Date post: | 31-Jan-2017 |
Category: |
Documents |
Upload: | truonghuong |
View: | 252 times |
Download: | 1 times |
PROJECT DESIGN DOCUMENT FORM (CDM PDD) - Version 03
CDM – Executive Board
page 1
CLEAN DEVELOPMENT MECHANISM
PROJECT DESIGN DOCUMENT FORM (CDM-PDD)
Version 03 - in effect as of: 28 July 2006
CONTENTS
A. General description of project activity
B. Application of a baseline and monitoring methodology
C. Duration of the project activity / crediting period
D. Environmental impacts
E. Stakeholders‟ comments
Annexes
Annex 1: Contact information on participants in the project activity
Annex 2: Information regarding public funding
Annex 3: Baseline information
Annex 4: Monitoring plan
PROJECT DESIGN DOCUMENT FORM (CDM PDD) - Version 03
CDM – Executive Board
page 2
SECTION A. General description of project activity
A.1. Title of the project activity:
Title: Municipal Solid Waste (MSW) Composting Project in Ikorodu, Lagos State
Version: 1.3
Date: 03/08/2010
A.2. Description of the project activity:
Brief description of project activity and baseline:
The project activity involves production of high quality compost from Municipal Solid Waste (MSW) by
using advanced composting technology. The compost facility would processes 1500 tonnes of solid waste
per day. The Project Proponent (PP), EarthCare Nigeria Limited (ENL) in collaboration with its
technology partner EarthCare Technologies Inc (ECTI) is developing a world class composting facility
in Lagos, Nigeria with an aim to provide environment friendly waste disposal option and produce high
quality compost for use in Nigerian farms.
Solid Waste Management sector in Nigeria, is highly neglected and the common practice is to dump the
waste in landfills. In the absence of the project activity, the MSW would have been diverted to ordinary
unmanaged landfills, resulting in methane emissions due to development of anaerobic conditions.
Methane is a potent greenhouse gas and its mitigation is major focus of global efforts in fighting the
current climate change problem. The project proponent has sought to rectify this situation, by importing a
highly successful technology that, in addition to treating waste, would also provide high quality compost
to Nigerian farmers for use in agriculture and horticulture. The compost produced in the site is a proven
grade A manure and would be sold under the name of Compost Plus which is proven to improve the
fertility and texture of the soil and favors growth of friendly microorganisms that aid agriculture and
resist disease causing bacteria. This manure is free from the adverse effects of chemical fertilizers like
ground water contamination and is full of micronutrients that are absent in chemical fertilizers.
The primary objectives of the project can be summarized as:
i. Production of high quality compost for sale to Nigerian farmers providing them an environment
friendly and cost effective alternative to chemical fertilizers.
ii. To aid the global efforts in fighting the current climate change problem by curtailing methane
emissions from MSW dumped in landfills in the city Lagos
iii. Help Nigerian people in general by improving soil quality and crop yield thus strengthens the
food security
iv. Contribute to sustainable development of the region
The contribution of project activity to sustainable development:
The impact of the project activity on sustainable development of the area has been discussed below in
four categories:
Social well being:
PROJECT DESIGN DOCUMENT FORM (CDM PDD) - Version 03
CDM – Executive Board
page 3
The use of excellent compost produced in the facility will aid the Nigerian farmers in increasing
productivity and will help fight the Nigerian government achieve the goal of self sufficiency in food
production1.
Economic well being:
The project activity in its full scale operation, would employ over 90 skilled and unskilled workers in the
facility. Indirect employment is also generated in supporting functions of the project (drivers, garbage
collectors, equipment providers etc.) also helping in the efforts to control unemployment2. In addition, the
business generated for service providers is also expected to positively impact the local economy. The
success of this project activity will mean, more such projects coming up in future, generating more
employment for the Nigerian population.
The increased production due to the use of compost will improve the profitability of the Nigerian farmers
leading to a better economic outlook for the agriculture dependent. As economic and social issues are
more or less interlinked, all such economic benefits are also expected to bring social benefits.
Environmental well being:
This project activity will contribute to effective MSW management in Lagos region. Moreover, success of
this project will mean more investment in clean waste management technologies in the future, that would
bring significant improvement to MSW management scenario in the region.
The project uses aerobic treatment for biological waste to produce compost thus avoiding the methane
that would otherwise have been released to the atmosphere. Also, effective waste management practices
mean less garbage in and around the city centre leading to an improved hygiene and environment for the
general population3.
Technological well being:
Although, the technology employed in this project is state of the art and has already been proven in varied
conditions in the US, China, Vietnam and Malaysia. But it is a “first-of-its-kind” project in Nigeria. The
successful implementation of this project will boost investors‟ confidence, bringing more investment to
the neglected sector of Solid Waste Management in Nigeria.
A.3. Project participants:
Name of Party involved (*)
((host) indicates a host Party)
Private and/or public entity(ies)
Project participants (*)
Kindly indicate if the party
involved wishes to be
1 “Nigeria: Global Food Crisis - World Bank Ready to Assist Nigeria”
http://allafrica.com/stories/200804160205.html
2 “Unemployment in Nigeria” http://www.economywatch.com/unemployment/countries/nigeria.html
3 The Lagos city with an estimated population of 12 million is one of the most populous African city. The city is the
industrial and commercial hub of Nigeria and due to continued migration from other parts, its population is
expected to grow to over 22 million by 2015 making it one of the world’s largest cities. This continued unplanned
expansion is expected to put enormous strain on the almost nonexistent MSW management infrastructure. According
to a study conducted by the Economic Intelligent Unit (EIU), Lagos was ranked as the fifth worst in terms of
Livability amongst the largest 139 cities in the world. It is estimated that 70% of all patients arriving at Lagos
hospitals are woman and children and 50% of their problems can be traced back to environmental waste related.
PROJECT DESIGN DOCUMENT FORM (CDM PDD) - Version 03
CDM – Executive Board
page 4
(as applicable) considered as project
participant (yes/no)
Nigeria
(Host Party)
EarthCare Nigeria Ltd.
(Private Party)
No
Portugal International Bank for
Reconstruction and
Development as the Trustee for
the Carbon Fund for Europe
(CFE)
Yes
(*) In accordance with the CDM modalities and procedures, at the time of making the CDM-PDD public
at the stage of validation, a Party involved may or may not have provided its approval. At the time of
requesting registration, the approval by the Party(ies) involved is required.
A.4. Technical description of the project activity:
A.4.1. Location of the project activity:
Federal Republic of Nigeria
A.4.1.1. Host Party(ies):
Nigeria
A.4.1.2. Region/State/Province etc.:
Lagos
A.4.1.3. City/Town/Community etc.:
Odogunyan
A.4.1.4. Details of physical location, including information allowing the
unique identification of this project activity (maximum one page):
The project activity is located Odogunyan in Ikorodu Local Government Council of Lagos State. The
project site is well connected with Lagos city by road. The nearest airport is Murtala Muhammed
International Airport Lagos at 55 km from project site. The following maps show the location of the
proposed project activity (Fig. a.1):
PROJECT DESIGN DOCUMENT FORM (CDM PDD) - Version 03
CDM – Executive Board
page 5
Fig. a.1. Maps showing the location of project
PROJECT DESIGN DOCUMENT FORM (CDM PDD) - Version 03
CDM – Executive Board
page 6
The latitude and longitude of the sites are;
Latitude: 06039‟06”
Longitude: 03032‟06”
Physical address of the project site:
EarthCare Nigeria Limited
EarthCare Road, Flower Bus Stop Ikorodu - Shagamu Express Road
Odogunyan, Ikorodu
Lagos State, Nigeria
West Africa.
A.4.2. Category(ies) of project activity:
The project activity is a large scale potential CDM project under the Sectoral Category 13: Waste
Handling and Disposal.
A.4.3. Technology to be employed by the project activity:
Technology:
Composting is a biological process for decomposition of the organic fraction of MSW (OFMSW) to
carbon dioxide (CO2), water vapour, ammonia (NH3), stable humus like materials and compost by
microorganism in a warm, moist and aerobic environment. The decomposition process is represented by
the following equation (Tchobanoglous et al., 1993)4:
The composting process to be adopted in this project is the unsheltered windrow system and will consist
of a number of compost pads, a processing unit and a wastewater collection pond. The process of open
windrow aerobic composting is a simple biological process in which Organic Fraction of municipal
(OFMSW) converts into valuable resource- nutrient rich compost. The compost is a stabilized product,
the soil application of which leads to the following positive impacts on the soil - improved soil structure,
improved nutrient content of the soil, improved moisture retention capacity of the soil, and improved
agricultural productivity of the soil. Aerobic composting process is an environment friendly process with
no harmful by products formation during the entire process.
4 Tchobanoglous, G., Theisen, H., Vigil, S.A., 1993. Integrated Solid Waste Management, Engineering Principles
and Management Issues, McGraw Hill International Edition. McGraw-Hill Companies, Singapore.
Proteins
Amino acids
Lipids
Carbohydrate
Cellulose
Lignin
Ash
+
O2
+
Nutrient
+
Microorganism
s
Compost
+
New cells
+
CO2, H2O, NO3-, SO4
-
+
Heat
PROJECT DESIGN DOCUMENT FORM (CDM PDD) - Version 03
CDM – Executive Board
page 7
Earthcare Nigeria Composting processes:
The process flow diagram of ENL composting facility is as given below. The entire process can be
divided into following three stages.
Stage 1: Receipt and Weighing of MSW:
The number of trucks, quantity of garbage arriving and compost leaving the ENL composting facility is
recorded. The records include truck identification numbers, weight of the garbage or compost, the
manifest number and other relevant data. The system is equipped with state of the art weighing scale and
computers for record keeping and is manned by operators and security personnel.
Bagged Compost
Water
Dry and Liquid Inoculants
Left overs
Used in roadconstruction and
as fillers
Aerobic composting process
Collection and transportation of MSW
MSW receipt and weighing at project site
Grinder / Shredder
Windrow formation
Stabilized compost
Screener
Storage of screened product i.e., Compost
Fig. a.2 Flow diagram of Composting Process
Stage 2: Windrow Composting:
In this step garbage is unloaded in the shredding area, where it is shredded in pieces < 7 cm for efficient
composting due to increased surface area and uniformity. A discharge conveyor loads the shredded
garbage in dump trucks for transport to active compost site. This is a continuous operations and
provisions of hopper /push wall has been made to maintain continuous operation even in the absence of
loading and unloading trucks.
PROJECT DESIGN DOCUMENT FORM (CDM PDD) - Version 03
CDM – Executive Board
page 8
The dump trucks unload the shredded material in the active composting row under the supervision of
compost technicians. The rows are formed from successive unloading of shredded garbage. Before
starting a compost row, the ground is treated with polymer and portland cement for strength, durability
and reduced permeability to prevent leachate permeation. A tiller is used to cut a trench in the row for
addition of water for optimal moisture level in the shredded material. The water added to the trench is
derived from a pond that has been constructed in the premises for rainwater storage (as well as occasional
leachate generated in the compost plant) and has been designed in such a way that all rainwater drains
into the pond. During the moisture addition step, dry and wet inoculants are also added for increased rate
of compost formation. The inoculants are proprietary mix of chemicals that accelerate degradation of
organic waste and speed up the decay of oily and greasy waste that impede organic decay. These
inoculants are added using dry spreader unit and liquid spray unit for uniformity throughout the row.
Once the inoculants have been added and proper moisture levels have been reached, the final finishing of
the rows is completed. In the monitoring stage of the composting process, daily sampling is done and
readings are taken for governing parameters like temperature, moisture, CO2 and O2. Daily reports are
generated for each row and suitable steps are taken by the site managers and compost technicians to
maintain optimum conditions. Daily reports also inform the site managers when composting in a
particular row is complete.
Stage 3 Preparation of final compost:
After the completion of composting in a particular row, the finished compost is taken for testing and
graded for the presence of heavy metals, pathogens and soil nutrients according to national and USEPA
standards. Once quality has been established the compost is established, it is loaded on dump trucks and
transported to the bagging area. The finished compost is screened for gravels or particles larger than 6.35
mm. The „overs‟ are screened and conveyed outside the bagging plant where upon accumulation it is
transported to be used as construction material or layering in composting plant. The fine compost is
either sold in bulk or packed in bags of 25 kg each. The ENL bagging unit is managed by four
professionals and has a capacity of 4800 bags per day.
A.4.4. Estimated amount of emission reductions over the chosen crediting period:
Years Estimation of annual emission
reductions in tones of CO2e
20105 18,054
2011 187,655
2012 241,654
2013 278,617
2014 304,109
2015 321,863
2016 334,385
20176 286,132
Total estimated reductions (tonnes of CO2e) 1,972,468
Total number of crediting years 7
Annual average of estimated reductions over 281,781
5 For 2 months duration starting November 1, 2010 (Start of Crediting Period) to December 31, 2010
6 For 10 months duration starting January 1, 2017 to October 31, 2017
PROJECT DESIGN DOCUMENT FORM (CDM PDD) - Version 03
CDM – Executive Board
page 9
the first crediting period (tonnes of CO2e)
A.4.5. Public funding of the project activity:
No Public Funding for the project activity has been provided.
SECTION B. Application of a baseline and monitoring methodology
B.1. Title and reference of the approved baseline and monitoring methodology applied to the
project activity:
Following approved baseline & monitoring methodology is applied;
a) AM0025 “Avoided emissions from organic waste through alternative waste treatment
processes”
- Reference: Version 11, EB 44
Tool to determine methane emissions avoided from disposal of waste at a solid waste disposal
site
- Reference: Version 05, EB 55
Tool for the demonstration and assessment of additionality
- Reference: Version 05.2, EB 41
Tool to calculate the emission factor for an electricity system
- Reference : Version 02 , EB 50
B.2. Justification of the choice of the methodology and why it is applicable to the project
activity:
Applicability criteria of the methodology AM0025 and the suitability of project activity are discussed in
following table;
Table: Applicability justification the methodology AM0025
S.No. Applicability Criteria Project Status
1 The project activity involves one or a
combination of the following waste treatment
options for the fresh waste that in a given
year would have otherwise been disposed of
in a landfill:
A composting process in aerobic
conditions;
Gasification to produce syngas and its
use;
Anaerobic digestion with biogas
The project activity involves the commissioning
new facility for fresh waste treatment i.e.,
composting process in aerobic conditions. In the
absence of the proposed facility the fresh waste
would have been disposed of in a landfill in a
given year. Therefore the project activity meets
the applicability criterion.
PROJECT DESIGN DOCUMENT FORM (CDM PDD) - Version 03
CDM – Executive Board
page 10
collection and flaring and/or its use;
Mechanical/thermal treatment process
to produce refuse-derived fuel
(RDF)/stabilized biomass (SB) and its
use. The thermal treatment process
(dehydration) occurs under controlled
conditions (up to 300 degrees Celsius).
In case of thermal treatment process,
the process shall generate a stabilized
biomass that would be used as fuel or
raw material in other industrial
process. The physical and chemical
properties of the produced RDF/SB
shall be homogenous and constant over
time;
Incineration of fresh waste for energy
generation, electricity and/or heat. The
thermal energy generated is either
consumed on-site and/or exported to a
nearby facility. Electricity generated is
either consumed on-site, exported to
the grid or exported to a nearby
facility. The incinerator is rotating
fluidized bed or hearth or grate type.
2. In case of anaerobic digestion, gasification
or RDF processing of waste, the residual
waste from these processes is aerobically
composted and/or delivered to a landfill
The proposed project activity does not involve
anaerobic digestion, gasification or RDF
processing of waste treatment technology.
Therefore, this criterion is not applicable for
proposed project activity.
3. In case of composting, the produced compost
is either used as soil conditioner or disposed
of in landfills;
The produced compost will be used as a soil
conditioner. Therefore, proposed project activity
meets the applicability criterion.
4. In case of RDF/stabilized biomass
processing, the produced RDF/stabilized
biomass should not be stored in a manner
that may result in anaerobic conditions
before its use;
In the proposed project activity RDF processing
is not involved. Therefore, this criterion is not
applicable for project activity.
5. If RDF/SB is disposed of in a landfill, project
proponent shall provide degradability
analysis on an annual basis to demonstrate
that the methane generation, in the life-cycle
of the SB is below 1% of related emissions. It
has to be demonstrated regularly that the
characteristics of the produced RDF/SB
should not allow for re-absorption of
moisture of more than 3%. Otherwise,
monitoring the fate of the produced RDF/SB
is necessary to ensure that it is not subject to
No RDF/SB disposal will be implied to the
proposed project activity. Therefore, this
criterion is not applicable for project activity.
PROJECT DESIGN DOCUMENT FORM (CDM PDD) - Version 03
CDM – Executive Board
page 11
anaerobic conditions in its lifecycle;
6. In the case of incineration of the waste, the
waste should not be stored longer than 10
days. The waste should not be stored in
conditions that would lead to anaerobic
decomposition and, hence, generation of
CH4;
No incineration of the waste will be implied in
the project activity. Therefore, this criterion is
not applicable for project activity.
7.
The proportions and characteristics of
different types of organic waste processed in
the project activity can be determined, in
order to apply a multiphase landfill gas
generation model to estimate the quantity of
landfill gas that would have been generated
in the absence of the project activity;
The proportions and characteristics of different
types of organic waste processed in the project
activity can be determined routinely as per the
procedure and frequency mentioned in
monitoring section in order to apply a
multiphase landfill gas generation model to
estimate the quantity of landfill gas that would
have been generated in the absence of the
project activity. Therefore, proposed project
activity meets the applicability criterion.
8. The project activity may include electricity
generation and/or thermal energy generation
from the biogas, syngas captured,
RDF/stabilized biomass produced,
combustion heat generated in the
incineration process, respectively, from the
anaerobic digester, the gasifier,
RDF/stabilized biomass combustor, and
waste incinerator. The electricity can be
exported to the grid and/or used internally at
the project site. In the case of RDF produced,
the emission reductions can be claimed only
for the cases where the RDF used for
electricity and/or thermal energy generation
can be monitored;
The project activity does not include electricity
generation and/or thermal energy generation
from the biogas, syngas captured,
RDF/stabilized biomass produced, combustion
heat generated in the incineration process,
respectively, from the anaerobic digester, the
gasifier, RDF/stabilized biomass combustor,
and waste incinerator. Therefore, this criterion
is not applicable for project activity.
9. Waste handling in the baseline scenario
shows a continuation of current practice of
disposing the waste in a landfill despite
environmental regulation that mandates the
treatment of the waste, if any, using any of
the project activity treatment options
mentioned above;
Waste handling in the baseline scenario shows a
continuation of current practice of disposing the
waste in a landfill (refer section B.4) as there is
no environmental regulation that mandates the
treatment of the waste. Therefore, proposed
project activity meets the applicability
criterion.
10. The compliance rate of the environmental
regulations during (part of) the crediting
period is below 50%; if monitored
compliance with the MSW rules exceeds
50%, the project activity shall receive no
further credit, since the assumption that the
policy is not enforced is no longer tenable;
During (part of) the crediting period, there is no
relative environmental regulation in host
country. Therefore, this criterion is not
applicable for project activity.
11. Local regulations do not constrain the This criterion is not applicable for project
PROJECT DESIGN DOCUMENT FORM (CDM PDD) - Version 03
CDM – Executive Board
page 12
establishment of RDF production
plants/thermal treatment plants nor the use of
RDF/stabilized biomass as fuel or raw
material;
activity.
12. In case of RDF/stabilized biomass
production, project proponent shall provide
evidences that no GHG emissions occur,
other than biogenic CO2, due to chemical
reactions during the thermal treatment
process (such as Chimney Gas Analysis
report);
This criterion is not applicable for project
activity.
13. The project activity does not involve thermal
treatment process of neither industrial nor
hospital waste.
The project activity does not involve thermal
treatment process of neither industrial nor
hospital waste. This criterion is not applicable
for project activity.
14. In case of waste incineration, if auxiliary
fossil fuel is added into the incinerator, the
fraction of energy generated by auxiliary
fossil fuel is no more than 50% of the total
energy generated in the incinerator.
The project activity does not involve
combustion of fossil fuels. This criterion is not
applicable for project activity.
Conclusion:
The project activity meets the applicability criteria of approved methodology AM0025.
B.3. Description of the sources and gases included in the project boundary:
The spatial extent of the project boundary is the site of the project activity where the waste is treated. This
includes the composting facility and the landfill site.
MSW Generation
MSW shoritng & shredding
MSW residue Landfill
MSW Compostingprocess
Compost
Onsite electricity consumption
Onsite fossil fuel consumption
Electricity from grid
Fossil fuel
End User
PROJECT DESIGN DOCUMENT FORM (CDM PDD) - Version 03
CDM – Executive Board
page 13
Fig. b.1 Diagram to show the project boundary
The greenhouse gases included in or excluded from the project boundary are shown in Table
below.
Table: Emissions sources included in or excluded from the project boundary
Source Gas Included Justification / Explanation
Base
lin
e
Emissions from
decomposition of
waste at the landfill
site
CH4 Yes The major source of emissions in the baseline.
N2O No
N2O emissions are small compared to CH4
emissions from landfills. Exclusion of this gas is
conservative.
CO2 No CO2 emissions from the decomposition of
organic waste are not accounted.
Emissions from
electricity
consumption
CO2 Yes Electricity may be consumed from the grid or
generated onsite in the baseline scenario
CH4 No Excluded for simplification. This is conservative.
N2O No Excluded for simplification. This is conservative.
Emissions from
thermal energy
Generation
CO2 Yes If thermal energy generation is included in the
project activity.
CH4 No Excluded for simplification. This is conservative.
N2O No Excluded for simplification. This is conservative.
Pro
ject
act
ivit
y
On-site fossil fuel
consumption due to
the project activity
other than
for electricity
generation
CO2 Yes May be an important emission source.
CH4 No Excluded for simplification. This emission
source is assumed to be very small.
N2O No Excluded for simplification. This emission
source is assumed to be very small.
Direct emissions
from the waste
treatment processes.
N2O Yes May be an important emission source for
composting activities.
CO2 No CO2 emissions from the decomposition of
organic waste are not accounted.
CH4 Yes The composting process may not be complete
and result in anaerobic decay.
Emissions from
on-site electricity
use
CO2 Yes Electricity may be consumed from the grid or
generated onsite
CH4 No Excluded for simplification. This is conservative.
N2O No Excluded for simplification. This is conservative.
Emissions from
wastewater
Treatment
CO2 No Not applicable
CH4 No Not applicable
N2O No Not applicable
B.4. Description of how the baseline scenario is identified and description of the identified
baseline scenario:
PROJECT DESIGN DOCUMENT FORM (CDM PDD) - Version 03
CDM – Executive Board
page 14
The scenarios given in the approved AM 0025 are discussed below to identify the most plausible baseline
scenario:
Procedure for the selection of the most plausible baseline scenario:
Step 1: Identification of alternative scenarios
To identify all realistic and credible baseline alternatives step 1 of the latest version of the “Tool for
demonstration and assessment of additionality (version 05.2); EB 39 is applied. Methodology AM 0025
further delineates that in doing so, relevant policies and regulations related to the management of landfill
sites should be taken into account. Such policies or regulations may include mandatory landfill gas
capture or destruction requirements because of safety issues or local environmental regulations. Other
policies could include local policies promoting productive use of landfill gas such as those for the
production of renewable energy, or those that promote the processing of organic waste. In addition, the
assessment of alternative scenarios should take into account local economic and technological
circumstances. Realistic and credible alternatives to the project activity(s) that can be (part of) the
baseline scenarios are identified through the following sub-steps:
Sub-step 1a. Define alternatives to the project activity:
As per AM 0025 following alternatives for the disposal/treatment of the fresh waste in the absence of the
project activity, i.e. the scenario relevant for estimating baseline methane emissions, to be analysed
should include;
M 1: The project activity (i.e. composting of waste) not implemented as a CDM project:
This alternative involves processing of waste in a composting plant as envisaged in the project with the
objective of producing compost which could be sold in the market to earn returns on investment.
Successful implementation of the composting plant requires substantial capital investment and high
operation and maintenance costs. In addition, continuous monitoring of the processes is required to
maintain the quality of compost that could be sold in the market. The option therefore requires skilled and
trained manpower. In this option, the project sponsors, in the absence of CDM, would rely only on the
sale of compost - a product which does not enjoy ready-made markets in the developing economies, and
more so in Nigeria. As per the guidance of the methodology this is considered as a plausible baseline
scenario.
M 2: Disposal of the waste at a landfill where landfill gas captured is flared:
There are three active landfills; Olusosun, Abu-Egba and Solus in Lagos state. None of these sites have
the landfill gas capture facility7. Currently, no landfill site is equipped with landfill capture and flaring
facility in Nigeria. In addition, at present there are no regulatory requirements in the country to collect
and flare or utilize landfill gas.
Instalment of landfill gas collection and combustion facilities requires huge investment without any
commensurate monetary benefits. Therefore, installation of the landfill gas capture and flaring facility
would also face the financial and technical barriers similar to the project activity. Therefore this
alternative is not the plausible baseline scenario.
M 3: Disposal of the waste on a landfill without the capture of landfill gas:
7 The study for construction of an Integrated Waste Management Facility (IWMF) in Lagos City, Lagos City,
Volume 03, May 2002. Waste management practice in Lagos State, Federal Ministry of Environment.
PROJECT DESIGN DOCUMENT FORM (CDM PDD) - Version 03
CDM – Executive Board
page 15
This is the business as usual scenario. Currently, all waste is collected by the various agencies,
transported to the designated landfill sites. As mentioned in previous section, these facilities are not
equipped with landfill gas capture measures. The current practice is the common practice and does not
face any technological or investment barriers like the other options described above. It is economically
the most feasible option. Therefore this alternative is a realistic and credible baseline alternative.
The proposed project does not involve power or heat generation therefore, the baseline scenarios of
power/heat generation or energy export are not applicable.
Outcome of Step 1a: Identified realistic and credible:
Out of the identified scenarios (M1, M2 and M3), scenario M2 was dropped from any further
consideration as it was not considered realistic. The two realistic and credible scenarios that have been
subject to further assessment include M1 and M3.
Sub-step 1b. Consistency with mandatory laws and regulations:
The two alternatives M1 and M3 are consistent with the laws and regulations in Nigeria. None of these
options are mandated by law. Therefore both the alternatives have been further considered for the purpose
of determining the baseline scenario.
Step 2: Identify the fuel for the baseline choice of energy source taking into account the national and/or
sectoral policies as applicable.
The proposed project activity does not deal with fuel, so this step is not applicable.
Step 3: Step 2 and/or Step 3 of the latest approved version of the “Tool for demonstration and assessment of
additionality” shall be used to assess which of these alternatives should be excluded from further
consideration (e.g. alternatives facing prohibitive barriers or those clearly economically unattractive).
As per the guidance of the methodology both the alternatives M1 and M3 have been subject to barrier
analysis for the purpose of determining the baseline.
Alternative M1 which represents the project without CDM is a first of its kind activity and consequently
faces the following barriers – (i) barriers due to prevailing practice, (ii) investment barriers, (iii) market
barriers and (iv) technological barriers - , as discussed in details in section B.5. On the contrary,
alternative M3 represents the current situation on the ground i.e., disposal of waste on landfill without the
capture of landfill gas, and does not face the barriers that are faced by alternative M1. Therefore
alternative M1 is eliminated from being considered as a baseline scenario. Therefore alternative M3 is the
only realistic and credible baseline alternative.
Step 4: Where more than one credible and plausible alternative remains, project participants shall, as a
conservative assumption, use the alternative baseline scenario that results in the lowest baseline emissions
as the most likely baseline scenario. The least emission alternative will be identified for each component of
the baseline scenario. In assessing these scenarios, any regulatory or contractual requirements should be
taken into consideration.
Only one alternative M3, i.e., current practice is identified as the baseline scenario by Step1 to Step 3, so
the Step 4 is not applicable.
PROJECT DESIGN DOCUMENT FORM (CDM PDD) - Version 03
CDM – Executive Board
page 16
B.5. Description of how the anthropogenic emissions of GHG by sources are reduced below
those that would have occurred in the absence of the registered CDM project activity (assessment
and demonstration of additionality):
Additionality of the project activity is determined based on Tool for the demonstration and assessment
of additionality (version 05.2); EB39.
This tool provides a step-wise approach to demonstrate and assess additionality of the project activity as
shown in the flowchart given below. These steps include:
Identification of alternatives to the project activity;
Investment analysis to determine that the proposed project activity is either: 1) not the
most economically or financially attractive, or 2) not economically or financially
feasible; and/or
Barriers analysis;
Common practice analysis
Figure b.2: Flowchart to assess the additionality of the project activity
Step 1: Identification of alternatives to the project activity consistent with current laws and regulations:
Sub-step 1 a. Defines alternatives to the project activities:
PROJECT DESIGN DOCUMENT FORM (CDM PDD) - Version 03
CDM – Executive Board
page 17
As discussed in section B.4, alternatives to the project activity are as follows;
M 1: The project activity (i.e. composting of waste) not implemented as a CDM project
M 2: Disposal of the waste at a landfill where landfill gas captured is flared
M 3: Disposal of the waste on a landfill without the capture of landfill gas
Outcome of Step 1a: Identified realistic and credible:
As explained in section B.4, installation of landfill gas collection and combustion facilities requires huge
investment without any commensurate monetary benefits. At present, Nigeria does not have any such
operational facilities, and hence no experience on these kind of projects. Therefore, the option of
installation of the landfill gas capture and flaring facility (M2) is not considered a realistic option.
Option M3 – disposal of solid waste in a landfill without any capture of landfill gas - represents the
current situation on the ground in Nigeria, and hence is considered a realistic option.
Therefore, the two options that merit further assessment are Option M1 and M3.
Sub-step 1b: Consistency with mandatory laws and regulations:
Both the options M1 and M3 are consistent with the mandatory laws and regulations. Thus both the
options M1 and M3 have been subject to further analysis for the purpose of demonstrating additionality of
the project.
The Tool for the demonstration and assessment of additionality stipulates that either Step 2 (Investment
Analysis) or Step 3 (Barrier Analysis), or both can be selected to demonstrate additionality. As the Project
is first of its kind project in the country and the barriers faced are clearly evidenced (as explained in the
subsequent sections) , the PP has applied only the barrier analysis (Step 3) to demonstrate the project‟s
additionality.
Step 3: Barriers analysis This Step is used to determine whether the proposed project activity faces barriers that:
(a) Prevent the implementation of this type of proposed project activity (Option M1 in this case);
and
(b) Do not prevent the implementation of at least one of the alternatives (Option M3 in this case).
Sub-step 3a: Identify barriers that would prevent the implementation of the proposed CDM project activity:
According to the “Tool for the demonstration and assessment of additionality under this section, PP
needs to;
Establish that there are realistic and credible barriers that would prevent the implementation of the
proposed project activity from being carried out if the project activity was not registered as a CDM
activity.
Identified barriers should be justified in line with “Guidelines for objective demonstration and
assessment of barriers” Annex 13, EB 50.
The PP has opted to use the following barriers- (i) barrier due to prevailing practice, (ii) investment
barrier, (iii) market barrier and (iv) technological barrier to justify the additionality of the project.
The project is first-of-its-kind project in Nigeria
PROJECT DESIGN DOCUMENT FORM (CDM PDD) - Version 03
CDM – Executive Board
page 18
.
i. Barriers due to Prevailing Practice
The prevailing practice for municipal solid waste disposal in Nigeria is to dispose the solid waste in
landfills. This is clearly evidenced in the fact that even the larger cities including Lagos and Abuja
dispose off their wastes in the landfills. All the waste generated in Lagos is disposed off in 3 large
landfills – Olushosun, Abulegba and Solus.
Alternative methods of disposal of solid wastes are yet to gain popularity in the African countries
including Nigeria. Alternative methods of waste disposal such as composting, anaerobic digestion etc.,
involve heavy capital investments, and require dedicated project management that involves managing the
technology, managing the process and moreover managing the product - all of which pose challenges.
This is also confirmed by a study undertaken by the United Nations8 which states that, even though the
organic content of the MSW in the typical African city may exceed 70% (wet basis), centralised
composting, anaerobic digestion, and gas recovery are not significant components of African
MSWM practice. In most African cities, MSW is disposed of near the perimeter of the city, within
easy reach of vehicles and collection crews. The waste collection and disposal services are provided
largely by the public agencies, and the role of the private sector is mostly limited to collection of
wastes, which does not involve significant capital investment and the revenue is linked to the tonnage
of waste collected and transported to the landfills, which does not involve any technical
sophistication.
The same study by the United Nations referred above also mentions that few composting plants that
were set up in African cities have been reported to be financially unsuccessful, plagued by
mechanical problems, and ultimately closed. Given these issues and challenges of alternative
methods of disposal, and the fact that there are no mandatory requirements to go for advanced
disposal options, disposal of wastes in the landfills remains the prevailing practice and act as a barrier
for adoption of any new technology including composting. This is clearly evidenced in the fact that the
proposed composting project by ENL is the first of its kind not only in Lagos, but also in the whole of
Nigeria.
Another prevailing practice that acts as a barrier to adoption of alternative waste disposal methods
particularly composting is the practice of waste collection. Lagos, like most of the other Africa cities,
does not have any system for segregation of wastes. The solid waste infrastructure (collection, transport
and disposal) in Lagos is managed by LAWMA through a large number of private operators, who are
primarily responsible for collection and transport of waste to the disposal sites. Source segregation of
waste is not practiced in Lagos and the operators are paid based on tonnage of waste hauled rather than
the type of waste hauled. As a result, the waste that is available for composting is of mixed type and the
composting plants have to be designed to be able to process mixed waste threatening the quality of
compost and its acceptability and marketability. The prevailing practice of mixed waste collection thus
acts as a barrier for commercial and sustainable composting.
ii. Investment barriers
8 http://www.unep.or.jp/ietc/Publications/spc/Solid_Waste_Management/SWM_Vol-II.pdf
PROJECT DESIGN DOCUMENT FORM (CDM PDD) - Version 03
CDM – Executive Board
page 19
For alternatives undertaken and operated by private entities: Similar activities have only been
implemented with grants or other non-commercial finance terms. Similar activities are defined as
activities that rely on a broadly similar technology or practices, are of a similar scale, take place in a
comparable environment with respect to regulatory framework and are undertaken in the relevant
country/region.
No private capital is available from domestic or international capital markets due to real or perceived
risks associated with investment in the country where the proposed CDM project activity is to be
implemented, as demonstrated by the credit rating of the country or other country investments reports of
reputed origin.
As per “Guidelines for objective demonstration and assessment of barriers” Annex 13, EB 50, while
demonstrating barriers related to the lack of access to capital, technologies and skilled labour, the
Project Proponent should provide information on nature of companies and entities involved in the
financing and implementation of the project.
As the project is first-of-its-kind in Nigeria, similar activities are not available for comparison as
required by the tool to demonstrate additionality of projects undertaken by private entities. The
investment barriers being faced by the project activity are discussed in terms of lack of access to long
term capital..
Lack of access to long term capital
Nigeria‟s economy is primarily driven by abundant petroleum resources and the petroleum sector is
responsible for 99% of export and 85% of revenue generation in the country. So far, industrial
development in other sectors has been negligible. Due to instabilities in the past and easy opportunities
available in the petroleum sector, banks and other financial institutions are not keen on provide loans to
new business. According to the World Bank - Long-term finance is very rare and only the most
creditworthy have access to it. Less than 16 percent of the sample reported having loans of more than one
year in term, mainly medium and large firms. Service sector companies such as hotels have better access
to long-term loans because of collateral availability. If entrepreneur’s finance long term investments by
short term debts, project risk increase sharply and failure rates increase substantially.9
The following table demonstrates the state of availability of finance to enterprises in Nigeria.
Table: Statistics on availability of finance to enterprises in Nigeria10
Parameter Value
% of Firms Identifying Access/ cost of Finance as a Major Constraint 53.1
% of Firms Using Banks to Finance Investments 2.7
Internal Finance for Investment (% of firms) 92.8
Value of Collateral Needed for a Loan (% of the Loan Amount) 138.8
9 An assessment of Private sector in Nigeria (pages 15 & 92) –
www.worldbank.org/EXTAFRSUMAFTPS/Resources/ICA005.pdf
10 Nigeria – 2007 Enterprise Survey – based on survey of 1891 enterprises from all sectors in Nigeria
https://www.enterprisesurveys.org/documents/EnterpriseSurveys/Reports/Nigeria-2007.pdf
PROJECT DESIGN DOCUMENT FORM (CDM PDD) - Version 03
CDM – Executive Board
page 20
The data provided in the above table clearly demonstrates the issue of limited availability of bank finance
to enterprises for investments. The value of collateral required for loan is approx. 140% of the loan
amount. The situation is expected to be even worse for new companies entering into new business areas
as they normally do not possess enough assets during the start up period to use as collateral as needed by
the banks. The owners of these kind of firms generally end up either using their personal properties as
part of their equity increase exercise and/or raise the money using short term loans, normally at higher
interest rates. These short term loans are often provided with a line of credit with no guarantee that the
lender will renew the same once the line is matured. This forces the companies again to look for other
lenders. Approval of the short term loans, in some cases, required the sponsors to pledge their personal
properties.
ENL, the project promoter, being new company venturing first time into the MSW composting business
has faced the barriers described above. The sponsors of ENL are individuals from different fields of
expertise and do not have any prior experience with implementation of waste management projects. The
ownership of the company as of December, 2007 is summarized in the table below.
Sl. No. Name Company /
Individual
Shares
(Naira)
% Shareholding
1 Gen. Theophilus Danjuma Individual 40,000,000 21.05
2 Dr. Benjamin Ohiaeri Individual 80,000,000 42.11
3 Hon. Olawale Oshun Individual 39,985,000 21.04
Total 190,000,000 100%
For ENL, the problem of accessing long term loan for the composting project is even worse as the project
is of first of its kind in the country and the banks and financial institutions do not have any prior
experience of dealing with such projects. The prevailing attitude of the investors/ banks and other
financial institutions towards a new business area strangled the arrangements of long term financing for
the project. The uniqueness of the project could not win the confidence of the financial institutions. The
sponsors could only secure short term debts11
to execute the project. As of December, 2007, the company
could raise only Naira 837,036,091, as short term loans from the banks, which represents only 53.7 % of
the total investment required for the project. The remaining 46.3% of the total investment had to be raised
in form of equity and shareholders‟ loan. Generally, projects are financed at a debt equity ratio of 70: 30.
The fact that the company could raise only 53.7% of the capital from the banks as short term loans,
clearly confirms the barrier with regard to access to long term capital from the banks.
With uncertain market conditions for compost, which is documented to be a major factor for failure of
many compost plants in the developing countries, implementing a compost project with high cost short
term borrowings is even considered riskier for the sponsors, as there is no guarantee for secured revenues
from the project.. In such difficult environment, the sponsors of ENL have decided to proceed with the
project implementation risking their own capital and personal properties along with paying higher interest
rates on short term loans considering the potential upsides possible from sale of carbon credits from the
project.
The potential of the project to earn additional revenues through sale of carbon credits was recognized
early in May, 2005. Faced with the challenge of accessing long term loan from commercial banks, the
shareholders decided to bring in more capital into the project, in form of shareholders loans, and short
11 Supportive Documents are provided to DoE during validation .
PROJECT DESIGN DOCUMENT FORM (CDM PDD) - Version 03
CDM – Executive Board
page 21
term loans pledging their personal properties, based on the consideration that the project could ultimately
benefit from CDM12
.
The financial struggle of the project continues even today. Considering the CDM benefits, the sponsors
have been able to set up the plant and start operation although with a smaller processing capacity.
iii. Market Barrier:
The success of a compost project largely depends on the size of the regional compost market. Although
compost is a highly effective soil conditioner, which can reduce the need for chemical fertilisers,
unfortunately, it does not enjoy a ready-made market. A number of factors account for this fact,
including:
Lack of awareness and knowledge on how, how much and when to use compost;
Misunderstanding about what compost is (e. g. expecting it to behave in the same way as a
chemical fertiliser);
Concerns about the quality of compost made from organic urban waste –sometimes based on
negative associations or past experience;
Inclination of many farmers to focus on optimising their yield within a short time;
Competition with chemical fertilisers,
High transport costs relative to product value, as compost is often produced far from its market;
Unfair regulations and policies (e. g. subsidies for chemical fertilisers) hindering the composting
approach.
Revenue from sales of compost is particularly important in low and middle-income countries where
subsidy and tipping fees are much less readily available than in Europe or the United States. In Europe,
composting plants charge a fee to all commercial enterprises dumping waste (e. g. tree surgeons and
gardeners), which is slightly lower than the cost of dumping waste in landfills. This is backed up by
legislation, which encourages (or makes compulsory) the recycling of „green waste‟. Therefore, in some
cases compost can be given away free because tipping fees cover all costs. Few such situations exist in
low and middle-income countries, so costs need to be covered by sales. Absence of a ready-made market
hinders the sale and thus acts as a prohibitive barrier. Absence of ready-made market is reported to be
one of the significant reasons for failure of compost facilities by United Nations Environment
Programme, Division of Technology, Industry and Economics 13
“…..Finished compost can become, but is not automatically, a valuable commodity: its value depends on
external demand for soil enhancers, on perceptions of its value, on its quality, and on its accessibility to
potential users in the immediate vicinity...”
12 Ref: Minutes of Board meeting, 18th May, 2005
13 http://www.unep.or.jp/ietc/ESTdir/Pub/MSW/SP/sp4/sp4_1.asp
PROJECT DESIGN DOCUMENT FORM (CDM PDD) - Version 03
CDM – Executive Board
page 22
Lack of market for sale of compost has been well documented to be one of the major barriers to
composting activities in the low and middle income countries in the report titled “Marketing of Compost
– A Guide for Compost Producers in Low and Middle Income Countries14
”.
Prior to the project activity, composting as a technology to manage MSW was non-existent in Nigeria.
Market for compost therefore did not exist. The project sponsors face the challenge of not only producing
high quality compost, but also of creating demand and market for compost with additional costs allocated
for the same.
The potential of the project to earn additional revenues through sale of carbon credits was recognized as
an upside to the investment15
and the sponsors decided to pursue the project based on the consideration
that they could ultimately benefit from the CDM revenues.
iv) Technological Barriers:
Lack of infrastructure for implementation and logistics for maintenance of the technology
Risk of technological failure: the process/technology failure risk in the local circumstances is
significantly greater than for other technologies that provide services or outputs comparable to
those of the proposed CDM project activity, as demonstrated by relevant scientific literature or
technology manufacturer information
The particular technology used in the proposed project activity is not available in the relevant
region.
Nigeria does not have an existing framework for safe disposal of Solid waste. The project is a first-of-its-
kind activity and consequently faces several technological barriers, as mentioned below:
The proposed CDM project would introduce a new technology for processing of solid wastes in Nigeria
for the first time. The fact that Nigeria does not have any solid waste composting facilities of equivalent
scale as of the project, the experience in operating large scale compost plants is limited. The successful
composting process depends on quality of MSW. MSW in developing countries, such as Nigeria has high
organic content and is highly suitable for composting. However, due to lack of source segregation,
presence of inert like sand, gravel and plastics in the waste makes the composting process less efficient16
.
As reported by United Nations Environment Programme, Division of Technology, Industry and
Economics
“....composting has the distinction of being the waste management system with the largest number of
failed facilities worldwide. In cities of developing countries, most large mixed-waste compost plants,
14
http://www.eawag.ch/organisation/abteilungen/sandec/publikationen/publications_swm/downloads_sw
m/marketing_compost_low.pdf
15 Ref: Minutes of Board meeting, 18th May, 2005
16 Benefits and constraints of composting http://www.idrc.ca/en/ev-103817-201-1-DO_TOPIC.html#tab8.1
PROJECT DESIGN DOCUMENT FORM (CDM PDD) - Version 03
CDM – Executive Board
page 23
often designed by foreign consultants and paid for by aid from their home countries, have failed or
operate at less than 30% of capacity..17
”
In future, with development and improvement in lifestyle of local populace, quantity of inert in
the waste is expected to increase. The composting technology in this case comes from the United
States and also involves the use of a proprietary inoculants in the composting process. The
technology and the whole composting process is required to be adapted to work in Nigeria with
the quality of feed stock available.Being, the first of its kind project in the country, the risk of
technology failure was perceived to be high. In order to address the risk, the sponsors had to
make the technology supplier accountable for its performance in the technology licensing
agreement. The need for proper training, and handholding has been included in the technology
licensing agreement.
Outcome of step 3(a):
It is obvious from above discussion that the identified barriers would have prevented implementation of
project without CDM benefits.
Sub-step 3 b: Show that the identified barriers would not prevent the implementation of at least one of
the alternatives (except the proposed project activity):
The barriers identified above do not prevent disposal of waste in unmanaged landfills, which represents
the current practice on ground. Lagos presently has 3 large unmanaged landfills (Olushosun, Solus and
Abulegba) and all the waste collected in Lagos are disposed in these three unmanaged landfills. The
barriers identified above do not affect this option.
Step 4. Common practice analysis:
The project activity is “first-of-its-kind” in Nigeria. Therefore this step is not applicable.
Above discussion demonstrates that the project faces several barriers and therefore is not a business-as-
usual case and is additional. In addition, the CDM registration of the proposed project, which will be a
first of its kind in Nigeria, will serve as a model for other projects and promote the dissemination of
sustainable waste management practices all across the region.
CDM Consideration:
As per the GUIDANCE ON THE DEMONSTRATION AND ASSESSMENT OF PRIOR
CONSIDERATION OF THE CDM –
(a) The project participant must indicate awareness of the CDM prior to the project activity start date,
and that the benefits of the CDM were a decisive factor in the decision to proceed with the project.
Evidence to support this would include, inter alia, minutes and/or notes related to the consideration of the
decision by the Board of Directors, or equivalent, of the project participant, to undertake the project as a
CDM project activity.
(b) The project participant must indicate, by means of reliable evidence, that continuing and real actions
were taken to secure CDM status for the project in parallel with its implementation. Evidence to support
this should include, inter alia, contracts with consultants for CDM/PDD/methodology services, Emission
Reduction Purchase Agreements or other documentation related to the sale of the potential CERs
17 http://www.unep.or.jp/ietc/ESTdir/Pub/MSW/SP/sp4/sp4_1.asp
PROJECT DESIGN DOCUMENT FORM (CDM PDD) - Version 03
CDM – Executive Board
page 24
(including correspondence with multilateral financial institutions or carbon funds), evidence of
agreements or negotiations with a DOE for validation services, submission of a new methodology to the
CDM Executive Board, publication in newspaper, interviews with DNA, earlier correspondence on the
project with the DNA or the UNFCCC secretariat;
Following milestones demonstrate the serious consideration of CDM benefits by ENL in implementation
of the project under discussion-
Date Event Details
Jan 2005 Allotment of the
Project Site
In January 2005, the Lagos State Government allocated the
project site to ENL to develop the composting facility.
May 2005 CDM consideration Representative of State Government of Lagos advised board
members of ENL to take advantage of CDM to cover up the
perceived risks of the project and to liaise with its Technical
Partners to seek ways of benefiting from the CDM programme
under the Kyoto protocol.18
July, 2005 Purchase Order for
Equipments Placed
Purchase of Equipments by ENL (Defined as the Project Start
Date as per the CDM guidance )
Sep 2005 EIA start ENL initiated EIA process to get environment license from
State/ National agencies.
Sep 2006 Authorization of
Carbon Credit
Progarmme
ENL authorised ECTI to continue research and prepare all
relevant documents on behalf of ENL for accessing carbon
credits. ECTI representative informed the company‟s director
that application for carbon credit programme would require
upfront cost and that was a hurdle in moving ahead. ECTI was
directed to explore alternative business models to move
forward.
October 2006 EIA Approval ENL received EIA approval for their project
August 2007 Meeting with World
Bank team
ECTI representatives, on behalf of ENL , had a meeting with
World Bank to discuss the CDM opportunities
Nov 2007 Meeting with World
Bank team
ENL had meeting with representative of World Bank to discuss
collaboration on CDM
Nov 2007 PIN submission On behalf of ENL, ECTI submitted Project Idea Note (PIN) to
the World Bank
Nov 2007 Approval of Carbon
finance proposal by
World Bank
The PIN was approval by World Bank
Sep 2008 Contract with CDM
consultant
Consultants were hired to prepare the PDD
October 2008 Site Visit by WB
and CDM consultant
Site visit by CDM Consultant
April 2009 Webhosting for GSP PDD webhosting for GSP on UNFCCC website
June 2009 HCA approval Letter of Approval by Host Country
18 Minutes of Board meeting dated 18/05/2005.
PROJECT DESIGN DOCUMENT FORM (CDM PDD) - Version 03
CDM – Executive Board
page 25
The above information demonstrates that ENL started the project registration process along with the
implementation of project.
B.6. Emission reductions:
B.6.1. Explanation of methodological choices:
Emission reduction is estimated following the approved methodology AM0025. The estimation of
baseline emission, project emission and leakage emission are described below.
Project emission:
As per the approved Methodology AM 0025, the project emissions in the year y are:
PEy = PEelec,y + PEfuel, on-site,y + PEc,y + PEa,y + PEg,y + PEr,y + PEi,y +PEw,y ……………….(1)
Where;
Parameter Details
PEy Project emissions during the year y (tCO2e)
PEelec,y Emissions from electricity consumption on-site due to the project activity in year y
(tCO2e)
PEfuel, on-site,y Emissions on-site due to fuel consumption on-site in year y (tCO2e)
PEc,y Emissions during the composting process in year y (tCO2e)
PEa,y Emissions from the anaerobic digestion process in year y (tCO2e)
PEg,y Emissions from the gasification process in year y (tCO2e)
PEr,y Emissions from the combustion of RDF/stabilized biomass in year y (tCO2e)
PEi,y Emissions from waste incineration in year y (tCO2e)
PEw,y Emissions from wastewater treatment in year (tCO2e)
The project activity does not include anaerobic digestion, gasification, combustion of RDF/stabilized
biomass, incineration of MSW or the wastewater treatment. Therefore, emissions from these sources
(PEa,y, PEg,y, PEr,y, PEi,y, and PEw,y) will not be considered in further discussion.
Emissions from electricity use (PEelec,y):
Project activity involves electricity consumption, CO2 emissions are calculated as follows:
PEelec,y = EGPJ,FF,y * CEFelec ………………………………………………………………(2)
Where;
Parameter Details
PEelec,y Emissions from electricity consumption on-site due to the project activity in year y
(tCO2e)
EGPJ,FF,y Amount of electricity generated in an on-site fossil fuel fired power plant or consumed
from the grid as a result of the project activity, measured using an electricity meter
(MWh)
CEFelec Carbon emissions factor for electricity generation in the project activity (tCO2/MWh)
Emissions from fuel use on-site (PEfuel, on-site,y)
PROJECT DESIGN DOCUMENT FORM (CDM PDD) - Version 03
CDM – Executive Board
page 26
As per the AM 0025 the project proponent shall account for CO2 emissions from any on-site fuel
combustion (other than electricity generation, e.g. vehicles used on-site, heat generation, for starting the
gasifier, auxiliary fossil fuels need to be added into incinerator to increase the temperature of the
incinerator, etc.). Emissions are calculated from the quantity of fuel used and the specific CO2 emission
factor of the fuel, as follows:
PEfuel, on-site,y = Fcons,y * NCVfuel * EFfuel………………………………………………(3)
Where;
Parameter Details
PEfuel, on-site,y Emissions on-site due to fuel consumption on-site in year y (tCO2e)
Fcons,y Fuel consumption on site in year y (l or kg)
NCVfuel Net caloric value of the fuel (MJ/l or MJ/kg)
EFfuel CO2 emissions factor of the fuel (tCO2/MJ)
Emissions from composting (PEc,y):
Emissions from composting are calculated as follows;
PEc,y = PEc,N2O,y + PEc,CH4,y ……………………………………………………………(4)
Where;
Parameter Details
PEc,y Emissions during the composting process in year y (tCO2e)
PEc,N2O,y N2O emissions during the composting process in year y (tCO2e)
PEc,CH4,y Emissions during the composting process due to methane production through anaerobic
conditions in year y (tCO2e)
N2O emissions:
During the storage of waste in collection containers, as part of the composting process itself, and during
the application of compost, N2O emissions might be released. Based upon Schenk and others, a total loss
of 42 mg N2O-N per kg composted dry matter can be expected (from which 26.9 mg N2O during the
composting process). The dry matter content of compost is around 50% up to 65%.
Based on these values, project participants should use a default emission factor of 0.043 kg N2O per tonne
of compost for EFc,N2O and calculate emissions as follows:
PEc,N2O,y = Mcompost,y * EFc,N2O * GWPN2O ………………………………………………(5)
Where;
Parameter Details
PEc,N2O,y N2O emissions from composting in year y (tCO2e)
Mcompost,y Total quantity of compost produced in year y (tonnes/a)
EFc,N2O Emission factor for N2O emissions from the composting process (tN2O/t compost)
GWPN2O Global Warming Potential of nitrous oxide, (tCO2/tN2O)
CH4 emissions:
During the composting process, aerobic conditions are neither completely reached in all areas nor at all
times. Pockets of anaerobic conditions – isolated areas in the composting heap where oxygen
PROJECT DESIGN DOCUMENT FORM (CDM PDD) - Version 03
CDM – Executive Board
page 27
concentrations are so low that the biodegradation process turns anaerobic – may occur. The emission
behaviour of such pockets is comparable to the anaerobic situation in a landfill. This is a potential
emission source for methane similar to anaerobic conditions which occur in unmanaged landfills. The
duration of the composting process is less than the duration of the crediting period. This is because of the
fact that the compost may be subject to anaerobic conditions during its end use, which is not foreseen that
it could be monitored. Assuming a residence time for the compost in anaerobic conditions equal to the
crediting period is conservative. Through pre-determined sampling procedures the percentage of waste
that degrades under anaerobic conditions can be determined. Using this percentage, project methane
emissions from composting are calculated as follows:
PEc,CH4,y = MBcompost,y * GWPCH4 * Sa,y………………………………………………(6)
Where;
Parameter Details
PEc,CH4,y Project methane emissions due to anaerobic conditions in the composting process in year
y (tCO2e)
Sa,y Share of the waste that degrades under anaerobic conditions in the composting plant
during year y (%)
MBcompost,y Quantity of methane that would be produced in the landfill in the absence of the
composting activity in year y (tCH4). MBcompost,y is estimated by multiplying MBy
estimated from equation 9 by the fraction of waste diverted, from the landfill, to the
composting activity (fc) relative to the total waste diverted from the landfill to all project
activities (composting, gasification, anaerobic digestion and RDF/stabilized biomass,
incineration)
GWPCH4 Global Warming Potential of methane (tCO2e/tCH4)
Calculation of Sa,y:
Sa,y is determined by a combination of measurements and calculations. To determine the oxygen content
during the process, project participants shall measure the oxygen content according to a predetermined
sampling scheme and frequency. These measurements should be undertaken for each year of the crediting
period and recorded each year. The percentage of the measurements that show oxygen content below 10%
is presumed to be equal to the share of waste that degrades under anaerobic conditions (i.e. that degrades
as if it were landfilled), hence the emissions caused by this share are calculated as project emissions ex-
post on an annual basis:
Sa,y = SOD,y / Stotal,y…………………………………………………………………………...(7)
Where:
Parameter Details
Sa,y Share of the waste that degrades under anaerobic conditions in the composting plant
during year y (%)
SOD,y Number of samples per year with an oxygen deficiency (i.e. oxygen content below 10%)
Stotal,y Total number of samples taken per year, where Stotal,y should be chosen in a manner that
ensures the estimation of Sa,y with 20% uncertainty at a 95% confidence level.
Baseline emission:
Baseline emissions are calculated as follows:
PROJECT DESIGN DOCUMENT FORM (CDM PDD) - Version 03
CDM – Executive Board
page 28
BEy = (MBy - MDreg,y) + BEEN,y ……………………………………………………………(8)
Where,
Parameter Details
BEy Baseline emission in the year y (tCO2/year)
MBy Methane produced in the landfill in the absence of the project activity in year y(tCO2/year)
MDreg,y Methane that would be destroyed in the absence of the project activity in year
y(tCO2/year)
BEEN,y Baseline emissions from generation of energy displaced by the project activity in year y
(tCO2/year). It is not applicable to the project activity. Hence, this is assumed to be 0.
Adjustment Factor (AF):
In cases where regulatory or contractual requirements do not specify MDreg,y, an Adjustment Factor (AF)
shall be used and justified, taking into account the project context. In doing so, the project participant
should take into account that some of the methane generated by the landfill may be captured and
destroyed to comply with other relevant regulations or contractual requirements, or to address safety and
odour concerns.
MDreg,y = MBy * AF………………………………………………………..……………...(9)
Where;
Parameter Details
AF Adjustment Factor for MBy (%)
The parameter AF shall be estimated as follows:
1. In cases where a specific system for collection and destruction of methane is mandated by
regulatory or contractual requirements, the ratio between the destruction efficiency of that system
and the destruction efficiency of the system used in the project activity shall be used;
2. In cases where a specific percentage of the “generated” amount of methane to be collected and
destroyed is specified in the contract or mandated by the regulation, this percentage divided by an
assumed efficiency for the collection and destruction system used in the project activity shall be
used.
The „Adjustment Factor‟ shall be revised at the start of each new crediting period taking into account the
amount of GHG flaring that occurs as part of common industry practice and/or regulation at that point in
the future.
Rate of compliance:
In cases where there are regulations that mandate the use of one of the project activity treatment options
and which is not being enforced, the baseline scenario is identified as a gradual improvement of waste
management practices to the acceptable technical options expected over a period of time to comply with
the MSW Management Rules. The adjusted baseline emissions (BEy,a) are calculated as follows:
BEy,a = BEy * ( 1 – RATE, Compliance
,y)……………………………………………… ..(10)
Where;
Parameter Details
PROJECT DESIGN DOCUMENT FORM (CDM PDD) - Version 03
CDM – Executive Board
page 29
BEy,a CO2-equivalent emissions as determined from equation
RATE, Compliance
State-level compliance rate of the MSW Management Rules in that year y. The
compliance rate shall be lower than 50%; if it exceeds 50% the project activity shall
receive no further credit.
In such cases BEy,a should replace BEy in Equation (10) to estimate emission reductions.
The compliance ratio RATECompliance
y shall be monitored ex post based on the official reports for instance
annual reports provided by municipal bodies.
Methane generation from the landfill in the absence of the project activity (MBy):
The amount of methane that is generated each year (MBy) is calculated as per the latest version of the
approved “Tool to determine methane emissions avoided from disposal of waste at a solid waste disposal
site Version 05” considering the following additional equation:
MBy = BECH4, SWDS, y…………………………………………………………………(11)
Where;
Parameter Details
MBy Methane emission in the year y
BECH4, SWDS, y Methane generation from the landfill in the absence of the project activity at year y,
calculated as per the “Tool to determine methane emissions avoided from disposal
of waste at a solid waste disposal site Version 05”. The tool estimates methane
generation adjusted for, using adjustment factor (f) any landfill gas in the baseline
that would have been captured and destroyed to comply with relevant regulations or
contractual requirements, or to address safety and odor concerns. As this is already
accounted for in equation 10, “f” in the tool shall be assigned a value 0.
The amount of methane that would in the absence of the project activity be generated from disposal of
waste at the solid waste disposal site (BECH4,SWDS,y) is calculated with a multi-phase model. The
calculation is based on a first order decay (FOD) model. The model differentiates between the different
types of waste j with respectively different decay rates kj and different fractions of degradable organic
carbon (DOCj). The model calculates the methane generation based on the actual waste streams Wj,x
disposed in each year x, starting with the first year after the start of the project activity until the until the
end of the year y, for which baseline emissions are calculated (years x with x = 1 to x = y).
In cases where at the SWDS methane is captured (e.g. due to safety regulations) and flared, combusted or
used in another manner, the baseline emissions are adjusted for the fraction of methane captured at the
SWDS.
The amount of methane produced in the year y (BECH4,SWDS,y) is calculated as follows:
BECH4,SWDS,y= φ*(1-f) *GWPCH4.(1-OX) *16/12*F*DOCf* MCF*
Y
x j1
Wj,x*DOCj*e-kj.(y-x)
*(1-e-
kj)…………………………………………..(12)
Where,
Parameter Description
PROJECT DESIGN DOCUMENT FORM (CDM PDD) - Version 03
CDM – Executive Board
page 30
Φ Model correction factor to account for model uncertainties (0.9)
F Fraction of methane captured at the SWDS and flared, combusted or used in another
manner
GWPCH4 Global Warming Potential (GWP) of methane, valid for the relevant commitment period
OX Oxidation factor (reflecting the amount of methane from SWDS that is oxidised in the
soil or other material covering the waste)
F Fraction of methane in the SWDS gas (volume fraction) (0.5)
DOCf Fraction of degradable organic carbon (DOC) that can decompose
MCF Methane correction factor
Wj,x Amount of organic waste type j prevented from disposal in the SWDS in the year x (tons)
DOCj Fraction of degradable organic carbon (by weight) in the waste type j
kj Decay rate for the waste type j
j Waste type category (index)
x Year during the crediting period: x runs from the first year of the first crediting period
(x = 1) to the year y for which avoided emissions are calculated (x = y)
Y Year for which methane emissions are calculated
Where different waste types j are prevented from disposal, determine the amount of different waste types
(Wj,x) through sampling and calculate the mean from the samples, as follows:
Wj,x = Wx .
z
xjPnz
n
1
,,
……………………………………………………………………..(13)
Where,
Parameter Description
Wj,x Amount of organic waste type j prevented from disposal in the SWDS in the year x (tons)
Wx Total amount of organic waste prevented from disposal in year x (tons)
Pn,j,x Weight fraction of the waste type j in the sample n collected during the year x
Z Number of samples collected during the year x
Leakage: The sources of leakage considered in the methodology are CO2 emissions from off-site transportation of
waste materials in addition to CH4 and N2O emission from the residual waste from the anaerobic
digestion, gasification processes and processing/combustion of RDF. Positive leakage that may occur
through the replacement of fossil-fuel based fertilizers with organic composts are not accounted for.
Leakage emissions should be estimated from the following equation:
Ly = Lt,y + Lr,y + Li,y + Ls,y …………………………………………………………...(14)
Where;
Parameter Description
L,y Leakage emission
Lt,y Leakage emission from increased transport in the year y (tCO2e)
Lr,y
Leakage emissions from the residual waste from the anaerobic digester, the gasifier, the
processing/combustion of RDF/stabilized biomass, or compost in case it is disposed of in
landfills in year y (tCO2e)
Li,y Leakage emissions from the residual waste from MSW incinerator in year y (tCO2e)
PROJECT DESIGN DOCUMENT FORM (CDM PDD) - Version 03
CDM – Executive Board
page 31
Ls,y Leakage emissions from end use of stabilized biomass
Emissions from transportation (Lt,y):
The project may result in a change in transport emissions. This would occur when the waste is transported
from waste collecting points, in the collection area, to the treatment facility, instead of to existing
landfills. When it is likely that the transport emissions will increase significantly, such emissions should
be incorporated as leakage. In this case, project participants shall document the following data in the
CDM PDD: an overview of collection points from where the waste will be collected, their approximate
distance (in km) to the treatment facility, existing landfills and their approximate distance (in km) to the
nearest end user.
For calculations of the emissions, IPCC default values for fuel consumption and emission factors may be
used. The CO2 emissions are calculated from the quantity of fuel used and the specific CO2-emission
factor of the fuel for vehicles i to n, as follows:
Lt,y = n
i
NO vehicles,i,y* DTi,y* VFcons,i*NCVfuel*Dfuel*EFfuel …………………………..(15)
Where;
Parameter Description
Lty Leakage emission from transportation in the year y
NOvehicles,i,y Number of vehicles for transport with similar loading capacity
DTi,y Average additional distance travelled by vehicle type i compared to baseline in year y (km)
VFcons Vehicle fuel consumption in litres per kilometre for vehicle type i (l/km)
NCVfuel Calorific value of the fuel (MJ/Kg or other unit)
Dfuel Fuel density (kg/l), if necessary
EFfuel Emission factor of the fuel (tCO2/MJ)
For transport of compost to the users, the same formula applies.
Emissions from residual waste from anaerobic digester, gasifier, and processing/combustion of
RDF/stabilized biomass or compost in case it is disposed of in landfills (Lr,y)
The residual waste from project will not be dumped in landfills but will be used as a construction and or
road filling. Hence, Leakage from residual waste produced in the project will be negligible. However, the
end use of the residual waste will be monitored and leakage emission from residual waste delivered to
landfill (if any) will be estimated ex post CH4 emissions are estimated using estimated weights of each
waste type (Aci,x).
Leakage Emissions from the residual waste from MSW incineration (Li,y) and Off-site Emissions from end
use of the stabilized biomass (Ls,y)
Leakage emissions from these sources are not applicable for the project activity.
Emission Reductions:
To calculate the emission reductions the project participant shall apply the following equation:
ERy = BEy – PEy – Ly …………………………………………………………………….(16)
Where;
PROJECT DESIGN DOCUMENT FORM (CDM PDD) - Version 03
CDM – Executive Board
page 32
Parameter Description
ERy Emissions reductions in year y (t CO2e)
BEy Emissions in the baseline scenario in year y (t CO2e)
PEy Emissions in the project scenario in year y (t CO2e)
Ly Leakage in year y (t CO2e)
B.6.2. Data and parameters that are available at validation:
Data / Parameter: Φ
Data unit: Factor
Description: Model correction factor to account for model uncertainties
Source of data used: Methodological tool of UNFCCC CDM
Value applied: 0.9
Justification of the
choice of data or
description of
measurement methods
and procedures actually
applied :
Oonk et el. (1994) have validated several landfill gas models based on 17
realized landfill gas projects. The mean relative error of multi-phase models
was assessed to be 18%. Given the uncertainties associated with the model and
in order to estimate emission reductions in a conservative manner, a discount of
10% is applied to the model results.
Any comment: Default Value as per “Tool to determine methane emissions avoided from
disposal of waste at a solid waste disposal site” Version 05, EB 55
Data / Parameter: OX
Data unit: Factor
Description: Oxidation factor (reflecting the amount of methane from SWDS that is oxidized
in the soil or other material covering the waste)
Source of data used: Methodological tool of UNFCCC CDM
Value applied: 0
Justification of the
choice of data or
description of
measurement methods
and procedures actually
applied :
The landfills where the waste would be disposed in the absence of the project
activity are not covered with oxidizing material. Therefore a value of 0 is
applied for oxidation factor.
Any comment: As per “Tool to determine methane emissions avoided from disposal of waste at
a solid waste disposal site” Version 05, EB 55, for landfills which are not
covered with soil or any other material, the value 0 should be used for oxidation
factor.
Data / Parameter: F
Data unit: -
Description: Fraction of methane in the SWDS gas (volume fraction)
Source of data used: IPCC 2006 Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas Inventories
Value applied: 0.5
Justification of the
choice of data or
description of
The factor reflects the fact that some degradable organic carbon does not
degrade, or degrades very slowly, under anaerobic conditions in the solid waste
disposal site. A default value of 0.5 is recommended by IPCC, as no local
PROJECT DESIGN DOCUMENT FORM (CDM PDD) - Version 03
CDM – Executive Board
page 33
measurement methods
and procedures actually
applied :
data was available
Any comment:
Data / Parameter: DOCf
Data unit: -
Description: Fraction of degradable organic carbon (DOC) that can decompose
Source of data used: IPCC 2006 Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas Inventories
Value applied: 0.5
Justification of the
choice of data or
description of
measurement methods
and procedures actually
applied :
Default Value as per “Tool to determine methane emissions avoided from
disposal of waste at a solid waste disposal site” Version 05, EB 55
Any comment: -
Data / Parameter: MCF
Data unit: -
Description: Methane correction Factor
Source of data used: IPCC 2006 guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas Inventories
Value applied: 0.8
Justification of the
choice of data or
description of
measurement methods
and procedures actually
applied :
For unmanaged solid waste disposal sites – deep and/or with high water
table. This comprises all SWDS not meeting the criteria of managed SWDS and
which have depths of greater than or equal to 5 meters and/or high water table at
near ground level. Latter situation corresponds to filling inland water, such as
pond, river or wetland, by waste. Presently, there are three existing landfills
Olusosun, Abu-Egba and Solus in Lgaos. These landfills are unmanged and
having depth more than 5 meter. In the project activity, wast will be diverted
from these landfills. Therefore MCF value 0.8 is applicable for the project
activity as per “Tool to determine methane emissions avoided from disposal of
waste at a solid waste disposal site” Version 05, EB 55.
Any comment: The methane correction factor (MCF) accounts for the fact that unmanaged
SWDS produce less methane from a given amount of waste than managed
SWDS, because a larger fraction of waste decomposes aerobically in the top
layers of unmanaged SWDS
Data / Parameter: DOCj
Data unit: % (wet weight)
Description: Fraction of degradable organic carbon (by weight) in the waste type j
Source of data used: IPCC 2006 Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas Inventories (adapted from
Volume 5, Tables 2.4 and 2.5)
Value applied:
Apply the following values for the different waste types j:
Waste type j DOCj
PROJECT DESIGN DOCUMENT FORM (CDM PDD) - Version 03
CDM – Executive Board
page 34
(% wet waste)
Wood and wood products 43
Pulp, paper and cardboard (other than sludge) 40
Food, food waste, beverages and tobacco
(other than sludge)
15
Textiles 24
Garden, yard and park waste 20
Glass, plastic, metal, other inert waste 0
Justification of the
choice of data or
description of
measurement methods
and procedures actually
applied :
Default values are taken from “Tool to determine methane emissions avoided
from dumping waste at a solid waste disposal site Version 05”
Any comment: According to the “Tool to determine methane emissions avoided from dumping
waste at a solid waste disposal site Version 05”, if a waste type, prevented from
disposal by the proposed CDM project activity, can not clearly be attributed to
one of the waste types in the table above, project participants should choose
among the waste types that have similar characteristics that waste type where
the values of DOCj and kj result in a conservative estimate (lowest emissions),
Data / Parameter: Kj
Data unit: Factor
Description: Decay rate for the waste type j
Source of data used: IPCC 2006 Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas Inventories (adapted from
Volume 5, Table 3.3)
Value applied: Apply the following default values for the different waste types j
Waste type j Tropical (MAT>20°C)
Wet MAP> 1000mm)
Slo
wly
deg
radin
g Pulp, paper, cardboard (other than sludge),
textiles
0.07
Wood, wood products and straw 0.035
Moder
ate
ly
deg
radin
g
Other (non-food) organic putrescible
garden and park waste
0.17
Rapid
ly
deg
radin
g Food, food waste, sewage sludge,
beverages and tobacco
0.40
NB: MAT – mean annual temperature, MAP – Mean annual precipitation, PET – potential evapotranspiration. MAP/PET is the ratio between the mean annual
PROJECT DESIGN DOCUMENT FORM (CDM PDD) - Version 03
CDM – Executive Board
page 35
precipitation and the potential evapo-transpiration.
Justification of the
choice of data or
description of
measurement methods
and procedures actually
applied :
MAP and MAT values for Lagos is as follows;
MAP: 150619
mm
MAT: 270C
20
Hence, Lagos lies in tropical area, hence conservative value for MAP and MAT
as proposed by the “Tool to determine methane emissions avoided from
dumping waste at a solid waste disposal site Version 05” is applicable.
Any comment: Document in the CDM-PDD the climatic conditions at the SWDS site (temperature,
precipitation and, where applicable, evapotranspiration).
Data / Parameter: EFc,N2O
Data unit: tN2O/tonnes of compost
Description: Emission factor for N2O emissions from the composting process
Source of data used: AM 0025
Value applied: Ex-ante fixed
Justification of the
choice of data or
description of
measurement methods
and procedures actually
applied :
Default value of 0.043kg-N2O/t-compost, recommended in approved
methodology AM0025.
Any comment: -
Data / Parameter: NCVfuel
Data unit: TJ/Gg
Description: Net calorific value
Source of data used: IPCC 2006 Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas Inventories (adapted from
Volume 5, Table 3.3)
Value applied: 43.33
Justification of the
choice of data or
description of
measurement methods
and procedures actually
applied :
Default value of IPCC is used as no authentic local source, or project specific
values are available to PP.
Any comment: -Ex ante fixed
Data / Parameter: EFfuel
Data unit: tCO2/MJ
Description: Emission factor for diesel fuel
Source of data used: IPCC 2006 Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas Inventories (adapted from
Volume 5, Table 3.3)
Value applied: 0.0000741
19 http://www.climate-charts.com/Locations/n/NI65201.php#data
20 http://www.climate-charts.com/Locations/n/NI65201.php#data
PROJECT DESIGN DOCUMENT FORM (CDM PDD) - Version 03
CDM – Executive Board
page 36
Justification of the
choice of data or
description of
measurement methods
and procedures actually
applied :
Default value of IPCC is used as no authentic local source and/ or project
specific values are available to PP.
Any comment: Ex ante Fixed
Data / Parameter: Dfuel
Data unit: Density of diesel fuel
Description: Kg/l
Source of data used: http://www.simetric.co.uk.htm
Value applied: 0.885
Justification of the
choice of data or
description of
measurement methods
and procedures actually
applied :
Default value
Any comment: Ex ante fixed
Data / Parameter: AF
Data unit: Factor
Description: %
Source of data used: Reports published by local, national authority and researchers
Value applied: 0
Justification of the
choice of data or
description of
measurement methods
and procedures actually
applied :
At present, there is no regulatory mandate for MSW disposal and treatment
exist in Nigeria.
Any comment:
Data / Parameter: GWPCH4
Data unit: -
Description: Global Warming potential (GWP) of methane
Source of data used: Decisions under UNFCCC and the Kyoto Protocol (a value of 21 is to be
applied for the first commitment period of the Kyoto Protocol).
Value applied: 21
Justification of the
choice of data or
description of
measurement methods
and procedures actually
applied :
-
Any comment: -
PROJECT DESIGN DOCUMENT FORM (CDM PDD) - Version 03
CDM – Executive Board
page 37
Data / Parameter: CEFelec
Data unit: tCO2/MWh
Description: Emission factor for the production of electricity in the project activity
Source of data used: Official utility documents
Value applied: 0.63
Justification of the
choice of data or
description of
measurement methods
and procedures actually
applied :
Calculated according to the “Tool to calculate the emission factor for an
electricity system”, according to data from captive power plant. Please refer
Annex 3.
Any comment: Ex-ante fixed
Data / Parameter: VFcons
Data unit: l/km
Description: Vehicle fuel consumption for vehicle type i
Source of data used: http://www.ghgprotocol.org/calculation-tools/all-tools
Value applied: 0.157
Justification of the
choice of data or
description of
measurement methods
and procedures actually
applied :
Any comment: Ex-ante fixed
B.6.3. Ex-ante calculation of emission reductions:
As described in section B.6.1, the emission reductions are calculated according to methodology AM0025,
“Tool to calculate the emission factor for an electricity system” and “Tool to determine methane
emissions avoided from dumping waste at a solid waste disposal site” therein. The ex-ante calculation of
emission reductions are completed with the following steps:
Project emission:
The project emissions in year y for the composting process, calculated as follows;
Emissions from electricity use (PEelec,y):
Project activity involves electricity consumption, CO2 emissions are calculated as follows:
Parameter Details Unit Values
EGPJ,FF,y Amount of electricity consumed from the grid as a result of the
project activity, measured using an electricity meter in a year (in
12 months) y
MWh 20
CEFelec Carbon emissions factor for electricity generation in the project
activity*
tCO2/
MWh
0.63
PEelec,y Emissions from electricity consumption on-site due to the (tCO2e) 13
PROJECT DESIGN DOCUMENT FORM (CDM PDD) - Version 03
CDM – Executive Board
page 38
project activity in year y
Emissions from fuel use on-site (PEfuel, on-site,y)
CO2 emissions from vehicles used on-site are calculated from the quantity of fuel used, as follows:
Parameter Details Unit Values
Fcons,y Fuel consumption on site in year (in 12 months) y Liters 603953
NCVfuel Net caloric value of the fuel MJ/kg 43330
Density Kg/l 0.00885
EFfuel CO2 emissions factor of the fuel tCO2/MJ 74.1*10-6
PEfuel, onsite,y Emissions on-site due to fuel consumption on-site in year y tCO2e 1716
.
Emissions from composting (PEc,y):
Emissions from composting are calculated as follows;
N2O emissions
N2O emissions are calculated as follows:
PEc,N2O,y = Mcompost,y * EFc,N2O * GWPN2O ………………………………………………(5)
Where;
Parameter Details Unit Values
Mcompost,y Total quantity of compost produced in year (in 12 months) y tonnes/a 191625
EFc,N2O Emission factor for N2O emissions from the composting process tN2O/t
compost
4.3*10-5
GWPN2O Global Warming Potential of nitrous oxide tCO2/tN2
O
310
PEc,N2O,y N2O emissions from composting in year y tCO2e 2554
CH4 emissions:
Project methane emissions from composting are calculated as follows:
Year Sa,y MBcompost,y GWPCH4 PEc,CH4,y
201021
2% 948 21 398
2011 2% 9542 21 4007
2012 2% 12165 21 5109
2013 2% 13961 21 5864
2014 2% 15200 21 6384
2015 2% 16063 21 6746
2016 2% 16671 21 7002
201722
2% 14256 21 5988
Project emission:
21 For 2 months duration starting November 1, 2010 (Start of Crediting Period) to Dec 31, 2010
22 For 10 months duration starting January 1, 2017 to October 31, 2017
PROJECT DESIGN DOCUMENT FORM (CDM PDD) - Version 03
CDM – Executive Board
page 39
Year PEelectricity,y PEfuel,onsite,y PEc,y PEy
201023
2 286 824 1112
2011 13 1716 6562 8291
2012 13 1716 7664 9393
2013 13 1716 8418 10147
2014 13 1716 8938 10667
2015 13 1716 9301 11029
2016 13 1716 9556 11285
201724
11 1430 8116 9557
Baseline emission:
Baseline emissions are calculated as follows:
Adjustment Factor (AF):
Adjustment factor is calculated as follows;
Parameter Details Unit Values
AF Adjustment Factor for MBy (%) % 0
Rate of compliance:
The adjusted baseline emissions (BEy,a) are calculated as follows:
Parameter Details Unit Values
RATE, Compliancey
State-level compliance rate of the MSW Management
Rules in that year y.
- 0
BEy,a CO2-equivalent emissions
Methane generation from the landfill in the absence of the project activity (MBy):
The amount of methane produced in the year y (BECH4,SWDS,y) is calculated as follows:
Parameter Description Unit Values
Φ Model correction factor to account for model uncertainties - 0.9
F Fraction of methane captured at the SWDS and flared,
combusted or used in another manner
- 0
GWPCH4 Global Warming Potential (GWP) of methane, valid for the
relevant commitment period
- 21
OX Oxidation factor (reflecting the amount of methane from SWDS
that is oxidised in the soil or other material covering the waste)
- 0
F Fraction of methane in the SWDS gas (volume fraction) - 0.5
DOCf Fraction of degradable organic carbon (DOC) that can
decompose
- 0.5
MCF Methane correction factor - 0.8
23 For 2 months duration starting November 1, 2010 (Start of Crediting Period) to December 31, 2010
24 For 10 months duration starting January 1, 2017 to October 31, 2017
PROJECT DESIGN DOCUMENT FORM (CDM PDD) - Version 03
CDM – Executive Board
page 40
Wj,x Amount of organic waste type j prevented from disposal in the
SWDS in the year x (12 months)
Tons/yr 547500
DOCj Fraction of degradable organic carbon (by weight) in the waste
type j
- Given in
Annex 5
kj Decay rate for the waste type j - AM 0025
j Waste type category (index) - AM 0025
x
Year during the crediting period: x runs from the first year of
the first crediting period
(x = 1) to the year y for which avoided emissions are calculated
(x = y)
- 2010
Y Year for which methane emissions are calculated (first crediting
period)
- 2017
Where different waste types j are prevented from disposal, determine the amount of different waste types
(Wj,x) through sampling and calculate the mean from the samples, as follows:
Summary of baseline emission:
Year Baseline emission
201025
19.904
2011 200,372
2012 255,473
2013 293,191
2014 319,203
2015 337,320
2016 350,097
201726
299,378
Total (tonnes of CO2e) 2,074,938
Leakage:
1. Emissions from waste transportation (Lt,y,w):
Parameter Description Unit Values
MSW Compost
Total operational days Days 365 365
Truck capacity Tons/trip 4 4
Quantity Tons/day 1500 525
NOvehicles,i,y Number of vehicles for transport with similar
loading capacity
- 136,875 47,906
DTi,y Average additional distance travelled by vehicle Km 20 150
25 For 2 months duration starting November 1, 2010 (Start of Crediting Period) to December 31, 2010
26 For 10 months duration starting January 1, 2017 to October 31, 2017
PROJECT DESIGN DOCUMENT FORM (CDM PDD) - Version 03
CDM – Executive Board
page 41
type i compared to baseline in year y (km)
VFcons Vehicle fuel consumption in litres per kilometre for
vehicle type i (l/km)
l/km 0.15727
0.157
NCVfuel Calorific value of the fuel MJ/Kg 43.33 43.33
Dfuel Fuel density kg/l 0.885 0.885
EFfuel Emission factor of the fuel tCO2/MJ 74.1 74.1
D Total days No of Days 365 365
Lty Leakage emission from transportation in the
year y (in 12 months)
tCO2 1,221 3,206
2. Emissions from residual waste from compost in case it is disposed of in landfills (Lr,y) The residual waste from project will not be dumped in landfills but will be used as a construction and or
road filling. Hence, Leakage from residual waste produced in the project is considered to be zero.
However, the end use of the residual waste will be monitored and leakage emission from residual waste
delivered to landfill (if any) will be estimated ex post. CH4 emissions shall be estimated using estimated
weights of each waste type (Aci,x). The composition analysis of the compost rejects will be done as per
the Annex 4.1.
For the purpose of PDD, residual waste to be disposed in landfill is considered zero. Further, it is assumed
that the compost rejects/ residue will have the similar composition as of original input MSW as follows:
Table: Composition of compost rejects/ residue
Fraction Type % fraction
Vegetables & food waste 85%
Paper 4%
Textiles 1%
Garden Waste 0%
Wood & wood products 0%
Emission is calculated using equation 12. Calculated emissions are given in table below.
Table: Summary of Leakage
Year Emissions from waste
transportation (Lt,y,w)
Emissions from
residual waste from
compost in case it is
disposed of in
landfills (Lr,y)
Total
201028
738 0 738
2011 4427 0 4427
2012 4427 0 4427
2013 4427 0 4427
2014 4427 0 4427
27 CO2 emissions from transport or mobile sources. The Greenhouse Gas Protocol Initiative.
The Diesel light truck value in Table 4. http://www.ghgprotocol.org/calculation-tools/all-tools.
28 For 2 months duration starting November 1, 2010 (Start of Crediting Period) to December 31, 2010
PROJECT DESIGN DOCUMENT FORM (CDM PDD) - Version 03
CDM – Executive Board
page 42
2015 4427 0 4427
2016 4427 0 4427
201729
3689 0 3689
Total (tonnes
of CO2e)
30,989
0 30,989
B.6.4 Summary of the ex-ante estimation of emission reductions:
Year Estimation of
project
activity
emissions
(tCO2 e)
Estimations of
baseline emissions
(tCO2 e)
Estimation of
leakage
(tCO2 e)
Estimation of
overall emission
reductions
(tCO2 e)
201030
1112 19,904 738 18,054
2011 8,291 200,372 4427 187,655
2012 9,393 255,473 4427 241,654
2013 10,147 293,191 4427 278,617
2014 10,667 319,203 4427 304,109
2015 11,029 337,320 4427 321,863
2016 11,285 350,097 4427 334,385
201731
9,557 299,378 3689 286,132
Total (tonnes
of CO2e) 71,480
2,074,938
30,989
1,972,468
B.7. Application of the monitoring methodology and description of the monitoring plan:
B.7.1 Data and parameters monitored:
Data / Parameter: EGPJ,FF,y
Data unit: MWh
Description: Amount of electricity consumed from the grid as a result of the project
activity
Source of data to be used: Electricity meter
Value of data applied for the
purpose of calculating
expected emission
reductions in section B.5
20
(Annual electricity consumption, based on actual monthly data for
February 2010, which happens to be 0.56 MWh, translates to 6.72
MWh/Year. A value of 20 MWh, has been used for conservative
estimates anticipating increase in electricity consumption in the future.
This parameter will be monitored and the actual value will be used for ex-
post calculation of emission reductions.
Description of measurement The power consumption from the grid will be measured using electricity
29 For 10 months duration starting January 1, 2017 to October 31, 2017
30 For 2 months duration starting November 1, 2010 (Start of Crediting Period) to December 31, 2010
31 For 10 months duration starting January 1, 2017 to October 31, 2017
PROJECT DESIGN DOCUMENT FORM (CDM PDD) - Version 03
CDM – Executive Board
page 43
methods and procedures to
be applied:
meter or it shall be taken from the monthly electricity bills.
QA/QC procedures to be
applied:
Electricity meter will be subject to regular (in accordance with stipulation
of the meter supplier) maintenance and testing to ensure accuracy. The
readings will be double checked by the electricity distribution company
purchase invoices.
Any comment: Monitoring Frequency: Continuous and aggregated monthly/annually
Data Archiving: Electronically and paper backup (+2 year of credit
period)
Data / Parameter: Fcons,y
Data unit: Litre
Description: Fuel consumption on-site during year 'y' of the crediting period.
Source of data to be used: Purchase invoices
Value of data applied for the
purpose of calculating
expected emission
reductions in section B.5
603,953
(
At the rate of 371.66 litres/day fuel consumption recorded for the month
of September, 2009, when the waste processing was at 336.92 TPD, fuel
consumption for a 1500 TPD plant is estimated to be 603,953
Litres/year.)
Description of measurement
methods and procedures to
be applied:
Fuel consumption will be recorded in daily log books and aggregated
monthly and annually.
QA/QC procedures to be
applied:
Annual fuel consumption will be cross checked with fuel purchase
invoices.
Any comment: Monitoring frequency: Aggregated monthly/ annually
Data achieving: Electronically and paper backup (+2 year of credit
period)
Data / Parameter: Wx
Data unit: Tonnes
Description: Total amount of municipal solid waste prevented from disposal in year x
Source of data to be used: Plant records
Value of data applied for the
purpose of calculating
expected emission
reductions in section B.5
547500 tonnes/year (Expected value for maximum capacity utilization i.e.
1500 TPD and 365 days of operation per annum)
Description of measurement
methods and procedures to
be applied:
Each truck carrying waste will be measured using weighbridge (s), which
will be installed at the entrance of the plant. In case the installation of the
weighbridge is either delayed or dropped, the weight of a standard load of
waste carried by each truck shall be established in any nearby
weighbridge once in every six months and the corresponding values shall
be used to calculate the quantity of waste brought in to the facility by
PROJECT DESIGN DOCUMENT FORM (CDM PDD) - Version 03
CDM – Executive Board
page 44
multiplying the number of trips of each truck with its standard load
weight.
QA/QC procedures to be
applied:
Weighbridge (s) will be calibrated annually.
Any comment: Monitoring frequency: Continuously and monthly/ annually aggregation
Data achieving: Electronically and paper backup (+2 year of credit
period)
Data / Parameter: Pn,j,x
Data unit: %
Description: Weight fraction of the waste type j in the sample n collected during the
year x
Source of data to be used: Sample analysis by PP
Value of data applied for the
purpose of calculating
expected emission
reductions in section B.5
Fraction Type MSW composition processed
Vegetables & food waste 85%
Paper 4%
Textiles 1%
Garden Waste 0.0%
Wood & wood products 0%
Reference: Characteristics of market waste provided by Lagos Waste
Management Authority (LAWMA)
3.
Description of measurement
methods and procedures to
be applied:
- Sampling procedure is outlined in Annex 4.1
- The size and frequency of sampling should be statistically significant
with a maximum uncertainty range 20% at a 95% confidence level. As
provided in Annex 4.4, total 24 samples per annum will be analysed.
-
QA/QC procedures to be
applied:
-Minimum four samples will be analysed by National Accredited
Laboratory quarterly
Any comment: Monitoring frequency: 24 samples/ annum
Data achieving: Electronically and paper backup (+2 year of credit
period)
Data / Parameter: Mcompost,y
Data unit: Tonnes
Description: Total quantity of compost produced in year „y‟.
Source of data to be used: Plant records
Value of data applied for the
purpose of calculating
expected emission
reductions in section B.5
191625 (35% of waste processed at for maximum capacity utilization i.e.
1500 TPD).
Description of measurement
methods and procedures to
be applied:
Each compost truck will be measured using weighbridge (s) installed at
the gate. The temporary stored compost will also be measured.
QA/QC procedures to be Cross checked with compost sale invoices.
PROJECT DESIGN DOCUMENT FORM (CDM PDD) - Version 03
CDM – Executive Board
page 45
applied:
Any comment: Monitoring frequency: Continuously and monthly/ annually aggregation
Data achieving: Electronically and paper backup (+2 year of credit
period)
Data / Parameter: RATECompliance
y
Data unit: Fraction
Description: State level compliance rate of the MSW Management rules in the year y
Source of data to be used: Monitored ex post based on the published information /annual report or
other reputed source or verifiable and accurate data to be provided by the
municipal bodies/state agency.
Value of data applied for the
purpose of calculating
expected emission
reductions in section B.5
0 (A value of zero has been considered as Nigeria does not have any
MSW Management Rules that mandate composting as the only option for
waste treatment).
Description of measurement
methods and procedures to
be applied:
The compliance rate is based on the annual reporting of the municipal
bodies issuing these reports. If the compliance rate exceeds 50%, no
CERs can be claimed.
QA/QC procedures to be
applied:
-
Any comment: Monitoring Frequency Annual
Data / Parameter: NOvehicles,i,y
Data unit: Number
Description: No of Vehicle i trips per year carrying waste and delivering compost to
end users
Source of data to be used: Plant records for Compost deliveries
Value of data applied for the
purpose of calculating
expected emission
reductions in section B.5
MSW= (1500*365)/5 =109500
Compost =(525*365)/5 = 38325
(Please refer Section: Leakage, page, 39)
Description of measurement
methods and procedures to
be applied:
Number of vehicles and total km travelled by the vehicles will be
recorded on daily basis. Average number of vehicle per carrying capacity
per year will be calculated using the aggregated annual values.
QA/QC procedures to be
applied:
Number of vehicles and average load should will be cross checked with
total amount of waste, compost and compost rejects delivered to and from
the facility.
Any comment: Monitoring frequency: Continuously and monthly/ annually aggregation
Data achieving: Electronically and paper backup (+2 year of credit
period)
Data / Parameter: DTi,y
Data unit: Km
Description: Average additional distance travelled by vehicle type „i‟ compared to the
baseline in year „y‟.
Source of data to be used: Expert estimate, map calculation and/or distance record in vehicle.
Value of data applied for the 20 km for Waste transportation
PROJECT DESIGN DOCUMENT FORM (CDM PDD) - Version 03
CDM – Executive Board
page 46
purpose of calculating
expected emission
reductions in section B.5
150 km for Compost transportation
Since waste will be transported from the nearby markets a distance of 20
KM has been used for waste transportation.
Most of the compost is expected to be used in the state of Lagos and other
nearby states. Therefore a distance of 150 KM has been used for the
purpose of PDD.
The actual distances for transport of waste will be monitored based on
areas from which the waste will be ultimate collected and for compost
based on the actual sales.
Description of measurement
methods and procedures to
be applied:
The distance covered by the vehicles for compost, waste and compost
residue delivery to and from the facility will be recorded on daily basis.
QA/QC procedures to be
applied:
The recorded distance will be cross checked with the actual average
distance based on distance map.
Any comment: Monitoring frequency: Continuously and monthly/ annually aggregation
Data achieving: Electronically and paper backup (+2 year of credit
period)
Data / Parameter: Sa,y
Data unit: %
Description: Share of the waste that degrades under anaerobic conditions in the
composting plant during year „y‟.
Source of data to be used: Plant records
Value of data applied for the
purpose of calculating
expected emission
reductions in section B.5
2%
The company will adhere to strict operating conditions in order to ensure
quality of compost. For the purpose of PDD share of wastes expected to
degrade under anaerobic condition is assumed to be 2%. In reality this
parameter will be monitored.
Description of measurement
methods and procedures to
be applied:
O2 measurement-instrument will be calibrated periodically in accordance
with stipulation of instrument-supplier. A statistically significant
sampling procedure will be set up that consists of multiple measurements
throughout the different stages of the composting process according to a
predetermined pattern (depths and scatter) on a weekly basis.
QA/QC procedures to be
applied:
Refer STotal,y
Any comment: -
Data / Parameter: SOD,y
Data unit: Number
Description: Number of samples with oxygen deficiency (i.e. oxygen content below
10%)
Source of data to be used: Oxygen measurement device
PROJECT DESIGN DOCUMENT FORM (CDM PDD) - Version 03
CDM – Executive Board
page 47
Value of data applied for the
purpose of calculating
expected emission
reductions in section B.5
24
Description of measurement
methods and procedures to
be applied:
O2-measurement-instrument will be subject to periodic calibration (in
accordance with stipulation of instrument-supplier). Measurement itself to
be done by using a standardised mobile gas detection instrument. A
statistically significant sampling procedure will be set up that consists of
multiple measurements throughout the different stages of the composting
process according to a predetermined pattern (depths and scatter) on a
weekly basis.
QA/QC procedures to be
applied:
STotal,y
Any comment: Samples with oxygen content <10%. Weekly measurements throughout
the year but accumulated once per year only.
Data / Parameter: STotal,y
Data unit: Number
Description: Number of samples
Source of data to be used: Oxygen measurement device
Value of data applied for the
purpose of calculating
expected emission
reductions in section B.5
Weekly
Description of measurement
methods and procedures to
be applied:
O2-measurement-instrument will be subject to periodic calibration (in
accordance with stipulation of instrument-supplier). Measurement itself to
be done by using a standardised mobile gas detection instrument. A
statistically significant sampling procedure will be set up that consists of
multiple measurements throughout the different stages of the composting
process according to a predetermined pattern (depths and scatter) on a
daily basis. Please refer Annex 4.2.
QA/QC procedures to be
applied:
Total number of samples taken per year, where STotal,y should be chosen in
a manner that ensures estimation of Sa,y with 20% uncertainty at 95%
confidence level. To determine the oxygen content during the process,
project participants shall measure the oxygen content according to a
predetermined sampling scheme and frequency. These measurements will
be undertaken for each year of the crediting period and recorded each
year.
Any comment: -
B.7.2. Description of the monitoring plan:
ENL will have procedures for monitoring and recording of data on operation & maintenance of the plant
equipments. This monitoring plan is developed in accordance with approved Methodology AM0025. The
subsequent sections describes about the monitoring plan including CDM team, monitoring practices,
quality assurance, quality control procedures, data storage and archiving.
Monitoring Plan:
PROJECT DESIGN DOCUMENT FORM (CDM PDD) - Version 03
CDM – Executive Board
page 48
Following components are identified as the integral part of the monitoring plan for proposed project
activity.
i. Composition of CDM Team:
The CDM Team proposed for monitoring of emission reductions due to the project activity
performs various functions such as measuring, recording, storage of measured data and reporting.
The CDM Team will comprise of following members;Plant General Manager,
Production In- charge
Maintenance Engineers
Shift In- Charge/ Shift Supervisor
Operators
ii. Responsibilities of CDM Team:
The Plant General Manager will be the responsible person for overall operation and maintenance of the
project activity. The Production In-charge will maintain all the data records and ensures the completeness
and reliability of the data. Maintenance Engineers will be responsible for equipments/meters maintenance
and calibration, etc.. The Shift In-charge/ Shift supervisors and operators will maintain the day to day
sampling and data collection. Following table provides the details of the responsibilities of CDM team;
Table: Responsibilities of the CDM team
S. No. Entity Responsibilities
1. Plant General
Manager
i. Supervise the project operation in compliance with the
monitoring plan
ii. Internal audit and project conformance reviews
iii. Reviewing of records and monitored data and sign off the
data on a monthly basis
iv. Responsibility for closing project non conformances and
implementing corrective actions
v. Organizing operation and maintenance and CDM training
programs regularly
2. Production In- Charge i. Implementing all monitoring control procedures and monthly
performance report generation
ii. Ensure QA and QC
iii. Overall responsibility for record handling and maintenance
iv. Organizing internal audit to check the recorded data
v. Supervising training of operators and maintaining training
records
3. Maintenance Engineers i. Overall responsibility for maintenance and calibration of
equipments
ii. Assisting production in-charge for record handling and
organizing internal audits
iii. Supervising shift in-charge in recording data
4. Shift In- charge/
Shift Supervisor
i. Overall responsibility of data collection and compilation
ii. Monitoring and reporting the quality of incoming MSW and
the compost produced
PROJECT DESIGN DOCUMENT FORM (CDM PDD) - Version 03
CDM – Executive Board
page 49
5. Operators i. Maintenance of daily log books and day to day monitoring of
identified parameters
ii. Assisting the overall team in record checking during internal
audit
iii. Monitoring parameters and responsible person:
Identified parameters will be monitored as described in table below.
Parameter Description Frequency Person
Responsible
EGPJ,FF,y Amount of electricity consumed from the grid
as a result of the project activity
Monthly and
annual
aggregation.
Maintenance
Engineer/ Plant
General
Manager
Fcons,y Fuel Consumption on site during the year y of
the crediting period
Daily and annual
aggregation.
Shift In-charge/
Plant General
Manager
Mcompost,y Total quantity of compost produced in year
„y‟
Daily;
Monthly and / or
annual
aggregation.
Production In-
charge
Pn,j,x Weight fraction of the waste type j in the
sample n collected during the year x
24 samples/ year Maintenance
Engineers/ Plant
General manager
Z Number of samples collected during the year
„y‟
24 samples/ year Maintenance
Engineers/ Plant
General
Manager
RATECompliance
y State level compliance rate of the MSW
Management rules in the year y
Annual Plant General
Manager
NOvehicles,i,y Number of Vehicle per carrying capacity per
year
Daily and annual
aggregation.
Operator / Shift
Incharge
DTi,y Average additional distance travelled by
vehicle type „i‟ compared to the baseline in
year „y‟
Daily and annual
aggregation.
Operator / Shift
Incharge
VFcons,i Vehicle fuel consumption in litres per kilometre
for vehicle type i Daily and annual
aggregation.
Operator / Shift
Incharge
Sa,y Share of the waste that degrades under
anaerobic conditions in the composting plant
during year „y‟
- Operator / Shift
Incharge
SOD,y Number of samples with oxygen deficiency
(i.e. oxygen content below 10%)
Annual
aggregation
Operator / Shift
Incharge
STotal,y Number of samples Weekly and
annual
aggregation
Operator / Shift
In-charge
Aj,x Amount of organic waste type j prevented from
disposal in the landfill in the year Continuous and
annual
aggregation.
Operator / Shift
In-charge/ Plant
General
Manager
PROJECT DESIGN DOCUMENT FORM (CDM PDD) - Version 03
CDM – Executive Board
page 50
iv. Calibration and Maintenance of the metering Systems:
All measuring and analytical instruments will be subject to periodic calibration in accordance with
stipulation of supplier and or relevant national/sector standard and/or regulation as indicated in Table
above. The calibration records will be kept for every instrument irrespective of its frequency of usage,
the equipment is an operational or spare unit. Maintenance engineers will be the responsible entity for this
activity.
v. Reporting of the Monitored Parameters:
Data flow is given in figure below. The monitored data will be compiled at the end of each month by the
relative departments. Further, monthly monitoring report will be prepared by relative departments/
authority and reported to the Plant General Manager. Based on the CDM regulation and the monitoring
report will be issued annually by the Plant General Manager.
Fig. Schematic diagram for data flow
vi. Archiving of Data:
All data will be kept in both electronic and/ or paper form. The archived data shall be kept for two
years after the crediting period or issuance of CERs.
vii. Internal Audits:
ENL will conduct internal audits of all monitored records of composting facility twice a year. Plant
manager will be the responsible for person for organizing internal audits with the help of other CDM
team member. During internal audits, the monitored records will be cross checked as per the
monitoring plan.
viii. Training of CDM Team:
The Plant General Manager will ensure that all staff employed at ENL composting facility are trained
in the following subject areas:
Monthly Monitoring report
Daily Log Sheet
Physical Project Activity
Operators Shift Supervisor/ Shift In-charge
Maintenance Engineers
Production In-Charge
Other Sources Plant General
manager
DoE
Monitoring Report
PROJECT DESIGN DOCUMENT FORM (CDM PDD) - Version 03
CDM – Executive Board
page 51
i. General operation of the composting facility;
ii. Specific job roles and procedures as defined in section 4.2; and
iii. Contingency plans and emergency response procedures.
The training of the CDM team will be carried out on CDM principles. Step-by-step instructions on how
the data should be measured, logged, consolidated and archived shall be provided to these personnel
through a planned schedule made in advance and a record of various training programmes undertaken
should be kept for verification.
ix. Emergency Preparedness:
CDM team will be responsible for preventive maintenance, handling emergency situations and
improvement measures under the overall responsibility of Plant General Manager . If any problem
occurred, the monitoring staff will inform the Plant General Manager immediately. If monitoring
equipment is broken, relevant staffs will repair it as soon as possible according to the specification. If the
equipment cannot be repaired, replacement will be carried out immediately. The missing data during
repair and replacement will be identified in conservative manner which results minimum emission
reductions. For instance, if the electricity meter is not functioning, the electricity consumption will adopt
the maximum historical data for resulting maximum project emissions; if the weighbridge is broken, the
treated MSW will adopt minimum historical data for resulting minimum baseline emissions. Monitoring
team will take measures to ensure to avoid similar problem in future. The periodic audits will include the
review of necessary corrective action and also the tracking of the completion of the corrective measure.
ENL has envisaged following conditions which can cause unintended emission in the project activity;
Emission from MSW storage
If there is a major breakdown in the facility, stored MSW can lead to emissions and order nuisance. For
such situation, plant manager will make sure the stored MSW is turned on regular basis and kept in small
heaps to avoid such situation. In addition to ensure the aerobic condition in stored waste oxygen samples
will be taken on regular basis as per the procedure given in annex 4.2. Records of the same will be kept
for verification. During such period the waste transportation will also be suspended temporarily.
Emission from compost storage
Storage of final compost due to any breakdown in packaging machines can lead to unintended project
emissions. Therefore, ENL will have a spare packaging machine along with the emergency plan for
deployment of trained manpower for manual packaging. Production In charge will be the responsible
person for such conditions. Records of the same will be kept for verification.
Emission from compost rejects/residue storage
Long term storage of compost rejects/residue due to unforeseen reasons can also lead to project
emissions. During this period, ENL will monitor the stored compost reject/ residue on periodic basis to
ensure aerobic conditions. Production In charge will be the responsible person for such conditions.
Records of the same will be kept for verification.
x. Monitoring of Sustainable Development Indicators/ Environmental Impacts ENL will ensure that its operations are carried out with due regard to environmental safety by minimizing
or completely eliminating all harmful discharge into the air, water and soil. To ensure the same ENL will
take following actions;
1. Ensuring compliance with all local/state/ national statutory compliance
PROJECT DESIGN DOCUMENT FORM (CDM PDD) - Version 03
CDM – Executive Board
page 52
2. Ensure periodic auditing of its environmental policy and operations with regard to the
environmental parameters highlighted in Environment Impact Assessment (EIA)
3. Establishment of effective information dissemination network about the company‟s environment
policy among all stakeholders like; workers, local stakeholders, government.
4. Establishment of demonstration centres for local farmers
5. Contribution to funding environmental related research and sponsorship of educational project
for local stakeholders, as may be applicable
Plant General Manager will be the responsible person to organize review/ audit to ensure the continuous
contribution to the sustainable development of host country (Table below). These audit/review report will
be archived electronically and or paper backup for review and necessary actions. The monitoring process
will be subject to modification as per to accesses effectiveness and achieve the desired results.
Particulars SD Indicators Purpose Frequecny Responsible Entity
Regulatory/
Statutory
Compliance Audit
Environmental To ensure compliance
with local/ state/ national
guidelines
Quarterly Plant General
Manager/
Production Manager
Environment
Management Audit
Environmental To ensure
implementation and
review of company‟s
environmental policy
Quarterly Plant General
Manager/
Production manager
Health Audit Social To ensure the safety of
workers in work
environment
Quarterly Plant Manger/
Production Manager
Employment Economic To ensure the
contribution to the
economic development
of the region
Annual Plant Manager/
Accounts head
Grants Social/
Economic
To ensure the
contribution to social and
economic development
Annual Plant General
Manager/
Production Manager
Demonstration
centres
Social To ensure the
dissemination of
information among the
local farmers
Half yearly Plant General
Manager/
Production manager
B.8. Date of completion of the application of the baseline study and monitoring methodology and
the name of the responsible person(s)/entity(ies):
Date of completion 25/10/2008
Emergent Ventures India Pvt. Ltd.
5th Floor, Universal Trade Tower
Gurgaon- Sohna Road, Sector 49
PROJECT DESIGN DOCUMENT FORM (CDM PDD) - Version 03
CDM – Executive Board
page 53
Gurgaon-122001, Haryana, India
SECTION C. Duration of the project activity / crediting period
C.1. Duration of the project activity:
C.1.1. Starting date of the project activity:
July 14, 2005 (Equipment Purchase Order placed)
C.1.2. Expected operational lifetime of the project activity:
25 Years
C.2. Choice of the crediting period and related information:
The project will use a renewable crediting period
C.2.1. Renewable crediting period:
C.2.1.1. Starting date of the first crediting period:
1/11/2010 or the project registration date whichever is later
C.2.1.2. Length of the first crediting period:
7 years
C.2.2. Fixed crediting period:
C.2.2.1. Starting date:
NA
C.2.2.2. Length:
NA
PROJECT DESIGN DOCUMENT FORM (CDM PDD) - Version 03
CDM – Executive Board
page 54
SECTION D. Environmental impacts
D.1. Documentation on the analysis of the environmental impacts, including transboundary
impacts:
An Environmental Impact Assessment for composting facility was conducted and approved by the
Federal Ministry of Environment, Nigeria. According to the EIA Report, the environment impacts
possibly caused by the Project and the corresponding mitigating measures adopted by the ENL are
analyzed as followings:
Construction phase impacts:
Air Quality:
The potential sources of air pollution are the fugitive dust produced by the movement of soils during site
clearing, grading and filling. Emission from internal combustion engines of vehicles and construction
equipment. These emissions are short term and localized to immediate site area. To avoid these emissions
engines, regular maintenance check of vehicles and construction equipment will be done. Emissions of
the fugitive dusts will be reduced by periodic spraying of water.
Geology and Soil:
Impacts to geology are not expected as site clearing and preparation had been effected during the
construction. The potential for soil erosion and degradation during the construction of the facility will be
greatly reduced by the forest buffer to be created around the project site and channelled to the rainwater
pond to reuse. Therefore no adverse impact on soil is envisaged.
Solid and liquid waste:
The construction will generate solid and liquid waste during construction such as slag, discarded solid,
wastewater from vehicles cleaning and sewage. The solid waste will be transferred to on-site disposal
point, which will be further used for building on-site road or landfilling at project site. The construction
personnel will be properly trained to handle and disposal of solid and liquid wastes to avoid accidental
spillage and to clean spillage appropriately.
Surface and ground water quality:
To mitigate the surface water pollution, the berms would be put to avoid washing away of the excavated
soil. The project is not expected to impact on groundwater in any adverse way. Ground water flow is not
expected to be disturbed during construction or operation phases. The storage area for lubricating and
waste oils, diesel fuel and other chemicals and solvents will be designed and built to prevent any
accidental spill infiltrating to the ground level.
Noise:
Noise arising from construction activities is expected to be the minimal and restricted to the project site
and of short duration. Adequate personnel protective equipment (PPE) will be provided to the workers
and site personnel.
Vegetation:
PROJECT DESIGN DOCUMENT FORM (CDM PDD) - Version 03
CDM – Executive Board
page 55
Construction activities are expected to impact significantly on wildlife and vegetation of the region. This
is the only significant impact of the project activity, which will be mitigated by putting buffered forest
around the project site.
Operation Phase impacts:
Air Quality:
The only significant source of air pollution during plant operation are the delivery trucks, diesel driven
grinder, screeners, loaders and ploughing tractors. Carbon dioxide and some methane may also be
emitted. The vegetation buffer zone will act as a sink for the emitted gases while the level other air
pollutants is expected to be insignificant.
Odour is a major concern in composting. But the inoculants eliminate or reduced the odour to a bare
minimum within one hour of application. The vegetation buffer around the project site is another
mitigation measure that will reduce the spread of odour.
Noise:
Noise generation will be limited to pieces of equipments to be used at the project site and to move
materials around. The level of noise will be insignificant but personnel at noise end of operation will be
mandated to wear ear muffs.
Geology and soil:
Significant adverse impact on the geology of the project site is not anticipated during the operation at the
project site. However the soil may be impacted though not significantly. The impact on soil can be
mitigated by using best available technology to convey waste and move loads around.
Surface and ground water quality:
The operation of the compost facility is not expected to affect significantly the ground water quality as the
dam will impound all storm water for reuse. The floor of the facility and the compost pads will be
concertized and the later lined will synthetic polymers to reduce permeability.
Vegetation and wild life:
The major impact would be during the construction phase only. And it is expected the composting may
indeed encourage some farmhouse wild life activity.
Environment Management and monitoring plan:
ENL is carrying out its business activities which is primarily the composting of biodegradable has a
standing policy of doing this in a law full manner with a strong emphasis on maintain a safe and healthy
environment for its employees and the general public. It is also part of the policy to minimize the bare
minimum effects of its activities and the natural environment within its area of activity.
The compost facility within its activities to maintain, manage and monitor the environmental indicators of
pollution to resist altering the natural ecosystem of the area.
D.2. If environmental impacts are considered significant by the project participants or the host
Party, please provide conclusions and all references to support documentation of an environmental
impact assessment undertaken in accordance with the procedures as required by the host Party:
PROJECT DESIGN DOCUMENT FORM (CDM PDD) - Version 03
CDM – Executive Board
page 56
The proposed project activity is designed to be state of the art composting facility, environment friendly
and sustainable. There is no adverse impact by the project activity on the environment (air, water, soil) as
discussed in previous section. It has only positive impacts in the form of emission reduction of GHG.
SECTION E. Stakeholders’ comments
E.1. Brief description how comments by local stakeholders have been invited and compiled:
ENL initiated the stakeholder consultation process by taking out a newspaper advertisement on 17
December, 2008, informing the locals about the project activity, its benefits, expected carbon credit
realization and the date and venue of the stakeholders‟ consultation meeting. The advertisement asked for
comments and suggestions that may help the project deliver benefits more efficiently to all parties
concerned. In addition to the newspaper advertisement, residents of Ikorodu farm settlement, Odogunyan
community and Ikorodu North Local Government area were informed by notices displayed at prominent
public places. LAWMA, the State Ministry for Environment, ENL employees and service providers were
also informed and their presence requested for the meeting.
The stakeholder consultation meeting was held on 19 December at the ENL composting facilities‟
premise. The attendees included:
1. Managing Director, Lagos State Waste Management Authority, LAWMA
2. Project Coordinator, Nigeria Liquefied Natural Gas
3. Project Coordinator, Lagos State Ministry for the Environment
4. Other Representatives from LAWMA
5. Representatives from Ikorodu farm settlements
6. Representatives from Odogunyan community
7. Residents from Ikorodu North Local Government area
8. Members of staff of ENL
Discussions on the project activity and its implications ensued and recorded as minutes of the meeting.
E.2. Summary of the comments received:
The gathering was introduced to Greenhouse gas effect, methane mitigation potential of the project and
the Clean Development Mechanism. The positive impact of carbon financing on such projects was also
mentioned in the address. After introduction, the meeting turned into interactive sessions. The queries of
the gathering were taken and answered. The queries/comments received, have been summarised below:
Question: How does clean development mechanism benefit society?
Response: CDM is a tool to provide incentives to mitigate the emission of greenhouse gases which are
enhancing the climate change. The purpose of this programme is to reduce emission of greenhouse gases
as well as promote sustainable development in the host country. Therefore developing country like
Nigeria will gain financial and environmental benefits by reducing the emissions of ever increasing
GHGs.
Question: What are carbon credits? How these will be obtained? Who will buy them?
PROJECT DESIGN DOCUMENT FORM (CDM PDD) - Version 03
CDM – Executive Board
page 57
Response: Carbon credits are generated in the developing countries by reducing the greenhouse gas
emission to the atmosphere. One ton of carbon dioxide saved equals one carbon credit. All steps of CDM
cycle and carbon credit monetization were explained.
Question: What is the price of one credit?
Response: Carbon credits are priced at about US$20 which changes from time to time like shares.
The stakeholders welcomed the project activity and its cause. LAWMA officials commended the project
as being a positive step towards more efficient waste management in the Lagos state.
The farmer representatives welcomed the stakeholder consultation process and requested that more such
forums be undertaken in future.
E.3. Report on how due account was taken of any comments received:
The comments/suggestions/queries received at every stage of the stakeholder consultation process were
duly noted and recorded. All queries and comments were responded to in the best possible manner.
Project was well taken and appreciated by the local stakeholders. ENL has welcomed the suggestion and
planned to organise such forums in future as well to disseminate project related information and to
receive suggestions from local stakeholders. No negative comment was received.
PROJECT DESIGN DOCUMENT FORM (CDM PDD) - Version 03
CDM – Executive Board
page 58
Annex 1
CONTACT INFORMATION ON PARTICIPANTS IN THE PROJECT ACTIVITY
Organization: International Bank for Reconstruction and Development as the Trustee for the
Carbon Fund for Europe (CFE)
Street/P.O.Box: 1818 H street NW
Building: MC
City: Washington
State/Region: DC
Postcode/ZIP: 20433
Country: USA
Telephone: 1202 473 9189
FAX: 1202 522 7432
E-Mail: [email protected]
URL: www.carbonfinance.org
Represented by:
Title: Manager, Carbon Finance Unit
Salutation:
Last name: Chassard
Middle name:
First name: Joelle
Department: ENVCF
Mobile:
Direct FAX:
Direct tel: -
Personal e-mail: -
Organization: Fundo Portugues de Carbono (Portuguese Carbon Fund)
Street/P.O.Box: Rua de S. Domingos A Lapa No. 26
Building:
City: Lisbon
State/Region:
Postcode/ZIP:
Country: Portugal
Telephone: (351-21) 323-2593
FAX: (351-21) 394-6877
E-Mail: [email protected]
URL:
Represented by: Nuno Lacasta
Title: Director of the Office of International Relations
Salutation: Mr.
Last name: Lacasta
Middle name:
First name: Nuno
Department: Office of International Relations
PROJECT DESIGN DOCUMENT FORM (CDM PDD) - Version 03
CDM – Executive Board
page 59
Mobile:
Direct FAX:
Direct tel:
Personal e-mail:
Organization: EarthCare Nigeria Ltd.
Street/P.O.Box: 16-24 Ikoyi Road, Obalende
Building:
City: Lagos
State/Region: Lagos
Postcode/ZIP:
Country: Nigeria
Telephone: +234 8072594880, 7037754221, 8023881551
FAX:
E-Mail: [email protected]
URL:
Represented by: Dr. Benjamin Ohiaeri
Title: Director
Salutation: Dr.
Last name: Ohiaeri
Middle name:
First name: Benjamin
Department:
Mobile: +234 8033072810
Direct FAX:
Direct tel:
Personal e-mail:
PROJECT DESIGN DOCUMENT FORM (CDM PDD) - Version 03
CDM – Executive Board
page 60
Annex 2
INFORMATION REGARDING PUBLIC FUNDING
NO public funding from ODA is available to project activity.
PROJECT DESIGN DOCUMENT FORM (CDM PDD) - Version 03
CDM – Executive Board
page 61
Annex 3
BASELINE INFORMATION
“Tool to calculate the emission factor for an electricity system” Version 0232
(hereafter “Tool”) provide
procedures to determine the following parameters to estimate baseline grid emission factor:
Parameter SI Unit Description
EFgrid,CM,y
tCO2/MWh Combined margin CO2 emission factor for the project electricity system in year y
EFgrid,BM,y
tCO2/MWh Build margin CO2 emission factor for the project electricity system in year y
EFgrid,OM,y
tCO2/MWh Operating margin CO2 emission factor for the project electricity system in year y
Baseline Methodology Procedure:
Following seven steps are followed to estimate baseline grid emission factor:
Step 1. Identify the relevant electric power system
Step 2. Choose whether to include off-grid power plants in the project electricity system (optional).
Step 3. Select a method to determine the operating margin (OM)
Step 4. Calculate the operating margin emission factor according to the selected method
Step 5. Identify the group of power units to be included in the build margin (BM)
Step 6. Calculate the build margin emission factor
Step 7. Calculate the combined margin (CM) emissions factor
Step 1. Identify the relevant electric power system:
The tool defines that project electricity system as the spatial extent of the power plants that are physically
connected through transmission and distribution lines to the project activity (e.g. the renewable power
plant location or the consumers where electricity is being saved) and that can be dispatched without
significant transmission constraints.
A connected electricity system, e.g. national or international, is defined as an electricity system that is
connected by transmission lines to the project electricity system. Power plants within the connected
electricity system can be dispatched without significant transmission constraints but transmission to the
project electricity system has significant transmission constraint.
National Grid of Nigeria is identified as connected electricity system for grid emission factor estimation.
Step 2: Choose whether to include off-grid power plants in the project electricity system (optional)
Option I: Only grid power plants are included in the calculation is chosen which corresponds to the
procedure contained in earlier versions of this tool to calculate the operating margin and build margin
emission factor.
Step 3. Select an operating margin (OM) method:
The calculation of the operating margin emission factor (EFgrid,OM,y) is based on one of the following
methods:
32 http://cdm.unfccc.int/methodologies/PAmethodologies/tools/am-tool-07-v2.pdf
PROJECT DESIGN DOCUMENT FORM (CDM PDD) - Version 03
CDM – Executive Board
page 62
(a) Simple OM, or
(b) Simple adjusted OM, or
(c) Dispatch data analysis OM, or
(d) Average OM.
According to the tool Simple OM (option a) can only be used where Low-cost/must-run (LC/MR)
resources comprise less than 50% of the total grid generation in
1) average of the five most recent years, or
2) based on long-term averages for hydroelectricity production.
Where, LC/MR resources are defined as power plants with low marginal generation costs or power plants
that are dispatched independently of the daily or seasonal load of the grid. They typically include hydro,
geothermal, wind, low-cost biomass, nuclear and solar generation.
Simple OM method (a) is applied because low-cost/must-run resources
constitute less than 50% of total
grid generation in the five most recent years. Electricity generation of the five most recent years is
summarized in following table;
)
Table: Power plant-wise electricity generation (2004-2008)
Power
plant
Type
Power plant
Name Generation (MWh)
Total (MWh) 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008
Hydro
KAINJI
2,878,774
2,586,929
2,366,716
2,816,750
2,707,020 13,356,190
JEBBA
2,703,750
2,268,230
2,171,747
2,728,899
2,794,976 12,667,602
SHIRORO
2,425,575
1,236,090
2,432,640
2,230,761
1,941,344 10,266,410
NESCO*
Thermal
EGBIN
7,962,764
8,592,097
4,924,478
3,636,
680
4,381
,564 29,497,584
SAPELE
1,025,568
878,417
185,079
490,790
728,977 3,308,831
AFAM
1,247,813
1,838,934
1,864,110
1,274,103
312,272 6,537,232
DELTA
3,933,785
3,235,212
3,752,054
2,696,719
1,510,988 15,128,758
AES
1,953,276
2,018,364
1,966,492
1,675,496
1,846,702 9,460,330
CALABAR 936
202
-
-
- 1,138
AGGREKO 1,409
-
-
-
- 1,409
GEOMETRIC 1,060
-
-
-
- 1,060
PROJECT DESIGN DOCUMENT FORM (CDM PDD) - Version 03
CDM – Executive Board
page 63
OKPAI -
1,343,611
3,267,430
3,294,207
2,708,671 10,613,919
AJAOKUTA -
80,597
356,452
572,517
30,344 1,039,910
OMOKU -
-
12,282
429,2
68
297,5
80 739,130
OMOTOSHO -
-
-
146,801
491,852 638,653
GEREGU -
-
-
1,193,553
995,875 2,189,427
OLORUNSGO -
-
-
-
418,546 418,546
AFAM6 -
-
-
-
142,3
89 142,389
Total Generation (2004-
2008) - MWh 116008516
Generation from Hydro
(2004-2008) - MWh 36290202
Generation from Other
Sources (2004-2008)-
MWH 79718314
Share of Hydro (%) 31%
Share of Other Sources
(%) 69%
* Data from NESCO Power Plant is not considered as it operates as an isolated system
Above table confirms that average contribution of LC/MR resources i.e., Hydro Power plant is less
than 50% of total grid generation, therefore Simple OM (option a) is used.
For the simple OM, the simple adjusted OM and the average OM, the emissions factor can be calculated
using either of the two following data vintages:
Ex ante option: If the ex ante option is chosen, the emission factor is determined once at the validation
stage, thus no monitoring and recalculation of the emissions factor during the crediting period is required.
For grid power plants, use a 3-year generation-weighted average, based on the most recent data
available at the time of submission of the CDM-PDD to the DOE for validation. For off-grid power
plants, use a single calendar year within the 5 most recent calendar years prior to the time of submission
of the CDM-PDD for validation.
Ex post option: If the ex post option is chosen, the emission factor is determined for the year in which the
project activity displaces grid electricity, requiring the emissions factor to be updated annually during
monitoring. If the data required to calculate the emission factor for year y is usually only available later
than six months after the end of year y, alternatively the emission factor of the previous year y-1 may be
used. If the data is usually only available 18 months after the end of year y, the emission factor of the year
PROJECT DESIGN DOCUMENT FORM (CDM PDD) - Version 03
CDM – Executive Board
page 64
proceeding the previous year y-2 may be used. The same data vintage (y, y-1 or y-2) should be used
throughout all crediting periods.
For Simple OM emission factor calculation Ex ante option is selected and 3- year generation weighted
average is applied.
Step 4. Calculate the operating margin emission factor according to the selected method
The simple OM emission factor is calculated as the generation-weighted average CO2 emissions per unit
net electricity generation (tCO2/MWh) of all generating power plants serving the system, not including
low-cost/must-run power plants/units.
The simple OM may be calculated:
Option A: Based on the net electricity generation and a CO2 emission factor of each power unit;3 or
Option B: Based on the total net electricity generation of all power plants serving the system and the fuel
types and total fuel consumption of the project electricity system.
Option B is selected because:
(a) CO2 emission factor for each unit of the power plant as required by Option A is not available; and
(b) Only renewable power generation (hydro) is considered as low-cost/must-run power sources
and the quantity of electricity supplied to the grid by these sources is known; and
(c) Off-grid power plants are not included in the calculation (i.e., if Option I has been chosen in
Step 2).
Option BCalculation based on total fuel consumption and electricity generation of the system. .
Under this option, the simple OM emission factor is calculated based on the net electricity supplied to the
grid by all power plants serving the system, not including low-cost/must-run power plants/units, and
based on the fuel type(s) and total fuel consumption of the project electricity system, as follows:
EFgrid,OMsimple,y = EGy
xEFxNCVFC yiCOyiyi
i
)( ,,2,,
,
Where;
Parameter Description Unit
EFgrid,OMsimple,y Simple operating margin CO2 emission factor in year y tCO2/MWh
FCi,y Amount of fossil fuel type i consumed by plant/unit m in year y (mass
or volume unit)
NCVi,y Net calorific value (energy content) of fossil fuel type i in the year y
(GJ/mass or volume unit)
EFCO2,i,y CO2 emission factor of fossil fuel type i, in the year y (tCO2/GJ)
PROJECT DESIGN DOCUMENT FORM (CDM PDD) - Version 03
CDM – Executive Board
page 65
EG,,y Net electricity generated and delivered to the grid by power plant/unit
m in year y
MWh
I All fossil fuel types combusted in power plant/unit m in year y
Y The relevant year as per the data vintage chosen in Step 3
In the project activity, (ex-ante) the full generation-weighted average for the most recent 3 years for
which data are available at the time of PDD submission has been considered.
Wherever fuel consumption data was not available, the emission factor of those power plants have been
calculated using the following formulae as suggested in the Tool.
EFEL,m,y =
ym
yimCO xEF
,
,,,2 6.3
Where
Parameter Description Unit
EFEL,m,y CO2 emission factor of power unit m in year y (tCO2/MWh) tCO2/MWh
Amount of fossil fuel type i consumed by plant/unit m in year y (mass
or volume unit)
EFCO2,m,i,y Average CO2 emission factor of fuel type i used in power unit m in year y (tCO2/GJ)
(tCO2/GJ)
ym, Average net energy conversion efficiency of power unit m in year y (ratio)
I All fossil fuel types combusted in power plant/unit m in year y
Y The relevant year as per the data vintage chosen in Step 3
m All power units serving the grid in year y except low-cost/must-run power
units
The data vintage option selected is the ex-ante approach, where a 3 year average OM is calculated as
given in following table
Table: Power plant-wise fuel consumption (2006-2008)
Fuel Type
Power plant
Name
Fuel Consumption for electricity generation
2006-2008 (MMSCF/Year for NG,
Tonnes/Year for Diesel, and no fuel
consumption for Hydro)
2006 2007 2008
HYDRO
KAINJI 0 0 0
JEBBA 0 0 0
SHIRORO 0 0 0
NESCO *
GAS EGBIN 50,523 35,601 47,875
PROJECT DESIGN DOCUMENT FORM (CDM PDD) - Version 03
CDM – Executive Board
page 66
(MMSCF/Year) SAPELE 2,631 7,398 7,675
AFAM 24,732 17,935 4,749
DELTA 48,004 38,216 21,058
AES 24,909 20,709 23,920
CALABAR 0 0 0
AGGREKO 0 0 0
DIESEL
(Tonnes/Year) GEOMETRIC 0 0 0
GAS
(MMSCF/Year)
OKPAI NA NA NA
AJAOKUTA NA NA NA
OMOKU NA NA NA
OMOTOSHO 0 1,393 5,508
GEREGU 0 10,593 11,476
OLORUNSGO 0 0 4,638
AFAM6 0 0 NA
* Data from NESCO Power Plant is not considered as it operates as an
isolated system
NA : Data on fuel consumption was not available.
Table: Calculation of Operating Margin Emission Factor (2006 - 2008)
Plant name
Plant wise Emissions (tCO2/Year)
2006 2007 2008
KAINJI - - -
JEBBA - - -
SHIRORO - - -
NESCO *
EGBIN 3,080,149
2,170,439
2,918,687
SAPELE 160,376
450,992
467,934
AFAM 1,507,810
1,093,380
289,527
DELTA 2,926,584
2,329,860
1,283,796
AES 1,518,587
1,262,513
1,458,297
CALABAR - - -
AGGREKO - - -
GEOMETRIC - - -
OKPAI 1,670,608
1,684,299
1,384,919
PROJECT DESIGN DOCUMENT FORM (CDM PDD) - Version 03
CDM – Executive Board
page 67
AJAOKUTA 182,251
292,723
15,515
OMOKU 6,280
219,481
152,150
OMOTOSHO -
84,903
335,792
GEREGU -
645,822
699,621
OLORUNSGO - -
282,776
AFAM6 - -
72,802
Total Emissions (tCO2) - 2006
11,052,644
Total Emissions (tCO2) - 2007
10,234,411
Total Emissions (tCO2) - 2008
9,361,816
Total Electricity Generated (MWh) - 2006
16,328,377
Total Electricity Generated (MWh) - 2007
15,410,133
Total Electricity Generated (MWh) - 2008
13,865,759
Emission Factor (tCO2/MWh)-2006 0.68
Emission Factor (tCO2/MWh)-2007 0.66
Emission Factor (tCO2/MWh)-2008 0.68
Average OM EF (tCO2/MWh) 0.67
* Data from NESCO Power Plant is not considered as it operates as an isolated system
Table : Inputs for Calculation of Emissions
Parameters Units Values Sources
Net Calorific Value - Diesel TJ/Ktonnes 43.33
IPCC 2006 Guidelines for National
Greenhouse Gas Inventories
Net Calorific Value - Gas TJ/Ktonnes 48.00
IPCC 2006 Guidelines for National
Greenhouse Gas Inventories
Carbon Emission Factor
(CEF) - Diesel tCO2/TJ 74.10
IPCC 2006 Guidelines for National
Greenhouse Gas Inventories
Carbon Emission Factor
(CEF) - Gas tCO2/GJ 0.0561
IPCC 2006 Guidelines for National
Greenhouse Gas Inventories
Carbon Emission Factor
(CEF) - Gas tCO2/TJ 56.10
IPCC 2006 Guidelines for National
Greenhouse Gas Inventories
Density of Natural gas Kg/m3 0.80
IPCC 2006 Guidelines for National
Greenhouse Gas Inventories
PROJECT DESIGN DOCUMENT FORM (CDM PDD) - Version 03
CDM – Executive Board
page 68
Density of Diesel Kg/m3 885 http://www.simetric.co.uk.htm
Efficiency of gas based
Power Plants for which fuel
consumption data was not
available % 39.5%
UNFCCC Tool to calculate the emission
factor for an electricity system Version 02
Conversion Factors used in the calculations
1 Ib/ft3 = 16.018 Kg/m3
1 Kg/m3 = 0.0624 Ib/ft3
1 ft3 = 0.0283 m3
1 MWh = 3.6 GJ
Step 5. Identify the group of power units to be included in the build margin
The sample group of power units m used to calculate the build margin consists of either:
(a) The set of five power units that have been built most recently; or
(b) The set of power capacity additions in the electricity system that comprise 20% of the system
generation (in MWh) and that have been built most recently.
As can be seen from the table below, electricity generation from the set of five power units built most
recently constitutes only 11% of the total generation in the system during the year selected for build
margin calculation (2008). Similarly, electricity generation from six power plants built most recently
represents only 11.2 % of the total generation in 2008. However electricity generation from seven power
plants built most recently represents 23.9% of the total generation, which is more than 20% bench mark
as required by the Tool to select the build margin power plants. These seven power plants have therefore
been identified as the build margin power plants for the purpose of calculating the build margin emission
factor.
Table: Identification of power units for build margin capacity
Plant Name Installed Capacity of
Power Plants (MW)
Electricity
generation (MWh)
in 2008
Year of
Commissioning
KAINJI 760 2,707,020
JEBBA 578.4 2,794,976
SHIRORO 600 1,941,344
NESCO * - -
EGBIN 1320 4,381,564
SAPELE 1020 728,977
AFAM 931.6 312,272
PROJECT DESIGN DOCUMENT FORM (CDM PDD) - Version 03
CDM – Executive Board
page 69
DELTA 882 1,510,988
AES 302 1,846,702
CALABAR -
AGGREKO -
GEOMETRIC -
OKPAI 450 2,708,671
AJAOKUTA 110 30,344
OMOKU 297,580 2006
OMOTOSHO 335 491,852 2007
GEREGU 414 995,875 2007
OLORUNSGO 335 418,546 2007
AFAM6 331.5 142,389 2008
Total Generation (MWh) 21,309,099
Generation in 5 newly built plants (MWh) 2,346,242
Share of 5 newly built plans in the total
generation (%) 11.0%
Generation in 6 newly built plants (MWh) 2,376,586
Share of 6 newly built plans in the total
generation (%) 11.2%
Generation in 7 newly built plants (MWh) 5,085,257
Share of 7 newly built plans in the total
generation (%) 23.9%
* Data from NESCO Power Plant is not considered it operates as an isolated system
As per the requirements of the Tool, the set of 7 power units built most recently and that represents 20%
of the system generation has been considered for build margin calculations. The build margin plants are
highlighted in the table above.
In terms of vintage of data, as per the tool, project participants can choose between one of the following
two options: Option 1: For the first crediting period, calculate the build margin emission factor ex ante based on the
most recent information available on units already built for sample group m at the time of CDM-PDD
submission to the DOE for validation. For the second crediting period, the build margin emission factor
should be updated based on the most recent information available on units already built at the time of
submission of the request for renewal of the crediting period to the DOE. For the third crediting period,
the build margin emission factor calculated for the second crediting period should be used. This option
does not require monitoring the emission factor during the crediting period.
Option 2: For the first crediting period, the build margin emission factor shall be updated annually,
ex post, including those units built up to the year of registration of the project activity or, if information
up to the year of registration is not yet available, including those units built up to the latest year for which
information is available. For the second crediting period, the build margin emissions factor shall be
calculated ex ante, as described in Option 1 above. For the third crediting period, the build margin
PROJECT DESIGN DOCUMENT FORM (CDM PDD) - Version 03
CDM – Executive Board
page 70
emission factor calculated for the second crediting period should be used.
The option chosen should be documented in the CDM-PDD.
Option 1 (ex-ante) has been used by the project participants for calculating the build margin emission
factor for the first crediting period. For the second crediting period, the build margin emission factor
will be updated based on the most recent information available on units already built at the time of
submission of the request for renewal of the crediting period to the DOE. For the third crediting period,
the build margin emission factor calculated for the second crediting period will be used. As per this
option monitoring the emission factor during the crediting period is not required.
STEP 6. Calculate the build margin emission factor (EFgrid, BM,y)
ym
m
m
ymELym
yBMgridEG
xEFEG
EF,
,,,
,,
Where,
EFgrid BM, ,y Build margin CO2 emission factor in t he year y, (tCO2/MWh)
EGm,,y Net quantity of electricity generated and delivered to the grid by power unit m in year y
(MWh)
EFEL,m,y CO2 emission factor of power unit m in the year y, (tCO2/MWh )
m Power units included in the build margin
y Most recent historical year for which power generation data is available.
The CO2 emission factor of each power unit m (EFEL,m,y) is determined for year y using the most recent
historical year for which power generation data is available, and using for m the power units included in
the build margin as follows:
Table: Build Margin Calculations
Power plant name Gas consumed Electricity EF(el,m,y) EF BM
MMSCF MWh tCO2/MWh tCO2/MWh
OKPAI NA 2,708,671 0.51
0.58
AJAOKUTA NA 30,344 0.51
OMOKU NA 297,580 0.51
OMOTOSHO 5,508 491,852 0.68
GEREGU 11,476 995,875 0.70
OLORUNSGO 4,638 418,546 0.68
AFAM6 NA 142,389 0.51
PROJECT DESIGN DOCUMENT FORM (CDM PDD) - Version 03
CDM – Executive Board
page 71
Step7. Calculate the combined margin (CM) emissions factor (EFgrid, CM, y )
The CM is calculated as per the following:
EFCM,y = EFgrid,OM,y * WOM + EFBM,y * WBM
Where:
Parameter Detail
EFBM,y Build Margin CO2 emission factor in the year y (tCO2/GWh)
EFOM,y Operating Margin CO2 emission factor in the year y (tCO2/GWh)
WOM Weighting of operating margin emission factor (%)
WBM Weighting of build margin emission factor (%)
The baseline emission factor for power projects in year y is calculated as the sum of 50% weightage of
OM and 50% weight age of BM emission factor. As noted above, the resulting Combined Margin is fixed
ex ante for the duration of the first crediting period:
Table: Combined Margin Emission Factor
Operating Margin EF tCO2/MWh 0.67
Build Margin EF tCO2/MWh 0.58
Weightage for OM (W1) % 50%
Weightage for BM (W2) % 50%
Combined Margin EF (EF CM) tCO2/MWh 0.63
In the project activity, combined margin has been chosen as the baseline emission factor for grid
emission factor. The value chosen is taken from relevant official sources.
Sources :
1. Annual Technical Report 2004, National Control Centre Osogbo, PHCN
2. Annual Technical Report 2005, National Control Centre Osogbo, PHCN
3. Annual Technical Report 2006, National Control Centre Osogbo, PHCN
4. Annual Technical Report 2007, National Control Centre Osogbo, PHCN
5. Annual Technical Report 2008, National Control Centre Osogbo, PHCN
PROJECT DESIGN DOCUMENT FORM (CDM PDD) - Version 03
CDM – Executive Board
page 72
1. Annex 4
MONITORING INFORMATION
Annex 4.1
Procedure for waste composition analysis:
The composition of incoming waste should be done by sampling fresh waste. At least 24 samples should
be collected and analysed annually.
Methodology for MSW sampling:
For each of the sample, waste from the freshly arrived solid waste will be collected from randomly
selected four incoming trucks. About, 100 Kg of sample will be collected from each truck and a quarter of
sample (25 kg approx) will be retained for sampling. Hence the composite sample size will be 100 Kg (25
kg each from 4 trucks). Physical inspection of the waste in the truck is required to ensure uniform nature
of waste. Using quartering method about 100 kg of composite sample will be drawn out for the original
solid waste. The waste should be sorted to segregate to the required constituents for weighing of each
component. This would be done at the site itself. The parameters would be noted down in format as
provided in table below. The record should be maintained for all sample analysed for verification.
Table: Composition of MSW
Sample No.
Date
S. NO. Waste Composition Weight in Grams
i. Wood and wood products
ii. Pulp, paper, and cardboard (other than sludge)
iii. Kitchen and food waste
iv. Textiles
v. Garden and park waste
vi. Glass, plastic, metal, other inert waste
vii. Total
Comments (if any)
Analysed by
Recorded by
Annex 4.2
Procedure to ensure aerobic condition in the windrow:
In the project activity, aerobic conditions during composting process should be ensured through two
means viz., maintaining specified width to height ratio of windrows and use of mechanical turner with
microbial spraying. The size and shape of the windrows should be designed to allow oxygen to flow
throughout the pile while maintaining its temperature in optimum range. If windrow is too large, oxygen
cannot penetrate to the center, while if it is too small it will not heat up properly result in low rate of
decomposition. The optimum size varies both with the type of material and with season. Therefore
windrows size should be according to the specification provided by technology supplier.
PROJECT DESIGN DOCUMENT FORM (CDM PDD) - Version 03
CDM – Executive Board
page 73
The main goals of turning the compost pile are to promote decomposition by moving material from the
outside to the inside of the pile, and to “fluff” the material so it will be more porous, allowing air to move
freely through the pile. Turning the piles increases the rate of decomposition by mixing of materials and
exposing new surface areas and improved destruction of any pathogens and weed seeds. Turning
frequency should be based on temperature, since temperature reflects decomposition taking place in the
pile. However, windrows may be turned within 1 to 2 weeks after initial windrow construction.
Table: Monitoring of Windrow Turing details
Date:
Windrow ID.
No.
Windrow
Start
Date
Spray of
microbial culture
(Yes/ No)
Widt
h (m)
Height
(m)
Windrow Turning Date
(dd/mm/yy)
1
2
3
4
N
Comments (if
any)
Operator
(Name and
Signature)
Recorded by
(Name and
Signature)
Annex 4.3
Verification procedure for land application of Compost:
To ensure the land application of compost, sample site will be selected randomly from the compiled list
of buyer. Number of sample site will be selected as per the method described in Appendix E for number
of waste sample selection. Approximately 24 number of sites should be visited annually. Following
information should be collected and recorded for verification.
Table: Verification of land application of Compost
Name of Respondent :
Address :
Contact No.:
Date of site visit :
Amount of Compost Sold:
Period:
Crops cultivated during the year:
1.
2.
3.
Type of Compost Use
PROJECT DESIGN DOCUMENT FORM (CDM PDD) - Version 03
CDM – Executive Board
page 74
Surface Use (Yes/ No) Submerged Use (Yes/ No)
Comment (if any)
Signature of Respondent
Name & Signature of Surveyor
Annex 4.4
Procedure for determination of number of samples:
For determining of number of minimum sample for waste composition and soil application of compost is
based upon general statistical methods33
and the formula is given below.
x = Z(c/100)2 r (100-r)………………………………………..(i)
n = Nx/((N-1)E2 + x)……………………………………………(ii)
Where
Parameter Detail Value
n sample size Calculated below
N population size Calculated below
E margin of error 20%
Z(c/100) critical value for the confidence level c 1.96 @ 95% confidence value
R response distribution 50%
X Constant calculated based on confidence
level and response distribution
9604 (Calculated below)
The size of sampling has been determined so that it is statistically significant with a Margin of Error of
20% at a 95% confidence level.
Calculation of Sample Size
Thus the value of x in equation (1) is calculated as:
X = (1.96)2*50*50 = 9604.
The plant will receive 109500 truck load of waste. Thus the population size (N) is 109500.
N = 109500
E = 20%
The sample size as per equation given above:
N = 109500*9604/ ((109500-1)*202 + 9604) = 24
Therefore the Sample Size is 24.
Required Sample size for Variable Population size at 95% confidence level and 20% margin of error:
33 http://www.raosoft.com/samplesize.html
PROJECT DESIGN DOCUMENT FORM (CDM PDD) - Version 03
CDM – Executive Board
page 75
Population Sample Size
500 23
1000 23
5000 24
10000 24
20000 24
30000 24
40000 24
50000 24
60000 24
70000 24
80000 24
90000 24
100000 24
110000 24
120000 24
130000 24
The above table demonstrates that irrespective of population size the sample size remains constant at 24.
Hence sample size of 24 is chosen for sampling of the following parameters
1. Waste Composition
2. Soil application of compost
- - - - -