for post-registration cha

e DOE took due account of all authentic and relevant comments in the verification as per paragraphs 391 and 392 of the CDM VVS for PA,
uance request indicates that the NCV used for calculating project emissions is chosen as the maximum between (i) IPCC default values at t

mission page, issuance request form and ER spreadsheet refer to ER amount 196,991 whereas the monitoring report and verification/certi
ormation on the temporary deviation PRC-8405-001 that has been approved for the period 27 Nov 2012 - 30 Sep 2014. However, the Veri
D.3 of the monitoring report has provided the sample size calculation that takes into account 90/10 confidence/precision level. However it
monitoring certain parameters as per the applied methodology." However, the paragraphs referred by the DOE in the validation opinion

irements for and means of validation in paragraphs 254−260 above shall apply mutatis mutandis with the following adjustments (para 391
d with other sources such as plant log books, inventories, purchase records, laboratory analyses. (VVS v7, para 262 (b))Issues: (i) The verific

equations for the project use from destructive sampling of trees randomly selected in each age class. In
” doing so, please also refer to the
s.2: Scope: The verification report does not provide a description of the actual operation of the project activity (VVS v7, para 273 (b))Issue
equired by para 26 of EB 106 report.
s with all the requirements as per the registered monitoring plan, as required by paras. 362 and 363 of the CDM validation and verificatio
bmission of the request for issuance as per paragraph 407 of VVS version 9 and Instruction
“ for filling out the verification and certification
4.69%) and the achieved precision of parameter CODww,discharge,PJ,y (i.e. from 7.42% to 72.19%) does not meet the required precision o
pages 61-62 of the registered monitoring plan it must be measured by the project participants, where the size and frequency of the sampli
verified that the conservative approach has been applied for delayed calibratin , in doing so, please provide the date of actual date of cali
alibration was conducted; (ii) The date of the delayed calibration of this temperature meter.

5, as required by the revised approved monitoring plan and reported in the monitoring report.5: The PP/DOE are requested to include info
ther substantiate how the calculation of the parameter EFBL,plant,y (Emission factor for the project activity power plant in the baseline) h
aph 388.Issue: The spread sheet submitted in the request for issuance includes the monthly monitored values of "% allocated Serum" whi
However, these values are significantly lower than the value (1.5 km2) reported in the registered PDD (page 26), which stated that the par
0" while the request for issuance covers period of 01 Oct 12 - 30 Sep 14. Further, please use English as the official language of the CDM Ex

orarily unable to monitor ESj, i,import, y in accordance with the registered monitoring plan in the duration of 16 July 2012 to 28 February 2
y) and
” the monitoring survey confirmed that the biogas units were operational. The DOE is required to provide further information on how

ice values are lower than the net export values based on JMR report. The DOE is therefore requested to explain how it verified parameter
n, provided the following conservative approach is adopted in the calculation of GHG emission reductions (para 366 of VVS for PA version
ease confirm with the return e-mail and secretariat will split the monitoring period. Once done, secretariat will inform you and after that y
e DOE verified the information flow (from data generation, aggregation, to recording, calculation and reporting) for these parameters inclu
vals must be submittedIssue: The submitted ER Calculation sheet is corrupted and not possible to open.4.Scope: According to PCP for Proj
of parameter FCPJ,k,y and FCPJ,i,y (page 30 of ACM0003 version 7.4.1) requires (1) checking the consistency of metered fuel consumption

e information how the average trip distance of passenger cars and motorcycles were determined based on survey method. The DOE is req
nd Verification Report provides the information of calibration of the GPS.
port shall contain a confirmation that appropriate methods and formulae for calculating baseline emissions, project emissions and leakage

sion 09.0 paragraph 392.Issue: The DOE is requested to clarify how the monitoring of moisture content is as per the monitoring plan, i.e c
ogy (AMS-I.C ver 19 page 21). 2: Scope: The verification report does not indicate that the information provided in the monitoring report ha
some parameters, it is observed that the sample size is beyond 216 (for example for number of buffalo, the calculated sample size is 1423
s used in the baseline emissions calculation of alternatives 1a and 1b, the registered PDD on page 23 states "In accordance with para 26 of
er required by the monitoring plan and does not provide an statement on how the DOE verified the information flow (from data generatio
monitoring has been carried out in accordance with registered or the accepted revised monitoring plan. (VVS v2 para 235)Issue: The DOE is

of EB 106 meeting report and the appendix 3 of the verification report included ERPA
“ as
” reference 6.4. which did not include any date.

17 September 2012 and 24 November 2012. Please refer to the CDM project standard, paragraph 97 (c).
a summary of impacts of the proposed or actual changes to the registered CDM project activity regarding: a) the applicability and applica
identifies the maximum accuracy as 0.36%. The PP/DOE shall provide more information why they considered applying a factor of -0.25%
t anthropogenic GHG removals in accordance with the CDM
“ project standard for project activities , if
” the monitoring period starts before

al of the Board.3: Scope: The DOE shall determine whether the monitoring of parameters related to the GHG emissions reductions in the p
ainty" and "3.Area per stratum i" indicate that the project activity is "Block 4".3: The monitoring report (p 10 - 12) shows that monitored v

mber of Certified Emission Reduction and breakdowns, verified by the DOE.Issue: The monitoring report refers on page 1 to GHG emission

of species planted does not have an impact on additionality and baseline determination, given that the estimated net removals have been

e randomly selected location there are no trees, then the inventory gets biased and hence invalidated. It is not clear how the DOE closed t

ak rates section B.7.1 of the registered PDD, 12.0 lpm = 6276 * 1000/60/8749) as per paragraph 273 (c) of VVS version 7. Besides, there is

sion reductions being claimed. (VVS v2 para 284(d))Issue: The parameter of Daily
“ Mean Weight of baked HHK bricks (DMW hhk bricks,di)"

oted that the MR (pg. 10) has reported the QA/QC procedures conducted for missing or damaged data. However, information related to th
oted that the MR (pg. 10) has reported the QA/QC procedures conducted for missing or damaged data. However, information related to th
ng report page 37 has stated that the emission factor of captive power (0.39tCO2/MWh) is used for the calculation of baseline emission fr
dology (page 50). It is also noted that the registered monitoring plan (section B.7.1) does not list EGhistoric,
“ 3yr as
” a monitored paramet

73 (c) of VVS-PA.
ort refers to monitoring report version 3 dated 09/12/2020 whereas the applicable monitoring report is version 2 dated 09/12/2020. Kind

mly placed sample plot for the reason of containing "no tree" would lead to bias and invalidate the inventory. Moving the plot centre bec
om April to Aug 2012 and the DOE verified the consumption only based on reported values from September 2012 to April 2013. The DOE

ter EFOM,y in accordance with the "Tool to calculate the emission factor for an electricity system", version 02. As per the tool, the ex-ante

. The DOE is required to provide further information on how it verified the monitored parameters.3: Scope: The verification and certificati
outes are new diesel and NG buses.2: The DOE is requested to explain how it confirmed that the monitoring plan is in accordance with the
tion factor (0.2%) has been applied for the delay in calibration in line with para 366 of CDM validation and verification standard for projec
that the Dongzhuan Reservoir will not be completed by 2015 as assumed in the PDD but rather at a later point in time (the Shaanxi Water
n information on the sampling plan in accordance with the AR Methodological Tool; EB 58 Annex 15 (PS v7, para 61).Issue: The MR (Section
ntract, CER delivery commitment by project participants), with reliance on applicable force majeure provisions in the validation or verificati

report for post-registration changes on page 3 refers to 20/05/2014 19/05/2021

– and on pages 3, 9 and 12 refers to period 20/05/2014

bration was on 15/04/2011, yet the subsequent was on carried out on 17/05/2011; (3) The fifth calibration was on 12/07/2011, yet the su
evised PDD) shows harvesting activities since 2015, and the verification report confirms the same. However, the verification report does n

he verifiction/certification report as well as the assessment opinion should also refer to the revised documents.4.Scope: The submitted do

2 years, however the DOE explained in section E.7 from the Verification Report that the valid period of the calibration report for flow mete
arbon stock change in the living biomass falls within the accuracy of ±10% of the mean at 90% confidence level.
ta for parameter FCdiesel,j,y being conservative assumption (Verification Report page 18), considering for months of May 2011, July 2011

ontinuously monitored by project sponsor. The monitoring of reservoir level is done by the Project Participant". Further information is req

are met, otherwise the flare efficiency for the minute m (ηflare, m) is 0%: A. The temperature of the flare (TEG,m) and the flow rate of the

012 to 21/06/2013 and the monitoring period is 01 Mar 12 - 31 Dec 20.

page 50) and monitoring methodology, ACM 0003 version 07. In doing so, the DOE shall clarify whether any independent survey or bioma
DD (average leak rates section B.7.1 of the registered PDD, 11.3 lpm = 4315 * 1000/60/6375) as per paragraph 273 (c) of VVS version 7. Be

as per the ER Spreadsheet, 6TPH boiler operated in 2013 and Nov-Dec 2018 and the steam generation is used for calculation purposes. 2.
206 & 221(d))Issue: it is not clear how each monitoring parameter in the monitoring plan of the registered PDD has been monitored by th

hods used. (EB48 - Annex 68 paragraph 10 (a) (vii))Issue:The calculation of EFphf_y is not presented in MR3: Scope: The verification report

d.  However, Section B.7 of the PDD (pages 54 and 60) states that the CO2 emission factor for the Central China Power Grid (EFCM grid y
not raise a FAR to revise the monitoring plan to reflect the change in the accuracy of the meters as the meters are controlled by Korea Ele
wed as per VVS version 09.0 paragraphs 403 (c) and 409 (j).Issue: The DOE is required to provide further information on how it verified the

no information of equipment with SN C4000000445747 in Appendix 3. - For P trans in 1# flare, DP trans in 1# flare and DP trans in 2# flare

D (average leak rates for gas regulator stations= 8.12 l/m and stop valves = 4.47 l/m in the registered CERs excel sheet) as per paragraph 27

actual number of CFLs distributed (340,476) is lower than the number stated in the registered PDD (709,484).3: Scope: The verification re
activity.

sed in the registered PDD are in place and/or that the project participant has implemented and operated the proposed CDM project activi

mitted CER spreadsheet, for 9-12 February.

in the bio-gas at each bio-digester/farm as page 10 of the verification report just mentions that " The reading values of biogas CH4 conten
ation conditions, the volumetric flow of landfill gas which is sent to flare is monitored as VLFG,sent_flare,y,db (m³ dry gas/h) since the tem

s per VVS version 09.0 paragraphs 403 (c) and 409 (j).Issue: The DOE is required to provide further information on how it verified the calcu
ns "During on-site visit, verification team has also taken a random sample of the PPs sampling records. Verification team has sampled 81 h

“mission Reductions column

” E) and EGf1,JMR,import (spreadsheet Emission
“ Reductions column
” H) are not utilized to calculate the EGf1,

tion on the several operational issues and changes described at pages 7 amd 8 of the Monitoring Report.
 409 (j).Issue: The DOE is requested to explain how it concluded that the methods and formulae for calculating the baseline GHG emission

As per the verification report, from the Kitchen test result and the number of time that each household prepare the specific food items us

ocuments (21,142 CO2).

oved by the Board under the issuance track in accordance with the provisions relating to temporary deviation from the registered monitor
orted at the intervals required by the monitoring plan and the applied methodology?Issue: The PP did not report the monthly values of me

Wuliji Phase-2 project, sum electricity imports from the grid by project activity (Wuliji Phase-1) and Wuliji Phase-2 project, Electricity impor

ing report does not provide this parameter. Further clarification is required how the DOE considers that the monitoring report is in line wi
g report does not contain the values of the monitored parameters. (EB 54 Annex 34)Issue: the PP is requested to provide the monitored da

tatus and actual operation of the project activity by providing monthly distribution of CFL referred in the monitoring report.2: The project

6/04/2010, whereas the verification report states this date as 06/04/2011.

s in the calibration date of: (i) meter PT-0811A334-01 between that in the monitoring report (16/04/2014) and that in the verification and

report using the valid version of the applicable monitoring report form taking into account the grace period of the form if it has been revis

r plant is inconsistently presented. Both the PDD (v.2.5) and Monitoring Report inconsistently describe the project. For example the PDD is
dsheet does not contain the formulae of calculation that are shown in the spreadsheet cells whenever possible. (EB48 - Annex 68 paragrap
rt of 09/04/2012 ver. 4."However, the submitted Monitoring Report is version 3, dated 26 April, 2012."3.Scope: According to EB48 Annex

d value is the same as the value presented in the registered PDD which states that project was under construction (p 1 and 41). Further inf

onclusion on the verified amount of emission reductions achieved and/or determine that calculations of baseline emissions, project emissi
by the monitoring plan (VVM v.1.2 para 206)Issue: The verification report does not list the parameters Nmonitored, Noperating.4: Scope: T
aragraph 9(f), the crediting period throughout the documentation must be consistent.Issue: Verification report refers to the 1st crediting p
value of QOE,BL and also correct the calculation of fcap in particular to verify the value of QEBL and QOE,Y.

d implementation, the report shall state the progress of the proposed CDM project activity achieved in each phase under verification). (VV

VM v.1.2 para 197..

newable energy has not been implemented yet. DOE has not described the reason for delay in full implementation of the project activity a

vative. The DOE is required to provide further information on how the monitoring of vCH4,RG,m during the monitoring period was in line w

ad of the actual total NAPBC of 160, 124 tHNO3 which was established during the baseline campaign.
ted in the table 3 of MR is different with the information displayed in the spreadsheet Calibration. It is found that for MHP project Memus

ons used in emission calculations have been justified and/or emission factors, default values and other reference values have been correct
ction factors derived from the calibration curve of the QAL2 test are simply applied to both the N2O concentration and the volume of the

L2 that no
“ new stoves have been implemented in the project since June 2015. ”

xplain why a PRC is not considered to address the non-compliance as per VVS-PA, para 360. (b) As per Annex 5 of the registered PDD, net
meter calibration delay, results in conservative values for baseline emissions and project emissions, considering that the applied formulae

between each other, the characteristics of parameters regarding humidity rate, temperature and pressure are similar, and therefore, it is n

sue: The data on flare temperature (compliance to manufacturer s ’specifications) and flare exhaust gas temperature is not mentioned in t
n and Certification report

: The wood density for each species for GHG removals calculation in working sheet "4. DBH, height and stem biomass" is not correct. Refe

ection of 1.75% is applied to the net electricity in the spreadsheet (Column F sheet "Montyly power recoard").
toring plan requires a calibration of meters within 3 years (PDD v.2.1 page 49)

, the report shall clearly describe the status of implementation and starting date of operation for each site. For CDM project activities with

PDD (both clean and tracked changes version) using the latest version of the PDD, ver. 4.1 which is available at this link: https://cdm.unfcc
3: Scope: The verification report does not provide a conclusion on the verified amount of emission reductions achieved and/or determine
es and other reference values have been correctly applied. (VVM v.1.2 para 208 (d) & (e))Issue: The DOE is requested to include further in
monitoring period a DG set has been installed at the project site for captive electricity production. The Verification Report does not contain

oject emission is "0 t CO2". The DOE is required to provide further clarification on the different values between the montioring report and

monitoring practice. Please refer to VVM version 1.2 paragraph 205 (a).

DOE indicated that the main meter (SN 8184) measuring Q-LPGy was recalibrated on 19th January, 18th February, 16th March, and 13th

parameters including rated steam output, rated steam pressure and rated steam temperature of the AQC boiler and the suspension prehe
are not correct and accurate.Issue: The verification/certification report refers on page 1 and page 32 to monitoring report version 3 dated

e an assessment on whether the calibration of measuring equipments was conducted at a frequency specified in applied monitoring meth

14 October 2011); however, as the monitoring period started on 21 September 2010, the monitoring report has not provided information

and calculation processes are presented in a spreadsheet /2/").

ss checked the reported data against any records. Kindly provide the required information, for each of the required parameters.

for the instrument has been met, as it is stated that annual calibration shall be performed, and the reported calibration dates are on 18/0

d spreadsheet.
ial number HM00008728/1-2 was valid until 10/11/2017, however the equipment was used until 11/11/2017; (c) As per the information o

includes the biogas that is not flared completely (in cases where the temperature of the flare is below 500oC during an hour, FE=0).

arameters CODinput and CODoutput were sampled and analysed on a daily basis by a trained Lab Technician and, as part of the QA/QC pr
e been entered showing how these values have been obtained from the monitored data sets. The PP/DOE is requested to reveal full trace

mission reductions for the four days (i.e.,05/01/2015, 30/03/15, 18/04/15 and 05/01/16) for which the monitored biogas flow was reporte

mal couples, the equipment for Medium was removed for calibration on 03/03/2014 but it was only installed back on 07/03/2014. It was
tion of measuring equipments was conducted at a frequency specified in applied monitoring methodology or EB guidance if applicable, an
SRAM Long life Compact Fluorescent Lamps (CFLs)" while the monitoring report (p 6) indicates that the total number of CFL distributed is 6

MR) was unexpected and temporary.

DOE is requested to provide information on how it has validated that the proposed change would not adversely affect baseline and additio
project "Methane Capture and On-site Power Generation Project at Sungai Kerang Palm Oil Mill in Sitiawan, Perak, Malaysia" was registere

made accordingly. The DOE shall provide an opinion on the compliance with EB 52 Annex 60 'Guidelines for assessing compliance with the

equal to 10W/m2 with power density being determined by dividing the installed generation capacity by the surface area at full reservoir l

in accordance with the registered monitoring plan.3: VVS-PA, paragraphs 361 (c) and 365: As per the registered PDD and the monitoring r
e supporting evidence to demonstrate that the planned implementation of the remaining equipment is likely.

eline emissions 607,903 whereas page 36 refers to baseline emissions 607,518. Kindly clarify.
cross-referencing and versioning within and between the document is correct and accurate.Issue: The submitted PDD is version 4 dated 1.

er, such parameter is determined ex-ante as 98.5%, instead of being monitored. The DOE shall provide information on how it has verified t

and the on-site verification took place on 16 November 2010. Clarification is required
plicability is limited to households and users that do not have a grid connection ( )…. ”Further clarification is requested regarding how the D

two energy meters for each auxiliary consumption: (i) T.G. House auxiliary consumption: Meter APH 9947 and Meter APH09949; (ii) Cooli

eriod throughout the documentation is not consistent.Issue: There is an inconsistency in the cross-referencing of the monitoring period nu

ctivities (version
” 4.1); (b) The paragraph 13 of the AMS-III.F version 5 requires that the operation of the composting facilities be documen
s not report how this has been implemented.

d/or that the project participant has implemented and operated the proposed CDM project activity as per the registered PDD or the appro

205 (a & c)..

onitored and/or reported at the intervals required by the monitoring plan and the applied methodology?Issue: The monitoring report / sp

at the remaining are planned to be installed between 2013 and 2015. However, the DOE has not provided information on how it has asses

onth) in the annual biomass availability study conducted by the PP. The DOE shall 1) explain how 7,500 t/month and 4,411 t/month have b
of calculation that are shown in the spreadsheet cells whenever possible.Issue: The PP did not provide the formulas used to determine th
ndtec gas analyzer) used to monitor the volume of biogas and the methane content of the biogas with the accuracy and monitoring metho
ethane content of the biogas with the accuracy  and monitoring method specified in the revised monitoring plan. Please refer to VVM ve
(23,759).

flating the baseline.4. Provide clarifications for any unbalance in demand and supply in the market relevant for the registered project activ
ed it with the ER spreadsheet, and confirmed the data was consistent between the daily records and the ER spreadsheet as
” a means of ve

preadsheet directly as raw data.

DM project standard for project activities , version1.0.

formulae.2: Scope: The verification report does not list each parameter required by the monitoring plan (VVM v.1.2 para 206)Issue: Paragr

e Energy Resources by Anders Evald and Others, Integrated Resource Planning, February 2005'.  The DOE / PP shall clarify how did they de

se days ("LFGtotal, y / LFGflared, y) and the flare was operational on 16.11.10 as indicated in sheet "Input 2009 -2010 -2011". 3: Scope: Th
be monitored. However, the spreadsheet does not contain the values of the relevant parameters from the tool needed to determine the fl

alance as required by the approved revised monitoring plan (page 39 of the revised PDD version 6.1.0).

o project emissions being accounted for. The verification report (CR 16) mentions that erroneous measurements of these 2 parameters we

lculation spreadsheet. Given the impact of these parameters on the CERs, please transparently present the calculation process.
URBAM
“ Urbanizadora
– Municipal S.A. . ”
EB54 Annex34.3: Scope: The monitoring report does not contain information on calibration of monitoring instruments (frequency, relevan

provides the values of the net electricity supplied to the grid by the project, without making any reference to transmission looses and com

e partial substitution of traditional fuel (fuel oil, petcoke and tank bottom fuel) by use of biomass fuels . . However,
” the registered PDD (pg
r the sludge has been treated and/or disposed aerobically, in accordance with applied methodology. Further clarification is required. Pleas

a. 373 (c )of the VVS-PA v.03.0.

the anaerobic treatment facility and consumed on site or sent to the grid. Hence, the DOE is requested to clarify this. Furthermore, it is als

cope: The spreadsheet does not contain explanation with regard to application of formulae in the spreadsheet. (EB48 - Annex 68 paragrap
n provided in response to CAR E3, however, it is not clear why the EF calculation considers HRSG in it. The reason the power from the GT w

on 31/08/2016 02/09/2016
– and the subsequent AST test was done on 13 15
– September 2017. Further, the monitoring report (p 8-9) s

tems, daily covering, equipment and workforce) which were not planned in the PDD; (iii) the landfill still receives waste until 2014 wherea
ameters methane
“ fraction in the landfill gas, wCH4 (monitoring report, page 31) and the total electricity imported by the project, ELimp,L
ra 184 (a) (ii) & EB 52 Annex 60)The DOE is requested to clarify whether the error has been applied for all the measured values taken durin

is requested to include in the ER calculation spreadsheet the COD values before and after the adjustment.

istered PDD, as the DOE has not provided any comparison between both.
oints including the existing 2.5 MW cogeneration plant. The resubmitted monitoring report in section C (page 8) states that the line diagram

in particular, (a) how it has considered that the Plant Name as the Identification of power source/ plant for the OM is listed or reported as

methodology document. (VVM v.1.2 para 208 (c) & 221 (h))Verification Report (Chapter 4) points out the differences between the reporte
onitoring plan and the applied methodology document. (VVM v.1.2 para 208 (c) & 221 (h))Issue: The DOE should provide a validation opini

mption of charcoal fines at the rotary kiln and the output of the dolomite kiln.

0)Issue: There is no information on the calibration of equipments used to monitor the following parameters: M11 Percentage of methane

ring plan. (VVS v2 para 235)Issue: The DOE is requested to further substantiate how the monitoring has been in accordance with the mon
h))Issue: The DOE is required to further explain how it verified that: (1) the project emissions in the spreadsheet are calculated in accordan

links to the external spreadsheet. For example in sheet "ER Fixed Connected Load 2010", cell B16 (Power consumed at baseline year 2010

does not determine if emission factors, default values and other reference values used in the calculation of project emissions due to diese

009 for PGC Train A and 30 April 2009 for PGC Train B; while the verification report includes only an explanation for the use of a specific gra
d ìMethane Content sampling dataî. The DOE is requested to further clarify 1) how 46.3 % was applied for the calculation of the average m
while in the project scenario, there were periods during which the project did not operate (less than one full year s hours
’ should be used)
history; this PDD version 5 in page 3 is dated April 2006.

ant log books, inventories, purchase records, laboratory analyses. (VVM v.1.2 para 208 (a) and (b))Issue:The PDD (Section D.3) and the Mo

m the monitoring plan in line with Appendix 1 of the Project standard v07, paragraph 3; in which case it should have raised a CAR for the p
flating the baseline.4. Provide clarifications for any unbalance in demand and supply in the market relevant for the registered project activ

the "planned calibration dates" for all the flow meters installed at the boiler and the furnaces.   Please refer to VVM v.1.2 para 184 (a) (ii)

ty stated "that the changes occured on 13th August 2008, when the 60 TPH AFBC boiler has been commissioned".However the Verification
positioned on the main pipe before the LFG is separated into two pipes to fed each flare. However, the methodology requires a separate m

1.2 para 184 (a) (ii) & EB 52 Annex 60)Issue: In particular, no validation opinion is provided for the calibration requirements of the spectrop
monitoring plan, and how it assessed the consistency of the acutal accuracy of the equipment  utilized with the accuracy specified in the m

e monitoring plan that the import energy meter has accuracy of 0.5s (page 31 of PDD) is complied with in the absence of any information

DOE has submitted a revised VR dated 12 June 2012, with the corrected statement on p. 9, as follows: "At site 21092, ROOTS meter S/N 53

he approved notification of changes from the project activity as described in the registered PDD requested to and approved by the Executi
nalyzer) and method used to monitor the volume of biogas and the methane content of the biogas  with the accuracy and monitoring met

does not provide an assessment on each site's operational status.

d certification/verification report (20 April 2011-31 May 2012) and the view page and signed form (01 June 2012 - 31 December 2012).

seous stream" version 03.0.2: The DOE did not verify the information flow of each parameter required by the registered monitoring plan (f

uesting approval of changes from the project activity as described in the registered PDD, EB48 Annex 66. Please refer to VVM paragraph
or any change that may have occurred.

ther the calibration of measuring equipments was conducted at a frequency specified in applied monitoring methodology or EB guidance

e applicable to the weighbridge nor explain how the waste quantity was adjusted due to the delay in calibration.
f PDD) whereas it is noted that there was diesel consumption all year round, even during the time when the co-generation system was wo

8 - Annex 68 paragraph 10 (b) (ii)).Issue: the spreadsheet does not contain the formulae required by the monitoring plan (parameters requ
sar and Soda-Mada while
” the spreadsheet submitted indicates that correction
“ factor was
” applied for September 2008 January
– 2009 a

t does not provide a conclusion on the verified amount of emission reductions achieved and/or determine that calculations of baseline em

flating the baseline.4. Provide clarifications for any unbalance in demand and supply in the market relevant for the registered project activ
 flating the baseline.4. Provide clarifications for any unbalance in demand and supply in the market relevant for the registered project activ

tion of the maximum permissible error of the meter (0.2%) is in line with per VVS version 1 EB93 §§368-374". The DOE is required to provid

ds described in the monitoring plan and the applied methodology document. (VVM v.1.2 para 208 (c) & 221 (h)) Issue: The amount of bag

However, this information is not clearly presented in the revised PDD.3: Scope: The verification report does not provide an assessment on
etween the maximum permissible error of the meters and the error identified in the delayed calibration certificate test, in order to identif

h the revised monitoring plan , ”however no revision of monitoring plan was requested and/or approved.
ates that If“the DOE determines that it is not possible for the project participants to conduct the calibration at the frequency specified du
with records of electricity sale.
quest for issuance of CERs (paragraph 392 of VVS for PA version 2)The DOE did not provide any information in the section E.10 of Global s

ssion reductions or net anthropogenic GHG removals is conducted by the project participants at a frequency specified in the applied meth
),”a very high CO2 emission factor is used for some plants (for example, see Cell H37 to H40 for gas-based power units, Cell H41 for a coal

equested to substantiate how it is conservative not to consider fraction of the biomethane which was flared. The monitoring report on pa

validation report for PRC does not contain an assessment regarding whether the changes would adversely affect the conclusion of the va
husk , 2979.54 Kcal/kg of woody biomass) is on dry basis or wet basis, nor the DOE has provided information on how it has verified this po
efer to 2 types of post registration changes (temporary deviation and types of changes). However, there is no reference to any post registr

e, 2016. The DOE is requested to clarify how this is in accordance with paragraph 390 (a) (b) and 392 of VVS version 09.0.

16 & 11/10/2016 to 04/12/2017 & 03/06/2018 to 30/06/2018) as the error during the latest calibration certificate dated 11/08/2015, 11/0

ed in the ER sheet (i.e. (0.00817/(D^2*H)+0.29886)*D^2*H). The DOE shall provide further information on how it has validated the consis

, the DOE did not indicate, in the verification report, how it has assessed this statement and which evidences were verified.

019. However, the DOE did not provide information on how it verified the calibration of the meters between 1 April 2019 and 17 June 201

paragraph 359.The DOE is requested to describe the actual operation of the project activity in the verification report, including the techno

e first verification for the DOE.The DOE is requested to clarify or confirm whether or not an on-site inspection was conducted for this verifi

oints (including the controller data indicated in the submitted emission reduction spreadsheet) as per the PS-PA ver. 03 paragraph 258 tak
rror identified in the delayed calibration tests is smaller than the maximum permissible error applied, as per the provisions in para 366 (a)

ort covers the first monitoring period for the project activity, the verification report shall provide a description of how the DOE conducted

monitoring plan (paragraph 260 (b) of PS for PA).The monitoring report (p 15) shows the calibration records of the Gasurveyors with serial
w are found: a) The factor 100 is further divided from the maximum permissible error 0.2% as per the formula set amongst the cells D8 to
61(b) of VVS for project activities (version 02.0).4: In regard to the project emissions from electricity consumption, the PDD describes that t
s of meters used to measure net electricity supplied given that the MR (p10-11) and VR are not clear on whether the meters installed are

the calibration is according to the national standard (PDD page 21). However, the monitoring and verification reports have not provided th
aily figure from controller meter as applicable).

1] of the monitoring report is not fully justified. The same equation is applied in the calculation spreadsheet. Please further justify the equ
nformation provided in the monitoring report has been cross-checked with other sources such as plant log books, inventories, purchase re
014, 24/02/2015, 24/02/2016. However, the calibration due date in the same table states "19/12/2015" while the last calibration was don
Baseline
“ Emission is” 26,075 kWh whereas as per the invoice, as shown in sheet Net
“ Generation Crosscheck it”is zero.3: As per VVS para

ange are used for Pinus caribaea.

versioning within and between the document are not correct and accurate.Issue: The validation report for post-registration change refers
(i.e. EFCO2,HFO,Baseline,DG1 of 76.31 tCO2/TJ; EFCO2,HFO,Baseline,DG2 of 76.35 tCO2/TJ; and EFCO2,LNG,Baseline,DG2 of 52.53 tCO2/T

2: The DOE shall determine whether the calculations of baseline GHG emissions or baseline net GHG removals, project GHG emissions or a
supplier (Suzlon) to provide the generation data whereas the verification report (page 14) indicates that the PP has no control over this pr
ssions, because part of the actual production of nitric acid has taken place during the deviation period. Based on the submitted monitoring
licable tool(s) and the standardized baseline; (iv) compliance of monitoring activities with the registered monitoring plan; (v) compliance w
licable tool(s) and the standardized baseline; (iv) compliance of monitoring activities with the registered monitoring plan; (v) compliance w

3".2: The validation report shall contain an assessment regarding whether the changes would adversely affect the conclusion of the valida

tion of the sampling plan for parameter YPJ which information is not provided in section B.6.3 as per the Standard for Sampling and survey
eadsheets containing the calculation of the grid emission factor for years 2015, 2016 and 2017 show that the weights applied for the Build

e DOE/PP is requested to further describe how the emission reductions are calculated and verified as per the registered PDD and the appli
ue: The verification report refers to the revised PDD version 2.1 (page 8 and 18) dated 14.06.2016 however no revised PDD is submitted w

dology (AMS-III.Z ver. 4 para 28 (b)) which requires that monitoring shall include the principal raw materials.3: The ER calculation sheet (w
pproach mentioned in paragraph 366.As per the requirement of 6-month calibration frequency, meters HPU 0032 and 0033 would have to
m at the power plant is automated and assures continuous operation, including monitoring on malfunction of equipment. By checking the

f the GWP of methane (21 tCO2e/tCH4) used during the current monitoring period for emission reduction calculation in compliance with t
o provide the explanation.
ary 2013 ?Issue: 1. There is an inconsistency of CER for the monitoring period 19 Dec 19 - 31 Dec 20 between the submitted documents (5,
of emission reductions.
calculate baseline, project and leakage emissions as well as other parameters required by the applied methodology and the registered mo
s mentioned in the monitoring report and the PDD; and 3) why it considered the invoices values rather than the actual monitored values f
ters in the diagram in the monitoring report and the PDD; and 3) why it considered the invoices values rather than the actual monitored va

tivity e.g. date of construction, commissioning, continued operation periods, etc.) during the monitoring period under consideration. (PS v
eport for post-registration changes on page 10 Appendix 3 reference number 4 refers to monitoring report version 2 dated 30/06/2022, w

d 392 of the CDM VVS for PA, version 02.0.

een (i) IPCC default values at the lower limit (as indicated in Cell row D27: R29 and cell O9 of the ER Calculation Tab Sheet) and (ii) informa

ng report and verification/certification report refer to 196,744. Kindly clarify.

0 Sep 2014. However, the Verification Report does not contain information on how the DOE verified and concluded that the approved dev
ce/precision level. However it has not shown whether the result of the sampling has met the required 90/10 confidence/precision level. P
DOE in the validation opinion is not in the CDM PS for PA version 1 but in the CDM project standard version 9 which is not valid.2: The veri

llowing adjustments (para 391 of VVS for PA ver. 3)The DOE did not provide any validation on the global stakeholder consultation as per p
a 262 (b))Issues: (i) The verification report (pg. 15) has indicated that the quantity of the biomass consumed was crosschecked with energ

ng so, please also refer to the AR tool, Demonstrating

“ appropriateness of allometric equations for estimation of aboveground tree biomas
ty (VVS v7, para 273 (b))Issue: The current monitoring period runs from 09/11/12 to 20/01/14 and all the generated electricity was supplie
CDM validation and verification standard (VVS) for project activities, Version 03.0 and para. 261 of the CDM project standard for project ac
verification and certification report form . ”
meet the required precision of 10%. The lower/upper bound of confidence limits have been applied in claiming emission reductions. How
e and frequency of the sampling should be statistically significant with a maximum uncertainty range of 20% at a 95% confidence level. Th
the date of actual date of calibration of imported electricity meter and the result of the calibration.
E are requested to include information on the following cross-checks required by the approved revised monitoring plan: (a) Consistency of
power plant in the baseline) has been in accordance with the methodology (page 10, equation 9) which requires the application of the min
es of "% allocated Serum" which refers
“ to the electricity generated by WTGs of the PP as a percentage of the electricity measured at the s
26), which stated that the parameter value was also measured by meters in project activity site from topographical surveys and maps. The
fficial language of the CDM Executive Board is English. 2) The cover of the spreadsheet states that "Hangyeong Second Phase SS-Wind Pow

16 July 2012 to 28 February 2014 . 2:

” Scope: The monitoring report does not contain the values of the monitored parameters used to cal
de further information on how it verified the operational status of the biogas stoves as per paragraph 12 of AMS-I.E. ver. 04 (which requir

lain how it verified parameter EG facility,y (Quantity of net electricity generation supplied by the project plant/unit) for each site in light of
ara 366 of VVS for PA version 3).The DOE states that there was delayed in calibration of main meter found from 01/04/2014 to 03/07/201
will inform you and after that you can re-submit the requests for issuance for the period for which the PPs wish to claim the CERs. If you req
ng) for these parameters including the values in the monitoring reports (VVS v7, para 236, 284 (e)).Issue: The verification report (page 32)
ope: According to PCP for Project Activities version 2.0, para 199, a valid CDM-VCR-FORM shall be submitted.1. We have observed that sep
of metered fuel consumption quantities through crosschecking by an annual energy balance (2) Where the purchased fuel invoices can be

urvey method. The DOE is requested to provide the information on how it has verified that the precision level of the TDi,y (i=passenger ca
project emissions and leakage have been followed. (VVS v7, para 291 (c))Issue: The MR (pg. 10) has reported monitored values for EGimpo

per the monitoring plan, i.e continuously measured, while the monitoring plan page 10 and the verification and certification report page 1
ed in the monitoring report has been cross-checked with other sources such as plant log books, inventories, purchase records, laboratory a
calculated sample size is 1423.729004); (b) It noted that: (i) For the amount of kerosene, during the baseline survey the respondents were
In accordance with para 26 of AMS I C version 18, η BL, Thermal considered as 100% ( option c default value) for both alternative 1a and a
tion flow (from data generation, aggregation, to recording, calculation and reporting) for these parameters including the values in the mon
v2 para 235)Issue: The DOE is requested to explain how it concluded that parameters have been monitored in accordance with the monit

hich did not include any date. ”

) the applicability and application of the applied methodology under the project activity has been registered; b)compliance of the monitor
d applying a factor of -0.25% to the parameter is conservative as required by paragraph 240 of the CDM Project Standard for project activ
 onitoring period starts before 31 December 2012 and ends anytime thereafter.The monitoring period is 09/09/2011 08/09/2021
– and th

G emissions reductions in the project activity has been implemented in accordance with the monitoring plan contained in the registered PD
 - 12) shows that monitored values for the parameters of "Location of sample plots", "Ai - size of the areas where the project activity has b

rs on page 1 to GHG emission reductions or net GHG removals by sinks reported up to 31 December 2012 as "not applicable" whereas it s

mated net removals have been increased to 122,525 tCO2e. 3: On p.42 of VR, against entry of sample plot B3-12, it is mentioned that "The

not clear how the DOE closed this CAR. (iii) The plot IDs mentioned On p.15 and p.42 are different from the plot IDs mentioned on p.7.

VS version 7. Besides, there is no information provided in the monitoring report regarding how the PP can "focus on repair and monitoring

HK bricks (DMW hhk bricks,di)" has not been daily monitored as per revised monitoring plan during period of 01/07/2014 to 31/08/2014 fo

ever, information related to the QA/QC procedures to check the rest of the data measured by the households, i.e. data that is not missing
“
ever, information related to the QA/QC procedures to check the rest of the data measured by the households, i.e. data that is not missing
“
ulation of baseline emission from generation and/or consumption of electricity since it is lower than the grid emission factor (0.716tCO2/M
3yr as
” a monitored parameter. The PP/DOE are requested to address this inconsistency and confirm if the monitoring of parameter EGh
“
sion 2 dated 09/12/2020. Kindly clarify.

y. Moving the plot centre because of any other reason makes the inventory susceptible to bias unless the reason for doing so is known an
2012 to April 2013. The DOE is required to provide further information on how it verified the electricity consumption for the period of Ap

2. As per the tool, the ex-ante option which was opted by the PP requires the use of a 3-year generation-weighted average, based on the

The verification and certification report does not provide a conclusion on the verified amount of emission reductions achieved nor/or confi
plan is in accordance with the approved methodology as per paragraphs 360 and 362 of VVS for PA (version 01.0), as the methodology re
erification standard for project activities, version 02.0. As the ER sheet shows that the maximum permissible error of the meter is applied t
nt in time (the Shaanxi Water Conservancy Construction Administration stated that the preparatory work for the reservoir has just started
ara 61).Issue: The MR (Section D.3) has described the sampling procedure, sample size, locating of the sample plots, layout of the sample
s in the validation or verification contracts as per the para 26(b) of EB 106 meeting report.

refers to period 20/05/2014 31/12/2021

– whereas the applicable monitoring period is 20/05/2014 31/12/2020.4.Scope:
– Cross-referen

was on 12/07/2011, yet the subsequent was on carried out on 17/08/2011; (4) The tenth calibration was on 10/12/2011, yet the subseque
 the verification report does not provide information on how those harvesting activities have been considered in ex-post stratification in li

nts.4.Scope: The submitted documentation are dated prior to the date of request for issuance submission.Issue: PDD version 12 (dated 20

alibration report for flow meters which issued in 2014 was one year. The PP shall provide a consistent information in the monitoring repor
onths of May 2011, July 2011, October 2011, December 2011, February 2012 and March 2012, lower values are used in the project emissi

nt". Further information is required on how the DOE has verified the monitoring parameter APJ
“ for
” each hydropower plant in line with th

EG,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

independent survey or biomass assessment study was carried out by the PP in line with the registered PDD. c) The DOE is requested to pro
ph 273 (c) of VVS version 7. Besides, there is no information provided in the monitoring report regarding how the PP can "focus on repair a

ed for calculation purposes. 2. Page 5 of the monitoring report shows the days on which the 10TPH boiler was shut down due to maintena
DD has been monitored by the three meters (M1, M2, M3).

Scope: The verification report does not state how the DOE verified the information flow for the listed parameters. (VVM v.1.2 para 206)Iss

hina Power Grid (EFCM grid y ) would be monitored ex-post which creates confusions on whether the grid emission factor is ex-ante or ex
ers are controlled by Korea Electric Power Corporation.
rmation on how it verified the calculation of the EGy (Net electricity exported to the grid by the project activity) as per the equations refer

flare and DP trans in 2# flare (SN 5000953), the equipment was moved to Phase 2 on 20/10/2014 and put back on 15/05/2015. - For V-co

cel sheet) as per paragraph 273 (c) of VVS version 7. Besides, there is no information provided in the monitoring report regarding how the

).3: Scope: The verification report does not list each parameter required by the monitoring plan (VVM v.1.2 para 206)Issue: The verificatio
e proposed CDM project activity as per the registered PDD or the approved revised PDD. (VVM v.1.2 para 196)Issue: The DOE shall explain

g values of biogas CH4 content (%) are within the 95% confidence level, determined through a statistical analysis carried out for each farm
b (m³ dry gas/h) since the temperature of the landfill gas (Tt) is less than 60ºC at the flow measurement point most of the time (Option A).

on on how it verified the calculation of the EGy (Net electricity exported to the grid by the project activity) as per the equations referred in
cation team has sampled 81 households with 334 CFLs, and found that all the information is fully consistent with PP s sampling
’ records./3

utilized to calculate the EGf1,y as per the approved PDD apportioning procedure. The same issues above are also found for the calculation
ng the baseline GHG emissions have been followed, in particular for the calculation of BECH,SWDS,y. The spreadsheet shows that during t

pare the specific food items using the fuel wood in a year, PP has determined the fuel wood consumption from parallel use of traditional w
n from the registered monitoring plan. Refer to paragraphs 373(a) and 374(a) of VVS-PA (version 02.0).
port the monthly values of meters M2 and M3, which are used to determine the electricity exported used for the apportioning approach.

se-2 project, Electricity import from the Emergency Power Supply by the project activity (Wuliji Phase-1) and Wuliji Phase-2 project, electr

monitoring report is in line with the revised monitoring plan.3: Scope: The verification report does not provide an assessment of the comp
d to provide the monitored data of all parameters involved in the calculation of emission reductions, in particular, the monitored values o

nitoring report.2: The project participants shall provide all parameters used to calculate the baseline, project and leakage GHG emissions b
nd that in the verification and certification report (18/09/2012); (ii) meter PT-0812A406-01 between that in the monitoring report (16/04/

of the form if it has been revised as per VVS version 9 paragraph 381. The submitted monitoring report template (version 4) is not the late

roject. For example the PDD is internally inconsistent, page 3 indicates generator capacity as 1,000kW*3 compared to page 6 (1,100kW*3
ble. (EB48 - Annex 68 paragraph 10 (b) (ii)).Issue: As per EB48 Annex 68, para. 10b(ii) and 10b(iii), as well as the "Issuance - Information and
ope: According to EB48 Annex 68 paragraph 9(e), cross-referencing and versioning within and between the document must be correct and

ction (p 1 and 41). Further information is required on how the DOE verified the monitoring parameter APJ
“ in” line with the applied metho

eline emissions, project emissions and leakage as appropriate have been carried out in accordance with the formulae and methods describ
itored, Noperating.4: Scope: The verification report does not state how the DOE verified the information flow for the listed parameters. (V
ort refers to the 1st crediting period (2.12.2009-1.4.2011) which is the monitoring period.
phase under verification). (VVM v.1.2 para 198 (a)).Issue: The DOE is requested to further verify the implementation status of the Kharg-B
 tation of the project activity as described in the PDD and has not presented the expected implementation dates.

monitoring period was in line with applied methodology and conservative considering that 1) the applied methodology requires to calculat

d that for MHP project Memushthang, the monitoring report page 12 reports due date of calibration as 19/06/2011, actual date of calibrati

ence values have been correctly applied. (VVS v2, para 246 (d))Issue: The DOE is requested to explain how it verified the diesel being the m
tration and the volume of the tail gas to the calculated hourly average.

5 of the registered PDD, net electricity generated at both Sol Plaatje site and Merino site will be compared to Dihlabeng meters. Howeve
ing that the applied formulae are: EGPJ,h (exports) = EGPJ,h*(1+0.2%). EGPJ,h (imports) = EGPJ,h*(1+0.2%)

re similar, and therefore, it is not necessary to bring the measurements to dry basis . The
” DOE shall further verify how it considered this to

perature is not mentioned in the spreadsheet.3: Scope: The spreadsheet does not contain the formulae of calculation that are shown in th
m biomass" is not correct. Refer to paragraph 373(e) of VVS-PA.
For CDM project activities with phased implementation, the report shall state the progress of the proposed CDM project activity achieved i

at this link: https://cdm.unfccc.int/Reference/PDDs_Forms/index.html#proj_cycle

s achieved and/or determine that calculations of baseline emissions, project emissions and leakage as appropriate have been carried out
equested to include further information related to the determination of wood density and whether the value used comprises density of b
cation Report does not contain information on how the DOE has verified the reason of this change and assessed whether or not it is to be

en the montioring report and the certification report.

bruary, 16th March, and 13th April, 2011(page 34 of Verification Report). Information should be provided on calibration status of the equip

oiler and the suspension preheater (SP) boiler are in line with the registered PDD (7t/h, 1.6MPa, 340°C against 7.4t/h, 1.27MPa, 337°C for
nitoring report version 3 dated 23/07/2017 whereas the submitted monitoring report is version 6 dated 13/10/2017. 3.Scope: Cross-refer

ed in applied monitoring methodology or EB guidance if applicable, and/or the monitoring plan? (VVM v.1.2 para 184 (a) (ii) & EB 52 Annex

has not provided information about the calibration that covers the period prior to 15 October 2010.
equired parameters.

d calibration dates are on 18/04/2008 and 07/09/2009 (for one flow meter); 21/04/2008 and 07/09/2009 (for the other flow meter). v) ID1

7; (c) As per the information on page 35 of the verification report, in the case of the electricity meter for parameter ECPJ,y, no calibration

C during an hour, FE=0).

and, as part of the QA/QC procedure, weekly samples were sent to an accredited laboratory (i.e. the Environmental Engineering Laborato
requested to reveal full traceability of the CER calculation in the data spreadsheet. 3: Scope: The verification report does not list each par

itored biogas flow was reported to be zero.

d back on 07/03/2014. It was again removed for calibration on 01/03/2015 and it was only put back on 26/03/2015. - For V-cone 1# for fla
r EB guidance if applicable, and/or the monitoring plan? (VVM v.1.2 para 184 (a) (ii) & EB 52 Annex 60)Issue: The verification report does n
number of CFL distributed is 669,036. Further clarification is required how the DOE verified the project implementation as per the PDD.

ely affect baseline and additionality of the project activity, considering: (a) the identified baseline scenario might not be appropriate as a r
Perak, Malaysia" was registered on 26 January, 2009.

assessing compliance with the calibration frequency requirements' if there is a calibration delay.

surface area at full reservoir level. However, the power density has been determined by dividing the installed generation capacity by the

red PDD and the monitoring report, meters used for measurement of parameters EGVCB and EGWEG shall be calibrated annually. As there
 itted PDD is version 4 dated 1.8.2008 but VR refers to PDD version 3 dated 22.5.2008 on page 33.

mation on how it has verified the compliance of the monitoring plan with the applied methodology.3: Scope: The verification and certificati
requested regarding how the DOE confirmed that the monitoring plan and applied methodology have been properly implemented and fol

nd Meter APH09949; (ii) Cooling tower auxiliary consumption: Meter APB 99999 and Meter APB99998; (iii) Boiler house auxiliary consump

ng of the monitoring period number. The verification and certification report refers on age 1 to monitoring period number 5 whereas the

mposting facilities be documented in a quality control program, monitoring the conditions and procedures that ensure the aerobic conditio
e registered PDD or the approved revised PDD. (VVM v.1.2 para 196)Issue: The verification report states (page 8) that the design operatin
ue: The monitoring report / spreadsheet do not contain the values of the temperature of the flare. 3: Scope: The verification report does n

formation on how it has assessed how likely that the remaining equipment will be installed in the coming years and it is not likely to be a p

nth and 4,411 t/month have been arrived and 2) shall verify how the demonstration on the availability of the alternative fuels (rice husk in
ormulas used to determine the transmission
“ loss apportioned in” line 17 of the Form
“ B spreadsheet.4:
” Scope: The verification report do
curacy and monitoring method specified in the revised monitoring plan. Please refer to Please refer to VVM version 01.2 paragraph 205 (c
g plan. Please refer to VVM version 01.2 paragraph 205 (c).
or the registered project activity5. Explain the development of the w-factor (ratio of HFC23 generated / amount of HCFC22 produced) ove
preadsheet as
” a means of verifying the values in the monitoring report. In addition the VR (pg. 63) has reported that no accidental event
M v.1.2 para 206)Issue: Paragraph 206 of VVM version 1.2 requires that the verification report shall list each parameter required by the m

P shall clarify how did they deem appropriate to still use the values as referred in report from 2005 while estimating leakage due to comp

09 -2010 -2011". 3: Scope: The verification report does not contain information on all CARs, CLs and FARs and/or provide an assessment a
ol needed to determine the flare efficiency. Additionally, the monitoring plan does not describe how these parameters are monitored.3: S

ents of these 2 parameters were observed in May 2010 and Jan 2011 but this is reflected in the ER spreadsheet only in January 2011.

calculation process.
truments (frequency, relevant dates of calibration and/or validity) as specified by the monitoring methodology and the monitoring plan. (

transmission looses and comparing the metered values with the invoices.

wever, the registered PDD (pg. 18) indicates that the baseline fuels were fuel oil and rice husks and further states that The
“ activities of th
r clarification is required. Please refer to VVM version 01.2 Paragraph 205 (b).3) The DOE identified that the gas analyser used to monitor t

arify this. Furthermore, it is also observed that the monitoring report (page 10) does not report on all the relevant dates of previous calibra

et. (EB48 - Annex 68 paragraph 10 (b) (iii)).Issue: No explanation in regard to increasing imports by 115%.
 ason the power from the GT was used was because the STG was not operating. The flowchart in the PDD page 16 shows that HRSG only s

he monitoring report (p 8-9) states that the error of 5.82 % was applied to the N2O concentration and the error of 5.76 % was applied for

eives waste until 2014 whereas the registered PDD considers the landfill would only receive waste until 2010. In doing so, the DOE is also r
ported by the project, ELimp,LFG (monitoring report, page 39) the
” values applied for emission reduction calculations are different from th
e measured values taken during the period between the scheduled date of calibration and the actual date of calibration (for the calculatio

e 8) states that the line diagram showing monitoring points (Energy meter, flow meters and other monitoring equipments) are provided in

he OM is listed or reported as specified in the registered PDD; and (b) how it has verified the information flow for this parameter, including

erences between the reported values and the verified values. The DOE is requested to provide further information on the reason for the s
ould provide a validation opinion on the formula used for the determination of CH4 density as a function of average temperature. 3: Scope

M11 Percentage of methane in the biogas at biodigester outlet, M15 Fraction of time gas is combusted in the flare; B2: Flow rate of raw e

n in accordance with the monitoring plan as for Naphtha the analysis is given by the supplier for each incoming load, whereas the registere
eet are calculated in accordance with the equations in the PDD (page 21); (2) the emission reduction equations prescribed in the PDD and

nsumed at baseline year 2010) is linked to spreadsheet "3 PM-3 SEP-10 TO DEC-11.xls" sheet "Mixing Chest" cell F22, which is the sum of t

project emissions due to diesel consumption have been correctly applied. Issue2: As verified by the DOE i) the ex-ante figure of 0.8345 kg C

on for the use of a specific gravity of 0.64 kg/liter and 0.625 kg/liter for train A and train B respectively.
e calculation of the average methane content, and 2) how it confirmed that the assumption taken is the most conservative assumption th
ll year s hours
’ should be used), considering that the registered PDD stipulates that emission reductions shall be based on actual operating
PDD (Section D.3) and the Monitoring Report (Section C and D.2) states that the electricity supplied to third parties will be crossed checked

uld have raised a CAR for the project participants to comply with the requirement for estimating estimate these parameters assuming that
for the registered project activity 5. Explain the development of the w-factor (ratio of HFC23 generated / amount of HCFC22 produced) ov

to VVM v.1.2 para 184 (a) (ii) & EB 52 Annex 60.

ned".However the Verification Report states that the changes from PDD effective only from 1st September 2008 and not applicable to this
hodology requires a separate measure of the total quantity of landfill gas generated (LFGtotal,y) as well as the quantity fed to the flare (LFG

n requirements of the spectrophotometer used for determining COD concentration of waste flows from and into the outlet.
the accuracy specified in the monitoring plan. In doing so, the DOE is also requested to clarify how it assessed the application of the meas

e absence of any information of import energy meter.

te 21092, ROOTS meter S/N 538085 was replaced by ROOTS meter S/N 531594 on 26 October 2010 as a part of normal operations. During

o and approved by the Executive Board on 20 January 2011.

accuracy and monitoring method specified in the revised monitoring plan. Please refer to VVM version 01.2 paragraph 205 (c).
2012 - 31 December 2012).

e registered monitoring plan (from data generation, aggregation, to recording, calculation and reporting) including the values in the monito

lease refer to VVM paragraph 195, 197..

methodology or EB guidance if applicable, and/or the monitoring plan? (VVM v.1.2 para 184 (a) (ii) & EB 52 Annex 60)Issue: The Verificati
co-generation system was working 24 hours for both electricity and steam production. The DOE shall further explain if meter M4 measure

itoring plan (parameters required for those formula are unreported in the spreadsheet), for example: the calculation of EGgen and EGaux
ember 2008 January
– 2009 and January - April 2010 and 2) the DOE did not verify the results of the delayed calibrations as per para 4(a) o

hat calculations of baseline emissions, project emissions and leakage as appropriate have been carried out in accordance with the formula

for the registered project activity 5. Explain the development of the w-factor (ratio of HFC23 generated / amount of HCFC22 produced) ov
for the registered project activity 5. Explain the development of the w-factor (ratio of HFC23 generated / amount of HCFC22 produced) ov

The DOE is required to provide further information on how it verified the difference of more than 5 % during March 2014 between measu

(h)) Issue: The amount of bagasse consumed in the project activity is calculated based on amount of steam used in project turbine (G3) an

ot provide an assessment on whether the calibration of measuring equipments was conducted at a frequency specified in applied monito
tificate test, in order to identify the applicable error. (VVS ver. 9 para. 394 400)
– Issue 2: Verification report Appendix 6 lists the natural ga
at the frequency specified due to reasons beyond the control of the project participants while the DOE (p 26) states that The
“ reason for n
in the section E.10 of Global stakeholder consultation in the verification while this request is the first request for issuance.

specified in the applied methodologies, the applied standardized baselines and/or the registered monitoring plan (paragraph 368 of VVS
ower units, Cell H41 for a coal-based unit). The DOE is requested to substantiate the reason for such high CO2 emission factors; Therefore

. The monitoring report on page 11 states that biomethane which does not reach the required parameters to be delivered to the NG distr

affect the conclusion of the validation report with regard to aspects described under paragraph 309(c) of VVS-PA.5: Paragraph 365 of VVS-
 on how it has verified this point. (b) The applied methodology (page 14 of AMS I.D version 18) requires determining the quantity of dry bi
o reference to any post registration change in the signed request for issuance form and there is no post registration changes submitted wi

version 09.0.

ficate dated 11/08/2015, 11/04/2016 and 04/12/2017 is within the permissible limit. This is inline with VVS para 369 of EB 93 annex 5." Th

how it has validated the consistency and correctness of each formulas in determining the stem volume of each type of tree.

s were verified.

n 1 April 2019 and 17 June 2019 considering that the monitoring period is 01 Apr 19 - 31 Dec 20.

n report, including the technology specification, the start date of the actual operation of the project activity considering that this is the firs

n was conducted for this verification as the verification report mentions "virtual audit" on page 7 and "virtual verification" on page 10.

-PA ver. 03 paragraph 258 taking into account that the verification report (Section E.6.2) indicates that the parameter Quantity
“ of net ele
the provisions in para 366 (a) and (b) of the VVS version 02.0.3: The DOE is requested to address the issue below as per requirement of pa

on of how the DOE conducted the global stakeholder consultation and took due account of all authentic and relevant comments in the ver

of the Gasurveyors with serial numbers. Among 10 Gasurveyors, 4 Gasurveyors were calibrated on 26/01/2020 and 16/07/2020 while the
la set amongst the cells D8 to D20, which is not in line with the provision and the example illustrated in the table 1 of the appendix to the
ption, the PDD describes that the project falls to case C.III. As per page 12 of Tool
“ to calculate baseline, project and/or leakage emissions f
ether the meters installed are bi-directional as specified in the previous request for issuance. In doing so, please refer to the VVS paragraph

n reports have not provided the national standard used for calibration. The DOE is requested to: (a) Clarify why international standard "No
Please further justify the equations applied to calculate bTREE,j,p,i; DBH, R2 (coefficient of determination) and ni explaining why and how
ooks, inventories, purchase records, laboratory analyses. (VVS v7, para 290 (b))Issue: In table "Summary of net electricity gene" of the ER
ile the last calibration was done on 24/02/2016.3: Scope: The monitoring report does not contain a comparison of the actual CERs claimed
 it”is zero.3: As per VVS para 373, the DOE shall determine whether the calculations of baseline emissions, project GHG emissions, and lea

ost-registration change refers to the monitoring report version 1 dated 30/07/2018 (page 10) whereas the submitted monitoring report is
,Baseline,DG2 of 52.53 tCO2/TJ). No justification is provided on the application of lower fuel emission factor in project scenario and higher

ls, project GHG emissions or actual net GHG removals, and leakage GHG emissions have been carried out in accordance with the formulae
PP has no control over this process. (ii) The monitoring report (page 7) indicates that the electricity exported from each WTG (EGexp) and
d on the submitted monitoring results, it is observed that the N2O abatement system kept operating during the deviation period i.e. emiss
nitoring plan; (v) compliance with the calibration frequency requirements for measuring instruments; (vi) assessment of data and calculati
nitoring plan; (v) compliance with the calibration frequency requirements for measuring instruments; (vi) assessment of data and calculati

ct the conclusion of the validation report in respect of: (a) the applicability and application of the applied methodologies, the applied stand

ndard for Sampling and surveys for CDM project activities and programmes of activities, version 05.0, paragraph 24, in particular whether
e weights applied for the Build Margin and Operating Margin are 0.5. However, for year 2018, the weights of 0.25 and 0.75 were applied f

e registered PDD and the applied methodology. Please refer to (VVS) CDM validation and verification standard for project activities, Versio
no revised PDD is submitted with this request for issuance.

.3: The ER calculation sheet (workbook Data

“ inputs ) is” not traceable. Please submit (i) an ER calculation spreadsheet which shows how th
0032 and 0033 would have to be re-calibrated in Jul 2020. As they were used until 12 Nov 2020, the PP has applied the maximum permiss
f equipment. By checking the daily operation logs /8/, CTI can confirm that no serious malfunction happened and the plant was under a no

alculation in compliance with the "Standard for the application of the global warming potentials to clean development mechanism project
n the submitted documents (5,595 CO2) and the project view page (5,596 CO2). 2.There is no breakdown of the CER in section G (verificati
odology and the registered monitoring plan. (PS v1, para 191, 192 (a)(c )(d)(e)(f))Issue:The revised PDD stated that : The
“ net supply (i.e. gr
the actual monitored values for the calculation of the emission reduction considering that the monitoring plan states that Measured
“ dat
r than the actual monitored values for the calculation of the emission reduction considering that the monitoring plan states that Measure
“

od under consideration. (PS v1 para 188 (a)(b)(c))Issue: The revised PDD mentions the rotor diameter being 52.9 m, whereas the monitori
ersion 2 dated 30/06/2022, whereas the applicable monitoring report is version 2 dated 01/07/2022.
on Tab Sheet) and (ii) information provided by fuel supplier.  Therefore, the DOE is further requested to clarify how it has verified that t

cluded that the approved deviation PRC-8405-001 also applies to the period 01 Oct 2014 - 06 Dec 2014, which is not covered by the applic
0 confidence/precision level. Please see Appendix 4 of Guideline for Sampling and surveys for CDM project activities and programmes of ac
9 which is not valid.2: The verification report does not include any information related to the verification of global stakeholder consultation

eholder consultation as per para 391 of VVS for PA as this request is the first monitoring report of the project activity.3: The DOE stated th
was crosschecked with energy balance and found consistent. However, information on the results of the cross-checking, and how the cro

n of aboveground tree biomass in A/R CDM project activities . ”

nerated electricity was supplied to the grid from 09/11/12. The VR (p.9) confirmed that all the generated electricity was delivered to the N
project standard for project activities, Version 03.0.
ing emission reductions. However, the vintage of the precision failure is beyond the first two years of the crediting period and the achieve
at a 95% confidence level. The PP/DOE are requested to clarify how the monitoring of the FCFi complies with all the requirements as per
toring plan: (a) Consistency of the measurements of NCVbiomass by comparing the measurement results with measurements from previo
ires the application of the minimum between the EF based on the historical data and the EF based on the project activity data
e electricity measured at the substation billing meters and
” indicates that the meters at the substation are shared with other projects. The
aphical surveys and maps. Therefore, the DOE is requested to provide further explanation on the significant difference between the PDD v
ng Second Phase SS-Wind Power Project" while the project activity is "Korea Midland Power Co. Photovoltaic power generation Bundling

itored parameters used to calculate baseline, project and leakage emissions as well as other parameters required by the applied methodo
AMS-I.E. ver. 04 (which requires monitoring to check all appliances).3: The emission reduction calculation has assumed that all the project

nt/unit) for each site in light of the invoice values being lower than the JMR values.
om 01/04/2014 to 03/07/2014. However, the DOE that verified the previous monitoring period (01 Jul 12 - 31 Mar 14) stated that main m
sh to claim the CERs. If you require any clarifications, please do not hesitate to contact us.2.Scope: The monitoring period throughout the
e verification report (page 32) reports the formula for calculation of baseline and project emissions. However, the formula for baseline em
.1. We have observed that separate documents have been submitted for these requests. Please note that for twin cases, both requests sh
purchased fuel invoices can be identified specifically for the CDM project, the metered fuel consumption quantities should also be cross-ch

el of the TDi,y (i=passenger car and motorcycles) is achieved. Please refer to Standard of sampling and surveys for CDM project activities a
monitored values for EGimport, M1 (331.584 MWh), EGimport, M2 (217.504 MWh), and EGimport, M3 (163.968 MWh). A value of 140 M

and certification report page 19 indicate that the parameter is obtained from sample.4: Scope: The verification and certification report do
purchase records, laboratory analyses. (VVS v9, para 373 (b (iv)) and 403 (b)).Issue: The VR (pg. 16) reports that the NCVsawdust was cross
survey the respondents were asked amount for cooking and starting the fire, however, in the monitoring survey, the respondent were as
) for both alternative 1a and alternative 1b.". However, the baseline emissions calculation uses efficiency of 85%. It is noted the validation
cluding the values in the monitoring reports.Issue 1: For parameter CODww,treated,PJ,k,y, the DOE is requested to clarify the inconsistenc
in accordance with the monitoring plan in the registered PDD, in particular parameter Qww,discharge,y (outlet). As per the PDD page 49,
; b)compliance of the monitoring plan with the applied methodology; c) the level of accuracy and completeness in the monitoring of the p
ject Standard for project activities version 01.0.
09/2011 08/09/2021
– and the DOE did not provide its verification as per the paragraph 376(g) of the VVS for PA.

contained in the registered PDD or any accepted revised monitoring plan. (VVS v2 para 233)Issue: DOE shall further evidence that the Qua
where the project activity has been implemented for each type of strata" and "Height of all trees within the sample plot measured along th

s "not applicable" whereas it should be "0" as stated on page 15 as well as the rest of the documents submitted. Kindly revise it to "0".4.Sc

-12, it is mentioned that "The plot centre is moved because there were not trees in the original one. It is not mentioned of how many met

lot IDs mentioned on p.7.

ocus on repair and monitoring of leaks with gas emission rates on the higher scale". Further, the DOE shall report how it confirmed that th

01/07/2014 to 31/08/2014 for all Kilns. Thus the DOE is requested to verify the accuracy of emission reduction due to the absence of mon

s, i.e. data that is not missing

“ or damaged , has
” not been provided. Please provide additional information on the QA/QC procedures for t
s, i.e. data that is not missing
“ or damaged , has
” not been provided. Please provide additional information on the QA/QC procedures for t
emission factor (0.716tCO2/MWh) as per the registered PDD. However, it is observed that the grid emission factor (0.716tCO2/MWh) ha
monitoring of parameter EGhistoric,
“ 3yr has
” been carried out in accordance with the applied methodology and monitoring plan as conta
ason for doing so is known and justified. Therefore, the DOE should describe in the VR how they arrived at a conclusion to close this CAR.
sumption for the period of Apr - Aug 2012 as per the paragraph 373 (a) of VVS for PA version 2.3: The DOE shall determine whether the ca

ighted average, based on the most recent data available at the time of submission of the CDM-PDD to the DOE for validation. However, th

ductions achieved nor/or confirm that appropriate methods and formulae for calculating baseline emissions, project emissions and leakag
01.0), as the methodology requires the annual monitoring of BSCR (Buses not required due to the project) while this parameter is fixed ex
error of the meter is applied to net electricity supply, the DOE is requested to provide explanation why the maximum permissible error of
r the reservoir has just started, particularly for the access road: http://www.sxsljgj.gov.cn/news/819.htm; according to the City of Xianyang
le plots, layout of the sample plots and assessment of adequacy of the sample size. A sample size of 152 plots was calculated. The DOE (VR

2/2020.4.Scope: Cross-referencing and versioning within and between the document is not correct and accurate.Issue: There is an inconsis

10/12/2011, yet the subsequent was on carried out on 11/01/2012; (5) The twelfth calibration was on 10/02/2012, yet the subsequent wa
ed in ex-post stratification in line with the methodology requirements.4: The spreadsheet containing information on how the tree biomass

sue: PDD version 12 (dated 20/10/2015) and monitoring report version 8 (dated 20/10/2015) which are submitted under additional docum

mation in the monitoring report on the exact calibration frequency and the reasons for applying discounts since the calibration dates indica
are used in the project emissions calculation, hence not conservative. Moreover, there is a discrepancy in the annual value for FCdiesel,j,y

ydropower plant in line with the applied methodology."2: Scope: The DOE shall determine whether the calibration of those measuring equ

the flare (SPECflare) in minute m; and B. The flame is detected in minute m (Flamem). Furthermore, MR page 5 specifies that the flare tem

c) The DOE is requested to provide futher verification opinion on how the mazout has been measured in line with the registered PDD give
w the PP can "focus on repair and monitoring of leaks with gas emission rates on the higher scale". Further, the DOE shall report how it con

as shut down due to maintenance purposes. However, even for days where the boiler is shut down, the ER spreadsheet shows steam gene
eters. (VVM v.1.2 para 206)Issue:it is not clear how the DOE has validated the uncertainty associated with each parameters as required by

mission factor is ex-ante or ex-post (presumed to be ex-ante). The DOE is requested to clarify why it did not issue a FAR to require the proj
ity) as per the equations referred in the PDD (Ver: 4.0, Date: 23/05/2012, p 34-37) section Apportioning
“ Procedure Implemented by Ener

ack on 15/05/2015. - For V-cone in 2# flare, the equipment was removed for calibration on 03/05/2015 but it was only installed back on 06

ring report regarding how the PP can "focus on repair and monitoring of leaks with gas emission rates on the higher scale". Further, the DO

para 206)Issue: The verification report has not provided information on how the DOE has verified the result of the survey in accordance w
6)Issue: The DOE shall explain how it has verified that the grid is the only recipient of the electricity generated by the power plant of the pr

lysis carried out for each farm, identifying the lower and upper limit of acceptable measurements" but further information on the analysis
t most of the time (Option A). The same volumetric flow is named as VLFG,sent_flare,y,wb (m³ wet gas/h) in case of wet basis of the gas, d

s per the equations referred in the appendix 3 of the PDD (Ver: 6.0, Date: 24/09/2010) section Apportioning
“ Procedure Implemented by E
with PP s sampling
’ records./30/, which is in accordance with Para.24 of EB65 Ann2". In light of the EB65 Annex 2 paragraph 24, the DOE is

e also found for the calculation of the values of EGf3,y and EGf4,y.
readsheet shows that during this monitoring period, 151 days (01/01/201 - 28/05/2013 or approximately 5 months) were considered for x

m parallel use of traditional wood stove for cooking. Also, page 18 of the monitoring report provides the average fuelwood used as propo
r the apportioning approach.

d Wuliji Phase-2 project, electricity generation export to the grid by project activity (Wuliji Phase-1), electricity imports from the grid and e

de an assessment of the compliance with EB 52 Annex 60 'Guidelines for assessing compliance with the calibration frequency requirement
cular, the monitored values of EG export main,y (electricity exported to the grid measured by the main meter and backup meter) & EG exp

t and leakage GHG emissions by sources, or the baseline and actual net GHG removals by sinks, as well as other relevant parameters for th
the monitoring report (16/04/2014) and that in the verification and certification report (07/10/2014).

plate (version 4) is not the latest form of the monitoring report template (version 5.1).3.Scope: A verification and certification report has n

mpared to page 6 (1,100kW*3). For example the monitoring report is internally inconsistent, page 4 indicates generator capacity of 1,000 k
he "Issuance - Information and Reporting Checklist", the spreadsheet must contain "formulae of calculation" and any explanation with reg
ocument must be correct and accurate.Issue: The version of the methodology included in the Monitoring Report document, version 3, dat

in” line with the applied methodology."

ormulae and methods described in the monitoring plan and the applied methodology document. (VVM v.1.2 para 208 (c) & 221 (h))Issue:
w for the listed parameters. (VVM v.1.2 para 206)Issue: The verification report does not state how the DOE verified the information flow fo
entation status of the Kharg-Bahregansar NGL and Gas Treatment project (Kharg NGL project).3: Scope: The verification report does not st
thodology requires to calculate the project emission as per the methodological tool Project
“ emissions from flaring which
” requires the pa

6/2011, actual date of calibration/replacement/installation as 20/03/2012 and type of meter as analogue, whereas the spreadsheet Calibr

verified the diesel being the most carbon intensive fuel in the country based on the Energy Balance 2004 and the emission factor calculati
to Dihlabeng meters. However, there is no information in the monitoring report or verification report how this was carried out or how the
erify how it considered this to be in compliance with the applicable Tool (Project emissions from flaring, ver. 02, page 11) which requires t

lculation that are shown in the spreadsheet cells whenever possible. (EB48 - Annex 68 paragraph 10 (b) (ii)).Issue: The formula for calcula
DM project activity achieved in each phase under verification). (VVM v.1.2 para 198 (a)).Issue: The verification report states that "The pro
opriate have been carried out in accordance with the formulae and methods described in the monitoring plan and the applied methodolog
e used comprises density of both the wood and bark components of the Eucalyptus species.
sed whether or not it is to be considered as a permanent change from the project activity as described in the registered PDD.3: Scope: The

calibration status of the equipment from the period of 1 of to 18th of January, 2011 which is within this monitoring period. No informatio

st 7.4t/h, 1.27MPa, 337°C for AQC boiler and 16t/h, 1.6MPa, 320°C against 15.1t/h, 1.27MPa, 336°C for SP boiler and in case changes are c
10/2017. 3.Scope: Cross-referencing and versioning within and between the document is not correct and accurate.Issue: The verification a

para 184 (a) (ii) & EB 52 Annex 60)Issue: The Monitoring Report (page 28) states that the calibration for one of the equipment measuring n
r the other flow meter). v) ID11: The calibration frequency required for the instrument is annually as stated in page 14 of the monitoring r

ameter ECPJ,y, no calibration was carried out during the monitoring period as the calibration was outside the control of the PP. The DOE is

nmental Engineering Laboratory of Khon Kaen University) for cross checking purposes. PP had set a ±10% range when comparing the resu
n report does not list each parameter required by the monitoring plan (VVM v.1.2 para 206)Issue: The methodology (page 14, 15 and 16) r

3/2015. - For V-cone 1# for flare, the equipment with SN 7102302 was removed for calibration on 02/04/2014, but it was never installed b
The verification report does not indicate how it verified the calibration of flow meter, gas analyzer, manometer and thermometer reporte
ementation as per the PDD.

might not be appropriate as a result of the proposed or actual modifications to the project activity with the different time scale for the two
ed generation capacity by the inundated area rather than surface area at full reservoir level. The DOE is required to clarify how it verified t

e calibrated annually. As there is no information on calibration of meters for these two parameters, the DOE is requested to explain how i
The verification and certification report does not provide a conclusion on the verified amount of emission reductions achieved nor/or con
properly implemented and followed, as per the VVM (version 1.2) para 205.a. 3) According to the PDD (page 14) The
“ calibration of the m

oiler house auxiliary consumption: Meter APB 09948 and Meter APH09950. However, it is not clear how the DOE has checked of the abov

period number 5 whereas the monitoring report refers to monitoring period number 1. 4.Scope: Cross-referencing and versioning within a

at ensure the aerobic condition of the waste during the composting process. As per VR page 18, the DOE during site visit verified the prop
ge 8) that the design operating time is 330 days a year. However it also states (page 14) that the nameplate (design) implies the total year
 The verification report does not state how the DOE verified the information flow for the listed parameters. (VVM v.1.2 para 206)Issue: Th

ars and it is not likely to be a permanent change to the project design. Please provide supporting evidence to demonstrate that the planne

e alternative fuels (rice husk in this case) has been considered in line with the methodology. In addition, the DOE shall report how it has ve
ope: The verification report does not list each parameter required by the monitoring plan and does not provide an statement on how the D
version 01.2 paragraph 205 (c).
ount of HCFC22 produced) over time since the start of production of HCFC22. In case there are changes, justify reasons.
orted that no accidental events occurred and therefore these parameters were not applicable for the current monitoring period.
parameter required by the monitoring plan and clearly state how the DOE verified the information flow (from data generation, aggregatio

timating leakage due to competing use of biomass in year 2010.   Please refer to VVM paragraph 208 (d).

d/or provide an assessment and close out of any CARs, CLs or FARs issued. (VVM v.1.2 para 192, 194)Issue: A clarification request (CL 4) w
 arameters are monitored.3: Scope: The spreadsheet does not contain the formulae of calculation that are shown in the spreadsheet cells

eet only in January 2011.

ogy and the monitoring plan. (EB48 - Annex 68 paragraph 10 (a) (iv) & EB 54 Annex 34)Issue: With regard to the parameters Power
“ import

tates that The

“ activities of the present project involve the husk amounts increase . The
” DOE is requested to provide information on how
gas analyser used to monitor the methane content of the biogas has an accuracy of 0.5% for methane contents of less than 5%, and an acc

evant dates of previous calibration done for the power meters

ge 16 shows that HRSG only supplies steam to STG. Furthermore, the Verification Report has not provided any information with regard to

rror of 5.76 % was applied for the stack gas flow for the delayed calibration period of 3 15
– September 2017. However, the DOE did not ve

. In doing so, the DOE is also requested to explain why the aforementioned changes are not considered as changes to the project design.
culations are different from the measured values. Measured values are required by the registered PDD and the applied methodology (ACM
 calibration (for the calculation of baseline emissions). The submission only refers to whole months rather than exact dates. In addition, th

g equipments) are provided in Appendix A, B, C & D at the end of the Monitoring report, however no appendices were found to be attache

w for this parameter, including the values reported in the monitoring report and the ER caclulation spreadsheet.2: The VCR notes in Sec. E

mation on the reason for the significant differences in the values of the parameters : H WHR-1,H WHR-2 and H FBC between the reported
 verage temperature. 3: Scope: The verification report does not determine if the assumptions used in emission calculations have been justi

he flare; B2: Flow rate of raw effluent at digester inlet. The DOE shall provide more information about the verification of calibration dates t

ng load, whereas the registered PDD requires that ultimate analysis of fuel in primary reformer to be recorded weekly.3: Scope: The verifi
ons prescribed in the PDD and the MR are correct as the calculation does not result in the emission reductions due to energy efficiency me

cell F22, which is the sum of the Pump (Project) Energy consumption for the entire monitoring period.3: Scope: The verification report do

e ex-ante figure of 0.8345 kg CO2 e/ kWh in the validated and registered PDD has been used for the calculation of emission reductions; ii)

st conservative assumption theoretically possible as per VVM v.1.2 para 208.

be based on actual operating hours in the project; 4) A significant number of inconsistencies of the (annualised) baseline consumption bet
parties will be crossed checked with sales receipts and accounts. However there is no reference of the same in the Verification Report. Mo

ese parameters assuming that the source of the GHG emissions operated at maximum capacity for the full period of the missing data, inclu
mount of HCFC22 produced) over time since the start of production of HCFC22. In case there are changes, justify reasons.

2008 and not applicable to this monitoirng period. The DOE is requested to clarify the discrepancies in dates (since both the Validation Opi
e quantity fed to the flare (LFGflare,y). Please provide further details on how the DOE has verified that the amount of gas measured in the

into the outlet.

ed the application of the measured values of CO2 and CH4 in the calculation of emission reductions, considering the Monitoring Report (pa

t of normal operations. During monthly maintenance, a technician noted the meter potentially required maintenance that could not be pe
paragraph 205 (c).
uding the values in the monitoring report. Please refer to paragraph 364 of the VVS for PA, version 3.0.The PP indicated in the monitoring
Annex 60)Issue: The Verification Report does not not provide an assessment on whether the maintenance and testing of measuring equip
 r explain if meter M4 measures only the electricity generated by the co-generation system (project activity) or if it includes the electricity

lculation of EGgen and EGaux requires the use of the calculated values for H1, H2 and H3 (used to work out the fraction of heat provided
calibrations as per para 4(a) of EB 52 Annex 60.

n accordance with the formulae and methods described in the monitoring plan and the applied methodology document. (VVM v.1.2 para 2

ount of HCFC22 produced) over time since the start of production of HCFC22. In case there are changes, justify reasons.
ount of HCFC22 produced) over time since the start of production of HCFC22. In case there are changes, justify reasons.

g March 2014 between measured electricity values between the ICE and CNFL meters.

used in project turbine (G3) and the project boiler efficiency. The project boiler efficiency is calculated based on total steam generated for

cy specified in applied monitoring methodology or EB guidance if applicable, and/or the monitoring plan (VVS v2, para 243)Issue: The verifi
Appendix 6 lists the natural gas flow meters and their calibration. It is noted that for the meters listed below, the calibration does not cove
6) states that The
“ reason for not calibrating the older meter is cost and time and
” 2) the DOE did not follow the applicable requirements r
t for issuance.

g plan (paragraph 368 of VVS for PA version 1).The DOE (p 16) verified that the calibration of the meters was done on 27 March 2017 and
O2 emission factors; Therefore, the DOE is requested to provide all the excel calculation files to the secretariat and also to substantiate how

o be delivered to the NG distribution system is flared. As this may include biomethane with volumetric fraction lower than the requiremen

S-PA.5: Paragraph 365 of VVS-PA: The DOE is requested to explain how it concluded that calibration has been conducted as per the monito
ermining the quantity of dry biomass through adjusting for the moisture content. However, the monitoring report has not stated whether
stration changes submitted with this request for issuance. Kindly clarify.

para 369 of EB 93 annex 5." The DOE is required to provide further information on how it validated the delayed calibration of the meters (H

ch type of tree.

considering that this is the first request for issuance.4: The DOE shall determine: (b) The information provided in the monitoring report ha

al verification" on page 10.

arameter Quantity
“ of net electricity generation supplied by the project plant/unit is ”measured based on certificate of share.5: The DOE
elow as per requirement of paragraphs 391 - 392 of the VVS version 02.0.This verification covers the first monitoring period for the project

relevant comments in the verification:The DOE is requested to clarify the reason why it concluded section E.10 of the VR template as "No

20 and 16/07/2020 while the other 6 Gasurveyors were calibrated only on 16/07/2020. The DOE (p 18) states that "calibration records to
table 1 of the appendix to the VVS for PA. b) It is not clear why the permissible error 0.2% is applied only to the net electricity generated fr
ect and/or leakage emissions from electricity consumption , version
” 01, default value of 3% can be used for project electricity consumptio
 ase refer to the VVS paragraph 361.

why international standard "Norme Internationale CEI IEC- International Standard 62053-21 dated in Jan. 2003" is used to justify the calibra
nd ni explaining why and how these are applicable to the current A/R project activity. Please note that all the corresponding documents s
net electricity gene" of the ER spreadsheet, it is observed that the sum of Recipient Power Supply to LMEL and Recipient Power Supply to G
son of the actual CERs claimed in the monitoring period with the estimate in the PDD, and explanation on any significant increase, includin
project GHG emissions, and leakage emissions have been carried out in accordance with the registered monitoring planThe DOE is request

ubmitted monitoring report is version 1 dated 05/10/2018.

in project scenario and higher fuel emission factor in baseline scenario. The DOE is requested to provide information on how it has verifie

accordance with the formulae and methods described in the registered monitoring plan, the applied methodologies. (para 373 of VVS of P
d from each WTG (EGexp) and imported by each WTG (EGimp) is calculated based on apportioning. However, the verification report (page
the deviation period i.e. emission reductions have been achieved, although no reliable inlet monitoring results were available. Kindly plea
essment of data and calculation of emission reductions; as per VVS version 09.0 paragraph 409 (d).Issue: The DOE (p 7) states that it has c
 essment of data and calculation of emission reductions; as per VVS version 09.0 paragraph 409 (d).Issue: The DOE (p 7) states that it has c

ethodologies, the applied standardized baselines and the other applied methodological regulatory documents with which the project activ

aph 24, in particular whether the actual precision has met the requirement. Please refer to Appendix 4 of Guideline for Sampling and surv
f 0.25 and 0.75 were applied for the Operating Margin and Build Margin, respectively.

rd for project activities, Version 02.0. section 9.2.7, para 373 (c).
readsheet which shows how the yearly input data applied in calculating the emission reductions were aggregated and (ii) the spreadsheet
applied the maximum permissible error for the whole month of Jul to Nov 2020. However, there is no information on calibration of meter
d and the plant was under a normal operation as expected in this monitoring period." However, in the spreadhsheet it is shown that for on

elopment mechanism project activities and programme of activities for the second commitment period of the Kyoto Protocol", version 01
he CER in section G (verification opinion) of the verification and certification report for the period up to 31 December 2012 and for the per
d that : The
“ net supply (i.e. gross supply minus supply by the grid to the project but in this case the net supply is equal to the gross supply
an states that Measured
“ data will be cross checked with sale/purchase records (invoices/receipts). ”
ring plan states that Measured
“ data will be cross checked with sale/purchase records (invoices/receipts). ”

52.9 m, whereas the monitoring report mentions as 53 m. Please clarify.

larify how it has verified that the monitoring plan, in particular NCV used for calculating project emissions is in accordance with the monito

ch is not covered by the applicable period of the approved temporary deviation PRC-8405-001.
ctivities and programmes of activities version 03.0 for the calculation of reliability.
lobal stakeholder consultation required to be conducted by the project participant for the first monitoring period in accordance with para

ct activity.3: The DOE stated that the site visit cannot be postponed to a later date. However, no information has been provided as a prope
oss-checking, and how the cross-checking using the monthly mass energy balance was carried out and verified has not been provided. In d
ectricity was delivered to the North China power grid (NCPG) based on the PPA dated 01/03/2013. The DOE (VR p. 13) further confirms tha
editing period and the achieved precision also beyond a limit of 15%, thus not in line with paragraph 18(c) of the Sampling Standard versio
th all the requirements as per the registered monitoring plan.   Please refer to paragraphs 362 and 363 of the VVS, v.03.0 and paragraphs
th measurements from previous years and with, relevant data sources (e.g., values in the literature, values used in the national GHG inven
oject activity data
hared with other projects. The DOE is required to provide the further information on how it verified the monitoring as per the monitoring
difference between the PDD value and monitored value for the area of the reservoir in accordance with para 359(c) and 357(b) of the VVS
c power generation Bundling Project".3: Scope: The verification and certification report does not provide a description of the actual opera

uired by the applied methodology and the registered monitoring plan. (PS v07, para 252)Issue:The MR (pgs. 14/15) has listed the“ amoun
s assumed that all the project activity households using baseline non-renewable woody Biomass (NRB) have switched to the introduced re
31 Mar 14) stated that main meter (0.2s, GJ-0940-A) was calibrated on 22/10/2011 with the expiration date of calibration of 21/10/2014. C
toring period throughout the documentation are not consistent.Issue: The request for issuance form does not refer to the extended MP d
r, the formula for baseline emission is related to calculation of project emissions, where the formula for project emissions are related to th
r twin cases, both requests should have the exact documents for the entire MP, except the issuance form. 2. There is an inconsistency in t
antities should also be cross-checked with available purchase invoices from the financial records. However, (1) the annual energy balances

eys for CDM project activities and programme of activities version 04.1.
3.968 MWh). A value of 140 MWh, which is attributable to the electricity imports by the proposed project activity, has been calculated bas

on and certification report does not provide an assessment and close out of any CARs, CLs or FARs issued, nor/or if appropriate, an assess
hat the NCVsawdust was crosschecked. However, details of the crosschecking (e.g. how it was crosschecked, results of the crosschecking e
rvey, the respondent were asked the amount for cooking, heating water and start up fuel (as shown in the worksheet Monitoring
“ survey
85%. It is noted the validation report during the request for registration mentions that efficiency of 80% and 85% is used for additionality
sted to clarify the inconsistency of the application of lower and upper values in yearly values, in particular, why the total value used for ye
tlet). As per the PDD page 49, there is a monitoring instrument in point 7 for this parameter, however the Verification Report page 33 stat
ness in the monitoring of the project activity; d) the additionality of the project activity; e) the scale of the project activity (PS v1, para 219)
further evidence that the Quantity of heat extracted from all heat only/peak load boilers, has been monitored in accordance with the mo
ample plot measured along the longitudinal axis from tree base to top" are presented in "UNBRP_Carbon calculation_Project1.xlsx". Howe

ed. Kindly revise it to "0".4.Scope: The monitoring period throughout the documentation is not consistent.Issue: There is an inconsistency

mentioned of how many meters has been moved." Moving of plots is also mentioned in case of several other plots. If a randomly located

eport how it confirmed that the reported high leak rates would not have been detected using the PP s existing
’ leak detection equipment (e

tion due to the absence of monitored data of this parameter.

n the QA/QC procedures for the data measured by the sampled users (please refer to the applied methodology AMS-I.C ver. 18 pg. 15 and
n the QA/QC procedures for the data measured by the sampled users (please refer to the applied methodology AMS-I.C ver. 18 pg. 15 and
n factor (0.716tCO2/MWh) has been applied in the ER calculation, as indicated in the ER spreadsheet baseline
“ cell
” D19. The PP/DOE is re
y and monitoring plan as contained in the registered and revised PDDs.
conclusion to close this CAR.
hall determine whether the calculations of baseline GHG emissions or baseline net GHG removals, project GHG emissions or actual net GH

OE for validation. However, the PP used a 3-year simple average data, as shown in annex 3 of the PDD and the ex-ante emission reduction

, project emissions and leakage have been followed as per VVS version 09.0 paragraphs 403 (c) and 409 (j).Issue: 1) The volume equations
while this parameter is fixed ex-ante in the PDD, i.e. not monitored.3: For the Leakage upstream emissions of gaseous fuels, the DOE is req
maximum permissible error of the meter is not applied to electricity import and electricity export separately. It is to be noted that append
cording to the City of Xianyang, the construction time will be seven years: http://www.xianyang.gov.cn/channel_1/2011/0727/article_100
ts was calculated. The DOE (VR pg. 54) confirmed the calculated sample size (152 sample plots) is correct and has been presented transpa

rate.Issue: There is an inconsistency in the cross-referencing of the PDD. The verification and certification report on page 25 refers to PDD

/2012, yet the subsequent was on carried out on 11/03/2012; (b) for BAB: (1) The second calibration was on 03/03/2011, yet the subsequ
ation on how the tree biomass of the sampled plots was derived are NOT submitted. The DOE is requested to submit these spreadsheets a

mitted under additional documents are dated prior to the date of the request for issuance signed form (dated 25/03/2015). Please also no

ce the calibration dates indicated in the monitoring report are within 2 years.
 e annual value for FCdiesel,j,y used in the calculation of the Emission reductions, as the verification report page 18 declares that the consu

ration of those measuring equipments that have an impact on the claimed emission reductions is conducted by the project participants at

ge 5 specifies that the flare temperature range (°C) is 500 -1200. However, the following issues are found. It is important to note that the is

e with the registered PDD given that the MR states it was measured by the flow meters whereas the verification report states mazout is m
he DOE shall report how it confirmed that the reported high leak rates would not have been detected using the PP s existing
’ leak detection

preadsheet shows steam generation and rice husk consumption. Example: plant was shut down from 09/07/2014 to 17/07/2014 but the E
ach parameters as required by the methodology 4: Scope: The verification report does not provide an assessment on whether the calibrati

ssue a FAR to require the project participant to revise the monitoring plan to correct the inconsistencies in the PDD. Please refer to paragr
ocedure Implemented by Enercon and Certified by MSEDCL as” (1) The spreadsheet Emission
“ Reductions shows
” that the EGf1,y (column

t was only installed back on 06/05/2015. - For DP trans in 2# flare, it is not clear if the calibration date of 19/05/2014 is for equipment wit

e higher scale". Further, the DOE shall report how it confirmed that the reported high leak rates would not have been detected using the P

of the survey in accordance with the EB65 Annex 2 paragraphs 21.4: Scope: The verification report does not provide a conclusion on the ve
d by the power plant of the project activity.3: Scope: The verification report does not indicate that the information provided in the monito

er information on the analysis and results are not provided.

 case of wet basis of the gas, demonstrating that the temperature of the gaseous stream (Tt) is more than 60ºC at the flow measurement

g Procedure Implemented by Enercon and Certified by MSEDCL as” (1) The spreadsheet Emission
“ Reductions shows
” that the EGf2,y (colu
nex 2 paragraph 24, the DOE is requested to clarify whether it carried out field/onsite check for the 81 samples determined by the DOE.
months) were considered for x=3. However, the second and third monitoring periods show period of 01/07/2012 - 31/12/2012 (or 6 month

erage fuelwood used as proportion for each of the food item to the total fuelwood. However, the ER spreadsheet does not show how the
ty imports from the grid and emergency power supply by project activity (Wuliji Phase-1). The DOE is requested to list all the parameters r

ration frequency requirements' for the calibration delay. (VVM v.1.2 para 184 (a) (ii) & EB 52 Annex 60)Issue: The DOE is requested to pro
er and backup meter) & EG export ii,y (electricity exported to the grid by Heiyupao II project).3: Scope: The monitoring report does not con

her relevant parameters for the monitoring period as required by the applied methodologies, the registered monitoring plan and, where a
and certification report has not been submitted with a request for issuance as required in the completeness check checklist for requests f

s generator capacity of 1,000 kW and 1,100 kW. See PS v2 para 82 (a).3: Scope: The verification report does not describe the implementati
" and any explanation with regard to application of formulae in the spreadsheet. Furthermore, according to EB54 Annex 34, section E.1 an
port document, version 3, dated 26 April, 2012, is not consistent with the version displayed in the project view page and the submitted Ve

2 para 208 (c) & 221 (h))Issue: the Verification Report does not contain a clear statement that formula used for calculating project emission
erified the information flow for parameters Nmonitored, Noperating. Further, the Verification Report does not provide information on ho
verification report does not state that the monitoring has been carried out in accordance with registered or the accepted revised monitor
flaring which
” requires the parameter to be measured continuously and 2) the registered monitoring plan states that If there
“ is no record

hereas the spreadsheet Calibration demonstrates (1) due date of calibration as 20/03/2012, (2) actual date of calibration/replacement/ins

d the emission factor calculation worksheet, considering: (i) the publicly available information about the Energy Balance 2004 of Sri Lanka
his was carried out or how the DOE verified this. 3: VVS-PA, para 372: In ER sheet, sheet SolPlaatjeData
“ , column
” G (Consumption data), th
. 02, page 11) which requires that if measurements are made on a wet basis, then it shall be converted to dry basis for reporting.3: The ve

Issue: The formula for calculation of baseline emissions from destruction of methane in flare and project emission from flare are not availa
on report states that "The project began the installation and testing of the flares from March 2009, but started regular operation in May 2
n and the applied methodology document. (VVM v.1.2 para 208 (c) & 221 (h))Issue: The monitoring report (page 28) states that the baselin
e registered PDD.3: Scope: The verification report does not state how the DOE verified the information flow for the listed parameters. (VVM

nitoring period. No information was provided on recalibration of back-up meter (SN 8185) and if it was used during this monitoring period

oiler and in case changes are confirmed, explain why a request for changes in PDD has not been submitted prior to the first request for iss
curate.Issue: The verification and certification report refers to PDD version 3 dated 31/10/2008 whereas the valid PDD is version 6 dated 2

of the equipment measuring nitric acid production (density meter with temperature sensor) was carried out on 28/08/2009 and 20/07/20
n page 14 of the monitoring report, whereas it is stated as every 2 years as stated in the verification report.

e control of the PP. The DOE is requested to explain why it did not follow the applicable requirements related to post-registration changes

nge when comparing the results between the internally analysed sample and the externally analysed sample. If the result exceeded the ra
odology (page 14, 15 and 16) requires that the recording frequency for parameters NCSG, VSG, TSG, PSG, NCSGBC, VSGBC, TSGBC, PSGBC s

14, but it was never installed back. - For DP 1# for flare, the equipment was calibrated on site on 21/03/2014 but it was not installed (Mon
eter and thermometer reported as conducted in 01st August 2008 in the monitoring report. Additionally the accuracy verified and reporte
ifferent time scale for the two oil fields and with the modification in the physical boundary for the project activity; and (b) revised/updated
uired to clarify how it verified that the emission reductions have been correctly calculated applying the selected methodology. Other Issue

E is requested to explain how it has verified that the calibration of the measuring equipment has been conducted at the frequency specifie
eductions achieved nor/or confirm that appropriate methods and formulae for calculating baseline emissions, project emissions and leakag
e 14) The
“ calibration of the meters will be carried out in conformity with the manufacturer s specifications
’ and the Peruvian law, but in an

DOE has checked of the above monitoring equipment including calibration performance and observations of monitoring practices against

ncing and versioning within and between the document is not correct and accurate.Issue: There is an inconsistency in the cross-referencin

ring site visit verified the proper compost application to ensure aerobic conditions for further decay. However it is not clear how the DOE v
(design) implies the total yearly capacity, (considering 365 days of operational time per year). The DOE is requested to clarify these incons
(VVM v.1.2 para 206)Issue: The verification report does not contain information on how the DOE verified the continuous check of complia

o demonstrate that the planned implementation of the remaining equipment is likely.3: Scope: The verification report does not provide an

DOE shall report how it has verified external reports referred by PP for its biomass residue availability study.3: Scope: The verification repo
ide an statement on how the DOE verified the information flow (from data generation, aggregation, to recording, calculation and reporting
t monitoring period.
m data generation, aggregation, to recording, calculation and reporting) for these parameters including the values in the monitoring repor

A clarification request (CL 4) was raised by the DOE because inconsistencies were found between the recorded temperature and the tempe
hown in the spreadsheet cells whenever possible. (EB48 - Annex 68 paragraph 10 (b) (ii)).Issue: The spreadsheet submitted only indicates t
 he parameters Power
“ import and
” Power
“ export : i)” the monitoring report does not specify frequency and validity of calibrations to be

o provide information on how it verified that the project activity was implemented as per described in the registered PDD. 3: Scope: The ve
nts of less than 5%, and an accuracy of 3% for methane contents above 15%. However the monitoring plan indicates that the equipment is
ny information with regard to the shut down of STG outside the above mentioned period (Sep-Nov 2008) that is stated in the monitoring r

7. However, the DOE did not verify the actual errors identified and applied for the delayed period and the spreadsheet does not clearly sho

hanges to the project design.

he applied methodology (ACM0001 ver. 04, page 9). The DOE is requested to clarify the differences; and provide information on how it ve
han exact dates. In addition, the DOE is requested to clarify whether the error was applied in a conservative manner such that the adjusted

ices were found to be attached. c) Thermal energy efficiency has been calculated on the basis of heat input from biomass consumption an

eet.2: The VCR notes in Sec. E.6.2 (pp. 14-15) that due to the identified delays in calibration, a conservative error factor of 0.2% has been a

H FBC between the reported and the verified values.

on calculations have been justified and/or emission factors, default values and other reference values have been correctly applied. (VVM v

rification of calibration dates to verify whether the calibration of equipments covers the monitoring period 03/06/2003-30/06/2008 and w

ed weekly.3: Scope: The verification report does not list each parameter required by the monitoring plan and does not provide an stateme
ns due to energy efficiency measure as the baseline emissions are calculated based on the historical figure of the electricity generation, no

pe: The verification report does not provide an assessment that all physical features of the proposed CDM project activity proposed in the

tion of emission reductions; ii) the monitored values of carbon content in coal are used in estimation of project emissions; however, the DO
sed) baseline consumption between the monitoring report and the spreadsheet was noted, e.g. the CER spreadsheet reports 92 885.40 kW
in the Verification Report. Moreover it is not clear how the DOE cross checked the electricity generation records with the DCS as there is n

eriod of the missing data, including an addition of 10% to account for transmission and distribution losses.; or (2) whether the alternative e
tify reasons.

(since both the Validation Opinion and the Verification Report is done by the same DOE).
mount of gas measured in the main pipe is the same that the amount of gas fed to the flares.3: Scope: It is not clear how the DOE has veri

ring the Monitoring Report (page 18) states that the volume of methane is calculated as "the biogas generated for each month * ((94 –CO

ntenance that could not be performed on site, and hence replaced the unit. There was no impact to the data recorded by this meter." How
PP indicated in the monitoring report that the periodical measurement of the methane concentration in the exhaust gas of the flare was no
nd testing of measuring equipments was conducted as specified in the revised monitoring plan for the back-up diesel electricity generator
or if it includes the electricity generated using the diesel generators.

the fraction of heat provided to the common header by the project activity) - not only are the values of H1, H2 and H3 and the underlying

document. (VVM v.1.2 para 208 (c) & 221 (h))Issue:The DOE should provide a validation opinion on why the evidence used to demonstrat

tify reasons.
tify reasons.

on total steam generated for G3 and G4 turbines with total quantity of bagasse consumed in boilers. The DOE has not provided a verificati

S v2, para 243)Issue: The verification report (page 11) states that "Due to the delayed calibration for the readings of the Elster meter, the
, the calibration does not cover the entire monitoring period. Therefore, the DOE is requested to describe how it has verified that the calib
the applicable requirements related to post-registration changes as per the paragraph 369; and 2) The DOE (p 26) states that The
“ PP has
s done on 27 March 2017 and states that "The calibration conformity test certificate confirms that the meters were calibrated prior to inst
at and also to substantiate how it has verified the compliance of the emission factor calculation with all the requirements of the applied to

on lower than the requirement, excluding lower volumetric fraction would result in volumetric fraction of CH4 in the LFG being overestim

n conducted as per the monitoring plan and that there is no delayed calibration, as the calibration frequency required by the monitoring p
eport has not stated whether the reported value (i.e. 91210.17 tonnes of rice husk, 21962.2 tonnes of woody biomass) is on dry basis or w

ed calibration of the meters (HPU04204 & HPU04205) as per paragraph 366 of VVS for PA since 1) three calibration dates referred in the v

ed in the monitoring report has been cross-checked with other sources such as plant logbooks, inventories, purchase records and laborato

ertificate of share.5: The DOE (p 15) states that "The net electricity generated by the project activity is taken directly from the joint meteri
nitoring period for the project activity and there is no information provided in the verification report (e.g. not applicable reported current

.10 of the VR template as "Not applicable for the present monitoring period", considering this monitoring period is the first of the project

s that "calibration records to confirm it has been conducted as the frequency specified in the registered monitoring plan." The PP/DOE is r
he net electricity generated from the Suba plant whereas the VVS for PA paragraph 367 and its appendix require that this maximum perm
project electricity consumption if the electricity consumption by all project and leakage electricity consumption sources is smaller than the
3" is used to justify the calibration frequency; (b) Provide the calibration frequency as per the applicable standard.
e corresponding documents shall be consistent and reflect any additional information presented. In doing so refer to the latest versions of
nd Recipient Power Supply to Grid (7366.5 MWh) is higher than net electricity generation (7235.3 MWh) in July 2013. The DOE is requested
y significant increase, including all information (i.e. data or parameters) that is different from that stated in the registered PDD) as per PS
toring planThe DOE is requested to clarify how it verified the calculation of net electricity supply in particular: (a) The use of 115% factor a
ormation on how it has verified the conservativeness of emission reductions determined. Please refer to paragraph 21 of AMS III.AH versio

dologies. (para 373 of VVS of PA version 3)1) The applied methodology (p 12) requires "Cross-check the measurements with an annual ene
r, the verification report (page 14) indicates that EGexp/EGimp are recorded by an energy meter installed at the sub-station.
lts were available. Kindly please follow the CDM PS-PA (version 2) paragraph 231 in filing the deviation request by: (1) Identifying an appro
e DOE (p 7) states that it has concluded that the monitoring report was completed using the valid version of the applicable monitoring rep
e DOE (p 7) states that it has concluded that the monitoring report was completed using the valid version of the applicable monitoring rep

s with which the project activity has been registered; (b) the project boundary and any associated leakages due to the changes; (c) the com

uideline for Sampling and surveys for CDM project activities and programmes of activities, version 04.0 for reliability calculation.3: Scope: T
gated and (ii) the spreadsheet containing the monitored net production output data (kg or m3 per day), as required by AMS-III.Z ver. 04 pa
mation on calibration of meters HPU 0032 and 0033 after the calibration on 4 Jan 2020 in order to support the claim that the application of
dhsheet it is shown that for one month period (26/08/2013-25/09/2013) no electricity was generated. The two stated facts are not consist

he Kyoto Protocol", version 01.0 (EB69, Annex 3)

ecember 2012 and for the period from 1 January 2013.
ply is equal to the gross supply) will be used in the calculations . It”is not clear how the DOE has verified that the net supply is equal to the
in accordance with the monitoring methodology, specifically how it has verified that the NCV of natural gas used by the project power uni
eriod in accordance with para 184 of the CDM project cycle procedure version 01. Refer to para. 394 of CDM VVS for PA version 01.

has been provided as a proper justification that why the site visits cannot be postponed, including the demonstration of a significant impa
d has not been provided. In doing so, please provide a reproducible excel sheet of the energy balance calculation; and (ii) The VR (pg. 16)
VR p. 13) further confirms that the wind farm issued sales receipts of the project covering the period from 09/11/12 to 20/01/14. It is not
the Sampling Standard version 09 and the discounting approach by the lower/upper bound in paragraph 18(b) of the same standard is no
e VVS, v.03.0 and paragraphs 260c and 261 of the VS-PA, v.03.0..
sed in the national GHG inventory) and default values by the IPCC and; (b) the measured NCV of coal by verifying the uncertainty range of
nitoring as per the monitoring plan as 1) the monitoring plan (p 21-22) states that Quantity
“ of net electricity supplied to the grid in year y
a 359(c) and 357(b) of the VVS-PA, version 1.0. When addressing the above, the DOE is also requested to correct power density values rep
description of the actual operation of the project activity as per VVS version 09.0 paragraph 385 (b).Issue: The monitoring report indicates

14/15) has listed the“ amount of electricity exported to the grid from the wind farm connected to the transformer in year y (ESp,export,y)
switched to the introduced renewable biomass (RB). However, no information how the DOE confirmed the complete displacement of all
of calibration of 21/10/2014. Considering that i) the DOE did not provide any evidence of the calibration done prior to 04/07/2014 and ii) t
ot refer to the extended MP dates.
ect emissions are related to the baseline emissions. The DOE is requested to address the inconsistencies.
. There is an inconsistency in the cross-referencing of the VVS version. The verification and certification report refers to VVS version 03.0, w
1) the annual energy balances of FCPJ,k,y and FCPJ,i,y are not provided; (2) the DOE did not provide information on whether the purchase
tivity, has been calculated based on equation B (MR_ section E) and used to calculate the baseline emissions. It is noted that the monitore

or/or if appropriate, an assessment of remaining issues from the previous verification period as per VVS version 09.0 paragraph 409 (g) (h)
, results of the crosschecking etc.) have not been provided.
worksheet Monitoring
“ survey ). The
” appendix 6 of the PDD also does not require the data for amount for heating water. The DOE is reque
85% is used for additionality demonstration, while efficiency of 100% is used for baseline emissions calculation (pages 28-29).
why the total value used for year 2013 has been the lower value in the 90/10 confidence level while for 2011, 2012 and 2014, upper values
erification Report page 33 states that there is no separate flow meter installed to monitor the discharged wastewater after the digester, an
oject activity (PS v1, para 219)Issue: The revised PDD does not contain a summary of the impacts of the proposed change in line with the r
ed in accordance with the monitoring plan and applied methodology.
lculation_Project1.xlsx". However, the spreadsheet submitted in the request for issuance is "UNBRP_Carbon calculation_Project4.xlsx.4: T

sue: There is an inconsistency of the monitoring period between the CER calculation sheet (01/01/2013 - 31/12/2014) and the rest of the

er plots. If a randomly located plot is shifted because at the randomly selected location there are no trees, then the inventory gets biased

g leak detection equipment (e.g. smell and soap solution) and repaired under business-as-usual conditions (i.e. for safety concerns and pr

ogy AMS-I.C ver. 18 pg. 15 and EB 50 Annex 30 section IV_ General guidelines for sampling and surveys for SSC project activities).2: Scope:
ogy AMS-I.C ver. 18 pg. 15 and EB 50 Annex 30 section IV_ General guidelines for sampling and surveys for SSC project activities).2: Scope:
ne cell
” D19. The PP/DOE is requested to clarify the inconsistency and make correction where applicable.
HG emissions or actual net GHG removals, and leakage GHG emissions have been carried out in accordance with the formulae and method

he ex-ante emission reductions spreadsheet during registration.

sue: 1) The volume equations of Gmelina arborea, Tectona grandis, Bombacopsis quinata, Tabebuia rosea and Eucalyptus tereticornis in th
f gaseous fuels, the DOE is requested to explain how it reviewed the fuel consumption in the project and baseline and confirmed that base
. It is to be noted that appendix of the VVS-PA provides example for separate application for electricity export and electricity import.3: As
nnel_1/2011/0727/article_100459.html). Later completion of the reservoir would result in higher electricity generation compared to the le
d has been presented transparently in a spreadsheet. However, the mentioned spreadsheet has not been submitted. 3: Scope: The spread

port on page 25 refers to PDD version 4 dated 07/11/2011 whereas the PDD is version 4 dated 07/01/2011.

n 03/03/2011, yet the subsequent was on carried out on 06/04/2011; (2) The third calibration was on 06/04/2011, yet the subsequent was
o submit these spreadsheets and provide information on how it has verified the correctness of the tree biomass calculation.

d 25/03/2015). Please also note that the request for issuance form is dated 25/03/2015 whereas the submission was on 27/11/2015.
age 18 declares that the consumed value (40,372 Litres) is used whereas the spreadsheet uses the procured value (40,400 litres).3: Scope

d by the project participants at a frequency specified in the applied monitoring methodology, the applied standardized baseline and/or the

s important to note that the issues listed below are some examples only, the DOE is requested to address all similar issues throughout the

tion report states mazout is measured using the two truck scales of the plant and using the stock changes monthly.2: Scope: The verificatio
the PP s existing
’ leak detection equipment (e.g. smell and soap solution) and repaired under business-as-usual conditions (i.e. for safety co

2014 to 17/07/2014 but the ER spreadsheet shows steam generation and rice husk consumption on these days. Refer Para 374 (b) of VVS-
ment on whether the calibration of measuring equipments was conducted at a frequency specified in applied monitoring methodology or

he PDD. Please refer to paragraph 199 of the VVM (version 1.2).

hows
” that the EGf1,y (column K) is calculated by aggregating the values directly from the spreadsheet Generation
“ Details rows
” 8 to 18 w

05/2014 is for equipment with SN 5000953 (as per Appendix 3) or SN 5476650 (as per Appendix 2). Furthermore, there is no information

ave been detected using the PP s existing

’ leak detection equipment (e.g. smell and soap solution) and repaired under business-as-usual co

provide a conclusion on the verified amount of emission reductions achieved and/or determine that calculations of baseline emissions, pr
mation provided in the monitoring report has been cross-checked with other sources such as plant log books, inventories, purchase record
0ºC at the flow measurement point following by converting the measured volumetric flow from wet basis to dry basis(Option B). Further, t

s shows
” that the EGf2,y (column I) is calculated by aggregating the values directly from the spreadsheet Generation
“ Details rows
” 8 to 2
es determined by the DOE.
2012 - 31/12/2012 (or 6 months) for x=3. Hence there are only 11 months considered for x=3.3: Scope: The verification and certification re

sheet does not show how the results of the sampling shown in page 18 of the monitoring report are used in the ER calculation, in particula
ted to list all the parameters required by the revised monitoring plan as per paragraph 206 of VVM version 1.2.3: Scope: The verification re

e: The DOE is requested to provide a validation opinion on why the correction for meter number 34 and 35 (Table 6 of MR) has only been a
monitoring report does not contain information on calibration of monitoring instruments (frequency, relevant dates of calibration and/or v

monitoring plan and, where applicable, the applied standardized baselines. The project participants shall provide information on how dat
 check checklist for requests for issuance in line with PCP version 9 para 222.Issue: The DOE is requested to submit the respective verificati

not describe the implementation status of the project. (For project activities that consist of more than one site, the report shall clearly des
EB54 Annex 34, section E.1 and E.2, the monitoring report "shall include all formulae used and description to calculate the project emission
ew page and the submitted Verification report. Please note that version 03 is not available as per web pages.

or calculating project emission and leakage are in accordance with that in the approved methodology and the registered PDD.
not provide information on how the DOE assessed that the number of monitored households is in accordance with the monitoring plan
the accepted revised monitoring plan. (VVM v.1.2 para 206 & 221(d))Issue: The DOE is requested to further explain the consistency of the
ates that If there
“ is no record of vCH4,RG,m, it shall be assumed that the flare efficiency is zero. ”

of calibration/replacement/installation as 19/03/2014, and (3) the meter replaced from analogue to digital on 20/03/2012 but the type of

rgy Balance 2004 of Sri Lanka shows that there is also coal used in the country; (ii) the emission factor calculation may only contain inform
umn G (Consumption data), the formula therein shows that the value is divided by two. For example, for month 12 year 2020, it shows (1
y basis for reporting.3: The verification report (page 35) states that when an equipment with a delayed calibration has been replaced and n

ission from flare are not available in the excel spread sheets.4: Scope: The verification report does not indicate that the information provi
ed regular operation in May 2009" while the monitoring report indicates that flare 2 only started to work regularly on 11.10.2009. Please c
page 28) states that the baseline has to be recalculated. However the formulae provided (page A-52) of the verification report for the base
for the listed parameters. (VVM v.1.2 para 206)Issue: the Verification Report does not contain information on how the DOE has verified th

during this monitoring period. (d) The DOE indicated that the equipment measuring ND_HFC23y was recalibrated on 1 January, February

prior to the first request for issuance as per EB48 Annex 66. iii. The verification report states that "the calibration cycle for the monitoring e
valid PDD is version 6 dated 29/09/2015.4.Scope: The submitted documentation are dated prior to the date of request for issuance submi

t on 28/08/2009 and 20/07/2010. However, the verification report does not provide any information regarding the calibration conducted o
d to post-registration changes in line with requirement in paragraph 369 of VVS-PA; (d) There is no information on calibration of equipmen

e. If the result exceeded the range, PP s internal

’ procedure specifies further actions to be taken. However, the comparison of COD (interna
SGBC, VSGBC, TSGBC, PSGBC shall be once every 2 seconds. However, the Verification Report states that the parameters are scanned
“ ev”

4 but it was not installed (Monitoring report page 45). - For V-cone 2# for flare, the equipment with SN 7102301 was removed for calibratio
accuracy verified and reported by the DOE in the verification report (3%) differs from the one reported in the monitoring report (1%). Add
tivity; and (b) revised/updated investment analysis due to the added oil field has not been provided. In doing so, the DOE shall also provid
ted methodology. Other Issues:3. Page 3 of the verification report states that the verification team has been provided with the Revised Mo

cted at the frequency specified in the registered monitoring plan.

s, project emissions and leakage have been followed as per VVS version 09.0 paragraphs 403 (c) and 409 (j).Issue: In determining the proje
nd the Peruvian law, but in any case at least once every three years. However,
” in the Monitoring Report (page 6) the PP informs that the

f monitoring practices against the requirements of the PDD and the selected methodology, as per the paragraph 184 (b) (v) of the VVM ve

sistency in the cross-referencing of the PDD version. The verification and certification report refer to PDD version 4 dated 04/07/2008 whe

er it is not clear how the DOE verified that the aerobic condition was ensured during the composting process;
uested to clarify these inconsistencies.
e continuous check of compliance with the manufacturer s specification
’ of the flare device (temperature, biogas flow rate), as required by

tion report does not provide an assessment on whether the calibration of measuring equipments was conducted at a frequency specified in

3: Scope: The verification report does not provide an assessment on whether the calibration of measuring equipments was conducted at a
ding, calculation and reporting) for these parameters including the values in the monitoring reports (VVS v2, para 236, 284 (e)).Issue: The
values in the monitoring reports. However, it is noted that the submitted verification report does not list all of the required monitoring par

ed temperature and the temperature operational range of the flare. Project participant has indicated that for 11.01.2011 there was no val
heet submitted only indicates the values of "Project emission from flaring of the residual gas stream", without explaining how it was calcul
d validity of calibrations to be conducted as per the industrial standards and procedures of India as specified in the monitoring plan; ii) the

gistered PDD. 3: Scope: The verification and certification report does not provide a conclusion on the verified amount of emission reductio
ndicates that the equipment is accurate to within 0.5%. The DOE is requested to explain how it confirmed that the monitoring has been co
at is stated in the monitoring report, including how the power was met during that period; (b) The CL D1 questioned how the total steam c

readsheet does not clearly show how the errors have been transparently applied to the calculation as per paragraph 366 of the VVS.

vide information on how it verified the compliance of the applied values with the registered monitoring plan and the monitoring methodo
manner such that the adjusted values resulted in higher project emissions.

from biomass consumption and the enthalpy of the steam generated. The PP is requested to provide explanation on why the enthalpy and

error factor of 0.2% has been applied on the values of electricity export and import for the months February to April 2014, July 2014 to Sep
been correctly applied. (VVM v.1.2 para 208 (d) & (e))Issue: The DOE should provide a validation opinion regarding the actual average annu

3/06/2003-30/06/2008 and whether there is calibration delay

d does not provide an statement on how the DOE verified the information flow (from data generation, aggregation, to recording, calculatio
the electricity generation, not the electricity generation during the project activity.4: Scope: The verification report does not provide an a

roject activity proposed in the registered PDD are in place and/or that the project participant has implemented and operated the propose

ct emissions; however, the DOE has not confirmed that the above values are in line with VVM 1.2, para 208 (d) and (e).
eadsheet reports 92 885.40 kWh for UT2 (Cell F5, worksheet MDS TEM UT2), whereas the monitoring report states 112,257.45 kWh (p.16)
ords with the DCS as there is no mention of the same in the Verification Report. The DOE is requested to incorporate the details of the cro

r (2) whether the alternative estimation approach taken by the project participant is accepted by the DOE; in which case it should have su
ot clear how the DOE has verified that the calibration of measuring equipments was conducted at a frequency specified in applied monito

ed for each month * ((94 –CO2) / 100). This includes the 6% trace gas deduction." Please refer to VVM version 01.2 paragraph 205 (a & c)

a recorded by this meter." However, the DOE has not provided a verification opinion on why it has considered that the replacement of the
exhaust gas of the flare was not conducted within the frequency specified in the methodology and monitoring plan, and applied default va
up diesel electricity generators operational time (Hdiesel) and Biomass steam boiler operational time (Hbiomass).
H2 and H3 and the underlying monitroed values used for their calculation not reported in the spreadsheet but the EGgen and EGaux are d

e evidence used to demonstrate the abundant availability of the biomass residues (i.e. Reference on SBE and seminar on Energy from biom
OE has not provided a verification opinion in the verification report on this calculation.3: Scope: The verification report does not provide an

dings of the Elster meter, the maximum permissible error of 0.2% was applied from January to April". However, the spreadsheet does not
ow it has verified that the calibration of the meters has been carried out as per the monitoring plan of the revised/approved PDD and VVS
(p 26) states that The
“ PP has also applied double of the maximum permissible error to values recorded during the period of delay by old m
s were calibrated prior to installation. Since, the installed meters have not completed the required frequency of 1 years for calibration, th
equirements of the applied tool to calculate the emission factor for an electricity system (version 4) as per paragraph 373 (C) of VVS for PA

H4 in the LFG being overestimated, and eventually BECH4,y being overestimated; (b) Deviation 3: (i) The PP considered the highest temper

required by the monitoring plan is annual, whereas the meters were only calibrated on 19/08/2016 and 30/06/2021.
y biomass) is on dry basis or wet basis, nor the DOE has provided information on how it has verified this point. (c) The applied methodolog

bration dates referred in the verification report are 11/08/2015 for the 1st calibration of HPU04204 & HPU04205 and both 11/04/2016 an

purchase records and laboratory analysis; (d) Any assumptions used in emission or removal calculations have been justified; Please refer to

directly from the joint metering report (JMR) issued by state utility on monthly basis." The DOE is required to provide its verification on th
ot applicable reported currently in the verification report section E.10) on how the DOE took due account of all authentic and relevant com

riod is the first of the project activity.

nitoring plan." The PP/DOE is required to provide further information on why 6 Gasurveyors were calibrated once in 2020 while the other
quire that this maximum permissible error is to be applied for both electricity exported and electricity imported respectively in a conservati
tion sources is smaller than the electricity consumption of all baseline electricity consumption sources. There is no information how this co
o refer to the latest versions of the Tool Demonstrating
“ appropriateness of allometric equations for estimation of aboveground tree biom
uly 2013. The DOE is requested to explain how it has verified the electricity data/system, in particular why the electricity received by the re
the registered PDD) as per PS version 09.0 paragraphs 256 and 257.Issue: The monitoring report (p 12) states that "Difference in the estim
r: (a) The use of 115% factor applied to import electricity in the calculation spreadsheet, considering the registered PDD does not mention
agraph 21 of AMS III.AH version 1 (i.e. "... All values shall be chosen in a conservative manner (i.e., lower values for the baseline and highe

surements with an annual energy balance that is based on purchased quantities (e.g. with sales/receipts) and stock changes. Check the con
the sub-station.
est by: (1) Identifying an appropriate alternative such as the lowest observed inlet N2O emissions or another alternative such as the value
the applicable monitoring report form and is followed the guidelines given in the template itself. The Instructions for filling out the monito
 the applicable monitoring report form and is followed the guidelines given in the template itself. The Instructions for filling out the monito

due to the changes; (c) the compliance of the monitoring plan with the applied methodologies, the applied standardized baselines and the

eliability calculation.3: Scope: The verification and certification report does not provide an assessment on whether the calibration of measu
quired by AMS-III.Z ver. 04 para 28 (a), as this has not been submitted.
e claim that the application of maximum permissible error of the meters is conservative. The DOE is requested to explain how provision o
wo stated facts are not consistent. Some description for this gap in operation of the plant should have been provided.
the net supply is equal to the gross supply and that the method is conservative. The DOE is requested to clarify whether the sales invoices
used by the project power unit(s) is within the uncertainty range of the IPCC default values. Please refer to paragraphs 386   of the VVS ve
M VVS for PA version 01.

onstration of a significant impact of delaying the site visits on the DOE, project participants or coordinating/managing entity (e.g. commitm
ation; and (ii) The VR (pg. 16) states that a sample
“ of moisture content analysis report from other accredited laboratory was checked by t
9/11/12 to 20/01/14. It is noted that the sales receipts were issued from 09/11/12 which is before the date (01/03/2013) the grid connecti
(b) of the same standard is not applicable to this request for issuance. The DOE shall provide information on how it has validated this devi
fying the uncertainty range of the IPCC default values and; Additionally, AMS-I.C, v.19 page 21 requires that in cases where emission reduc
y supplied to the grid in year y are
” monitored through main and check meters at the MSEDCL sub-station and The“ monthly meter reading
rect power density values reported in Verification Report (5.5W/m2 and 5.6 W/m2 in page 23), in line with the values reported in Monitor
e monitoring report indicates that the Seocheon (II) PV power plant was not implemented as per decision by the Ministry of Trade, Industr

former in year y (ESp,export,y); and the amount of electricity imported from the grid to the wind farm connected to the transformer in yea
complete displacement of all the NRB at each installation site (please refer to AMS-I.E. ver. 04 para 14).
e prior to 04/07/2014 and ii) the DOE that verified the previous monitoring period (01 Jul 12 - 31 Mar 14) stated that main meter (0.2s, GJ
rt refers to VVS version 03.0, whereas the request is submitted in VVS version 02.0. Please note that VVS 2 is no longer valid. 3. The Board
tion on whether the purchased fuel invoices can be identified specifically for the CDM project, and how the purchased invoices were chec
s. It is noted that the monitored value (EGimport, M3 - 163.968 MWh) is higher than the calculated value (140 MWh). The DOE is requeste

ion 09.0 paragraph 409 (g) (h).Issue: The DOE is requested to explain how it has properly closed CL01, considering the information on the
eating water. The DOE is requested to explain how the monitoring survey has been carried out as per the monitoring plan; (ii) For the amo
tion (pages 28-29).
, 2012 and 2014, upper values have been used. Issue 2: The PDD (pg.42) indicates for parameter FVdigester,y that the“ amount of the prod
stewater after the digester, and the value used in this case is the same as recorded for (Qww,y). Furthermore, the DOE is also requested t
posed change in line with the requirement of para 219 of hte Project Standards version 1. 4: Scope: The verification report does not provid
 calculation_Project4.xlsx.4: The verification report (p 8) states that "the actual standing plantations from 2006-2011 (29.94 ha) and the ar

/12/2014) and the rest of the documents submitted (31/12/2013 - 31/12/2014).5.Scope: The submitted documents are not internally and

hen the inventory gets biased and hence invalidated. It is not clear how the DOE closed this CAR 13. (VVS for PA (v2) paragraphs 360 and 3

i.e. for safety concerns and prevention of hazardous conditions) and therefore not be considered as baseline leaks for the project activity.

SC project activities).2: Scope: The verification report does not indicate that the information provided in the monitoring report has been cr
SC project activities).2: Scope: The verification report does not indicate that the information provided in the monitoring report has been cr
with the formulae and methods described in the registered monitoring plan, the applied methodologies, the applied standardized baseline

nd Eucalyptus tereticornis in the monitoring report (p 14) are different from the equations in the PDD. Further the equations of the monito
eline and confirmed that baseline NG consumption is more than that of the project, hence leakage is zero, considering the monitoring rep
rt and electricity import.3: As per paragraph 373(c) of VVS-PA, the DOE shall determine whether the calculations of baseline GHG emission
generation compared to the level estimated in the PDD.The DOE is requested to verify whether the completion date for the Dongzhuan Re
bmitted. 3: Scope: The spreadsheet does not contain the formulae of calculation that are shown in the spreadsheet cells whenever possib

2011, yet the subsequent was on carried out on 15/05/2011; (3) The fourth calibration was on 15/05/2011, yet the subsequent was on ca
ass calculation.

sion was on 27/11/2015.

 value (40,400 litres).3: Scope: The verification report does not determine if the assumptions used in emission calculations have been justi

ndardized baseline and/or the monitoring plan (VVS Ver 7. para. 282)Issue: PP/DOE shall provide the details of the calibration meters used

similar issues throughout the entire monitoring spreadsheets: (1) There is a lack of information in the calculation spreadsheets (e.g. sprea

onthly.2: Scope: The verification report does not provide an assessment on whether the calibration of measuring equipments was conduct
al conditions (i.e. for safety concerns and prevention of hazardous conditions) and therefore not be considered as baseline leaks for the p

ays. Refer Para 374 (b) of VVS-PA, version 3.0.

ed monitoring methodology or EB guidance if applicable, and/or the monitoring plan? (VVM v.1.2 para 184 (a) (ii) & EB 52 Annex 60)Issue:T
ration Details rows
” 8 to 18 which are the net electricity generated from those 11 WEGs belonging to the project activity, and (2) the valu

more, there is no information of equipment with SN 5476650 in Appendix 3. (b) Tflare: - For Thermal couple 1 in 1# flare (top), the equipm

ed under business-as-usual conditions (i.e. for safety concerns and prevention of hazardous conditions) and therefore not be considered a

tions of baseline emissions, project emissions and leakage as appropriate have been carried out in accordance with the formulae and meth
s, inventories, purchase records, laboratory analyses. (VVM v.1.2 para 208 (a) and (b))Issue: The DOE shall explain whether and how it has
dry basis(Option B). Further, the submitted Monitoring Report, Verification report and Spreadsheets provide the values of the volumetric

eneration
“ Details rows
” 8 to 22 which are the net electricity generated from those 15 WEGs belonging to the project activity, and (2) the v
erification and certification report does not determine if the assumptions used in emission calculations have been justified as per VVS vers

the ER calculation, in particular to each relevant households under the project activity. Refer paragraph 372 of VVS-PA (version 02.0).
.2.3: Scope: The verification report does not state how the DOE verified the information flow for the listed parameters. (VVM v.1.2 para 2

Table 6 of MR) has only been applied for Aug 2010-April 2011, as the validity of the calibration was only until 20/07/2010 and 23/07/2010
t dates of calibration and/or validity) as specified by the monitoring methodology and the monitoring plan. (EB48 - Annex 68 paragraph 10

ovide information on how data and parameters have been monitored. Please refer to PS for PA v1,0 paragraph 260.Page 8 of monitoring r
submit the respective verification and certification report and the validation report using the valid version of the applicable verification an

te, the report shall clearly describe the status of implementation and starting date of operation for each site. For CDM project activities w
calculate the project emissions applying actual values. A table may be used and included in this monitoring report or include references t
he registered PDD.
e with the monitoring plan
explain the consistency of the application of standard conditions (15 0C and 1.01325 bar) applied to parameters- Vc1,y, Vc2,y, Vc3,y, VD1,
n 20/03/2012 but the type of meter is still as analogue. It is noted that according to the spreadsheet Calibration, except for the plant Ovee

ation may only contain information of the fuel of power plants.

onth 12 year 2020, it shows (1078/2)/1000
“ . The
” note in the cell states total
“ reading = 1078 kW for half hour data. Therefore, converted
ration has been replaced and no further calibration has been carried out, it is not possible to check whether the error found would be high

ate that the information provided in the monitoring report has been cross-checked with other sources such as plant log books, inventories
verification report for the baseline emission calculation does not include the correction factor. The DOE is requested to clarify this inconsis
n how the DOE has verified the soil application of the compost in agriculture or related activities and its monitoring by the project propone

brated on 1 January, February and March, 2011(page 33 of Verification Report). Precise calibration dates are not provided for February and

tion cycle for the monitoring equipment as stated in the PDD is 3 years", however the PDD only indicates that calibration will be performe
of request for issuance submission.Issue: The verification and certification report (29/08/2017) is dated prior to the monitoring report, ve

ng the calibration conducted on 20/07/2010. Information is required.

on on calibration of equipment measuring parameter Tcombust which is used to determine whether manufacturer specification for flarin

e comparison of COD (internal) and COD (external) contains inconsistencies: for example, when calculating the difference for CODinput in
 parameters are scanned
“ ever
” 1 second but recorded
“ by 1 minute interval . Information
” must be provided regarding how the methodo

301 was removed for calibration on 02/04/2014, but was only installed back on 04/04/2014. (b) MMELEC/MDELEC being measured contin
e monitoring report (1%). Additionally the verification report does not clearly indicate how it verified (source of information) the calibratio
g so, the DOE shall also provide information related to suitability of parameters for the revised/updated investment analysis due to additio
provided with the Revised Monitoring Report, version 1 on Sep.27, 09, which serves as the basis for the DOE's assessment. The DOE is req
ssue: In determining the project emissions from electricity consumption, ACM0008 version 8 refers to the Tool
“ to calculate baseline, proj
age 6) the PP informs that the date of last calibration of the meters was on 19 March 2007, and thus they were out of calibration from 19

raph 184 (b) (v) of the VVM ver 2.1, in particular, it is not clear the nature and quantity of auxiliary consumption sources existed during the

sion 4 dated 04/07/2008 whereas the applicable PDD as mentioned in the monitoring report is version 2 dated 10/07/2015. 5.Scope: The

;
gas flow rate), as required by the monitoring plan and applied monitoring methodology.

cted at a frequency specified in applied monitoring methodology or EB guidance if applicable, and/or the monitoring plan. (VVM v.1.2 para

quipments was conducted at a frequency specified in applied monitoring methodology or EB guidance if applicable, and/or the monitoring
para 236, 284 (e)).Issue: The DOE did not report he monitored values of the parameters Electricity
“ exported by the each WTG at site an
of the required monitoring parameters, for example, OT, OP, AFR and AIFR. The DOE is requested to further include the required informati

r 11.01.2011 there was no value reported due to an electrical problem occurred on site which caused a shut down in the flare and the DO
t explaining how it was calculated.4: Scope: The verification report does not list each parameter required by the monitoring plan (VVM v.1
in the monitoring plan; ii) the monitoring report considers the calibrations of only two energy meters (Serial N. CSEE29169 and APM20048

d amount of emission reductions achieved nor/or confirm that appropriate methods and formulae for calculating baseline emissions, proje
at the monitoring has been conducted as per monitoring plan. Please refer to VVM version 01.2 Paragraph 205 (c).
stioned how the total steam consumed in STG only for power production (SSTG) is calculated. However, the verification report or the spre

ragraph 366 of the VVS.

n and the monitoring methodology. iii. The landfill gas captured (257,162,385 Nm3; monitoring report, page 25) is lower than the landfill g
ation on why the enthalpy and temperature of fresh water are fixed numbers for each month considering that energy generation in the bo

to April 2014, July 2014 to September 2014, December 2014 to August 2016, and November 2016 to February 2017. However, the DOE ha
arding the actual average annual population of each animal type in comparison to the one described in the PDD, in order to assess the rele

gation, to recording, calculation and reporting) for these parameters including the values in the monitoring reports (VVS v2, para 236, 284
n report does not provide an assessment of the compliance with EB 52 Annex 60 'Guidelines for assessing compliance with the calibration

ted and operated the proposed CDM project activity as per the registered PDD or the approved revised PDD. (VVM v.1.2 para 196)Issue: T

(d) and (e).

states 112,257.45 kWh (p.16). Clarification is required.
orporate the details of the cross checking mechanism for better clarity.Further the PP/DOE shall also clarify the term third
“ party . ”

n which case it should have submitted a request for deviation prior to submitting the request for issuance for approval by the Board.
cy specified in applied monitoring methodology or EB guidance if applicable, and/or the monitoring plan? (VVM v.1.2 para 184 (a) (ii) & EB

on 01.2 paragraph 205 (a & c).

d that the replacement of the meter had no impact on the data recorded by the meter.
ng plan, and applied default values of flare efficiency following the approach from the methodological tool Project
“ emissions from flaring
mass).
ut the EGgen and EGaux are directly entered into the spreadsheet and how these values were derived are therefore not transparent or rep

seminar on Energy from biomass) which was available in 2006 and 2007, is considered appropriate given that the monitoring period is be
tion report does not provide an assessment on whether the calibration of measuring equipments was conducted at a frequency specified i

ver, the spreadsheet does not show how the maximum error was applied.
vised/approved PDD and VVS ver. 9 para 394. (VVS ver 9 para 394 400)
– PA 4 serial number 0019653, validity Oct 2014 PA 5 serial numbe
ng the period of delay by old meter in ER sheet (C8-D20). However,
” the maximum error of the meter (0.002) was applied to C8 “ which
” re
y of 1 years for calibration, the initial calibration is valid upto one year after installation of the meters on the site as per the registered mon
aragraph 373 (C) of VVS for PA version 3. Also, as minor issues, different CM values (0.3222 tCO2/MWh against 0.3277 tCO2/MWh, which

onsidered the highest temperature of LFG as 78 degree C whereas the value observed is 78.333 degree C, instead of rounded down value

/06/2021.
nt. (c) The applied methodology (page 14 of AMS I.D version 18) requires an annual energy balance to cross-check the measured quantity o

4205 and both 11/04/2016 and 04/12/2017 for and 1st and 2nd calibration of 09539957 & 10058641 as per the annex of the monitoring r

been justified; Please refer to VVS PA v1.0 paragraph 376 (b)(d).The DOE (p 20) states that the NCV is sourced
“ from the GAIL supplier inv

o provide its verification on the emission reduction spreadsheet ( Apportioning

“ ) as” per the revised PDD submitted along with the request
all authentic and relevant comments in the verification, as per para. 392 of the VVS version 02.0.

once in 2020 while the other 4 Gasurveyors were calibrated twice in 2020.3: The project participants shall, for the registered CDM project
ted respectively in a conservative manner.
is no information how this condition has been met by the project activity in order to apply default value of 3% for project emissions. Plea
tion of aboveground tree biomass in A/R CDM project activities paragraph
” 6; Tool Calculation
“ of the number of sample plots for measure
e electricity received by the recipients is higher than the power generated by the project activity.3: Scope: The verification report does no
s that "Difference in the estimated values in registered PDD as compared to the CERs under the current monitoring period is (-11.25%)." H
stered PDD does not mention this factor and there is no explanation in the MR, ER spreadsheet or verification report; (b) The use of the n
ues for the baseline and higher values for the project should be chosen within a plausible range) and the choice shall be justified and docum

d stock changes. Check the consistency of measurements ex post with annual data on energy generation, fossil fuels and biomass used and
alternative such as the value referred to by the methodology, and providing a justification regarding this alternative on why it would not
ctions for filling out the monitoring report form states requires to provide the approval date and reference number in cases where the pos
ctions for filling out the monitoring report form states requires to provide the approval date and reference number in cases where the pos

tandardized baselines and the other applied methodological regulatory documents; (d) the level of accuracy and completeness of the mon

ether the calibration of measuring equipments was conducted at a frequency specified by the applied methodology, the standardized bas
ed to explain how provision of paragraph 366 of VVS-PA is complied with without any information when the delayed calibration was cond
rify whether the sales invoices based on the one direction/export meter accurately reflects the net electricity displaced in the grid and furt
aragraphs 386   of the VVS version 9.0. Please refer to Paragraphs 386 of the VVS version 9.0..2) Upstream leakage emissions (fugitive me
managing entity (e.g. commitment/ timeline as per the validation or verification contract, CER delivery commitment by project participants
d laboratory was checked by the verification team to cross check the consistency of moisture content estimated in plant s laboratory
’ corre
(01/03/2013) the grid connection agreement was signed. The DOE is requested to provide information on how the PP can issue the grid co
how it has validated this deviation from the Sampling Standard. (2) The specific raw data of each sampled measurement (i.e. measureme
in cases where emission reductions are calculated based on energy output, the consistency of measurements ex post has to be checked w
d The“ monthly meter reading is arrived at as the difference between the current meter reading and the previous meter reading and
” 2) t
he values reported in Monitoring Report (4.55 W/m2 and 4.76 W/m2 in table E.2 of page 11) and ER calculation sheet (4.55 W/m2 and 4.7
 the Ministry of Trade, Industry and Energy. However, the verification report (p 6) states "The verification team confirmed that Seocheon

ected to the transformer in year y (ESp,import,y) as monitored

” parameters. However, the monitored values have not been reported in the
ated that main meter (0.2s, GJ-0940-A) was calibrated on 22/10/2011, the DOE is required to provide further information how it verified th
s no longer valid. 3. The Board agreed at EB 108 (December 2020), as temporary measures pending CMP guidance at CMP 16, to process re
purchased invoices were checked to cross-check the metered fuel consumption quantities.
40 MWh). The DOE is requested to report how it assessed the conservativeness of the approach (Equation B) used to calculate the baseline

dering the information on the metering equipment for parameter ECPJ,y is still missing in the monitoring report.
nitoring plan; (ii) For the amount of fire wood, considering the baseline survey did not ask the amount for heating water and the monitori
y that the“ amount of the produced gas is applied in order to cross check with the amount of the gas to be utilized (FVelectricity) and flare
e, the DOE is also requested to explain why this is not considered as deviation to the monitoring plan, and how this approach is conservati
cation report does not provide a conclusion on the verified amount of emission reductions achieved and/or determine that calculations o
 06-2011 (29.94 ha) and the area planted in 2012-2018 (282.25 ha) according the plantation delineation report". However, as the monitori

uments are not internally and mutually consistent.Issue: The verification/certification report refers to the registration date 31/12/2012 (p

PA (v2) paragraphs 360 and 361):4: The CAR 12 item (a) is closed based on the conclusion The“ provided documents /29/ /39/ confirm tha

e leaks for the project activity.

monitoring report has been cross-checked with other sources . (VVS ver. 07, para 290(b))Issue: The VR (pg.33) states that in order
“ to veri
monitoring report has been cross-checked with other sources. (VVS ver. 07, para 290(b))Issue: The VR (pg.33) states that in order
“ to verif
applied standardized baselines and the other applied methodological regulatory documents (paragraph 373(c) of VVS for PA version 2)Th

er the equations of the monitoring report are different from the spreadsheet. For example, SM3 “ sheet
” for Eucalyptus tereticornis 13-16
onsidering the monitoring report, page 33, justifies the leakage being zero based on the feeder buses which were the baseline buses, whe
tions of baseline GHG emissions have been carried out in accordance with the formulae and methods described in the registered monitorin
on date for the Dongzhuan Reservoir is consistent with information provided in the PDD and to submit a request for approval of changes
adsheet cells whenever possible.Issue: The values listed on columns L, M, N and O (ER calculation spreadsheet worksheet_ Biomass_AR
“ T

yet the subsequent was on carried out on 24/06/2011; (4) The fifth calibration was on 24/06/2011, yet the subsequent was on carried out
on calculations have been justified and/or emission factors, default values and other reference values have been correctly applied. (VVS v2

of the calibration meters used to monitor the parameter TEGy

“ - Total electricity produced by the project activity, including the electricity

ation spreadsheets (e.g. spreadsheet hourly-201801

“ ) to” demonstrate that the continuous measuring was made every minute. (2) The va

uring equipments was conducted at a frequency specified in applied monitoring methodology or EB guidance if applicable, and/or the mon
red as baseline leaks for the project activity.
a) (ii) & EB 52 Annex 60)Issue:The calibration information given in the Monitoring Report for equipment Agilent Technonologies 7890 A / V
oject activity, and (2) the values EGf1,JMR,export (spreadsheet Emission
“ Reductions column
” E) and EGf1,JMR,import (spreadsheet Emis
“

1 in 1# flare (top), the equipment with SN C3106879004040 was removed for calibration on 19/05/2014 but it was only installed back on 2

therefore not be considered as baseline leaks for the project activity.

ce with the formulae and methods described in the monitoring plan and the applied methodology document. (VVM v.1.2 para 208 (c) & 22
plain whether and how it has verified the electricity supplied to the recipient (EGi,j,y) against the sales receipts as required by ACM0012 v
e the values of the volumetric flow in normalized cubic meters (Nm3). However, as per the applied methodological tool "Tool
“ to determin

e project activity, and (2) the values EGf2,JMR,export (spreadsheet Emission

“ Reductions column
” E) and EGf2,JMR,import (spreadsheet E
been justified as per VVS version 09.0 paragraph 403 (d).Issue: The DOE is requested how it has verified the GWP of CH4 and N2O as per

of VVS-PA (version 02.0).

arameters. (VVM v.1.2 para 206)Issue: The verification report does not provide the DOE assessment on the information flow (including da

20/07/2010 and 23/07/2010 respectively. Therefore, it is not clear why a correction was not applied for the period of 21/07/2010 to 31/0
EB48 - Annex 68 paragraph 10 (a) (iv) & EB 54 Annex 34)Issue: the PP is requested to include the calibration details of all monitoring instru

ph 260.Page 8 of monitoring report indicates that the 3rd, 4th and 5th sampling survey have covered phase 4 distributions. However, only
the applicable verification and certification report form, taking into account the grace period of the form if it has been revised as per VVS

. For CDM project activities with phased implementation, the report shall state the progress of the proposed CDM project activity achieve
report or include references to spreadsheet". However, it is noted that the submitted spreadsheet only contains the calculated results fro
ters- Vc1,y, Vc2,y, Vc3,y, VD1,y, VD2,y and VL,y given that these parameters shall be measured at standard conditions as per the registere
tion, except for the plant Oveer Arkari, all plants have date of replacement from analogue to digital, however the meter type of some plan
ur data. Therefore, converted to MWh by dividing by 2 and then again by 1,000 . The
” DOE is requested to explain this calculation and how
the error found would be higher than the maximum permissible error, thus the maximum permissible error has been applied. The DOE sh

as plant log books, inventories, purchase records, laboratory analyses. (VVM v.1.2 para 208 (a) and (b))Issue: It is not clear how the DOE ha
quested to clarify this inconsistency.
nitoring by the project proponent.4: Scope: The verification report does not indicate that the information provided in the monitoring repor

not provided for February and March to ensure that the equipment was duly calibrated during the entire monitoring period. The relevant

at calibration will be performed in accordance with the manufacturer's specification. The DOE shall clarify the manufacture specification ve
r to the monitoring report, version 6.0 dated 13/10/17.
acturer specification for flaring is met.2: Paragraph 374(a) of VVS-PA: There are missing data outside the temporary deviation period as ev

he difference for CODinput in cell E9 from the COD

“ Comparison sheet,
” the denominator should be D9“ (internal),
” not C9 “ (external).
” S
d regarding how the methodological requirement on the 2-second recording frequency has been complied with.

DELEC being measured continuously, as there was gaps without equipment identified. The Appendices 2 and 3 show that for V-cone engin
e of information) the calibrations frequencies and calibration dates of each metering equipments used in the monitoring period 12: Scope
stment analysis due to addition of new oil field. Please refer to project standard (PS) version 7, paragraph 280 and validation and certifica
E's assessment. The DOE is requested to clarify why the reference is being made to a "revised" Monitoring Report.
ool
“ to calculate baseline, project and/or leakage emissions from electricity consumption and
” the tool requires considering technical trans
ere out of calibration from 19 March 2010 to 30 September 2010. The DOE is requested to clarify how it verified that the calibration requ

tion sources existed during the monitoring period and if those sources have been consuming energy simultaneously. Please, provide a des

ted 10/07/2015. 5.Scope: The cross-referencing and versioning within and between the document are not correct and accurate.Issue: The
nitoring plan. (VVM v.1.2 para 184 (a) (ii) & EB 52 Annex 60)Issue: The verification report does not contain information on how the DOE ha

licable, and/or the monitoring plan? (VVM v.1.2 para 184 (a) (ii) & EB 52 Annex 60)Issue: the calibration on weighting feeder scales was co
include the required information in the verification report.

down in the flare and the DOE confirmed that on this day the flare was not operational. However the CER sheet ("CERs 2009 - 2010 - 2011
the monitoring plan (VVM v.1.2 para 206)Issue: The monitoring plan makes reference to the Tool
“ to determine project emissions from fl
 N. CSEE29169 and APM20048), while a total of four meters (2 main meters and 2 check meters) should have been installed and calibrated

ating baseline emissions, project emissions and leakage have been followed as per VVS version 09.0 paragraphs 403 (c) and 409 (j).Issues:
verification report or the spreadsheet has not provided the calculation of how this was computed, given that SSTG does not equal to SB (s

25) is lower than the landfill gas delivered to the flaring unit and the power plant (258,397,600 Nm3; monitoring report pages 26 and 30).
at energy generation in the boiler is a dynamic process. The resubmitted documents dated 02/01/2014 do not include a response to the is

ary 2017. However, the DOE has not confirmed that the result of the delayed calibration is within the maximum permissible error of the m
DD, in order to assess the relevance of the ex-ante estimate of emission reductions included therein.

reports (VVS v2, para 236, 284 (e)).Issue: The Verification Report has not provided any information with regard to the use of one value of C
mpliance with the calibration frequency requirements' for the calibration delay. (VVM v.1.2 para 184 (a) (ii) & EB 52 Annex 60)Issue: For p

. (VVM v.1.2 para 196)Issue: The DOE is requested to further substantiate how the implementation of the project activity has been in acco
he term third
“ party . ”

r approval by the Board.

VM v.1.2 para 184 (a) (ii) & EB 52 Annex 60)Issue: The secretariat has observed that: (i) The MR explains that the main equipment at the s
Project
“ emissions from flaring . However,
” the DOE has neither validated this approach nor whether this approach is a temporary deviation
erefore not transparent or replicable. The PP/DOE shoul resubmit the spreadsheet containing the parameters and formulas required by th

at the monitoring period is between January-April 2010. In addition, the DOE shall provide details on the "Biomass Assessment Report" (R
cted at a frequency specified in applied monitoring methodology or EB guidance if applicable, and/or the monitoring plan? (VVM v.1.2 par
ty Oct 2014 PA 5 serial number 0019649, validity Oct 2014 PA 8 serial number 0019654, validity Oct 2014 PA 11 serial number 0019658, va
2) was applied to C8 “ which
” represents the Gross Electricity exported of November 2017.
site as per the registered monitoring plan". The DOE is required to provide further information on how it considered the initial calibration
nst 0.3277 tCO2/MWh, which was used in the final ER calculation) are reported in several places of Monitoring Report (page 18) and Verifi

stead of rounded down value 78 degree C; (ii) The ER sheet for August 2020 shows that the highest measured temperature is 1370.2: Para
check the measured quantity of biomass. However, such energy balance is not provided.3: Scope: The verification and certification report

the annex of the monitoring report and 2) the monitoring report and the verification report do not provide information on when the dela

ced from the GAIL supplier invoices by”referring Monthly

“ NG consumption data Sales invoices and
” the emission reduction spreadsheet

bmitted along with the request for issuance.6: The DOE states that "The management of Clean Wind Power (Devgarh) Private Limited is res
or the registered CDM project activity for the monitoring period, identify the formulae used for, and provide the calculations of, the follow
3% for project emissions. Please refer to paragraph 373(e) of VVS for project activities (version 02.0).
er of sample plots for measurements within A/R CDM project activities and
” CDM Project Standard, paragraph 265.3: The spreadsheet (NA
he verification report does not provide a conclusion on the verified amount of emission reductions achieved and/or determine that calcula
itoring period is (-11.25%)." However, the monitoring report (p 1) shows that the actual emission reduction of 106,283 tCO2 is higher than
on report; (b) The use of the net electricity in sheet Baseline
“ Emission for”the ER calculation instead of the net electricity supplied to the
ice shall be justified and documented in the SSC-CDM-PDD. Where measurements are undertaken, project participants shall document th

sil fuels and biomass used and the efficiency of energy generation as determined ex ante." However, the PP did not provide information o
ernative on why it would not result in over-estimation of emission reductions; only when an alternative is not available, the PP may volun
umber in cases where the post-registration changes are approved prior to the submission of the motioning report for the request for issua
umber in cases where the post-registration changes are approved prior to the submission of the motioning report for the request for issua

and completeness of the monitoring compared with the requirements contained in the registered monitoring plan; (e) the additionality o

odology, the standardized baseline and/or the monitoring plan as per VVS version 09.0 paragraph 400.Issue: The DOE is requested to expl
delayed calibration was conducted.3: As per VVS 3.0 para 373a, DOE shall determine whether a complete set of data for the specified mo
y displaced in the grid and further confirm whether the sales invoice are based only on the one-direction meter. The DOE is requested to c
leakage emissions (fugitive methane emissions from production, transportation, distribution of natural gas) is calculated using the default
mitment by project participants) if needed. This is not in line with EB 106 meeting report para. 26.
ated in plant s laboratory
’ corresponding to the monitoring period and found consistent . Similar
” phrase has been provided for crosschecki
ow the PP can issue the grid company with the sales receipts before the grid connection agreement was signed.
measurement (i.e. measurement result, entity and date etc.) are not provided. Therefore, it is not clear (a) how the statistic values (sample
ts ex post has to be checked with annual data on energy generation, fossil fuels and biomass used and the efficiency of energy generation
evious meter reading and
” 2) the actual monthly electricity import and export shown in the spreadsheet is calculated based on the meter r
tion sheet (4.55 W/m2 and 4.76 W/m2).
am confirmed that Seocheon (II) PV power plant construction was implemented in the monitoring period because of the government s de’

have not been reported in the submitted documents.

r information how it verified the delayed calibration for the period of 01/04/2014 to 03/07/2014.
dance at CMP 16, to process requests for issuance of CER for emission reductions achieved on or after 1 January 2021 (paragraph 8 of the
used to calculate the baseline emissions.
eating water and the monitoring survey asked the amount for heating water, DOE is requested to explain, to which category the amount o
tilized (FVelectricity) and flared (FVRG) however
” the DOE has not provided information on the proposed crosscheck. By doing so, the DOE
ow this approach is conservative.3: Scope: The verification report does not list each parameter required by the monitoring plan and does n
determine that calculations of baseline emissions, project emissions and leakage as appropriate have been carried out in accordance with
ort". However, as the monitoring report and the evidenced from the spreadsheet, the GHG removals are calculated only based on areas pl

gistration date 31/12/2012 (page 2) whereas the project was registered on 25/08/2011.

cuments /29/ /39/ confirm that there is cultivation all over the place including cutting of the natural belts, there was illegality of the trees

3) states that in order

“ to verify the monitored data and determine whether the data applied is acceptable for ER calculation the verificati
3) states that in order
“ to verify the monitored data and determine whether the data applied is acceptable for ER calculation the verificatio
(c) of VVS for PA version 2)The DOE states that the default efficiency value of 90% was used in the calculation as per version 01 of the Too

Eucalyptus tereticornis 13-16 years provides the equation of V=0.017039+0.00003639*DBH²*H-0.00019893*DBH²

“ while
” the monitoring
were the baseline buses, whereas the technology implemented for the trunk buses and supporting routes also includes new NG buses as
bed in the registered monitoring plan. The DOE is requested to clarify "Te" in the equation mentioned in section E.8.1 of verification report
quest for approval of changes in accordance with section VI.B of the project cycle procedure if the actually projected completion date is di
et worksheet_ Biomass_AR
“ Tool14, Version 04.1 ) are
” not traceable. These values are related change in tree biomass per hectare and we

ubsequent was on carried out on 28/07/2011; (5) The seventh calibration was on 15/08/2011, yet the subsequent was on carried out on 2
een correctly applied. (VVS v2, para 246 (d))Issue: The DOE is requested to explain how it has verified the appropriateness of the assumpti

tivity, including the electricity supplied to the grid and the electricity supplied to internal loads, in year y. 3: Scope: The DOE shall assess th

made every minute. (2) The value PE flare calculation in the calculation spreadsheets (e.g. spreadsheet hourly-201801
“ , cells
” AI51 and AI5

e if applicable, and/or the monitoring plan? (VVM v.1.2 para 184 (a) (ii) & EB 52 Annex 60)Issue: a) The DOE is requested to verify the calibr
ent Technonologies 7890 A / VQ-2420 does not cover the whole monitoring period and is valid only between 22/02/2011 - 22/08/2011.5:
MR,import (spreadsheet Emission
“ Reductions column
” H) are not utilized to calculate the EGf1,y as per the approved PDD apportioning p

it was only installed back on 21/05/2014. There is no information on the subsequent calibration either. Furthermore it is not clear if/when

. (VVM v.1.2 para 208 (c) & 221 (h))Issue: The DOE is required to further substantiate how it verified the apportioned value of LFRi,y applie
pts as required by ACM0012 version 3.2 (page 40).
logical tool "Tool
“ to determine the mass flow of a greenhouse gas in a gaseous stream , version
” 3.0, particularly Options A and B applied

2,JMR,import (spreadsheet Emission

“ Reductions column
” H) are not utilized to calculate the EGf2,y as per the PDD apportioning procedu
GWP of CH4 and N2O as per the Standard
“ for application of the global warming potentials to CDM PA and PoA for the second commitme
nformation flow (including data generation, aggregation, recording, calculation and reporting) of the parameters in the monitoring report

period of 21/07/2010 to 31/07/2010 (for number 34) and 24/07/2010 to 31/07/2010 (for number 35). The same case is presented for the
details of all monitoring instruments involved in the monitoring of the project activity. In particular, the monitoring requirements and deta

4 distributions. However, only the 5th sampling survey result are used for emission reduction calculation. The PP/DOE is requested to clar
it has been revised as per VVS version 9 paragraph 406. The submitted certification report is in the wrong form. Please submit the docume

d CDM project activity achieved in each phase under verification). (VVS v2, para 228 (a))Issue: page 7 of the verification report indicates th
ains the calculated results from another software. The hourly raw data (e.g. NCSG, VSG, NAP, etc.) presented in the spreadsheet are not li
conditions as per the registered monitoring plan whereas the parameters VD1,y, VD2,y and VL,y have been measured at standard conditio
r the meter type of some plants remain analogue
“ . The
” similar issues are also found from other MPH projects such as Ahmedabad, Hush
plain this calculation and how it verified it.
has been applied. The DOE shall clarify how it considered this approach to comply with the VVS-PA ver.02 paragraph 369 which requires th

It is not clear how the DOE has checked the compliance to manufacturer s specification
’ for operation of flare, especially the flare tempera
ovided in the monitoring report has been cross-checked with other sources such as plant log books, inventories, purchase records, laborato

onitoring period. The relevant information should be provided. (e) The DOE indicated that the main meter measuring Q_Elecy was recalibr

e manufacture specification verified and confirm that the equipments were calibrated accordingly, as per VVM v.1.2 para 184 (a) (ii).
mporary deviation period as evidenced from ER sheets. However, there is no explanation provided by the DOE. For example: 1 - 7 Decembe

nternal),
” not C9 “ (external).
” Similarly, when calculating the difference for CODoutput, the denominator should be H4 “ (internal),
” not G4
e monitoring period 12: Scope: The verification report does not provide an assessment of the compliance with EB 52 Annex 60 'Guidelines
80 and validation and certification standard (VVS), version 7 paragraph 318 & 319.
res considering technical transmission and distribution losses (i.e. parameter TDL). However, such consideration of parameter TDL is not o
rified that the calibration requirements were met, as per the VVM (version 1.2) para 184.a.(ii), and why the EB52 Annex 60 Guideline was

neously. Please, provide a description of the auxiliary consumption sources for each parameter (house auxiliary consumption, cooling tow

orrect and accurate.Issue: There is an inconsistency in the cross-referencing of the methodology version. The project view page and monit
nformation on how the DOE has verified the compliance of the calibration of gas analyzers with the manufacturer's specifications, particula

weighting feeder scales was conducted based on manufacturer specification. However, it is not clear what the calibration frequency is requ
heet ("CERs 2009 - 2010 - 2011") indicates that emission reductions are being accounted for 11.01.2011, and the close out of the findings d
mine project emissions from flaring gases containing methane" on the monitoring of the parameter "PEflare, y", however the verification r
e been installed and calibrated as per description in section C of the monitoring report.4: Scope: The verification report does not provide a

phs 403 (c) and 409 (j).Issues: In calculating the moisture penalty (ACM0003 ver. 4, step 2) the submitted ER calculation spreadsheet (cells
at SSTG does not equal to SB (steam from the auxiliary boiler) plus SHRSG (steam from the HRSG).

oring report pages 26 and 30). The DOE is requested to report how it verified a higher LFG consumption than the LFG captured. In doing so
ot include a response to the issue. d) The DOE is requested to provide information on how it verified that the EB guidelines (EB 52, Annex

um permissible error of the measuring instruments, as specified by the manufacturers as part of their technical specifications. The DOE is r
rd to the use of one value of C/H ratio in Naphtha throughout the monitoring period, considering that the registered PDD requires the ulti
& EB 52 Annex 60)Issue: For parameter Gross Quantity of electricity generated, the DOE mentions that the maximum correction factor has

oject activity has been in accordance with the registered PDD, in particular: (a) as the verification report page 6 states "During the first ver
t the main equipment at the site consists in two enclosed flares that are operated alternately. (ii) The DOE has verified that the commissio
roach is a temporary deviation or a permanent change to the monitoring plan.
rs and formulas required by the monitoring plan in a transparent and replicable manner.4: Scope: The verification report does not list eac

omass Assessment Report" (Ref /8/ VR page 8), including a validation opinion on how it was deemed appropriate in the context of the pro
onitoring plan? (VVM v.1.2 para 184 (a) (ii) & EB 52 Annex 60) Issue: The DOE has not provided in the verification report an assessment of t
11 serial number 0019658, validity Nov 2014 PA 24 serial number 75145682, validity Oct 2014
nsidered the initial calibration is valid upto one year after installation of the meters considering that 1) the monitoring plan states that "A
ng Report (page 18) and Verification Report (page 13). Also, the DOE referred to version 7 of the tool (see page 4 of Verification Report), w

ed temperature is 1370.2: Paragraph 309(b) of VVS-PA: The DOE is requested to explain how it validated the changes to the project design
ation and certification report does not state that the monitoring has been carried out in accordance with registered or the revised monito

nformation on when the delayed calibration of the meters (HPU04204 & HPU04205) was conducted including the outcome of the delayed

ission reduction spreadsheet shows that only monthly NCV of natural gas is provided and the values are constant along the time. The DOE

Devgarh) Private Limited is responsible for the preparation of the GHG emissions data and the reported GHG emissions reductions on the
e the calculations of, the following: (a) Baseline GHG emissions or baseline net GHG removals; (b) Project GHG emissions or actual net GHG
h 265.3: The spreadsheet (NASPP_ARACM0003v1.xls) is divided into 6 sheets: 1) stands, lists 143 stands ids as per 8 stratums. For each sta
and/or determine that calculations of baseline emissions, project emissions and leakage as appropriate have been carried out in accordan
of 106,283 tCO2 is higher than the estimate of 95,539 tCO2.4: Scope: The verification and certification report does not provide informatio
net electricity supplied to the grid by the project activity in sheet Net“Generation Crosscheck which
” is lower.
articipants shall document the measurement results and the calculated average values of the emission factor or net calorific value for the

did not provide information on annual energy balance and the DOE did not provide verification opinion on this requirement; and 2) The D
ot available, the PP may voluntarily opt for zero emission reductions during the concerned period of deviation. (2) Correctly applying the co
eport for the request for issuance and the DOE states that the changes in the monitoring plan on the number of meters that was installed
eport for the request for issuance and the DOE states that the changes in the monitoring plan on the number of meters that was installed

ng plan; (e) the additionality of the project activity; and (f) the scale of the project activity.Issue: It is observed that the the design capacity

The DOE is requested to explain how it verified the following delays in calibration: (a) for parameter YPJ. The DOE confirmed that maximu
et of data for the specified monitoring period is available.In CL3 of the VR, the PP clarified that the total quantity of Diesel Consumed in th
ter. The DOE is requested to clarify whether the installation of one direction meter is in line with the local regulation.4: Scope: The monito
s calculated using the default emission factor (EFi, upstream, CH4) value provided in the applied methodology. However, it is observed tha
been provided for crosschecking the parameter NCV“ . However,
” the reference of the“other accredited laboratory and” the results of the
w the statistic values (sample size, standard error and precision etc.) are derived; and (b) how the distribution of the sample measuremen
fficiency of energy generation as determined ex ante. The PP/DOE are requested to include this information in the Monitoring and Verifica
alculated based on the meter readings at the substation and "% allocated Serum . ”
cause of the government s decision
’ under the Demanded-supply
“ program of electricity. of Ministry
” of Trade, Industry and Energy of Rep
uary 2021 (paragraph 8 of the EB 108th meeting report). The DOE is required to raise a forward action request (FAR) in its verification repo
which category the amount of fire wood for heating water in the baseline was included.2: Scope: The verification and certification report
osscheck. By doing so, the DOE is also requested to explain: 1. several values of FVdigester,y, monitored at the biogas delivery piping syste
he monitoring plan and does not provide an statement on how the DOE verified the information flow (from data generation, aggregation,
carried out in accordance with the formulae and methods described in the monitoring plan and the applied methodology document. (VVS
culated only based on areas planted/strata 2008 and 2012. The DOE is requested to provide further information on how it verified the imp

ere was illegality of the trees as small logs were being cut and loaded on the vehicles, and some patrol man have supported the illegal cutti

or ER calculation the verification team therefore checked ALL the original monitoring data of ALL 79 households obtained for the paramet
or ER calculation the verification team therefore checked ALL the original monitoring data of ALL 79 households obtained for the paramete
n as per version 01 of the Tool‘ to determine project emissions from flaring gases containing methane . The’ DOE is required to provide fur

3*DBH² while” the monitoring report (p 31) refers to the different equation. The DOE shall provide further information on 1) how it has va
lso includes new NG buses as described in page 4 of monitoring report (paragraph 377 (c) of VVS for PA (version 01.0)).4: The DOE is reque
tion E.8.1 of verification report (i.e. "EGPJ, y = EGExport,y EGImport,y
– TE")
– as this "Te" is not mentioned in the PDD or the monitoring p
rojected completion date is different than in the PDD.
e biomass per hectare and were used for determining the uncertainty factor (27.43%).4: Scope: The verification report does not provide a

quent was on carried out on 28/09/2011; (6) The eighth calibration was on 28/09/2011, yet the subsequent was on carried out on 30/10/
propriateness of the assumptions, in line with the VVS version 03.0 paragraph 245 (d), considering the methodology the applied methodo

Scope: The DOE shall assess the data and calculations of GHG emission reductions achieved by/resulting from the project activity by the ap

rly-201801 , cells
” AI51 and AI52) is not traceable to demonstrate (a) how the MR page 28 formula (8) is applied and (b) whether the MR p

s requested to verify the calibration dates of all the equipments used to monitor parameters such as quantity of alternative fuel (AF) and f
22/02/2011 - 22/08/2011.5: Scope: The verification report does not provide an assessment of the compliance with EB 52 Annex 60 'Guide
approved PDD apportioning procedure. The same issues above are also found for the calculation of the values of EGf2,y and EGf3,y.

hermore it is not clear if/when the equipment with SN SN-2 was installed. - For Thermal couple 2 in 1# flare (middle), Thermal couple 1 in

portioned value of LFRi,y applied in the 2nd year in line with applied methodology as index 'y' in the applied methodology refers to counte
ularly Options A and B applied by the project activity, the volumetric flow of landfill gas shall be monitored in operation conditions. 3) Meth

he PDD apportioning procedure. The same issues above are also found for the calculation of the values of EGf3,y.
PoA for the second commitment period of the Kyoto protocol Version
” 1.0 (EB 69 Annex 3).
eters in the monitoring report. Information is requested as per VVM version 01.2 paragraph 206.

same case is presented for the meter number 24, in which a correction was applied for August 2010, with a validity of the calibration until
nitoring requirements and details of the electricity meters installed in the 35 kV transmission line of Heiyupao II project. 4: Scope: The verifi

e PP/DOE is requested to clarify how the lamp failure rate (LFR) are determined as per the AMS.II.J version 7.3: The DOE shall determine w
rm. Please submit the documents in the correct form (CDM-VCR-FORM).4.Scope: The cross-referencing and versioning within and betwee

verification report indicates that the total installed capacity is 1,000 kW*3. This is inconsistent with the post registration change (PRC-3110
d in the spreadsheet are not linked with the result (e.g. "BL_Import_Access" page and "PC_Import_Access" page in spreadsheet "Deepak_
measured at standard conditions and still applying the conversion factor (i.e. 0.9908).4: Scope: The verification report does not state how t
cts such as Ahmedabad, Hushay and others. Please address all issues entirely. b. For MHP project Oveer Arkari, there is a lack of informatio
aragraph 369 which requires that the maximum permissible error is applied if the results of the delayed calibration do not show any errors

e, especially the flare temperature. As per flare manufacturer s specifications

’ mentioned in Annex 5 of registered PDD, the combustion te
ies, purchase records, laboratory analyses. (VVM v.1.2 para 208 (a) and (b))Issue: the Verification Report does not contain information on

easuring Q_Elecy was recalibrated by comparing the periodical reading with another certified meter providing details of such meter calibr

VM v.1.2 para 184 (a) (ii).

E. For example: 1 - 7 December 2013; 1 - 8 December 2015.

uld be H4 “ (internal),
” not G4 “ (external).
”
h EB 52 Annex 60 'Guidelines for assessing compliance with the calibration frequency requirements' for the calibration delay. (VVM v.1.2
tion of parameter TDL is not observed in the PDD version 3.3. The DOE shall provide information on how it has verified the correctness of
EB52 Annex 60 Guideline was not applied. 4) The monitoring plan in the registered PDD (page 13) states that 3 meters will be used to mon

ary consumption, cooling tower auxiliary consumption and boiler house auxiliary consumption, etc) and the monitoring arrangement for t

e project view page and monitoring report refer to methodology AMS-I.D. version 18 whereas the verification and certification report refer
turer's specifications, particularly regarding the weekly on-site test.

e calibration frequency is required in the specification and whether the calibration frequency implemented during the monitoring period (
the close out of the findings does not provide further explanations.
, y", however the verification report does not explain how the necessary parameters used to calculate "PEflare, y" were monitored (this is
tion report does not provide an assessment on whether the calibration of measuring equipments was conducted at a frequency specified

calculation spreadsheet (cells R93 and R94) has considered the amount of fuel oil, rice husk and Tank bottom Oil (FBT) in calculating the p
the LFG captured. In doing so, a diagram of the monitoring system shall also be provided in which the locations of the flow meters (FT-01,
e EB guidelines (EB 52, Annex 60) regarding the calibration delay of 15 days for the weighbridge, i.e. between 15/10/2007 - 30/10/2007 ha

cal specifications. The DOE is requested to clarify how it has determined that the application of the error factor is conservative in line with
egistered PDD requires the ultimate analysis to be recorded weekly.4: Scope: The verification report does not provide an assessment on w
maximum correction factor has been applied in line with EB52 Annex 60. However, it is not clear how this has complied with the EB52 Anne

e 6 states "During the first verification (1 January 2006 to 31 December 2006) /19/, project developer had clarified that the following com
as verified that the commissioning date for both flares is 13/11/2008 (VR pg A-4 and A-5). (iii) The DOE has stated that the calibration of th
cation report does not list each parameter required by the monitoring plan (VVM v.1.2 para 206)Issue: The verification report does not sta

riate in the context of the proposed project activity and in line with the VVM requirements.3: Scope: The verification report does not dete
tion report an assessment of the calibration of steam flow meters.
monitoring plan states that "A test and calibration of the meters will be carried out after each deviation of more than +- 0.5% but at least o
age 4 of Verification Report), while version 4 was used. These should be corrected.

changes to the project design, in particular: (a) There is no opinion on assessment on the reasons for the expansion of landfill area; (b) Th
gistered or the revised monitoring plan as per VVS version 09.0 paragraph 392.Issue: The determination approach of biomass quantity is n

ng the outcome of the delayed calibration. Further, there are inconsistencies regarding the 2nd calibration date for 09539957 (Main Mete

nstant along the time. The DOE is request to clarify how it has verified the NCV from the fuel supplier as per the monitoring plan and applie

G emissions reductions on the basis set out within the project s Monitoring
’ Plan in the registered PDD version 03 dated 16/02/2015" in the
G emissions or actual net GHG removals; (c) Leakage GHG emissions; (d) GHG emission reductions or net anthropogenic GHG removals (pa
as per 8 stratums. For each stand a total area was input. 2) tress data, lists plots ids as per stratum. For each plot circumspherence was in
ve been carried out in accordance with the formulae and methods described in the monitoring plan and the applied methodology docume
rt does not provide information on data and variables that are different from the registered PDD or any approved revised PDD, and has ca
or or net calorific value for the ex post determination of the baseline and project emissions.").

this requirement; and 2) The DOE (p 16) states that " Leakages emissions (LEy) as per the methodology are to be considered if the energy g
n. (2) Correctly applying the concept of cap based on Pproduct,
“ max by ”following the methodology equation correctly: BEy = sum [FTI,i *
er of meters that was installed, calibration frequency of power meters were mentioned in the PDD version 06 dated 12/03/2015 submitte
er of meters that was installed, calibration frequency of power meters were mentioned in the PDD version 06 dated 12/03/2015 submitte

ed that the the design capacity of each turbo generators has been revised to 74.924 MWh as compared to 70MW in the original PDD, and

he DOE confirmed that maximum error has been applied in conservative manner. However it is not evident in the spreadsheet how this ha
ntity of Diesel Consumed in the month of Dec 2019 has been accounted in the previous monitoring period, hence the diesel consumed for
egulation.4: Scope: The monitoring report does not contain calculations of baseline emissions, project emissions, leakage (if any), and emis
gy. However, it is observed that there is a mismatch between the value used in the ER excel sheet submitted along with the issuance requ
oratory and
” the results of the crosschecking have not been reported.
on of the sample measurements within each year is representative of the year-average COD values.
in the Monitoring and Verification Reports.6: The DOE is requested to include the information related to the stakeholder consultation con
de, Industry and Energy of Republic of Korea." Please rectify this inconsistency in the project implmentation.4: Scope: The verification and
st (FAR) in its verification report that requires the PP to update their monitoring reports: (i) To apply any global warming potential values t
cation and certification report does not provide a conclusion on the verified amount of emission reductions achieved nor/or confirm that a
methodology document. (VVS v2, para 246 (c), 284 (i))Issue: the Verification Report does not contain information on how the DOE verified
tion on how it verified the implementation of the project activity as per the paragraphs 354 and 356(a) of VVS-PA.

have supported the illegal cutting of the trees. Therefore it is demonstrated that the project area is routinely assessed as ”per p.41 of VR.

olds obtained for the parameter B as collected from the RES . However,
” no information has been provided on how the DOE crosschecked
olds obtained for the parameter B as collected from the RES . However,
” no information has been provided on how the DOE crosschecked
DOE is required to provide further information on how it verified the application of the 90% default value in conjunction with the complia

nformation on 1) how it has validated the consistency and correctness of each formulas in determining the stem volume of each type of tr
sion 01.0)).4: The DOE is requested to explain how the ex-ante parameter RSy (Total road space available in year y) is applicable for the pr
n the PDD or the monitoring plan
tion report does not provide a description of the actual operation of the project activity (VVS v7, para 273 (b))Issue: The DOE (PRC assessm

was on carried out on 30/10/2011. 3: Scope: The verification report does not provide a conclusion on the verified amount of emission red
hodology the applied methodology paragraph 19 requires the SFC of fossil fuel to be determined ex-ante, whereas the PDD does not conta

m the project activity by the application of the selected methodology and, where applicable, the selected standardized baseline (VVS. Ver.

lied and (b) whether the MR page 27 the actual flare efficiency value 80% is applied. (3) The inconsistence of unit applied is found. The spr

y of alternative fuel (AF) and fossil fuel (FF), NCV of AF and FF, electricity consumption, clinker produciton as mentioned in the MR in line
nce with EB 52 Annex 60 'Guidelines for assessing compliance with the calibration frequency requirements' for the calibration delay. (VVM
es of EGf2,y and EGf3,y.

(middle), Thermal couple 1 in 2# flare (top) and Thermal couple 2 in 2# flare (middle), the equipment was removed for calibration on 19/0

methodology refers to counter for year.

n operation conditions. 3) Methane density (DCH4), page 13 of the MR by–scanning through ACM0001 Version 18, we view that the way
validity of the calibration until 27/08/2010 and the delayed calibration on 22/09/2010 and a correction was not applied for the period of 2
o II project. 4: Scope: The verification report does not list each parameter required by the monitoring plan (VVM v.1.2 para 206)Issue: In p

7.3: The DOE shall determine whether: (d) Monitoring results are consistently recorded as per the approved frequency. Please refer to VV
versioning within and between the document are not correct and accurate.Issue: The verification/certification report refers on page 1 to t

registration change (PRC-3110-001).

page in spreadsheet "Deepak_WNA1_PC_Calc") by appropriate formulae. 3: Scope: The verification report does not provide an assessmen
on report does not state how the DOE verified the information flow for the listed parameters. (VVM v.1.2 para 206)Issue: 1. The DOE is req
ari, there is a lack of information reported in the spreadsheet Summary of CERs about the type of meter installed. The monitoring report p
bration do not show any errors in the measuring equipment, or if the error is smaller than the maximum permissible error.

tered PDD, the combustion temperature at flare should be between 1,000 1,200
– 0C. It is not evident from either monitoring report or ve
es not contain information on how the DOE has verified that the waste delivered to the project site is only organic waste and does not con

ing details of such meter calibration (page 32 of Verification Report). However, the DOE has not provided information to confirm that this
calibration delay. (VVM v.1.2 para 184 (a) (ii) & EB 52 Annex 60)Issue: The verification report does not indicate how DOE verified the calib
has verified the correctness of emission reduction calculation.
 3 meters will be used to monitor the electricity supplied to the mine, however, the monitoring report (page 5) also includes another mete

monitoring arrangement for those sources. Issue (b): The DOE states that the solid flow meters for Annual energy (fuel) and Annual produ

n and certification report refer to AMS-I.D. version 12.

during the monitoring period (monthly as stated in the verification report) has been in line with the specification. In doing so, the DOE sha
are, y" were monitored (this is also missing in the monitoring plan).5: Scope: The verification report does not provide an assessment on wh
ucted at a frequency specified in applied monitoring methodology or EB guidance if applicable, and/or the monitoring plan? (VVM v.1.2 pa

m Oil (FBT) in calculating the parameter specific

“ fuel consumption in the baseline when only fossil fuel is used (HCFF) for”the baseline ye
ons of the flow meters (FT-01, FT-02, FT-04 to FT-09 and FT-10) are illustrated.
n 15/10/2007 - 30/10/2007 had been followed. In the resubmission, the DOE has stated in the verification report (pg 11) that the quantity

ctor is conservative in line with the CDM VVS for Project Activities, version 3.0, para 366(a).
t provide an assessment on whether the calibration of measuring equipments was conducted at a frequency specified in applied monitori
s complied with the EB52 Annex 60 paragraph 4 as the result of the delayed calibrations are not presented. Furthermore, the delayed peri

arified that the following components will not be installed during the entire crediting period. The non-implementation of these componen
tated that the calibration of the gas analyzer is covered by valid calibrated certificates for the whole 1st MP and provides the calibration d
verification report does not state an opinion of the validity of the actual values for the parameters monitored for the monitoring period as

rification report does not determine if the assumptions used in emission calculations have been justified and/or emission factors, default
ore than +- 0.5% but at least on a yearly basis, following manufacturer s recommendations"
’ and 2) the monitoring period is 20 Nov 17 - 30
roach of biomass quantity is not described consistently within the submitted documents, e.g. page 11 of the monitoring report states that

date for 09539957 (Main Meter) and 10058641 (Check Meter) since the page 17 of the verification report and the monitoring report state

the monitoring plan and applied methodology which requires the monitoring frequency of Monitored
“ and recorded fortnightly . ”

n 03 dated 16/02/2015" in the verification opinion of the verification report. However, the DOE also submitted the post-registration which
thropogenic GHG removals (paragraph 264 of PS for PA).The submitted spreadsheet shows that the period of emission reduction claimed
plot circumspherence was input. Total tree biomass, tree CO2, and CO2/ha have been calculated. Equations are not shown and units are
applied methodology document. (VVS v7, para 291 (c), 330 (i))Issue: With regard to the calculation of energy content in WHRB steam and
oved revised PDD, and has caused an increase in estimates of the emission reductions in the current monitoring period or is highly likely t
o be considered if the energy generating equipment is transferred from another activity or if the existing equipment is transferred to anot
on correctly: BEy = sum [FTI,i * CIN2O,i * Mi] / Pproduct,y * GWPN2O * Minimum(Pproduct,max ,Pproduct,y), after the first step (1). It has
6 dated 12/03/2015 submitted to EB. However, the section B of the monitoring report does not include any approve PRC approved prior t
6 dated 12/03/2015 submitted to EB. However, the section B of the monitoring report does not include any approve PRC approved prior t

0MW in the original PDD, and the overall capacity of project has been revised to 149.848 MW as compared to 140 MW in the original PDD

n the spreadsheet how this has been applied; (b) for parameters PPJ,y and FPJ,charcoal which calibration as per the monitoring plan are do
hence the diesel consumed for 4 days of Dec 2019 in the current monitoring period is considered as zero. The DOE is requested to clarify w
ons, leakage (if any), and emission reductions, including reference to formulae and methods used (PS v1, 194 (a)(b)(c)(d))Issue: The DOE/P
along with the issuance request (0.296 tCO2/GJ) versus the one indicated in the methodology (296 tCH4/PJ or 0.000296 tCH4/GJ ( “Data P
e stakeholder consultation conducted after the publication of the first monitoring report, as per para. 391 of the VVS, v.03.0.
4: Scope: The verification and certification report does not provide a conclusion on the verified amount of emission reductions achieved n
bal warming potential values that may be adopted by the CMP; and (ii) In accordance with any requirements of the CMP guidance. (i) appl
achieved nor/or confirm that appropriate methods and formulae for calculating baseline emissions, project emissions and leakage have be
ation on how the DOE verified the correct application of para 4(a) of Appendix 1 to the Project Standard to the calculation of baseline emi
y assessed as ”per p.41 of VR. However, it is not clear how and why is illegal cultivation, illegal cutting of trees and the patrol personnel su

on how the DOE crosschecked the data reported by the RES.

n how the DOE crosschecked the data reported by the RES.
conjunction with the compliance with manufacturer's specification of flare (temperature, flow rate of residual gas at the inlet of the flare

tem volume of each type of tree and 2) why it did not request the post registration changes which do not require prior approval by the Bo
year y) is applicable for the project activity as the project activity has implemented more trunk lines (paragraph 377 (d) of VVS for PA (vers
))Issue: The DOE (PRC assessment opinion pg. 11) has verified a change in species composition as part of the submitted PRC. However, the

erified amount of emission reductions achieved and/or determine that calculations of baseline emissions, project emissions and leakage a
ereas the PDD does not contain any SFC of coal, which was also used in during this monitoring period

andardized baseline (VVS. Ver. 7 para 289. In particular, the DOE shall further clarify:Issues: i) How the discount factor due to the delayed c

f unit applied is found. The spreadsheet 20180121

“ - 20181031 cells
” G53 -G55 demonstrate the value PEflare,y project emission from flar

s mentioned in the MR in line with the calibration requirements of the registered PDD. In doing so, please clarify any gap in the calibration
or the calibration delay. (VVM v.1.2 para 184 (a) (ii) & EB 52 Annex 60)Issue:the PP/DOE has not provided results of the delayed calibration
ion 18, we view that the way DCH4 is determined is not in accordance with ACM0001 Version 18. On further looking we observed that the
not applied for the period of 28/08/2010 to 21/09/2010.
VVM v.1.2 para 206)Issue: In particular, the DOE is requested to indicate how the parameter EG export,ii,y was verified. In doing this, the D

frequency. Please refer to VVS PA v1.0 paragraph 364.The DOE confirms that the CFL distribution for phase 4 lasted from Jan 2010 to Dec
on report refers on page 1 to the monitoring report version 1 dated 4.12.2014 whereas the submitted monitoring report is version 2 dated
oes not provide an assessment on whether the calibration of measuring equipments was conducted at a frequency specified in applied m
ra 206)Issue: 1. The DOE is requested to further clarify how it has verified the reset of the readings of the flow meters (totalizers) that hav
alled. The monitoring report page 12 reports the type of meter is digital, whereas the spreadsheet Calibration mentions analogue. c. Both
missible error.

either monitoring report or verification report if the combustion temperature at flare is measured.
rganic waste and does not contain inert glass, plastic, metal, and other inert waste.

ormation to confirm that this is an acceptable practice considering national calibration standards. Furthermore, recalibration dates were r
ate how DOE verified the calibration delay (reported as January 2010 hence not covering the monitoring period) for both electricity meter
 5) also includes another meter called M0, located at Huachaper substation. According to the VVM (ver 1.2) paragraph 204, the DOE is req

energy (fuel) and Annual production of clinker have been calibrated as per the KCP s quality
’ management system procedure. The DOE has
ation. In doing so, the DOE shall refer to EB 52 Annex 60.
provide an assessment on whether the calibration of measuring equipments was conducted at a frequency specified in applied monitorin
monitoring plan? (VVM v.1.2 para 184 (a) (ii) & EB 52 Annex 60)Issue: As specified in the monitoring plan, calibrations of energy meter is to

ed (HCFF) for”the baseline years 1998/1999. However, it is noted that rice husk is not a fossil fuel and FBT was not identified as a baseline
y specified in applied monitoring methodology or EB guidance if applicable, and/or the monitoring plan (VVS v2, para 243)Issue: (a) Section
Furthermore, the delayed period has also not been presented.

mentation of these components was verified and confirmed during the current site visit". Furthermore, why post registration changes wer
and provides the calibration dates as follows: BM11071: 28/06/2008, 17/12/2008, 10/12/2009, 10/12/2010 BM11259: 14/01/2009, 18/01
d for the monitoring period as these are not presented. In addition, the verification report does not list nor assess the calculated paramete

d/or emission factors, default values and other reference values have been correctly applied. (VVM v.1.2 para 208 (d) & (e))Issue:The emis
toring period is 20 Nov 17 - 30 Jun 18 and the calibration was done on 27 March 2017.
 monitoring report states that the quantity of biomass is calculated from the measured monthly NCV values, whereas page 10 of the verifi

d the monitoring report state the calibration date as "05-12-2017" and p 27 of the report states "04/12/2017".2: For the stakeholder consu

ecorded fortnightly . ”

ed the post-registration which includes the revised PDD version 04 dated 05/09/2022. The DOE is required to substantiate how it verified t
f emission reduction claimed for this monitoring period does not correspond to the monitoring period of this request for issuance (08 Nov
are not shown and units are not clearly stated. Tree biomass equation is not shown. 3) calc, calculation of CO2/ha as per each plot is show
content in WHRB steam and FBC steam (i.e. table "Emission Reduction calculations" in the ER spreadsheet), it is not clear how those value
ring period or is highly likely to increase the estimates of emission reductions in the future monitoring periods as per VVS version 09.0 par
ipment is transferred to another activity. The project activity since involves setting up of a new WTGs, no leakages due to transfer of any e
), after the first step (1). It has been observed that the methodological equation requires the application of the lower value between Ppro
approve PRC approved prior to the request for issuance as per the instruction of the template.
approve PRC approved prior to the request for issuance as per the instruction of the template.

o 140 MW in the original PDD. In addition, the number of production wells have changed from 33 to 21. The DOE should provide informati

per the monitoring plan are done quarterly. For PPJ,y, the calibration was due on 10/04/2015 and 11/10/2015, but it was only calibrated o
e DOE is requested to clarify whether there was any diesel consumption in the 4 days of Dec 2019 in the current monitoring period. If there
4 (a)(b)(c)(d))Issue: The DOE/PP is requested to clarify why the project emission occurred due to the diesel generator can be neglected as p
or 0.000296 tCH4/GJ ( “Data Parameter EFi, upstream, CH4, Page 19, ACM007, Version 06.1.0). In addition, for LEy calculation in the ER ex
the VVS, v.03.0.
mission reductions achieved nor/or confirm that appropriate methods and formulae for calculating baseline emissions, project emissions a
s of the CMP guidance. (i) apply any GWP values that may be adopted by the CMP for the period from 1 January 2021 in its monitoring rep
emissions and leakage have been followed as per VVS version 09.0 paragraphs 403 (c) and 409 (j).Issue: As described in the PDD, the projec
he calculation of baseline emisison.
s and the patrol personnel supporting the illegal cutting can be taken as evidence that "the project area is routinely assessed." (VVS for PA
ual gas at the inlet of the flare) required by the applied tool.

quire prior approval by the Board if these changes in the equations are as per the paragraph 4(p) of Annex 24 of EB 66.
aph 377 (d) of VVS for PA (version 01.0)).
 submitted PRC. However, the VR (pgs. 48 and 52) indicates that the species planted are observed to be consistent with the registered PDD

oject emissions and leakage as appropriate have been carried out in accordance with the formulae and methods described in the monitori
nt factor due to the delayed calibration was conservatively applied in the in the values of the imported electricity of each hydropower pla

e,y project emission from flare number 2 is 0.23 tCO2e, which is resulting from the raw data in the spreadsheet hourly-201801
“ cells” AI1

rify any gap in the calibration in accordance with EB 52 Annex 60. b) The DOE is requested to verify the NCV of alternative or less carbon in
ults of the delayed calibration.
looking we observed that the applied approach is defined until ACM0001 Version 11 and after that subsequent version of meth has differ
as verified. In doing this, the DOE shall also provide details on how it verified that the monitoring equipment used for this parameter is in c

4 lasted from Jan 2010 to Dec 2014. However, only one average lamp failure rate (LFR) determined based on all these distributed lamps re
oring report is version 2 dated 19.1.2015.
quency specified in applied monitoring methodology or EB guidance if applicable, and/or the monitoring plan? (VVM v.1.2 para 184 (a) (ii)
w meters (totalizers) that have an overflow. In doing so, the DOE should verify the initial reference value of the totalizer used within the m
n mentions analogue. c. Both PDD and monitoring report have the provision that the deduction in kWh with 2% for analogue meters will b
ore, recalibration dates were reported as 29 January, 28 February, 31 March 2011 (page 32 of Verification Report). No information is provid
od) for both electricity meters as per EB 52 Annex 60. Additionally, the verification report states that In cases
“ where the calibration frequ
paragraph 204, the DOE is requested to verify that the monitoring of emission reductions shall be implemented in accordance with the m

tem procedure. The DOE has provided a verification of the last calibration (16 March 2010). Since the calibration frequency of solid flow m
specified in applied monitoring methodology or EB guidance if applicable, and/or the monitoring plan? (VVM v.1.2 para 184 (a) (ii) & EB 52
brations of energy meter is to be conducted as per the industrial standards and procedures of India; however, the verification report does

as not identified as a baseline fossil fuel (please refer to the registered PDD pg. 18). The DOE is requested to provide information on how i
v2, para 243)Issue: (a) Section 3.6 of the Verification Report states that the meters for the following parameters are calibrated by master
BM11259: 14/01/2009, 18/01/2010. However, it is not clear how the DOE has verified that the calibration of each gas analyzer was valid d
ssess the calculated parameters H1, H2 and H3. The PP/DOE shall revise the verification report to contain the acutal monitoring values for

a 208 (d) & (e))Issue:The emission factor for fossil fuel stated in the monitoring report on page 6 is 94.2 tCO2/t, whereas the emission redu
 whereas page 10 of the verification report states that the quantity of biomass is monitored with the help of weigh bridge. The PP is reque

7".2: For the stakeholder consultation conducted after the publication of the first monitoring report in accordance with the CDM“project c

o substantiate how it verified the implementation and the monitoring of project activity as per the revised PDD.
s request for issuance (08 Nov 19 - 31 Dec 20). For example, Code "NA-J.6.RR.4423.1" considers the emission reduction from 14 May 2017
O2/ha as per each plot is shown. Formula is not presented. It is not clear why this value is not the same as the one calculated in trees data
it is not clear how those values are calculated from the hourly-recorded steam/water temperature, steam pressure and quantity. In doing
ds as per VVS version 09.0 paragraph 385 (c).Issue: The DOE (p 12) states that "Difference in the estimated values in registered PDD as com
akages due to transfer of any equipment has been considered." However, the project activity does not involve in implementing WTG.3: Th
he lower value between Pproduct,
“ max and” Pproduct,y
“ whereas
” the PP has applied the higher value Pproduct in the daily calculations
DOE should provide information regarding how it has assessed the impact on additionality of the project activity due to any potential diffe

5, but it was only calibrated on 18/04/2015 and 17/10/2015. For parameter FPJ,charcoal, the calibration was due on 11/10/2015, but it w
ent monitoring period. If there was, the DOE shall explain how it concluded that a complete set of data for the monitoring period is availab
enerator can be neglected as per the requirement of ACM00012 version 13, considering that the proposed project is not a solar or geothe
or LEy calculation in the ER excel sheet, it is not clear why the parts of the equations are divided by 10^6, for example, the equation in cel
emissions, project emissions and leakage have been followed as per VVS version 09.0 paragraphs 403 (c) and 409 (j).Issue: The monitoring
ary 2021 in its monitoring reports for any emission reductions achieved by the project activity in that period.
escribed in the PDD, the project will reduce the amount of fuel wood and kerosene used for cooking and heating water and will replace ine
outinely assessed." (VVS for PA (v2) paragraph 373)5: Description about verification of location of sample plots is not consistent. The plot ID
4 of EB 66.
sistent with the registered PDD. The DOE is requested to address this inconsistency between the PRC assessment opinion and the verificati

hods described in the monitoring plan and the applied methodology document. (VVS v2, para 246 (c), 284 (i))Issue: The DOE is requested to
tricity of each hydropower plant?. (ER spreadsheet, in particular CER sheet). ii) The inconsistencies in the values presented in the ER spread

eet hourly-201801
“ cells” AI11 to AI274. However, the unit applied for the spreadsheet hourly-201801
“ column
” for PE flare_2 is tCH4/ho

of alternative or less carbon intensive fuel types k (NCVk,y) which was measured by an external laboratory before 21.03.2011 as mentione
ent version of meth has different provision. So, parameter DCH4 is not in accordance with applied methodology.
used for this parameter is in compliance with the calibration and accuracy requirements in the monitoring plan in the PDD.5: Scope: The v

all these distributed lamps regardless the year of distribution are used for ER calculation. The DOE is requested to further substantiate ho
n? (VVM v.1.2 para 184 (a) (ii) & EB 52 Annex 60)Issue: The Verification Report (on page 16 and 17) states that the latest AST was performe
he totalizer used within the monitoring period. 2. The DOE is requested to clarify how it has cross checked the uncertainty assessment for
2% for analogue meters will be applied in case of the delay of calibration every two years; however, it is found that the factor 1% deducti
port). No information is provided related to the period before January 29th. In addition, information should be provided on recalibration d
es where the calibration frequency is not according to registered PDD calibrations afterward have been performed however
” does not ind
nted in accordance with the monitoring plan contained in the registered PDD or the accepted revised monitoring plan. Further clarificatio

ation frequency of solid flow meters is once in 3 months accordingly with KCP s quality
’ management system procedure, please provide det
M v.1.2 para 184 (a) (ii) & EB 52 Annex 60)Issue: The verification report does not contain an assessment on whether the instrument used to
r, the verification report does not provide an assessment on whether the calibration of energy meters is conducted in line with industrial s

provide information on how it verified the correctness and conservativeness of the approach applied in calculating moisture penalties. 4:
ters are calibrated by master calibrators that are calibrated annually: Quantity of fuel consumed in primary reformer (Furnace) NG,–Surp
f each gas analyzer was valid during the period of time each flare was in operation. In particular, please clarify how verified that the calibra
e acutal monitoring values for the parameters of the monitoring plan as well as the missing calculated parameters.

2/t, whereas the emission reduction calculation spreadsheet uses a value of 94.5 tCO2/TJ for Kanthan plant and of 94.3 tCO2/TJ for Rawan
 weigh bridge. The PP is requested to clarify on how biomass quantity is measured and the DOE is requested to provide information on ho

dance with the CDM“project cycle procedure for project activities , the ”requirements for and means of validation in paragraphs 254−260 a
n reduction from 14 May 2017 to 29 December 2020 while the monitoring period is 08 Nov 19 - 31 Dec 20. The PP/DOE requires to provide
ressure and quantity. In doing so, please also: (a) explain how the enthalpy of the steam/water is calculated based on those hourly-record
alues in registered PDD as compared to the CERs under the current monitoring period is 11.25%. The actual value is less than the estimate
e in implementing WTG.3: The DOE shall take due account of all authentic and relevant comments in the verification for the first request f
oduct in the daily calculations, as demonstrated in the example highlighted on page 33 of 37 of the revised Monitoring Report.
tivity due to any potential difference in capital expenses caused by the change, if any, and potential change to the O&M costs because of s

s due on 11/10/2015, but it was only calibrated on 17/10/2015.4: Scope: The verification and certification report does not provide a concl
he monitoring period is available and that the calculation of project emissions has been carried out in accordance with the formulae and m
roject is not a solar or geothermal project.
r example, the equation in cell [cell row D36: R36 of the ER Calculation Tab Sheet] since the units used for fuel consumed by the project is
d 409 (j).Issue: The monitoring period of the request for issuance is 01 Oct 12 - 30 Sep 14. However, while the DOE verifying the net electri
ting water and will replace inefficient traditional cooking stoves with cleaner biogas stoves. It is observed that from the monitoring survey
ts is not consistent. The plot IDs mentioned On p.15 and p.42 are different from the plot IDs mentioned on p.7. (VVS for PA (v2) paragraph
ment opinion and the verification report.

Issue: The DOE is requested to further verify if the actual emission reductions are only due to the project activity, in particular in light of th
ues presented in the ER spreadsheet, in particular CER sheet cells: D15 and D55, D35 and D73, J15 and J55, J16 and J56, P15 and P55, V15

umn
” for PE flare_2 is tCH4/hourly. (4) It is not clear how the temperature values measured by three thermocouples installed at each flare

before 21.03.2011 as mentioned in the MR. Furthermore, please clarify whether NCV is obtained for each fuel delivery as required by ACM
plan in the PDD.5: Scope: The verification report does not state how the DOE verified the information flow for the listed parameters. (VVM

ted to further substantiate how it has validated the 5th sampling survey for phase 4 distributions as per AMS.II.J v7 paragraph 29(c), wher
at the latest AST was performed on 11 March 2010 whereas the same report refers to 2 March 2010 on page 26. Please rectify the inconsi
he uncertainty assessment for variables as required by the registered monitoring plan and the applied methodology AM 0009 version 03.3
nd that the factor 1% deduction are applied for the delay calibration of analogue meters such as the spreadsheet Summary of CERs cells K
be provided on recalibration dates of other 2 meters (SN 211-784809 and SN 203-145608) which as per the Monitoring Report ( page 18)
ormed however
” does not indicate for which meter and which specific period the DOE confirmed that the calibration has been delayed an
oring plan. Further clarification is requested regarding how the DOE verified that the actual monitoring was in accordance with the monito

procedure, please provide details about the verification of the solid flow meters calibration dates for the whole monitoring period.3: Scop
hether the instrument used to monitor the temperature of the exhaust gas was replaced or calibrated within the frequency specified by th
ducted in line with industrial standards and procedures of India.

ulating moisture penalties. 4: Scope: The verification and certification report does not determine if the assumptions used in emission calcu
reformer (Furnace) NG,–Surplus gas, Purge gas, Tail gas, C-03 off gas, and Naphtha, Quantity of fuel consumed in super heater Naphtha
–
y how verified that the calibration of the gas analyzer BM11259 was valid during the time this spare flare was in operation.
meters.

and of 94.3 tCO2/TJ for Rawang plant. The DOE shall clarify the inconsistency.
d to provide information on how it has verified the compliance of measurement approach with the methodology requirement.

ation in paragraphs 254−260 above shall apply mutatis mutandis with the following adjustments (para 391 of VVS for PA).The DOE states
he PP/DOE requires to provide further information how the calculation presented in the spreadsheet corresponds to the monitoring perio
based on those hourly-recorded monitoring parameters; (b) provide a spreadsheet used to calculate those energy contents.
value is less than the estimated one and hence no further explanation is required." However, the verification report (p 1) shows that the c
rification for the first request for issuance of CERs. (para 392 of VVS for PA version 3)The DOE states "Not applicable for the present monit
Monitoring Report.
 o the O&M costs because of significantly smaller number of production wells being put in operation. Kindly please provide the relevant in

eport does not provide a conclusion on the verified amount of emission reductions achieved nor/or confirm that appropriate methods and
dance with the formulae and methods described in the monitoring plan, considering that the project emissions from diesel consumption fo
el consumed by the project is reported in m3 and historical fuel consumptions is reported in 10^6 m3. The DOE is further requested to cla
e DOE verifying the net electricity supplied by the Yeosu Expo PV power plant and Jeju University PV power plant based on year (p 18-9, 2
at from the monitoring survey, the responded provided the amount of fuel wood for heating water (column V of worksheet Monitoring
“ s
.7. (VVS for PA (v2) paragraphs 360 and 361)
tivity, in particular in light of the leaks that occurred in warm flare and cold flare in BAB, whether the leaks also occur in other flares in BAB
16 and J56, P15 and P55, V15 and V55, V16 and V56. iii) The inconsistency in the EGpj values presented in the ER spreadsheet, in particula

couples installed at each flare would be selected to decide and calculate the value of PEflare,y. It is found that the spreadsheet hourly-20
“

el delivery as required by ACM 0003 version 07 (option b, where the measurements are done by the PP).
r the listed parameters. (VVM v.1.2 para 206)Issue: The DOE is requested to explain how it verified the information flow for the paramete

S.II.J v7 paragraph 29(c), where it is required that the ex post monitoring sampling surveys to determine Lamp Failure Rate (LFRi,y) shall be
e 26. Please rectify the inconsistency.
odology AM 0009 version 03.3.5: Scope: The verification report does not provide an assessment on whether the calibration of measuring e
sheet Summary of CERs cells K19, K24, K27, K34, K43 and K44 for plants Katisho, Hango, Haltanmosa Hargosil, Wazirpoor, Ganuk and Yalbo
Monitoring Report ( page 18) were used during this monitoring period. (f) The DOE indicated (page 34 of Verification Report) that the equ
libration has been delayed and EB52 Annex 60 applied as required.
n accordance with the monitoring plan.

ole monitoring period.3: Scope: The verification report does not provide an assessment of the compliance with EB 52 Annex 60 'Guideline
n the frequency specified by the "Tool to determine project emissions from flaring gases containing methane". In doing so, the DOE shall a
mptions used in emission calculations have been justified as per VVS version 09.0 paragraph 403 (d).Issue: The registered PDD (pg.37) indi
med in super heater Naphtha
– and NG, Daily consumption of combustion air in super heater, combustion air outlet temperature after APH
as in operation.
 ogy requirement.

of VVS for PA).The DOE states indicates in the section E.10. Global stakeholder consultation as "Not applicable". However, this is the 1st mo
ponds to the monitoring period.
energy contents.
n report (p 1) shows that the certified emission reduction is higher than the estimated GHG emission reduction as shown below: "Estimate
plicable for the present monitoring period" in the section E.10 of the verification report. However, this is the first monitoring period of the
please provide the relevant information and validation assessment on these aspects.

hat appropriate methods and formulae for calculating baseline emissions, project emissions and leakage have been followed as per VVS v
ns from diesel consumption for 4 days of Dec 2019 in the current monitoring period are not considered.
DOE is further requested to clarify how it has verified that the default emission factor EFi,upstream,CH4
“ , ”the equations and units were co
plant based on year (p 18-9, 20-1), the periods refers to "1 October 31 December
– 2012", "2011" and "1 January 30 September
– 2012". P
V of worksheet Monitoring
“ survey ). However,
” this figure is not considered in the calculation of project emissions.
so occur in other flares in BAB and all flares in ASAB.4: Scope: The verification report does not determine if the assumptions used in emiss
 mation flow for the parameter "electricity exported by HII project to the grid". In doing this, the DOE is requested to explain how it verified

mp Failure Rate (LFRi,y) shall be conducted for each batch of project lamps considering that 1) the average lifetime of CFLs are defined as 60
the calibration of measuring equipments was conducted at a frequency specified in applied monitoring methodology or EB guidance if app
l, Wazirpoor, Ganuk and Yalbo Sabsar. d. The PDD has the provision that the digital meter does not need calibration unless there is error r
rification Report) that the equipment measuring Q_Steamy were recalibrated on 13 of April, 2011 (SN 20080345, 080225008 and L81A110
e". In doing so, the DOE shall also verify the compliance with EB52 - Annex 60 in case of delayed calibration/replacement.
he registered PDD (pg.37) indicates that the emission factor for fossil fuel displaced (EFFF) was calculated as 77.09 tCO2/TJ (based on the
outlet temperature after APH, and combustion air inlet temperature before APH. However, the Verification Report has not shown how th
e". However, this is the 1st monitoring period after the registration.
on as shown below: "Estimated GHG emission reductions or net anthropogenic GHG removals for this monitoring period in the registered P
first monitoring period of the project activity of which the global stakeholder consultation is required by para 198 of PCP for PA version 3
e equations and units were correctly applied for the calculation of upstream leakage emissions.   Please refer to Paragraphs 402(c), (d) a
uary 30 September
– 2012". Please rectify this inconsistency.
he assumptions used in emission calculations have been justified and/or emission factors, default values and other reference values have
ested to explain how it verified that the monitoring plan in the registered PDD is in accordance with the monitoring methodology and doe

etime of CFLs are defined as 6000hours or 4.7 years and 2) the CFLs distributed in early 2010 are nearly approaching the end of the lifetim
hodology or EB guidance if applicable, and/or the monitoring plan? (VVM v.1.2 para 184 (a) (ii) & EB 52 Annex 60)Issue: 1. The DOE is requ
345, 080225008 and L81A1103) and on 19th January, 18th February, 16th March, 13 April, 2011 (SN 20090436, 08225004 and L81A1104)
eplacement.
77.09 tCO2/TJ (based on the weighted
“ average annual CO2 emission factor for the fossil fuel(s) consumed and monitored ex-ante during
Report has not shown how the master calibrators have been calibrated and whether or not the calibration covers the monitoring period;
oring period in the registered PDD" as "95,539tCO2e" and "Certified GHG emission reductions or net anthropogenic GHG removals for this
ra 198 of PCP for PA version 3.4: The DOE shall determine whether the project participants have addressed the FARs identified during valid
fer to Paragraphs 402(c), (d) and (e) of the VVS version 9.0.
d other reference values have been correctly applied. (VVS v2, para 246 (d))Issue: The DOE is requested to further explain how parameter
nitoring methodology and does reflect the actual monitoring activity.6: Scope: The verification report does not provide an assessment on w

oaching the end of the lifetime.

ex 60)Issue: 1. The DOE is requested to further verify all the calibration dates of the flow meters for parameters -Vc1,y, Vc2,y, Vc3,y, VD1,y
36, 08225004 and L81A1104). Calibration information does not cover the entire monitoring period. (g) DOE does not provide precise date
and monitored ex-ante during the year before the validation ). However,
” the submitted monitoring report indicates a value of 77.27 tCO2/
overs the monitoring period; (b) Section 3.6 of the verification report reports that the calibration of measuring equipment was carried out
pogenic GHG removals for this monitoring period" as "106,283 tCO2e"
the FARs identified during validation or previous verification(s). (Para 320 of VVS of PA version 3)The DOE states that " No FAR was raised d
urther explain how parameter VBE,NG (Annual volume of purge gas in baseline at each site) the has been justified, in light of: (i) the differe
ot provide an assessment on whether the calibration of measuring equipments was conducted at a frequency specified in applied monitor
ers -Vc1,y, Vc2,y, Vc3,y, VD1,y, VD2,y and VL,y as mentioned on page 31 of the MR. 2. The DOE is requested to clarify how it has verified th
does not provide precise dates for the calibration of the equipment measuring Q_HCFC22y to ensure that all 7 equipments were dully cali
ndicates a value of 77.27 tCO2/TJ (based on the same source). The PP/DOE are requested to address this inconsistency.
ng equipment was carried out by an accredited person or institution. The DOE is requested to further substantiate how the calibration car
ates that " No FAR was raised during the validation of the project activity." However, the validation report (p 100) contains two FARs for th
stified, in light of: (i) the difference amount of waste gas flared between the baseline and the project activity, and (ii) the leaks that occurr
cy specified in applied monitoring methodology or EB guidance if applicable, and/or the monitoring plan? (VVM v.1.2 para 184 (a) (ii) & EB
to clarify how it has verified the weekly records of the laboratory analysis of carbon content for parameters - w carbon, c2, y, w carbon, c
all 7 equipments were dully calibrated during the entire monitoring period (page 33 of Verification Report).
antiate how the calibration carried out by the Instrument Department of Indo Gulf Fertilisers can be considered carried out by an accredit
100) contains two FARs for the first verification.
, and (ii) the leaks that occurred in warm flare and cold flare in BAB, which may also occur in other lines in BAB and ASAB, whether value o
VM v.1.2 para 184 (a) (ii) & EB 52 Annex 60)Issue: the DOE is requested to provide an assessment of the calibration details of each monito
- w carbon, c2, y, w carbon, c3, y, w carbon, D1,y and w carbon, D2,y in line with the registered monitoring plan.
red carried out by an accredited person or institution.
AB and ASAB, whether value of the parameter VBE,NG has taken into consideration these factors.
ration details of each monitoring equipment used for monitoring.