Voluntary Offset projects
(GS-VER-PDD)
For more information, please contact The Gold Standard: http://www.cdmgoldstandard.org
[email protected] Telephone +41 61 283 09 16
Fax +41 61 271 10 10
Grid-connected electricity generation from
renewable sources:
VOLUNTARY OFFSET PROJECTS
PROJECT DESIGN DOCUMENT FORM (GS-VER-PDD) (Version 01 - in effect as of: January 2006)
CONTENTS
A. General description of project activity B. Application of a baseline methodology
C. Duration of the project activity / Crediting period D. Application of a monitoring methodology and plan E. Estimation of GHG emissions by sources F. Environmental impacts
G. Stakeholders’ comments
Annexes
Annex 1: Contact information on participants in the project activity Annex 2: Baseline information
Annex 3: Monitoring plan
Annex 4: Initial Stakeholder Meeting Invitation List Annex 5: EIA exemption letter
SECTION A. General description of project activity A.1 Title of the project activity
Title: MAZI-3 30 MW Wind Power Plant Project, Turkey Version: 02
Date: June 09th, 2008
A.2. Description of the project activity
The objective of the project activity is to supply electricity from renewable sources to the highly growing Turkish electricity market. The project is expected to generate about 118,500 MWh electricity and result in about 76,734 tons of CO2emission reductions per year.
The MAZI3 Wind Power Plant (WPP) project involves the establishment of a 30 MW wind farm at Zeytineli Village -Urla District of Izmir which is located at the Aegean Coast of Turkey. The owner of the WPP will beMAZI-3 Rüzgar Enerjisi Santrali Elektrik Üretim A.Ş. The Wind farm is planned to consist of 12 wind turbines each having a capacity of 2.5 MW. Connection to the grid will be made via an 8 kilometre transmission line.
Since the project results in green house gas (GHG) emission reduction by increasing the renewable electricity in the Turkish grid, in order to improve the project financial viability, it is proposed to register and implement the project as a Gold Standard Voluntary Emission Reduction (GS-VER) project. Since the financial incentives for the provision of renewable electricity are not satisfying, the financial inflows provided by the sales of emission reduction credits will increase the internal rate of return of the project to an attractive level for investors.
The project will definitely have positive influences on sustainable development in the region and in Turkey. The MAZI-3 WPP will enable the use of local resources for energy production and thus decrease dependency on imported fossil fuels as an energy source. In addition, the project will have a significant effect on air quality in the region; directly and indirectly, create new jobs for local inhabitants during the construction and operation phases. Scores for the sustainable development matrix are given in the table below. Details and explanations are determined according to the section 3.4 of the Gold standard VER Project Developer’s Manual.
Component Indicators Score (-2 to 2)/(-, 0, +)
Rationale Local/regional/global environment
Water quality and quantity 0 Access to water by the community will not be
affected by the project activity Air quality (emissions other than GHGs)
+1 The project has positive impacts on air quality associated with using clean energy Replacing fossil fuel, project will contribute air quality by decreasing SOx, NOx etc. country level. Other pollutants
(including, where relevant, toxicity, radioactivity, POPs, stratospheric ozone layer depleting gases)
+1 Project will replace use of fossil fuels therefore it will inhibit formation of pollutants(like ash etc) which form as a result of combustion.
Soil condition (quality and quantity)
0 The project will not have an impact on soil nutrients since it will not interfere with soil regimes. Area around the turbines can be used for grazing or agricultural activities.
Biodiversity (species and habitat conservation)
0 The project has no impact on biodiversity. No trees will be cut or replaced for project. Existing roads will be renovated for transport of turbines.
Sub total +2
Social sustainability and development
*Employment (including job quality, fulfilment of labour standards)
+1 Significant amount of people work in fish farms in the region. Project will create new opportunities for both skilled and unskilled people.
Livelihood of the poor (including poverty alleviation, distributional equity, and access to essential services)
+1 Project will contribute to poverty alleviation by creating direct and indirect employment opportunities and improve infrastructure of the village (renovation of roads, schools etc) Access to energy services
+1 Electricity delivered to the grid will contribute to the use of local/renewable resources and strengthen security in electricity supply side. *Human and institutional capacity (including empowerment,
education involvement, gender)
+1 Employees will be trained during construction and operational phases. Technicians will be trained by the turbine manufacturers and by TEIAS as stated by the regulations.
Sub total +4
Economic and technological development
*Employment (numbers)
+1 During operation phase, project is expected to create about 15 new job opportunities. This number will increase up to 60 during construction phase.
Balance of payments (sustainability)
+1 Turkey is heavily dependent on imported oil and natural gas for electricity generation. Use of local sources like wind and hydro helps in decreasing the external deficit.
Technological self reliance
(including project reliability, hard currency liability, skills development, institutional capacity, technology transfer)
+1 Project will contribute to dissemination of wind energy technology and development of supporting sectors in Turkey. This will promote the technological capacity and skills of the local industry.
Sub total +3
TOTAL +9
Name of Party involved (*)
((host) indicates a host Party) Private and/or public entity(ies) project participants(*) (as applicable)
Kindly indicate if the Party involved wishes
to be considered as project participant
(Yes/No)
Turkey (Host) MAZI-3 Rüzgar Enerjisi Santrali Elektrik Üretim A.Ş. JP Morgan Ventures Energy Corporation
No Pioneer Carbon is a business unit of JP Morgan Chase.
A.4. Technical description of the project activity: A.4.1. Location of the project activity:
The Project will be implemented near Zeytineli Village – Urla District of Izmir
A.4.1.1. Host Party (ies):
Host country is Republic of TURKEY and she does not have a quantitative reduction target under the Kyoto Protocol. Therefore; the project is eligible for the VER application.
A.4.1.2. Region / State / Province etc.:
Aegean Region, Province of Izmir, District of Urla
A.4.1.3. City / Town / Community etc:
Project is located at Zeytineli Village – Urla District of Izmir.
A.4.1.4. Detail of physical location, including information allowing the unique identification of this project activity (maximum one page):
Project will be implemented at about 80km of west of Izmir and in south of Çesme peninsula. Location of the project activity is shown in maps below (Figure.1&Figure2).
The geographical coordinates have been given in Table.2. Table 2 - Coordinates of the TurbinesFigure 1. Project Location
Turbine East North 1 26°26'10.93955" 38°14'06.49005" 2 26°26'22.24720" 38°14'06.99841" 3 26°26'33.75114" 38°14'08.74027" 4 26°26'45.26706" 38°14'08.92457" 5 26°26'56.39077" 38°14'12.02667" 6 26°27'07.34121" 38°14'16.32808" 7 26°26'29.19760" 38°13'29.49393" 8 26°26'41.52370" 38°13'31.07727" 9 26°26'58.23574" 38°13'29.17690" 10 26°27'09.45623" 38°13'30.13780" 11 26°27'20.95454" 38°13'32.46234" 12 26°27'31.84869" 38°13'38.64462"
Figure 2. Location of Turbines
A.4.2. Size of the project:
Proposed project activity is considered as large scale according to both CDM and Gold Standard rules since the installed capacity is above 15 MW and annual emission reduction by the project activity is far above 15,000 tCO2per
year.
Project category is included in the sectoral scope 1 “Energy Industry – Renewable Sources” according to the UNFCCC definition whereas it is included in category “A.1 Renewable Energy (Electricity/Heat)” according to the GS VER manual.
A.4.4. Brief explanation of how the anthropogenic emissions of anthropogenic greenhouse gas (GHGs) by sources are to be reduced by the proposed project activity, including why the emission reductions would not occur in the absence of the proposed project activity, taking into account national and/or sectoral policies and circumstances:
In the absence of the project activity, corresponding amount of electricity would have been supplied by the grid. As the Turkish grid is mainly fed by fossil fuel sources, which is expected to continue in the coming years, emissions per unit of electricity generation will continue to increase.
According to the applied methodology (ACM0002, version 7), the baseline scenario for the proposed project has been defined as:
Electricity delivered to the grid by the project would have otherwise been generated by the operation of grid-connected power plants and by the addition of new generation sources, as reflected in the combined margin (CM) calculations described in the “Tool to calculate the emission factor for an electricity system”
Based on this baseline scenario, the baseline emission factor has been calculated using the combined margin (CM) approach as defined in the“Tool to calculate the emission factor for an electricity system”. The baseline emissions factor for the Turkish electricity grid has been determined conservatively. As indicated in the First National Communication (FNC) of Turkey over the period of 1990 - 2004, Turkey’s energy / electricity demand has increased at an annual rate of 7.2% and this demand has been supplied (mainly) by thermal and hydro power plants.
In 2004, electricity generation resulted in the emission of about 167, 800 ktCO2of green house gases which was
equivalent to about 76.7% of total net GHG emission of Turkey. With the GDP projected to grow at over at 6% per year for the next 15 years, gross electricity demand is expected to increase from 166 TWh in 2005 to 499 TWh in 2020 against an expected total generation capacity of 520TWh in 20201. As it can be seen from Figure.3 below,
fossil fuels dominate as primary sources for the actual and expected generation capacity.
1Chapter.5.Projections and Mitigations Scenarios, First National Communication of Turkey on Climate Change, January 2007, (pg. 121-157)
Figure 3. Breakdown of actual and expected generating capacity by primary sources1 A.4.4.1. Estimated amount of emission reductions over the crediting period:
The estimated annual electricity generation of 118,500 MWh, will result in 76,734 tCO2e per year of
emission reductions over a 7 year crediting period. The total emission reduction by project activity will be 537,138 tCO2e over the full 7 year crediting period.
Table 3 - Expected emission reduction by the project activity
Years Annual estimation of emission reductions
In tonnes of CO2e September 2009-August 2010 76,734 September 2010- August 2011 76,734 September 2011- August 2012 76,734 September 2012- August 2013 76,734 September 2013- August 2014 76,734 September 2014- August 2015 76,734 September 2015- August 2016 76,734
Total emission reductions(tonnes of CO2e) 537,138
Total number of crediting years 7 Years
Annual average over the crediting period of estimated reductions(tonnes of CO2e)
SECTION B. Application of a baseline methodology
The baseline methodology has been applied in a conservative manner, particularly in calculation of the fuel emission factors as stated by the methodology.
B.1. Title and reference of the approved baseline methodology applied to the project activity:
The approved consolidated baseline and monitoring methodology ACM0002, version 7 has been applied for this project. The baseline methodology is applicable for grid connected electricity generation from renewable sources. The methodology applied also draws upon:
Tool for assessment and demonstration of additionality, ver. 5 Tool to calculate the emission factor for an electricity system, ver. 01
B.1.1. Justification of the choice of the methodology and why it is applicable to the project activity:
The choice of methodology ACM0002, Version 7, is justified as the project activity meets its applicability criteria: The MAZI-3 WPP Project activity is the installation of a 30 MW wind power plant.
The geographic and system boundaries for the relevant electricity grid can be clearly identified and information on the characteristics of the grid is available.
B.2. Description of how the methodology is applied in the context of the project activity:
ACM0002, version 7 requires the application of the following tools which have been applied for this project as explained below:
Tool to calculate the emission factor for an electricity system, ver. 01 Tool for assessment and demonstration of additionality, ver. 5
The baseline scenario has been identified as “Electricity delivered to the grid by the project would have otherwise been generated by the operation of grid-connected power plants and by the addition of new generation sources, as reflected in the combined margin (CM) calculations described in the “Tool to calculate the emission factor for an electricity system”
The baseline methodology has been applied in a conservative manner even though it is expected that the use of fossil fuels for electricity generation for the Turkish grid will increase overtime due to utilization of new domestic coal reserves. Basic assumptions made are;
Weight of thermal power plants (and thus the emission factor) will remain same over the crediting period.
When there is no data about the emission factor of fuels sources, it has been accepted as “0” or the lowest value has been used
The additionality of the project activity has been demonstrated using the latest version (version 5) of the Tool for assessment and demonstration of additionality obtained from the UNFCCC website.
The main gases included in the project boundary are summarised in Table 4 below while the other key data and parameters used in the calculations are given in Annex 2.
Source Gas Included? Justification/Explanation
CO2 Yes Main Emission Source
CH4 No Minor emission source.
Excluded for simplification
Baselin
e Electricity generation in baseline(Turkey Grid)
N2O No Minor emission source.
Excluded for simplification CO2 Yes Although it is negligible,
emission from use of auxiliary power unit is considered
CH4 No No emission
Project Activity
Emission from the reservoir of the proposed project (inside project boundary)
N2O No Zero-emission electricity
generation
According to ACM0002, version 7 requires the emission factor for the grid system is calculated in accordance with the “Tool to calculate the emission factor for an electricity system”, ver. 01. According to the tool, the following four methods may be used to calculate the operating margin:
a) Simple OM,
b) Simple adjusted OM,
c) Dispatch Data Analysis OM and d) Average OM.
In the Turkish electricity grid system, the share of low-cost / must-run sources is below 50%, method (d) is therefore eliminated. Also due to insufficient data methods (b) and (c) are not considered and thus (a) Simple OM method is used in calculations. The following table is used for demonstrating the share of low cost/must run resources. Only hydro and other renewable are accepted as low cost/must run sources.
Table 5 - Share of primary sources in electricity generation, 2002 – 20062
YEAR THERMAL HYDRO GEOTHERM.WIND TOTAL
MW % MW % MW % MW 2002 19,569 61.4 12,241 38.4 36.4 0.1 31,846 2003 22,974 64.6 12,579 35.3 33.9 0.1 35,587 2004 24,145 65.6 12,645 34.3 33.9 0.1 36,824 2005 25,902 66.7 12,906 33.2 35.1 0.1 38,844 2006 27,420 67.6 13,063 32.2 81.9 0.2 40,565
The following steps explain show the Simple Operating Margin approach provided in the “Tool to calculate the emission factor for an electricity system”; Version 01 has been used to calculate the combined margin emission factor for Turkey.
Step 1. Identify the relevant electric power system
The spatial extent of the project boundary includes the project power plants (wind mills) and all power plants that are connected physically to the Turkish national electricity grid system. The total installed capacity of the Turkish electricity grid system has reached to 40,565 MW in 2006 whereas the total annual generation has become 176,299.8 GWh3,4
Step 2. Select an operating margin method
The Simple Operating Margin (OM) emission factor (EFGRI, OMsimple, y) is calculated as the generation-weighted
average CO2 emissions per unit net electricity generation (tCO2/MWh) of all the generating plants serving the
system, excluding low-cost/must-run power plants. As electricity generation from solar and low cost biomass facilities is insignificant and there is no nuclear plant in Turkey, the only low cost /must run plants are hydro, wind and geothermal facilities.
Step 3. Calculate the operating margin emission factor according to the selected method
Since only available data for the Turkish grid system is total amount of fuels used together with According to the “Tool to calculate the emission factor for an electricity system”, Version 01, the following equation in option C is applied:
EF
grid, OMsimple, y =∑
FC
i,,y. NCV
i,y. EF
co2,i,y/
∑
EG
,y (1)i
Where:
EFgrid,OMsimple,y = Simple operating margin CO2emission factor in year y (tCO2/MWh)
FCi,y = Amount of fossil fuel type i consumed in the project electricity in year y (mass or volume unit) NCVi,y = Net calorific value (energy content) of fossil fuel type i in year y (GJ / mass or volume unit) EFCO2,i,y = CO2emission factor of fossil fuel type i in year y (tCO2/GJ)
EGm,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 sources in the project electricity system m in year y y = Either the three most recent years for which data is available at the time of submission of the
CDM-PDD to the DOE for validation (ex ante option) or the applicable year during monitoring (ex post option), following the guidance on data vintage in step 2
Data about the fuel consumption for electricity generation, electricity generation by fuel type, import and export were obtained from the Turkish Electricity Distribution Company (TEİAŞ) web site5. Operating and Build Margin calculation
have been based on data for 2004 - 2006. Other data required for calculation of CO2emission coefficient has been
obtained through IPCC 2006 guidelines for GHG inventories. Details of the data used for the calculations are given in Annex 2. Using the available data and ACM0002 methodology, overall CO2production by electricity generation is
calculated using IPCC values as given in Table 6 and Table 7 below.
3http://www.teias.gov.tr/ist2006/1.xls
4http://www.teias.gov.tr/ist2006/13.xls 5http://www.teias.gov.tr/istatistikler.htm
Table 6 - Calculation of Emission factors for fuels COEF (NCV*EF) (tCO2/kt6) Consumption (2004 - 2006) (tons or 1000m3) Total Emission (2004 - 2006) (tCO2) Hard Coal 2,069 8,647,694 17,888,860 Imported Coal 2,069 6,793,940 14,054,133 Lignite 620 132,679,613 82,201,282 Fuel Oil 3,029 6,155,607 18,643,834 Diesel Oil 3,095 119,084 368,600 LPG 2,833 25,614 72,564 Naphtha 3,056 306,683 937,273 Natural Gas 2,013 46,117,033 92,829,786 Total Emissions 226,996,333
Net electricity generated and supplied to the grid by thermal plants has been calculated using data obtained from the TEİAŞweb page7,8. The ratio between gross and net generation has been calculated first, and assuming that the
same ratio is valid for thermal plants, gross generation by thermal power plants has been multiplied by this ratio in order to find net generation by thermal plants. Summing up this with the imported electricity, total supply excluding low cost / must run sources are determined as given in table below.
Table 7 - Net Electricity Generation from thermal power plants (units in GWh) Year generationGross generatioNet
n
Net/Gross Gross Gen.Thermal Net GenThermal Import Total Supplyto the grid
2004 150,698 145,066 0.963 104,464 100,559 464 101,023
2005 161,956 155,469 0.960 122,242 117,346 636 117,982
2006 176,299 169,543 0.962 131,835 126,783 573 127,356
Total Net Thermal Gen. 344,688 1,673 346,360
Finally, using the data tabulated in the previous two tables, OM emission factor considering years 2004 - 2006 has been calculated dividing the total CO2emission by total electricity supply to the grid which is (from equation (1)
above;
EF
grid, OMsimple, y = 226,996,333tCO2 /346,360.2GWh= 0.655tCO2/MWh.
6Vol.2. Energy, 2006 IPCC Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas Inventories, (http://www.ipcc -nggip.iges.or.jp/public/2006gl/pdf/
2_Volume2/V2_2_Ch2_Stationary_Combustion.pdf)
7http://www.teias.gov.tr/istatistik2006/36(06).xls
This Operating Margin emission factor will stay constant throughout the first 7-year crediting period.
Step 4. Identify the cohort of power units to be included in the build margin (BM)
BM has been calculated ex-ante using the most recent data available (Option 1).
The build margin emissions factor is the generation-weighted average emission factor (tCO2/MWh) of all power units mduring the most recent yearyfor which power generation data is available.
According to the “Tool to calculate the emission factor for an electricity system”, Version 01, the sample group of power unitsmused to calculate the built margin consists of either:
The five power plants that have been built most recently, or
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. If 20% falls on part capacity of a unit, that unit is fully included in the calculations.
From these two options the sample group that comprises of the larger annual generation has been used. List of most recent capacity additions to the grid and their average and firm generation capacities are available at the TEİAŞweb page9,10,11. For determination of plants that comprise 20% of the system generation, generation in year 2006 which is
176.299,8 GWh has been taken as reference and its 20% has been determined as about 35.260 GWh. Summing up all the plants built in 2006, 2005 and 2004 together we add up to 35,289,8 GWh for the selected plants.
Step 5. Calculate the build margin emission factor
The Build Margin emission factorEFgrid, BMs, yis calculated as the generation-weighted average emission factor of a
sample of power plantsmfor a specific yearyas follows:
EF
grid, BM, y =∑
EG
,m,y. EF
EL,m,y/
∑
EG
,m,y (12)Where:
EFgrid,BM,y = Build margin CO2emission factor in 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 = CO2emission factor of power unit m in year y (tCO2/MWh) m = Power units included in the build margin
y = Most recent historical year for which power generation data is available
Data for generation efficiency has been calculated using average values obtained from environmental map of Turkey12 (p197). For LPG and naphtha whose weights are not very significant, best available techniques (EFBAT)
9http://www.teias.gov.tr/istatistik2005/7.xls
10http://www.teias.gov.tr/istat2004/7.xls 11http://www.teias.gov.tr/istatistik/7.xls
12TabloX.3.1. Türkiyedeki termik santrallerin adları, bulunduğu yer ve diğer bilgiler, Türkiye Çevre Atlası, MoEF, Ankara 2004, pg.197,
data from European Integrated Pollution Prevention and Control Bureau has been used (p405)13. For EF values of
fuels consumed, IPCC default values at lower limit of 95% confidence interval have been used. Table 8 - Calculation of emission factor from most recent plants.
B D E
(=3.6/D/1000*B*C) EF CO2(tCO2/Tj) Generation Efficiency EF
(tCO2/MWh) Coal 94.6 33.6% 1.014 Lignite 90.9 32.8% 0.999 Fuel Oil 75.5 35.1% 0.775 Diesel 72.6 27.5% 0.949 LPG 61.6 45.0% 0.493 Naphtha 69.3 45.0% 0.554 Natural Gas 54.3 46.0% 0.425
Build margin emission factor has been determined for most recent capacity additions as shown in table below. For electricity generation from renewable and solid wastes, the emission factors have been taken as “zero” since data is not available and contribution of these plants are insignificant. The Build margin emission factor in the last column has been determined by multiplying each EF value with the corresponding electricity generation for that fuel and dividing by the total generation by most recent capacity additions.
Table 9 - Distribution of most recent capacity additions by fuel source.
G H
(=G/35,289.8)
E EFW
(=G*H)
Fuel Source Generation
(MWh)
Percent Generation EF Weighted EF
Coal 1,463 4.1% 1.014 0.04 Lignite 11,480 32.5% 0.999 0.32 Fuel Oil 565 1.6% 0.775 0.01 Diesel oil 6 0.0% 0.949 0.00 LPG 50 0.1% 0.493 0.00 Naphtha 323 0.9% 0.554 0.01 Natural Gas 19,811 56.1% 0.425 0.24
Renewable and wastes 85 0.2% 0.000 0.00
Solid 5 0.0% 0.000 0.00
Total Renewable 1,502 4.3% 0.000 0.00
TOTAL Capacity additions 35,289.8 0.624
Finally, by summing up the weighted EFBATvalues, overall build margin emission factor have been calculated as:
EF
grid, BM, y = 0.624STEP 6 - Calculate the combined margin emission factor
Based on ACM0002, weighted average baseline emission factor is calculated as follows;
EFgrid, CM, y = wOM* EFgrid, OMsimple, y+wBM* EFgrid, BM, y (13)
Where:
EFgrid,BM,y = Build margin CO2emission factor in year y (tCO2/MWh) as calculated from equation (12) above. EFgrid,OM,y = Operating margin CO2emission factor in year y (tCO2/MWh) as calculated from equation (1) above. wOM = Weighting of operating margin emissions factor (%)
wBM = Weighting of build margin emissions factor (%)
The default values of the weights,wOMandwBM,as recommended by the selected methodology are 0.75 and 0.25,
respectively. These default values have been used in calculating CM emission factor together without rounding the values of EFOMand EFBM.
Based on the formula above, baseline emission factor is calculated as;
EF
grid, CM, y =0.75 * 0.655 + 0.25 * 0.624 = 0.648
The combined margin emission factor is therefore0.648 tCO2/MWh,which will be used as therefore as the baseline emission factor as recommended by the methodology ACM0002, version 7.
B.3. Description of how the anthropogenic emissions of GHG by sources are reduced below those that would have occurred in the absence of the registered VER project activity:
In the absence of the project activity, a corresponding amount of electricity will be supplied by the grid through the current power plants. For each unit of electricity supplied from the proposed project, corresponding amount of fossil fuel based component will be displaced from the grid. That component when replaced by the renewable electricity will result in equivalent emission reductions.
Step 1 - Identification of Alternatives to the project activity consistent with current laws and regulations
Sub-step 1a -Define alternatives to the project activity:
Within this framework, most realistic and reliable alternatives to the project activity are: 1. Proposed project not undertaken as a VER project activity
2. Supply of equal amount of electricity in the grid but generated by fossil fuels. 3. No project activity
First alternative, which is the implementation of the project without VER income is not financially attractive as discussed in investment analysis section below.
The Second alternative (Scenario 2) is the baseline scenario and implementation of the proposed project as a VER activity would be additional to this scenario. Since the solid fuel reliance of Turkish grid is expected to continue, the emission factor per MWh of electricity generated is expected to increase over time. However, for the calculation of emission reductions, the emission factor is taken as constant at the current level during the activity period.
Sub-step 1b -Enforcement of applicable laws and regulations:
The above discussed scenarios are in compliance with the applicable legal and regulatory requirements.
Step 2 - Investment analysis
The investment analysis has been done in order to make an economic and financial evaluation of the project. No public funding or ODA are available in Turkey for project finance. MAZI-3 WPP has been financed through loans from commercial banks and their own resources.
Sub-step 2a -Determine appropriate analysis method
There are three options for the determination of analysis method which are: Simple Cost Analysis
Investment Comparison Analysis and Benchmark Analysis
Since Project generates economic benefits from sales of electricity, the simple cost analysis is not applicable. Also, since the baseline of the project is generation of electricity by the grid, no alternative investment is considered at issue. So, it has been decided to use benchmark analysis for evaluation of the project investment
Sub-step 2b - Option III-Apply benchmark analysis
Since there is no pre-determined value for IRR or any other financial indicator for wind power plants in Turkey, Benchmark value has been selected as the Eurobond rates. Eurobond Rates in Turkish market for ten and twenty year periods have been determined as14:
Table 10 - Eurobond Rates in Turkey for various due dates.
Code-Due date Currency Interest Rate %
651-18.01.2011 EUR 9.5
684-02.04.2019 EUR 5.8
630-15.01.2030 USD 5.9
Sub-step 2c - Calculation and comparison of financial indicators
Main parameters used for evaluation of the investment are as follows; Table 11 - Financial parameters used in investment analysis
Installed Capacity 30 MW
Expected annual Electricity Generation 118.5 GWh Emission current Reduction(ER) 76,734 tCO2e
Total Investment 40,753,565 Euro
Loan 34,640,530 Euro
Loan Period 10
Income Tax 20%
Wind Power investment is a capital intensive sector and initial investment cost constitute about 75% of the electricity cost whereas in conventional fuel fired power plants, 40 to 60% of the costs are related to the fuel costs. Since it is a capital intensive sector, the cost of capital is a major factor determining the return of investments15.
For the MAZI-3 WPP project, Internal the Rate of Return is calculated as 9.49% without the carbon revenue. Acceptable IRR values for energy investments in Turkey are about 13-16% according to the report of government auditing board published in 200316. Compared with the Eurobond interest rates shown above and IRR values in
Turkey, it is seen that the investment is not financially attractive without VER revenue. One can get the revenue through other financial instruments and without undertaking any project risks. Considering the carbon revenue, IRR increases to 14.47% and becomes more attractive financially. Since the project having IRR values below have difficulty in getting loan from the banks, VER revenue will also help the investors for getting loans with better rates as stated in web page of Clean Energy Foundation17.
Sub-step 2d - Sensitivity Analysis
In order to determine whether investment decision is the most attractive alternative financially, a sensitivity analysis has been done. Three parameters for analysis are:
Investment Cost Operating Cost
Electricity Sales revenue
For a range of ±10% fluctuations in parameters above, table 4 below has been obtained. Table 12 - Sensitivity analysis for the project
% Fluctuation
-10 -5 -2,5 0 2,5 5 10
Investment 15.3 12.1 10.7 9.5 8.4 7.3 5.5
Operating 10.5 10.0 9.7 9.5 9.2 9.0 8.5
El. Sale Revenue 3.8 6.6 8.0 9.5 11.0 12.6 16.0
Table 12 above includes IRRs without VER revenue. As seen from the table, the project becomes competitive only if the marginal fluctuations occur in investment cost or electricity prices. In the absence of VER revenue, IRR becomes 15.3 and 16.0 for a 10% decrease in investment cost or 10% increase in sales revenue respectively. Also, it should be considered that calculations do not reflect the project risks which are difficult to quantify (such as generation below estimations etc). When these risks are also considered, it is seen that project activity is not the most attractive financial alternative, and is therefore additional to baseline scenario.
Details of the Investment analysis and calculations are available as spread sheet however, since it is commercially sensitive information, details are not given here but can be submitted if requested during validation.
Step 3 - Barrier Analysis
Sub-step 3a - Identify barriers that would prevent the implementation of type of the proposed GS-VER project activity
15Wind Energy-The Facts, Volume 2-Costs&Prices (p103. Available at http:\\www.ewea.org)
16http://www.cankaya.gov.tr/tr_html/DDK/enerji.htm (p36-accessed on 06th June 2008) 17http://www.temev.org.tr/duyurularS.htm(p 3-accessed on 06th June 2008)
(a) Investment barriers: The main barriers for renewable energy investments in Turkey are lack of financial incentives, uncertainty about the national energy and economic parameters. Within this framework, the voluntary carbon market provides an innovative and effective element for creating an “enabling environment” for investment in renewable sources in Turkey. While national economic policy can concentrate on how to support the country’s rapidly developing economy, funds from international carbon credit buyers help the simultaneously fast growing electricity market to pursue a sustainable path by alleviating barriers faced by project developers.
(b) Technological barriers: Wind energy is a new technology compared to conventional technologies used for energy generation. The equipment or wind turbines are imported from European Countries. This will require maintenance service from specialists and will raise the operational cost.
(c) In addition to the general barriers mentioned above, a specific barrier faced by the project is the construction barriers. Since the project location is very close to the fault line, additional measurements will be issued in order to eliminate the effects of a potential earthquake. The Project also includes construction of 8 km transmission line from MAZI-3 WPP to the nearest transmission station which also requires significant amount of investment as given in financial calculations.
Sub-step 3b - Show that the identified barriers would not prevent the implementation of at least one of the alternatives (except the proposed project activity)
The most probable alternative to the proposed project activity is defined as either supplying an equal amount of electricity generated by fossil fuels to the grid. There are a few points to be clarified in case of implementing that option in return of wind power plant.
Wind energy is intermittent and wind power plants have the risk of inadequate wind to operate even at high peak periods. This makes wind energy less compatible with conventional energy as the electricity is not continuously fed from wind power plants and needs to be balanced in pool of energy sources.
The initial capital outlay per MWh generated is significantly higher compared to the fossil fuel-based plants which can be constructed and get in operation in a shorter time.
Step.4. Common practice analysis
Sub-step 4a: Analyse other activities similar to the proposed project activity:
The wind power plant projects in Turkey, either under operation or construction, have been listed in Table.13.with the basic information. The investments to wind power have increased in 2006 and populated in 2008 as it can be seen from the table. The capacities of the plants which became operational in 2006 are much higher than the plants previously commissioned in 1998 and 2000.
The power plants in İzmir province have been shaded in the table. Most of the projects constructed in 2006 and thereafter are benefiting carbon finance. Gold Standard validated projects have been presented in bold while Verified Emission Reduction (VER) projects are underlined in the table.
Table.13.Wind Projects in Turkey18
Wind Projects in Turkey (as of 22 January, 2008) N
O Location Company Comm.Date Installedcapacity (MW) TurbineManufacturer Turbine capacity
1 İzmir-Çeşme Alize A.Ş. 1998 1,5 Enercon 3 turbines, 500 kW 2 İzmir- Çeşme Güçbirliği
A.Ş.
1998 7,2 Vestas 12 turbines, 600kW 3
Çanakkale-Bozcaada
Bores A.Ş. 2000 10,2 Enercon 17 turbines, 600kW 4 İstanbul- Hadımköy Sunjüt A.Ş. 2003 1,2 Enercon 2 turbines, 600kW 5 Balıkesir-Bandırma Bares A.Ş. I/2006 30 GE 20 turbines, 1500 kW 6 İstanbul-Silivri Ertürk A.Ş. II/2006 0,85 Vestas 1 turbine, 850 kW
7 İzmir-Çeşme Mare A.Ş. I/2007 39,2 Enercon 49 turbines, 800 kW
8 Manisa-Akhisar Deniz A.Ş. I/2007 10,8 Vestas 6 turbines, 1800 kW
9 Çanakkale-İntepe Anemon
A.Ş. I/2007 30,4 Enercon 38 turbines, 800 kW
10 Çanakkale-Gelibolu Doğal A.Ş. II/2007 14,9 Enercon 13 turbines, 800 kW+ 5 turbines 900 kW
CAPACITY UNDER OPERATION 146,25
11 Hatay-Samandağ Deniz A.Ş. I/2008 30 Vestas 15 turbines, 2000 kW
12 Manisa-Sayalar Doğal A.Ş. I/2008 30,4 Enercon 38 turbines, 800 kW
13 İ stanbul-Gaziosmanpaşa
Lodos A.Ş. I/2008 24 Enercon 12 turbines, 2000 kW
14 İstanbul- Çatalca Ertürk A.Ş. I/2008 60 Vestas 20 turbines, 3000 kW
15 İzmir- Aliağa Innores
A.Ş. I/2008 42,5 Nordex 17 turbines, 2500 kW
16 Balıkesir-Şamlı Baki A.Ş. I/2008 90 Vestas 30 turbines, 3000 kW
CAPACITY UNDER CONSTRUCTION 276,9
Sub-step 4b: Discuss any similar Options that are occurring:
Most of the wind power plant projects in the area are benefiting the carbon finance and excluded from consideration. On the other hand, the first four projects utilise old technology and they, together with the 6thİstanbul-Silivri project,
have rather small installed capacities compared to Mazi-3 Wind Power Plant.
The 15thproject, recently built in İzmir-Aliağa Wind Power Plant Project has a comparable size and location to the
project activity, however; it is already developed as Gold Standard project.
B.4. Description of how the definition of the project boundary related to the baseline methodology selected is applied to the project activity:
The Project boundary consists of the Turkish National Electricity Grid. All of Turkish electricity network is interconnected and there is no separate regional electricity grid. The emission factor for electricity imported from neighbouring countries has been taken as “0” during the calculations.
18“Türkiye Elektrik Piyasasında RES projelerinin Son Durumu”, Murat Durak, Chairman of Turkish Wind Energy Association,
Turkish- American Clean Energy Conference,İstanbul, Turkey
B.5. Details of baseline information, including the date of completion of the baseline study and the name of person (s)/entity (ies) determining the baseline:
Date of completion of the baseline study: 20thDecember 2007
Baseline determined by JP Morgan Ventures Energy Corporation Telephone: +90 312 439 95 03
Fax: +90 312 439 95 06
E-mail: [email protected]
Address: Refik Belendir Sokak 35/3 Y. Ayrancı- ANKARA / TURKEY
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:
Construction of the project is expected to start in early 2009. Estimated commissioning date is September 2009.
C.1.2. Expected operational lifetime of the project activity:
C.2 Choice of the crediting period and related information:
Renewable crediting period of three times seven years will be used.
C.2.1. Renewable crediting period:
C.2.1.1. Starting date of the first crediting period:
First crediting period of the project is expected to start in 01/09/ 2009.
C.2.1.2. Length of the first crediting period:
Length of first crediting period is 7 years
C.2.2. Fixed crediting period:
>>NA
C.2.2.1. Starting date:
>>NA
C.2.2.2. Length:
SECTION D. Application of a monitoring methodology and plan
D.1. Name and reference of approved monitoring methodology applied to the project activity:
Monitoring methodology applied to the project is ACM0002 version 7, “Approved consolidated baseline and monitoring methodology for grid connected electricity generation from renewable resources”
D.2. Justification of the choice of the methodology and why it is applicable to the project activity:
The Project activity fulfils the criteria of the selected methodology:
Project is a grid connected electricity generation project using wind power
Project boundary is clearly identified and information about characteristic of the grid is available Project does not involve fuel switching activity.
The selected baseline is the grid supplied electricity and the project activity is zero emission electricity generation from wind power. Since, no leakage is estimated from the project activities, the main data to be monitored is the power generation by the project activity.
Some parameters listed below under “data and parameters” either need to be monitored continuously during the crediting period or to be calculated only once for the crediting period, depending on the data vintage chosen, following the provisions in the baseline methodology procedure outlined above and the guidance on “monitoring frequency” for the parameter. Such data are appropriately identified in the tables below.
The calculation of the operating margin and build margin emission factors has been documented electronically in a spreadsheet that will be attached to the PDD for validation. This includes all data used to calculate the emission factors.
D.2. 1. OPTION 1: Monitoring of the emissions in the project scenario and the baseline scenario:
D.2.1.1. Data to be collected in order to monitor emissions from the project activity and how this data will be archived:
NA
D.2.1.2. Data to be collected in order to monitor project performance on the most sensitive sustainable development indicators:
Sustainable Development Indicator Data type Data variable Data unit Measured (m), calculated (c) or estimated (e)
N/A.
D.2.1.3. Relevant data necessary for determining the baseline of anthropogenic emissions by sources of GHGs within the project boundary and how such data will be collected and archived:
ID number (Please use numbers to ease cross-referencing to table D.3) Data variable Source of data Data unit Measured (m), calculated (c), estimated (e), Recording frequency Proportion of data to be monitored
How will the data be archived? (electronic/
paper)
Comment
D.2.1.4. Description of formulae used to estimate baseline emissions (for each gas, source, formulae/algorithm, emissions units of CO2 equ.)
D. 2.2. OPTION 2: Direct monitoring of emission reductions from the project activity (values should be consistent with those in section E): D.2.2.1. Data to be collected in order to monitor emissions from the project activity and how this data will be archived:
ID number
(Please use numbers to ease cross-referencing to table D.3)
Data variable Source of data Data unit Measured (m), calculated (c), estimated (e), Recording frequency Proportion of data to be monitored
How will the data be archived? (electronic/ paper) Comment D1 GENy-Net electricity generated by the plant TEİAŞand Project Owner MWh m Continuou s 100% Electronic and Paper
Electricity generated by the project activity and supplied to the grid can be monitored through metering
devices and invoices
D2 GDy Equipment
counter and project owner
Liter m Continuou s
100% Paper Although the amount is negligible, emission from auxiliary power source is considered for a more accurate result.
D.2.2.2. Description of formulae used to calculate project emissions (for each gas, source, formulae/algorithm, emissions units of CO2equ.):
The only project emission will be originated from use of diesel generator as auxiliary power equipment. The amount of fuel consumed will be monitored annually in order to calculate the emission from use of auxiliary equipment. Following formula will be used:
Pe = (FDy) × NCVdieselx COEFdiesel
Pe:Project emissions from diesel generator (tCO2)
FDy: Annual diesel fuel consumption (Litres)
NCVdiesel: Net Calorific Value for diesel oil (TJ/m3)
COEFdiesel: CO2emission coefficient for diesel oil (tCO2/TJ)
D.2.3. Treatment of leakage in the monitoring plan
No source of leakage is determined within the project boundary.
D.2.3.1. If applicable, please describe the data and information that will be collected in order to monitor leakage effects of the project activity
ID number
(Please use numbers to ease cross-referencing to table D.3)
Data variable
Source of
data Data unit
Measured (m), calculated (c) or estimated (e) Recording frequency Proportion of data to be monitored
How will the data be archived? (electronic/ paper)
Comment
N/A
D.2.3.2. Description of formulae used to estimate leakage (for each gas, source, formulae/algorithm, emissions units of CO2equ.)
N/A. Since no leakage is determined within the project boundary
D.2.4. Description of formulae used to estimate emission reductions for the project activity (for each gas, source, formulae/algorithm, emissions units of CO2equ.)
Details of the calculations for baseline emission have been given in section B.2.
D.3. Quality control (QC) and quality assurance (QA) procedures are being undertaken for data monitored
The main data to be monitored in order to determine the emission reduction by the project activity is the electricity generated by the project activity. The amount of electricity generated will be recorded by Turkish Transmission Company (TEİAŞ) and will be billed by the project owner as the electricity supplied to the grid. TEIAS officer will visit the plant every month in order to record the electricity generation and check the metering devices. Either the manager of the plant or the electrical engineer will company the officer during recording process. A standard form used by TEİAŞwill be filled and signed by both parties after each measurement. Two metering devices will be used, one of them being separate. The maintenance and the calibration of the meters will be done periodically every two years by TEİAŞ. In case the difference in the readings of two metering devices exceeds 0.2%, the maintenance will be done immediately. The data from both of the metering devices will also be cross checked. Another source of data source to be used for cross-checking is the software embedded on each turbine which shows the individual generation by each turbine.
The amount of fuel consumed by the auxiliary power source, i.e. existing generators, will be monitored during crediting period. Using the counter on the equipment and hourly consumption data, amount of diesel fuel consumed and corresponding emission will be calculated. Consumption data will also be cross-checked by the invoices for purchase of diesel fuel and the logbooks kept in the plant for internal monitoring purposes.
Data
(Indicate table and ID number e.g. 3.-1.; 3.2.)
Uncertainty level of data (High/Medium/Low)
Explain QA/QC procedures planned for these data, or why such procedures are not necessary.
D1 Low The data will be measured and cross-checked by two metering devices by both TEİAŞand the project owner for billing purposes. The amount of electricity generated by each turbine can be monitored through the software used as well. Those lower the uncertainty level.
FDy Low The data can be obtained from equipment’s counter and the invoices. Also, the logbook kept in plant for internal monitoring process can be used as a proof.
D.4. Please describe the operational and management structure that the project operator will implement in order to monitor emission reductions and any leakage effects, generated by the project activity
Roles and Responsibilities
In order to demonstrate the emission reduction, only the required data is the amount of electricity generated by the project activity. This will already be measured and recorded by both TEİAŞand project owner, therefore; no new additional protocol will be needed monitoring emission reduction. The plant manager or the electrical engineer will be responsible for the electricity generated, gathering all relevant data and keeping the records. They will be informed about VER concepts and mechanisms and how to monitor and collect the data which will be used for emission reduction calculations. The generation data collected during crediting period will be submitted to JP Morgan Ventures Energy Corporation who will be responsible for calculating the emission reduction. The generation data will be used to prepare monitoring reports which will be used to determine the vintage from the project activity. These reports will be submitted to DOE before each verification period.
VER Team Members Include;
Plant Manager:Overall responsibility of compliance with VER monitoring plan
Chief Electrical Engineer:Responsible for day to day running of plant, recording and monitoring of relevant data and periodic reporting
Accounting Manager:Responsible for keeping data about power sales, invoicing and purchasing.
JP Morgan Ventures Energy Corporation: Responsible for emission reduction calculations, preparing monitoring report and periodical verification process.
D.5 Name of person/entity determining the monitoring methodology:
JP Morgan Ventures Energy Corporation (Project Partner) Telephone: +90 312 439 95 03
Fax: +90 312 439 95 06
SECTION E. Estimation of GHG emissions by sources E.1. Estimate of GHG emissions by sources:
The Project activity involves zero emission electricity generation using wind power so there will not be any GHG generation by project activities.
E.2. Estimated leakage:
No leakage is expected for project activities.
E.3. The sum of E.1 and E.2 representing the project activity emissions:
GHG emission by project activities is zero.
E.4. Estimated anthropogenic emissions by sources of greenhouse gases of the baseline:
Source of baseline emission is thermal power plants in the national grid. The emission factor for baseline has been calculated as explained in Annex 2. The Calculated combined margin emission factor is 0.648 tCO2/MWh and
expected electricity generation is 118,500 MWh which makes a total of about 76,734 tCO2e per annum.
E.5. Difference between E.4 and E.3 representing the emission reductions of the project activity:
Since the project activity will not cause any GHG emission, all emission by baseline scenario will be equal to emission reduction by the project.
E.6. Table providing values obtained when applying formulae above:
Year Estimation of project
activity emission reductions (tCO2e) Estimation of baseline emission reduction(tCO2e) Estimation of leakage (tCO2e) Estimation of emission reductions (tCO2e) September 2009 –August 2010 0 76,734 0 76,734 September 2010 –August 2011 0 76,734 0 76,734 September 2011 –August 2012 0 76,734 0 76,734 September 2012 –August 2013 0 76,734 0 76,734 September 2013 –August 2014 0 76,734 0 76,734 September 2014 –August 2015 0 76,734 0 76,734 September 2015 –August 2016 0 76,734 0 76,734 Total 0 537,138 0 537,138
SECTION F. Environmental impacts
F.1. Documentation on the analysis of the environmental impacts, including transboundary impacts:
According to national legislation, an Environmental Impact Assessment is not mandatory for wind power plants unless requested by the relevant agency after the project introductory document is submitted to Ministry of environment and Forestry (MoEF). For the MAZI-3 project, the MoEF has confirmed in that EIA is not required for the project activity after reviewing the introductory project document. A copy of the letter from MoEF is given in Annex 5. The Gold Standard sustainable development matrix of the project activity (See Section A2) has a total score of +9 with no negative effects.
F.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:
No significant environmental impact has been determined. For the transport of the turbines and access to the turbines, main roads will be renovated; which will also serve to other residents in the vicinity. Length of new roads which will be constructed between main road and turbines will be very low. No trees will be cut at any stage of the construction and, since the land in the project site is mainly formed of rocks, project will not have any adverse effect on agricultural activity or land use.
Grid connection will be made through 8 km transmission line. According to the local regulations, transmission line below 10km does not need EIA assessment. The transmission line build for the MAZI-3 WPP project will be used for other WPPs which are planned to be built in the same region. As mentioned above, due to the flora of the site, no trees will be cut in the region and the area will be open to grazing activities of the local habitants.
G.1. Brief description how comments by local stakeholders have been invited and compiled:
The initial stakeholder meeting was held on the 21st February 2008 and the main stakeholder consultation has been conducted on 14th April 2008 in Zeytineli Village according to the GS requirements. The meetings have been
announced in local (Yeni Asır and Demokrat Urla) and national (Milliyet) newspapers and through Village heads of Zeytineli and Zeytinler. Also, representatives from local and central government, local NGOs and GS-endorsed NGOs were invited and GS was informed by e-mail. List and contact info of the NGOs have been determined using the database of “Civil Society Development Center19”. NGOs have been sent via fax or e-mail if they don’t have fax
number. Residents in the village have been announced through the village heads of both Zeytineli and Zeytinler. The invitation list is given in annex 4.
Figure 5. MAZI-3 WPP ISC meeting
21 people have participated the meeting ISC meeting whereas about 13 people have participated to the main consultation meeting. Invitation list is given below whereas the participation list of first and second meeting are given in meeting reports in detail. During the first meeting, a non technical summary of the PDD has been distributed and Mrs. G. AslıSezer ÖZÇELİK from JP Morgan Ventures Energy Corporation informed the participants about the project, emission reduction achieved by the project and carbon finance. Yaşar KUŞ, from MAZI-3 A.Ş., (the project investor) made a more detailed explanation about wind power plants and answered questions raised by the participants.
In the Main stakeholder consultation, G.Aslı Sezer Özçelik from Pioneer Carbon has explained the project and summarized the PDD in Turkish once more. Abdullah Özdemir from MAZI-3 Elektrik Üretim A.Ş (YAPISAN) has given technical information about the project and technology used in wind power plants. After technical explanation of the project, G.AslıSezer Özçelik has gone through the questions in the checklist which has been translated to 19www.stgm.gov.tr/eng
Turkish and simplified so that participants can better follow the questions. Later, comments from the project participants have been invited which have been given the meeting report.
Since EIA is not required by local regulations, only pre-EIA report is prepared for wind power plants. The pre-EIA report for MAZI-3 points no significant issue about the project as summarized during the meeting. The environmental and social impact checklist of GS has been translated to Turkish and distributed to the participants. Each question in the checklist has also been by Mrs. G.Aslı Sezer Özçelik and explained to the participants and they have been invited to fill the questionnaire.
G.2. Summary of the comments received:
No significant issue has been raised during the meeting. Since there are other wind power plants in the vicinity of the village, local people were familiar with this type of plants in the region. During the meeting, participants asked some questions about the exact location of the towers, when they will be constructed, any detrimental effects and benefits to the village such as employment opportunities. Technical questions such as height, location etc. of the tower were been answered by Yaşar KUŞ. He also informed the villagers that noise will not be a problem to the habitants since the location of the plant is far from the houses in the village. In terms of benefits to the village, Mr. KUŞexplained that about 15 people will be employed during the operation phase and local people will be given priority in recruitment.
In general, attitudes of the villagers were positive and they seemed keen on construction of the WPP near their village. Details of the comments and questions received has been sent to invitee list and submitted to GS and validator.
G.3. Report on how due account was taken of any comments received:
Comments by the participants were noted during meeting. As no significant issues were raised there is no significant issue raised, no revision in the project design will be required. The only request from the local people was giving priority to people in recruiting, which was positively responded by the MAZI-3 A.Ş.
Summary of both meetings and all the questions and comments raised during these meetings has been sent to the institutions in the invitation list via fax or mail. The meeting reports have also been published on GS web page together with the draft PDD of the project for review GS and other users.
Annex 1
CONTACT INFORMATION ON PARTICIPANTS IN THE PROJECT ACTIVITY
Organization: JP Morgan Ventures Energy Corporation Street / P.O. Box: Refik Belendir Sokak Y. Ayrancı- Çankaya
Building: 35/3 City: ANKARA Postfix / ZIP: Country: TURKEY Telephone: +90 312 439 95 03 / +90 312 439 95 04 Fax: +90 312 439 95 06 E-mail: [email protected] URL: www.climatecare.org Represented by:
Title: Country Manager
Salutation:
Last Name: Sezer Özçelik
Middle Name: Ganime
First Name: Aslı
Department: Mobile:
Personal e-mail: [email protected] Organization: Bilgin Enerji Yatırım Holding A.Ş.
Street / P.O. Box: Kuleli Sokak
Building: No: 87 City: ANKARA State / Region: Postfix / ZIP: 06700 Country: TURKEY Telephone: +90 312 446 30 23 Fax: +90 312 437 43 99 E-mail: [email protected] URL: www.bilgin.com.tr Represented by: Title: Manager Salutation:
Last Name: Bilgin
Middle Name: Tolga
First Name: Direct Fax: Direct Tel.:
Personal e-mail: [email protected]
BASELINE INFORMATION Data Used in calculation of OM for Turkish Electricity Grid
Table 13 - Values used in calculation of OM20
NCV (Tj/kt)(1000m3 for gas) EF (tCO2/Tj) COEF(tCO2/kt) Hard Coal 21.9 94.6 2,069 Imported Coal 21.9 94.6 2,069 Lignite 6.8 90.9 620 Fuel Oil 40.1 75.5 3,029 Diesel Oil 42.6 72.6 3,095 LPG 46.0 61.6 2,833 Naphtha 44.1 69.3 3,056 Natural Gas 37.1 54.3 2,013
Table 14 - Amount of fuels used for electricity generation21,22
2004 2005 2006 Total Fuel Consumption 2004-2006 Total Emission 2004-2006 Hard Coal 1,327,603 1,702,228 5,617,863 8,647,694 17,888,860 Imported Coal 3,237,110 3,556,830 0 6,793,940 14,054,133 Lignite 33,776,660 48,319,143 50,583,810 132,679,613 82,201,282 Fuel Oil 2,403,338 2,005,899 1,746,370 6,155,607 18,643,834 Diesel Oil 29,141 28,442 61,501 119,084 368,600 LPG 12,673 12,908 33 25,614 72,564 Naphtha 208,749 84,481 13,453 306,683 937,273 Natural Gas 13,325,721 15,756,764 17,034,548 46,117,033 92,829,786
20 Vol.2. Energy, 2006 IPCC Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas Inventories, (http://www.ipcc-nggip.iges.or.jp/public /2006gl/pdf/2_Volume2/V2_2_Ch2_Stationary_Combustion.pdf)
21http://www.teias.gov.tr/istatistik2005/46.xls 22http://www.teias.gov.tr/ist2006/43.xls
Table 15 - Net Electricity supply to the grid by thermal plants and imports (GWh).23
Year generationGross Net generation Net/Gross Gross Gen.Thermal ThermalNet Gen Import Total
2004 150,698.0 145,066 0.963 104,464 100,559 464 101,023 2005 161,956.0 155,469 0.960 122,242 117,346 636 117,982 2006 176,299.8 169,543 0.962 131,835 126,783 573 127,356
Total Net Thermal Gen. 344,687.6 1,672.6 346,360.2
Data Used in calculation of BM for Turkish Electricity Grid Table 16 - Values used in BM calculation24
A NCV B EFCO2 D E (=3.6/D/1000*B*C) (Tj/kt or m3for gas) (tCO2/Tj) Generation Efficiency EF25
tCO2/MWh Coal 21.87 94.6 33.6% 1.014 Lignite 6.82 90.9 32.8% 0.999 Fuel Oil 40.12 75.5 35.1% 0.775 Diesel 42.63 72.6 27.5% 0.949 LPG 45.99 61.6 45.0% 0.493 Naphtha 44.10 69.3 45.0% 0.554 Natural Gas 37.07 54.3 46.0% 0.425 23http://www.teias.gov.tr/ist2006/47.xls
24Vol.2. Energy, 2006 IPCC Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas Inventories, (http://www.ipcc-nggip.iges.or.jp/public /2006gl/pdf/2_Volume2/V2_2_Ch2_Stationary_Combustion.pdf)
Table 17 - Most recent capacity additions corresponding to 20%.11,12,13,14 Fuel Source Electricity Generated
(MWh)
EF Share in total generation
Coal 1,463 1.014 4.1% Lignite 11,480 0.999 32.5% Fuel Oil 565 0.775 1.6% Diesel oil 6 0.949 0.0% LPG 50 0.493 0.1% Naphtha 323 0.554 0.9% Natural Gas 19,811 0.425 56.1%
Renewable and wastes 85 0.000 0.2%
Solid 5 0.000 0.0%
total Renewable 1,502 0.000 4.3%
Annex 3 MONITORING PLAN
The Monitoring Plan (MP) used for determining the emission reduction by the project is based on the approved methodology ACM0002. Since the project activity involves electricity generation from renewable sources and there is no significant leakage source or environmental impacts, MP will mainly include monitoring electricity generation by the project activity and key sustainable development indicators.
MP will be implemented by MAZI-3 Elektrik Üretim A.Ş. during all stages of the project activity in conjunction with the PDD of the project. The plant manager or electrical engineer will be responsible for monitoring the generation in the plant. Two Am-meters issued in the plant will be used as primary source of generation data. This will also be monitored by the head quarter of the MAZI-3 A.Ş. located in Ankara. Generation can be checked with the invoices, and the software used in turbines which shows the actual generation by each turbine. Since the diesel generator will be used very rarely, it is not expected to create a significant emission during monitoring period however it will be included in calculations.
Sustainable Development Indicators
Public consultations did not raise any significant issues which should be included in the monitoring plan. Key sustainable development indicators have been determined as employment (both quality and number of jobs) and contribution to human and institutional capacity. Number of people employed in the plant can be easily determined during operation of the plants. Since plant operation requires skilled technician trained for working in high voltage environment, local people will mainly recruited as support staff( security, logistic, etc) which will still be a better opportunity for local people working in fish farms.
Training of Monitoring Personnel
For the training of the personnel, a five day course will be organized by the turbine manufacturer in Germany. All technical staff in the plant will be trained for being eligible to work in high voltage environment, as required by TEİAŞ. Staff in the VER team will also be trained about emission reduction project activity.
Emission Reductions
A spreadsheet prepared in excel will be used in order to calculate emission reduction. The Project owner will collect data for EGy, net electricity supplied to the grid by the MAZI-3 WPP and FDy, diesel fuel consumption. Generation will be measured and recorded monthly through two high precision measuring devices sealed and controlled by TEİAŞaccording to the regulations issued of the TEIAS. Data can also be checked from electricity sales invoices and records kept by MAZI-3 A.Ş. for cross-checking. Emission from the diesel generator will be tracked from the counter on the equipment showing the total period equipment has been used and the invoices for purchased diesel. Data will be multiplied by hourly consumption and diesel fuel emission factor to find the actual emission.
Data / parameter: FCi,y
Data unit: m3or tons
Source of data: TEİAŞweb page (www.teias.gov.tr) Measurement procedures
(if any):
-Monitoring frequency:
• Once for each crediting period QA/QC procedures:
Any comment: Data is published by the transmission company (TEİAŞ) annually. Data will be used only once for the crediting period
Data / parameter: NCVi,y
Data unit: Tj/kt
Description: Net calorific value (energy content) of fossil fuel type i in year y
Source of data: Calculated using data in TEİAŞweb page using fuel consumption and heating values data
Measurement procedures (if any):
-Monitoring frequency:
• Once for each crediting period QA/QC procedures:
Any comment: Applied in the calculation of the simple OM, where fuel consumption data is available for all power plants.
Data / parameter: EFCO2,i, y i
Data unit: tCO2/TJ
Description: CO2emission factor of fossil fuel type i in year y
Source of data: 2006 IPCC Guidelines for National Greenhouse Inventories Measurement procedures (if
any):
-Monitoring frequency:
• Once for each crediting period QA/QC procedures:
Any comment: Applied in the calculation of the simple OM, where fuel consumption data is available for all power plants.
