project design document
Transkript
project design document
UNFCCC/CCNUCC CDM – Executive Board Page 1 PROJECT DESIGN DOCUMENT FORM FOR SMALL-SCALE CDM PROJECT ACTIVITIES (F-CDM-SSC-PDD) Version 04.1 PROJECT DESIGN DOCUMENT (PDD) Title of the project activity Kar-demir Bozyaka RES 12 MW Version number of the PDD 7.1 Completion date of the PDD 23/03/2015 Project participant(s) Kar-demir Haddecilik ve Elektrik Üretim San. Tic. Ltd. Şti. Host Party(ies) Turkey Sectoral scope(s) and selected methodology(ies) 01 Energy industries (renewable - / non-renewable sources) AMS-I.D.: Grid connected renewable electricity generation --- Version 17.0 Estimated amount of annual average GHG emission reductions 20,641 tCO2/yr UNFCCC/CCNUCC CDM – Executive Board Page 2 SECTION A. Description of project activity A.1. Purpose and general description of project activity Kar-demir Haddecilik San. ve Tic. Ltd. Şti. (referred to as Kar-demir from here on) is operating as a steel producing company in Turkey for roughly 40 years. As its first project of this kind the company has developed the Kar-demir Bozyaka RES 12 MW wind farm project close to Horozgediği community in Aliağa district in İzmir province in Turkey. The project area is very remote, with a distance of roughly 1 km from the closest residential buildings in Horozgediği village. Exact details of the project location are given in Section A.2 below. The purpose of the project activity is to deliver carbon neutral power to the Turkish electricity grid and thus to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by displacing power mainly from fossil fuel fired power plants. The situation prior to the implementation of the proposed project activity is represented by the current and expected power generation mix delivering electricity to the Turkish grid. This mix is clearly dominated by fossil fueled plants, see 4 in Section A.3. below. This situation mainly corresponds to the baseline scenario, i.e. electricity delivered to the grid by the project activity would have otherwise been generated by the operation of grid-connected power plants and by the addition of new generation sources into the grid. According to the initial plans which envisaged to operate the power plant under the Autoproducer business model, the Autoproducer licence for an installed capacity of 12 MW has been obtained from the Energy Market Regulatory Authority (Turkish: Enerji Piyasası Düzenleme Kurumu, EPDK) in May 2008. Upon respective application, a change to Independent Power Producer (IPP) was granted on 19/01/2011. Also, by decision of the Turkish Ministry of Environment and Forestry (Turkish: Türkiye Cumhuriyeti Çevre ve Orman Bakanlığı, TÇOB), the project was released from the duty to perform an Environmental Impact Assessment. The wind farm comprises five turbines of the type Nordex N-100 with a nominal capacity of 2.5 MW each.1 As the above-mentioned EPDK licence refers to only 12 MW, the wind farm – though having a total rated generator capacity of 12.5 MW – will be operated under this maximum output restriction. From the wind yield assessment prepared by EMD for the project, a 33% plant load factor was concluded. This leads to an estimated net annual electricity production of 34,690 MWh/yr (for further details, see 2 below in Section A.3.). With an emission factor of 0.595 tCO2/MWh (see Step 6 below in Section B.6.3), the expected emission reductions over the first crediting period (see Section C.2 below) are: 1 In the technical description of the used turbine, the power factor is given as: “1.00 as default setting”, and the nominal power of the generator is 2,500kW, i.e. 2.5 MW, so 1.00 * 2.5 MW = 2.5 MW. UNFCCC/CCNUCC CDM – Executive Board Page 3 Year Annual estimation of emission reductions in tonnes of CO2e 10/03/2012 - 31/12/2012 16,795 01/01/2013 - 31/12/2013 20,641 01/01/2014 - 31/12/2014 20,641 31/12/2015 20,641 01/01/2015 01/01/2016 - 31/12/2016 20,641 01/01/2017 - 31/12/2017 20,641 01/01/2018 - 31/12/2018 20,641 01/01/2019 - 09/03/2019 3,845 Total estimated reductions (tonnes of CO2e) Total number of crediting years Annual average over the crediting period of estimated reductions (tonnes of CO2e) 144,486 7 20,641 As a renewable energy project, Kar-demir Bozyaka RES 12 MW falls under sectoral scope no. 01 Energy industries (renewable - / non-renewable sources). As a renewable energy project activity with a maximum output capacity of 15 MW, it qualifies as Type I project in accordance with Clause 81 of the Clean development mechanism project standard Version 4.0 valid as of 29/07/2013.2 Contribution to sustainable development Building a wind farm contributes to a sustainable expansion path of the Turkish energy system, as it serves the steadily growing electricity demand in an environmentally suitable way. The project will contribute to dissemination of state-of-the-art new renewable energy (REN) technology. This helps strengthening those pillars of Turkish energy supply that are based on ecologically sound and domestically sourced technology. No significant negative ecological impacts can be expected from the proposed project activity. Rather, there will be essential positive effects, as highly polluting electricity generation technologies will be displaced by the project. This refers not only to greenhouse gases but also to other local air pollutants (such as SO2, NOx, etc.). As for social impacts, significant positive employment effects are expected especially during the construction and installation period, not only directly in terms of temporary construction worker employment, but as well indirectly. In fact, material supplies such as foundations, cables and access roads will be locally sourced so that the project will also contribute to employment of external supplier companies. Operation and maintenance of the wind farm will have positive job effects, too. The experiences with operating a wind farm in Turkey will help building capacity and know-how on state-of-the-art REN technology.Technical description of the small-scale project activity: A.2. Location of project activity A.2.1. Host Party(/ies) Republic of Turkey 2 http://cdm.unfccc.int/sunsetcms/storage/contents/stored-file-20130729142713423/reg_stan01.pdf UNFCCC/CCNUCC CDM – Executive Board Page 4 A.2.2. Region/State/Province İzmir province A.2.3. City/Town/Community etc. Town and district of Aliağa, Horozgediği village A.2.4. Physical / Geographical location Please refer to the maps below for a description of the physical location of the project activity: Figure 1: Location of Izmir province in Turkey Figure 2: Location of Horozgediği village in Aliağa district in İzmir province UNFCCC/CCNUCC CDM – Executive Board Page 5 The detailed locations of every single plant are visualised in Figure 3: Layout of Kar-demir Bozyaka RES 12 MW The exact coordinates are summarized in Table 1: Wind farm layout coordinates WEC no. Longitude (N) Latitude (E) Elevation [m] 1 38°44'44.00"N 26°56'15.00"E 55 2 38°44'45.00"N 26°56'26.00"E 80 3 38°44'49.00"N 26°56'37.00"E 87 4 38°44'54.00"N 26°56'47.00"E 28 5 38°44'16.00"N 26°56'10.00"E 49 UNFCCC/CCNUCC CDM – Executive Board Page 6 A.3. Technologies and/or measures The proposed project activity will involve the transfer of state-of-the-art REN technology for gridconnected generation of electricity in the host country by adding highly developed wind energy converter technology to the current generation mix. The general technical information on the proposed project activity, including the expected energy flow and type and level of services is given in Table 2: Technical data of Kar-demir Bozyaka RES 12 MW Total power 12.0 MW Total rated generator capacity 12.5 MW Turbine Nordex N-100 Rated power of turbine 2.5 MW No. of turbines 5 Annual net production 34,690 MWh Capacity factor 33 %3 Expected lifetime 20 years4 By annually delivering an expected amount of 34,690 MWh to the Turkish grid, the proposed project activity contributes to reductions in greenhouse gas emissions, because this electricity would otherwise be generated by the operation of grid-connected power plants and by the addition of new generation sources into the grid. By applying state-of-the-art wind energy technology the project involves significant transfer of environmentally safe and sound technology to the host country. Moreover, tower construction was conducted in the host country, which contributes to additional and sustainable long-term transfer of technology and know-how. 3 4 Capacity factor was applied as indicated in EMD Wind Yield Assessment. The latter is provided to the DOE for validation. See http://www.nordex-online.com/fileadmin/MEDIA/Gamma/Nordex_Gamma_en.pdf. UNFCCC/CCNUCC CDM – Executive Board Page 7 A more detailed compilation of the power production technologies and equipment involved is given in Table: 3 Technical data of Nordex N-100 Rotor Rotor blades Number of rotor blades 3 Length 48.7 m Rotor speed 9.6-14.9 rpm Material GRP Rotor diameter 100 m Weight C. 9,800 kg Swept area 7,854 m² Power regulation Pitch Brakes Cut-in wind speed 3 m/s Primary Rotor blade pitch Cut-out wind speed 20 m/s Secondary Hydraulic disc brake Rated power from 13 m/s Survival wind speed 52.5 m/s Tower Pitch regulation Individual rotor blade pitch Type Modular tubular steel tower Weight C. 56,500 kg Hub height 100 m, certificate DIBt 2, IEC 3a Gearbox Type Planetary/spur gear or differential gear box Gear ratio 1:77.4 (50 Hz) / 1:92.9 (60 Hz) Generator Power 2,500 kW Voltage 660 V Type Double-fed asynchronous generator with partial frequency converter Frequency 50 or 60 Hz Yaw system Bearing Ball bearing Brake Hydraulic disc brake Drive Asynchronous motors with integrated brakes Speed C. 0.4 °/s Control system Type PLC, Remote Field Controller (RFC) Grid connection Via IGBT converter Scope of monitoring Remote monitoring of over 300 different parameters, e.g. temperature, hydraulic pressure, pitch parameters, wind speed and direction Recording Production data, event lists with filter function, long and short-term trends Visualisation Panel PC in control cabinet and Web-based access possible from any PC, adapter for laptop at the bottom of tower or in nacelle UNFCCC/CCNUCC CDM – Executive Board Page 8 As primary monitoring equipment, one main and one backup bidirectional electricity meter with 0.5s accuracy class5 are installed at the substation to which Kar-demir Bozyaka RES 12 MW is connected. As backup monitoring equipment, another proprietary set of main and backup meters is installed on site for control purposes. Location of meters is represented in 7 in Section B.7.3. below. Facilities, systems and equipment under the existing scenario prior to the implementation of the project activity which corresponds to the baseline scenario can best be summarised by 1. the current distribution of primary energy resources used for electricity generation in Turkey and 2. the projected future distribution of those primary energy resources. For the current distribution, data is available from Turkish electricity generation-transmission statistics 20116 published by the Turkish grid operator Türkiye Elektrik İletim A.Ş (TEİAŞ) as summarised in Table 4: Turkey’s gross electricity generation by primary energy resources 7 Gross electricity generation (GWh) Primary Energy Resources 2009 2010 2011 Hard Coal+Imported Coal 16,595.60 19,104.30 27,347.50 Lignite 39,089.46 35,942.10 38,870.40 Fuel Oil 4,439.77 2,143.80 900.50 345.81 4.30 3.10 0.40 0.00 0.00 17.56 31.90 0.00 96,094.71 98,143.70 104,047.60 Diesel oil LPG Naphtha Natural Gas Renewables and wastes Hydro+Geothermal+Wind Total TURKEY'S TOTAL 340.15 457.50 469.20 37,889.47 55,380.10 57,756.80 194,812.92 211,207.70 229,395.10 The current generation mix is clearly dominated by fossil fuel fired power sources, causing GHG emissions of 98,047 kt CO2 in 2009, 98,582 kt CO2 in 2010, and 110,027 kt CO2 in 2011, as calculated in this document, see 14 Section B.6.3 Step 4. below. The coal fired power plants serving the Turkish system are characterised by pulverized coal combustion technology with relatively low pressure and temperature. The average efficiency is around 32-33%, with a maximum of 38%. The average age is approx. 28 years.8 See also 5 6 7 8 See detailed specification in Section B.7.1 below. See http://www.teias.gov.tr/T%C3%BCrkiyeElektrik%C4%B0statistikleri/istatistik2011/istatistik%202011.htm [TEİAŞ Statistics]. Source: TEİAŞ Statistics (http://www.teias.gov.tr/T%C3%BCrkiyeElektrik%C4%B0statistikleri/istatistik2011/uretim %20tuketim(22-45)/40(06-11).xls). For a detailed compilation of all power plants serving the Turkish system, see TEİAŞ (2011): Türkiye elektrik enerjisi 10 yıllık üretim kapasite projeksiyonu (2012–2021) pp. 1-101 (Turkish 10year electricity generation capacity projection). http://www.teias.gov.tr/projeksiyon/KAPASITEPROJEKSIYONU2012.pdf [TEİAŞ Projection] See Presentation “Clean Coal Technologies“ held by Assoc. Prof. Dr. Fehmi Akgün during the “Turkish-American Clean Energy Conference” in Istanbul in January 2008. Download at: http://www.americanturkishcouncil.org/ events/cleanenergy/pdf/TuesdayMorningBallroom2&3/AkgunFehmi_2008CleanEnergy.pdf. UNFCCC/CCNUCC CDM – Executive Board Table 5: Page 9 Thermal power plants in Turkey9 Power plant name Fuel type Province Afşin-Elbistan A Lignite K.Maraş Aliağa GT+KÇ Diesel oil Ambarlı Total capacity (MW) Projected generation (GWh) Average thermal efficiency (%) 1,360.00 8,840.00 30.06 İzmir 180.00 540.00 33.78 Fuel oil İstanbul 630.00 4,100.00 37.25 Ambarlı KÇ Natural Gas İstanbul 1,350.90 8,780.00 48.57 Bursa Natural Gas Bursa 1,432.00 10,024.00 54.40 Çatalağzı B Hard Coal Zonguldak 300.00 1,950.00 33.57 Çayırhan 1,2 Linyit Ankara 320.00 2,080.00 34.54 Denizli Tabii Buhar Denizli 17.50 105.00 11.57 Esenyurt I,II,III,IV Natural Gas İstanbul 188.50 1,413.80 45.00 Enron(Trakya Elek.) Natural Gas Tekirdağ 498.70 3,740.30 47.00 Engil GT Diesel oil Van 15.00 90.00 21.27 Hakkari Fuel oil Hakkari 11.10 83.30 35.03 Hamitabat KÇ Natural Gas Kırklareli 1,200.00 7,800.00 45.81 Hopa Fuel oil Artvin 50.00 200.00 26.27 Kangal 1,2,3 Lignite Sivas 457.00 2,970.50 29.76 Kemerköy 1,2,3 Lignite Muğla 630.00 4,095.00 33.21 Orhaneli Lignite Bursa 210.00 1,365.00 36.18 Ova elektrik Natural Gas Kocaeli 258.40 1,938.00 44.00 Park Termik Lignite Ankara 300.00 1,072.90 34.71 PS3-Silopi Fuel oil Ş. Urfa 44.10 330.80 37.36 PS3A-idil Fuel oil Mardin 11.40 85.50 35.19 Seyitömer Lignite Kütahya 600.00 3,900.00 32.97 Soma A Lignite Manisa 44.00 290.00 30.31 Soma B Lignite Manisa 990.00 6,435.00 32.45 Tunçbilek A+B Lignite Kütahya 429.00 2,790.00 31.45 Unimar Natural Gas Tekirdağ 504.00 3,780.00 37.00 Van Fuel oil Van 24.00 180.00 39.33 Yatağan Lignite Muğla 630.00 4,100.00 32.67 Yeniköy Lignite Muğla 420.00 2,730.00 34.82 As for the future of the generation mix in Turkey, it can be stated that the typical capacity additions in recent years are clearly dominated by natural gas plants with presumably higher efficiencies than displayed in 5 above (see also the assumptions explained in Step 5. below in Section B.6.1, as well as the plants listed in D below in Appendix 4). The expectations about the development of the Turkish power production sources in the coming 10 year period as published in TEİAŞ Projection are illustrated in 9 Source: Environmental Atlas of Turkey (Türkiye Çevre Atlası) 2004, p. 197. Download at: http://www.cedgm.gov.tr/CED/Files/cevreatlas%C4%B1/atlas_metni.pdf. UNFCCC/CCNUCC CDM – Executive Board Figure 4: Shares of energy resources in projected Turkish electricity generation 2012-2021 (scenario 1).10 Figure 5: Shares of energy resources in projected Turkish electricity generation 2012-2021 (scenario 2).11 Page 10 As can be seen in both scenarios, electricity generation in Turkey is clearly based on fossil fuels and is expected to remain so in the nearer future. The share of natural gas will slightly decline from over 45% to roughly 40%. Emission intensive but domestic lignite will keep a share of around 15%, hard coal of approx. 10% while petroleum based sources are expected to stay below 5%. Hydro electricity plants are expected to increase their share to well above 25%. Other renewable energy is expected to remain at very low levels of around 2.7%, and are expected to be outpaced by newly added nuclear power plants. 10 11 For underlying values see A below in Appendix 4. For underlying values see B below in Appendix 4. UNFCCC/CCNUCC CDM – Executive Board Page 11 The baseline scenario is almost identical with the situation prior to the implementation of the proposed GS VER project activity as described above in this section. I.e., the assumption is that the electricity presumably generated by the proposed GS VER project activity would be otherwise provided by the existing and forecast generation mix. Section B.4 below will contain general explanations on the way of identifying the baseline scenario as well as a general definition according to the methodology used to calculate GHG emission reductions caused by the proposed GS VER project activity. Section B.5 below will exactly apply a stepwise approach of identifying the baseline scenario in compliance with the used methodology. Step 3 and Step 4 in Section B.6.1 will contain an exact specification of the characteristics of the power plants to be included in the baseline scenario, particularly w.r.t. the current generation mix. Step 5 in Section B.6.1, as well as D below in Appendix 4 will also provide for exact definitions as to how the forecast generation mix will be represented in the baseline scenario. A.4. Parties and project participants Name of Party involved Turkey (host) Private and/or public entity project participants Kar-demir Haddecilik San. Tic. Ltd. Sti. Party involved wishes to be considered as project participant No A.5. Public funding of project activity No public funding is involved in the financing of the proposed GS VER project activity.12 A.6. Debundling for project activity According to UNFCCC "Guidelines on assessment of debundling for SSC project activities" 13, a "[...] proposed small-scale project activity shall be deemed to be a debundled component of a large project activity if there is a registered small-scale CDM project activity or an application to register another small-scale CDM project activity: (a) With the same project participants; (b) In the same project category and technology/measure; and (c) Registered within the previous 2 years; and (d) Whose project boundary is within 1 km of the project boundary of the proposed small-scale activity at the closest point. [...]" None of this is applicable to Kar-demir Bozyaka RES 12 MW. 12 13 A respective written undertaking by the financier of the project is submitted to the DOE for validation. http://cdm.unfccc.int/Reference/Guidclarif/ssc/methSSC_guid17.pdf UNFCCC/CCNUCC CDM – Executive Board Page 12 SECTION B. Application of selected approved baseline and monitoring methodology B.1. Reference of methodology For the proposed GS VER project activity the 1. Indicative simplified baseline and monitoring methodology small-scale CDM project activity category "I. D. Grid connected renewable electricity generation", Version 17.0, valid as of 17/06/2011 (referred to as AMS-I.D. from here on) is used in combination with 2. the “Tool for the demonstration and assessment of additionality” Version 07.0.0 valid as of 23/11/2012 (referred to as Additionality Tool from here on) as well as with the 3. “Tool to calculate the emission factor for an electricity system” Version 03.0.0 valid as of 23/11/2012 (referred to as EF Tool from here on). B.2. Project activity eligibility Kar-demir Bozyaka RES 12 MW represents a capacity addition of wind energy resources to the Turkish national electricity grid. It does not involve switching from fossil fuels to renewable energy at the project site. Identification of geographic and system boundaries is feasible in a clear way and information of grid characteristics is available. Concluding, all applicability criteria listed in AMS-I.D. are met by the proposed GS VER project activity. As it is a grid connected power plant, the applicability criteria of the EF Tool are also met. B.3. Project boundary Only CO2 emissions will be included in the project boundary. The proposed project activity itself will cause no emissions: Table 6: Emission sources included in the project boundary: Project Baseline Source Gas Included? Justification/ Explanation CO2 Yes Major emission source CH4 No Minor emission source N2 O No Minor emission source CO2 Yes Major baseline emission source CH4 No Minor baseline emission source N2 O No Minor baseline emission source According to AMS-I.D., the spatial extent of the project boundary includes the project site and all power plants connected physically to the electricity system that the project power plant is connected to. So, as relevant sources, basically all power plants connected physically to the Turkish national electricity grid and feeding in electricity to it will be included in the project boundary. This includes power plants outside Turkey supplying electricity imports into the Turkish grid. The figure below provides for an overview: UNFCCC/CCNUCC CDM – Executive Board Figure 6: Page 13 Flow diagram of Turkish electricity system Turkish interconnected system CO2 Power producers* Kar-demir Connected electricity systems Bozyaka wind farm Grid connected power plants TEIAŞ Transmission system Regional Distributors Electricity imports Transmission lines Distribution lines Electricity exports Distribution system Power consumers Isolated autoproducer power plants Isolated Autoproducers *i.e. EÜAŞ (and associated companies), IPP, (grid connected) Autoproducers, BOO/BO/BOT companies. B.4. Establishment and description baseline scenario The baseline scenario will be identified by applying the stepwise approach provided by the Additionality Tool. Section B.5 below will demonstrate that the proposed project activity is not business as usual and that the most plausible alternative corresponding to the proposed project activity is the baseline scenario as prescribed by AMS-I.D.: “[...] 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 into the grid.”. This corresponds to the situation prior to the implementation of the proposed project activity as described in Section A.3 above. The CM calculations reflecting the baseline, the characteristics of the technology that would be employed, and the activities that would take place in the absence of the proposed project activity are described in detail in Section B.5 below. The relevant electricity system is identified in Step 1 below in Section B.6.1 A general UNFCCC/CCNUCC CDM – Executive Board Page 14 characterisation of the power plants included in the baseline scenario's presence component is contained in Step 3 in Section B.6.1 below. The characterisation of the power plants representing the future component of the baseline is given in Step 5 in Section B.6.1 below, and D below in Appendix 4 lists the actual power plants representing the forecast component. The explanations under Step 4 in Section B.6.3 below contain the actual values of the relevant characteristics (i.e. generation and emissions, see 14 and 15, respectively) of the power plants representing the presence component. B.5. Demonstration of additionality Early consideration of carbon credits Contracting of carbon market consultant enveco GmbH took place on 19/09/2008 14, demonstrating clearly that carbon revenue was included in the project feasibility assessment. This was clearly before the project starting date, as well as before the public announcement of the project activity (i.e. invitation to GS Local Stakeholder Consultation on 10/03/2010), see Table 7: Project time line Date Project development step 01/05/2008 Autoproducer licence for 12 MW project is granted by EPDK 14/07/2008 Wind yield assessment is submitted by DLC 01/04/2008 Board decision about the necessity to use carbon finance November 2008 08/2008 Pre-Negotiations with several turbine suppliers in Germany Project presentation file (Turkish: Proje Tanıtım Dosyası, PTD) is submitted to TÇOB for environmental assessment of the project 11/09/2008 TÇOB decides that the project is relieved from duty to perform EIA 19/09/2008 Carbon market consulting contract with enveco GmbH 21/12/2009 First non-binding offer from turbine supplier Nordex 10/03/2010 GS Local Stakeholder Consultation Meeting 04/2010 14/05/2010 Wind yield assessment by EMD Bank loan contract with YapiKredi Bank 10/06/2010 Supplier contract with Nordex signed Time of investment decision, first real action, and project start date. First invoice from turbine supplier Nordex 15/01/2011 Date of site delivery protocol and start of anchorage construction 19/01/2011 Change of production licence from Autoproducer to IPP 10/03/2012 Commissioning date 21/01/2013 Application for GS version 2.2 pre-feasibility assessment due to retroactive registration 11/06/2013 Contract with DOE for validation 19/06/2010 For the detailed demonstration and assessment of additionality of the proposed GS VER project activity, the stepwise approach provided by the Additionality Tool will be used below. Step 0 Demonstration whether the proposed project activity is the first-of-its-kind This step is not applied, as the project activity clearly is not first-of-its-kind. 14 The contract is submitted to the DOE for validation. UNFCCC/CCNUCC CDM – Executive Board Page 15 Step 1 Identification of alternatives to the project activity consistent with current laws and regulations Sub-step 1.a Define alternatives to the project activity Kar-demir has only the choice whether or not to implement the proposed GS VER project activity. If not, the respective power will be provided by the (then) existing Turkish generation facilities as represented by 4 and 5 in Section A.3. above. Concluding, only the following alternatives to the proposed GS VER project activity will be considered: Alternative (1) The proposed wind power project without origination and sale of GS VERs. Alternative (2) The production of the projected electricity amount by the operation of gridconnected power plants as well as by those power plants subject to the upgrading of Turkish electricity generation according to the latest projection of the development of the Turkish power supply published by TEİAŞ. Sub-step 1.b Consistency with mandatory laws and regulations Both alternatives are in full compliance with all applicable laws and regulations. All required official approvals for the proposed GS VER project activity are at hand. The electricity system expansion scenario has been published by an official Turkish authority making any conflict with applicable law very unlikely. All the alternatives to the project outlined in Sub-step 1.a are in compliance with applicable laws and regulations, including: 1. Electricity Market Law (number 4628, ratified 20/02/2001, enacted 03/03/2001) 2. Law on Utilization of Renewable Energy Resources for the Purpose of Generating Electricity Energy (number 5346, ratified 10/05/2005, enacted 18/05/2005) 3. Environment Law (number 2827, ratified 09/08/1983, enacted 11/08/1983) Step 2 Investment analysis The purpose of this step is to demonstrate that the proposed GS VER project activity is not economically or financially feasible without the revenue from the sale of VERs. According to the Additionality Tool, “[...] the latest version of the 'Guidelines on the assessment of investment analysis' [in short Investment Analysis Guidelines] […] shall be taken into account when applying this step. The latest version as of submission of the PDD to the DOE for validation is version 5, valid as of 15/07/2011.15 Sub-step 2.a Determine appropriate analysis method The Additionality Tool provides for three options regarding investment analysis, i.e. (I) simple cost analysis, (II) investment comparison analysis, and (III) benchmark analysis. Option (I) is considered appropriate only if the proposed project activity as well as the alternatives presented in Sub-step 1.a above generate no financial or economic benefits other than income from carbon trade. As all alternatives and the proposed project activity generate income from electricity sales, Option (I) is not applicable. Option (II) investment comparison is also not applicable. Clause 19 of the Investment Analysis Guidelines: "[...] If the alternative to the project activity is the supply of electricity from a grid this is not to be considered an investment and a benchmark approach is considered appropriate. [...]" Kar-demir has only the choice between implementing the proposed project activity or not investing at all. In the latter case, Alternative (2) as described in Sub-step 1.a above would become effective, which is equal to the one described in the citation above. Concluding, Option (III), i.e. benchmark analysis, is chosen. 15 http://cdm.unfccc.int/Reference/Guidclarif/reg/reg_guid03.pdf UNFCCC/CCNUCC CDM – Executive Board Page 16 Sub-step 2.b Option III. Apply benchmark analysis First, an appropriate financial indicator must be chosen to measure economic attractiveness/feasibility of the proposed GS VER project activity. We choose IRR as typical indicator for long-term investments. As the investment discussed in this section is made by a private entity contributing equity to financing of the project, the appropriate indicator is assumed to be equity IRR. The appropriate benchmark for equity IRR is required return on equity, according to the Additionality Tool. Sub-step 2.c Calculation and comparison of financial indicators The Additionality Tool states that "[...] the financial/economic analysis shall be based on parameters that are standard in the market[...]” except for certain particular circumstances. More precisely, the Investment Analysis Guidelines state in their clause 13: “In cases of projects which could be developed by an entity other than the project participant the benchmark should be based on parameters that are standard in the market.” As the development of Wind Farm projects in Turkey is not reserved to one company only, the application of parameters that are standard in the market is obligatory. According to Clause 38 of the Additionality Tool, benchmarks shall be derived from estimates of the cost of financing and required return on capital, based on bankers' views. According to the World Bank, the typical expected equity IRR for Wind Farms in Turkey is 15%.16 Thus, this benchmark is accordingly determined. Taking into account the guidance of Clause 5 of the Investment Analysis Guidelines, this figure is conservatively interpreted as a post-tax value. Table 8: Financial data and equity IRR as of 19/06/2010 Turbine costs Investment side costs (erection of turbines, buildings, roads, etc.) Total investment Debt to Equity ratio Bank loan duration Bank loan interest Equity Bank loan Annual operation costs (average) 11,500,000 € Source: Supply and Installation Agreement17 2,800,000 € Source: Loan Contract18 14,300,000 € (turbine cost + investment side cost) 80% : 20% Source: Loan Contract 10 years 5.65% 2,860,000 € (figures calculated from debt to equity ratio displayed in loan contract 11,440,000 € 371,515 € Source: Kar-demir calculation19 Feed-in tariff (per MWh) 55,00 € Source: Law no. 5346 Annual electricity generation (net) (MWh/yr) 34,690 Source: EMD WYA20 Equity IRR (20 years, post tax, nominal) Carbon credit price (expectation at the time of investment decision) Equity IRR with carbon credits 16 17 18 19 20 21 10.81% 7.00 € Source: State of the Voluntary Carbon Market 2010, page vii.21 13.39% Project Appraisal Document on a proposed International Bank for Reconstruction and Development Loan, World Bank, 2009; page 80. See http://www-wds.worldbank.org/external/default/WDSContentServer/WDSP/IB/2009/05/ 11/000333037_20090511030724/Rendered/PDF/468080PAD0P112101Official0Use0Only1.pdf The SIA is provided to the DOE for validation. The loan contract is provided to the DOE for validation. The financial tables showing the OPEX estimate applied by Kar-demir are provided to the DOE for validation. The wind yield assessment prepared by EMD for the project is povided to the DOE for validation. See http://forest-trends.org/publication_details.php?publicationID=2434. UNFCCC/CCNUCC CDM – Executive Board Page 17 As can be seen, the equity IRR does not reach the benchmark without including carbon credit income into the financial model while it improves significantly once carbon income is added. As a preliminary conclusion, the proposed GS VER project activity without origination and sale of GS VERs is not economically or financially feasible. Sub-step 2.d Sensitivity analysis To demonstrate that the preliminary conclusion deduced above is robust to reasonable variations in the critical assumptions, a sensitivity analysis is conducted. The Additionality Tool suggests to subject only those variables to variation that constitute more than 20% of total project costs, and that a general point of departure should at least cover a range of +/-10%. The variables included in the sensitivity analysis are: 1. The annual income, depending on feed-in tariff and net annual electricity production 2. The investment cost A compilation of input value variations and the corresponding impact on equity IRR is given in Table 9: Sensitivity analysis Variation acc. to Additionality Tool Variable Feed-in tariff per MWh Investment cost Annual Electricity Generation Variation Value IRR +10.00% 60.50 € 14.85% -10.00% 49.50 € 7.07% -10.00% 12,870,000 € 13.39% +10.00% 15,730,000 € 8.64% +10.00% 38,159 MWh/yr 13.41% -10.00% 31,221 MWh/yr 7.07% Variation to reach benchmark Variation Value +10.35% 60.69 € -15.52% 0€ +16.17% 40,030 MWh/yr The sensitivity analysis shows that the benchmark cannot be reached with variations of variables within the range of +10% and -10%. What is more, the deviations from assumed figures are highly unlikely. At the time of investment decision, i.e. 19/06/2010 (see 7 above), the guaranteed feed-in tariff was limited to a maximum of 0.055 €/kWh according to law no. 5346 as amended by law no. 5627.22 On 29/12/2010, law no. 609423 came into effect, amending law no. 5346 again, introducing a feed-in tariff nominated in USD instead of EUR, amounting to 73 USD/MWh. 22 23 Energy Efficiency Law (http://www.eie.gov.tr/english/announcements/EV_kanunu/EnVer_kanunu_tercume_revize2707.doc). http://www.enerji.gov.tr/mevzuat/5346/Yenilenebilir_Enerji_Kaynaklarinin_Elektrik_Enerjisi_Uretimi_Amacli_Kullan imina_Iliskin_Kanunda_Degisiklik_Yapilmasina_Dair_Kanun.pdf. UNFCCC/CCNUCC CDM – Executive Board Page 18 Given USD-EUR exchange rates of the previous year, this tariff actually represents a reduction as against the former feed-in tariff, see Table 10: USD-EUR exchange-rates since coming into effect of law no. 6094 and resulting EUR denominated feed-in tariffs24 1 EUR = Date feed-in tariff (EUR/MWh) Low 1.2089 USD 24/07/12 60.39 Peak 1.4882 USD 04/05/11 49.05 Average 1.3327 USD 29/10/10 – 01/10/2013 54.78 As can be seen, the new guaranteed feed-in tariff since its introduction has never reached the 10.35% upward variation determined in the sensitivity analysis to be required for reaching the benchmark. Also, the new legal framework added a significant exchange-rate risk to the proposed GS VER project activity, as both technology procurement and financing are nominated in Euros. As for options to sell power on the Turkish Electricity Market Financial Settlement Center, Piyasa Mali Uzlastirma Merkezi (PMUM), the price development there has been generally unfavourable since the peak in 2008. An overview is given in Table 11: Average Power Prices in Turkey 2006 - 201325 Year(s) Annual average (EUR/MWh) 2006 62.27 2007 71.86 2008 84.42 2009 67.64 2010 61.52 2011 54.48 2012 61.26 2013 (Jan-Aug) 54.62 Average 2006- Aug 2013 65.53 So, even without taking into account the manifold shortfalls of the option to sell power to PMUM (exchange-rate risk, high volatility of power prices, timing of electricity production, etc.), the general price level has not been attractive since the project start date. However, the discussed downward variation of -10% is evenly unlikely. As a consequence of this lack of financial attractiveness, the risk assessment by the financing bank led to significant requirements for the security package, although Kar-demir is a long term client. The bank has explicitly emphasized that the carbon credits generated by the project represent an important part of this security package.26 As for the annual electricity generation, wind farm performance to date has shown that the 33% plant load factor assumption from the wind yield assessment is slightly too optimistic. So, a significant and systematic long term exceedance of this is highly unlikely. Also, the potential for a positive impact on return and subsequently on IRR is severely impaired by the SIA terms related to operation and maintenance. A supplementary fee of 0.02 €/kWh for each kWh over and above 7,000,000 kWh per turbine is included therein. The likelihood for a systematic and significant overestimation of AEG as reflected in the -10% variation included in 9 above is also very low. 24 25 26 See http://www.ecb.eu/stats/exchange/eurofxref/html/eurofxref-graph-usd.en.html. For TL nominated prices, see http://dgpys.teias.gov.tr/dgpys/. For exchange rates, see http://evds.tcmb.gov.tr/yeni/cbt-uk.html. The respective letter by the bank is provided to the DOE for validation. UNFCCC/CCNUCC CDM – Executive Board Page 19 Last, the investment has actually increased to over € 17 million, whereas the loan could only be used up to the amount of € 12 million, instead of the actually sought amount of € 12.8million. This severely increased the equity share in total CAPEX, much to the disadvantage of the project owner. With the actual CAPEX and an AEG of 34,690 MWh/yr, the power price would need to rise to 68.15 €/MWh in order to reach the benchmark. AEG would need to rise to 47,910 MWh/yr with the estimated power price of 55.00 €/MWh. As for CAPEX, the +10% variation included in 9 above has turned out to be even too optimistic, let alone the -10% variation. Thus, the conclusion reached in Sub-step 2.c above is robust. Concluding, the proposed project activity is additional. Step 3 Barrier analysis This step is not chosen. Step 4 Common practice analysis According to the CDM validation and verification standard version 8.0 valid as of 28/11/2014, Clause 137, a common practice analysis is only necessary for large-scale project activities. B.6. B.6.1. Emission reductions Explanation of methodological choices Emission reductions The generic equation for the calculation of emission reductions is ER y =BE y −PE y − LE y equation (1a) where ERy BEy PEy LEy = = = = Emission reductions in year y (t CO2/yr) Baseline emissions in year y (t CO2/yr) Project emission in year y (t CO2/yr) Leakage emissions in year y (t CO2/yr) AMS-I.D. gives instructions and methods to calculate/estimate each of the above stated parameters separately and sometimes provides for generic assumptions which are allowed to to be made. Project emissions According to AMS-I.D., “project emissions have to be considered following the procedure described in the most recent version of ACM002”. According to the Large-scale Cosolidated Methodology Grid-connected electricity generation from renewable sources Version 16.0 dated 28/11/2014 (ACM002), Clause 37 states: “For all renewable energy power generation project activities, emissions due to the use of fossil fuels for the backup generator can be neglected.” Thus: equation (2) PE y =0 UNFCCC/CCNUCC CDM – Executive Board Page 20 Leakage emissions According to AMS-I.D., leakage is to be considered if the energy generating equipment is transferred from another activity. This is not the case for Kar-demir Bozyaka RES 12 MW, so LE y =0 equation (3) where LEy = Leakage emissions in year y (t CO2/yr) Conclusion for emission reductions Concluding, by inserting equation (2) and equation (3) into equation (1a) leads to: ER y = BE y equation (1) Baseline emissions According to AMS-I.D., “baseline emissions include […] CO2 emissions from electricity generation in fossil fuel fired power plants that are displaced due to the project activity.” The equation provided there to calculate baseline emissions is: BE y =EG BL , y⋅EF CO , grid , y equation (4a) 2 where BEy EGBL,y = = EFCO2,grid,y = Baseline emissions in year y (tCO2/yr) Quantity of net electricity supplied to the grid as a result of the implementation of the [...] project activity in year y (MWh/yr) CO2 emission factor of the grid in year y (tCO2/MWh) In this PDD, the EF Tool is applied for calculating the emission factor, thus EF CO equation (5) where EFgrid,CM,y = 2 , grid , y =EF grid ,CM , y Combined margin CO2 emission factor for the project electricity system in year y (tCO2/MWh) Concluding, the final way to calculate baseline emissions is: equation (4) BE y =EG BL , y⋅EF grid ,CM , y EGBL,y has been estimated in advance by expert studies, the result of which is applied in this PDD, see 8 above (Section B.5) and will be subjected to validation. The parameter will be subjected to monitoring as described in Section B.7 below and will be verified periodically for the purpose of final determination of actual emission reductions. For calculating EFgrid,CM,y, AMS-I.D. allows to use the EF Tool. The latter provides for several methodological choices which are explained along with the presentation of the stepwise approach of the EF Tool: The combined margin (CM) emission factor shall represent the electricity generation displacement effect of the proposed project activity on the electricity system. It is calculated as the weighted average of the operating margin and the build margin. The operating margin (OM) refers to a cohort of existing power plants whose electricity generation amount is likely to be affected by the proposed project activity. It represents the presence component of the baseline scenario. The build margin (BM) refers to a cohort of power units reflecting the type of power UNFCCC/CCNUCC CDM – Executive Board Page 21 units whose construction/commissioning would be affected by the proposed project activity. It represents the future/forecast component of the baseline scenario. For calculation of EFgrid,CM,y the EF Tool provides for the following steps: Step 1 Identification of the relevant power systems Step 2 Choose whether to include off-grid power plants in the project electricity system (optional) Step 3 Selection of an OM method Step 4 OM emission factor calculation Step 5 BM emission factor calculation Step 6 CM emission factor calculation In the course of performing these steps, the EF Tool on several occasions provides for certain methodological options to choose from. The choices taken in this PDD will be presented and justified in the following section in the order of their appearance in the course of the stepwise procedure. Step 1, Step 2, and Step 3 will actually also already be performed in this section, as they address methodological choices in them selves rather than being sub steps of the emission reduction calculation. UNFCCC/CCNUCC CDM – Executive Board Page 22 Step 1 Identification of the relevant power systems According to the guidance provided in the EF Tool, the relevant electricity system, i.e. the project electricity system “is defined by 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.” It shall preferably be identified using an official delineation provided by the host country. As this is not available for Turkey, the provisions of the EF Tool will be followed: “project participants should define the project electricity system and any connected electricity system and justify and document their assumptions […]”. Power can be dispatched without significant transmission constraint in the Turkish national electricity transmission and distribution grid. This is demonstrated i.a. by the fact that Turkey’s interconnected peak load in 2010 and 2011 amounts only to some 34% of the total capacity of transformers in the national interconnected system: Table 12: Relation of peak load and transformer capacity in interconnected Turkish national grid in years 2010 and 201127 2010 2011 Turkey’s interconnected peak load (instantaneous) [MW] 33,391.9 36,122.4 Total transformer capacity [MVA] 99,852.0 104,658.0 Share 33,44% 34,51% Concluding, the Turkish national electricity system as outlined in 6 in Section B.3. above is the project system. The connected electricity system “is defined as an electricity system that is connected by transmission lines to the project electricity system.” This is also included in 6 in Section B.3. above. In 2010 and 2011, Turkey has imported electricity from Georgia, Iran, and the Azerbaijani Nakhchivan Autonomous Republic, Greece, and Bulgaria. Electricity was exported to the same countries, and also to Iraq and Syria. The amount of exports and imports is negligible as compared to total generation 28, and no indications as to a significant increase in imports enabled by additions in transmission capacity can be found. Concluding, for determining the BM emission factor, the spatial extent is limited to the project electricity system. As the project electricity system is the Turkish national grid, and, concluding, all connected electricity systems are located in another country, the emission factor for the electricity imports, which are to be included in the OM calculations, is EFgrid,import,y = 0 tCO2/MWh according to the provisions of the EF Tool. Step 2 Choose whether to include off-grid power plants in the project electricity system (optional) No off-grid power plants will be included in the project electricity system. 27 28 Sources: http://www.teias.gov.tr/T%C3%BCrkiyeElektrik%C4%B0statistikleri/istatistik2011/kgucunkullan %C4%B1m(13-21)/20(2006-2011).xls (peak load); http://www.teias.gov.tr/T%C3%BCrkiyeElektrik %C4%B0statistikleri/istatistik2011/hat%20trafo(55-59)/58.xls (transformer capacity). Source: http://www.teias.gov.tr/T%C3%BCrkiyeElektrik%C4%B0statistikleri/istatistik2011/maliyet(67-73)/69.xls. UNFCCC/CCNUCC CDM – Executive Board Page 23 Step 3 Selection of an OM method For the OM calculation, the EF Tool presents four different options. For the proposed project activity, option (a) Simple OM is chosen. The simple OM emission factor is calculated as the generation-weighted average CO2 emissions per unit net electricity generation (tCO 2/MWh) of all generating power plants serving the system, not including low-cost/must-run power plants/units. This choice is permitted by the EF Tool only under the condition that low-cost/mustrun resources constitute less than 50% of total grid generation in: 1) average of the five most recent years, or 2) based on long-term averages for hydroelectricity production. Coal is not considered as a must-run resource in Turkey. The respective shares for the last five years for which data is available are shown in Table 13: Share of low-cost/must-run resources in Turkish electricity production, 2007-201129 [%] 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 TOTAL THERMAL 81.0 82.7 80.6 73.8 74.8 TOTAL HYDRO 18.7 16.8 18.5 24.5 22.8 GEOTHERMAL+WIND 0.3 0.5 1.0 1.7 2.4 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 TOTAL TURKEY The EF Tool also allows for the choice between an ex ante and an ex post option for data vintage. For the proposed project activity, the OM will be calculated according to the ex ante option, being a 3-year generation-weighted average, based on the most recent data available at the time of submission of the project documentation to the DOE for validation, without requirement to monitor and recalculate the emissions factor during the crediting period. For the proposed project activity, data from the years 2009-2011 is applied, as these are the most recent years covered by TEİAŞ Statistics. Step 4 OM emission factor calculation (Methodological choices) For the application of the simple OM as chosen in Step 3 above, the EF Tool again allows two sub-options: Option A based on the net electricity generation and a CO2 emission factor of each power unit 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. For the proposed project activity, Option B is applied. According to the EF Tool, Option B can only be used if (a) the necessary data for Option A is not available; and (b) only nuclear and renewable power generation are 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. 29 Source: http://www.teias.gov.tr/T%C3%BCrkiyeElektrik%C4%B0statistikleri/istatistik2011/uretim%20tuketim(2245)/36.xls UNFCCC/CCNUCC CDM – Executive Board Page 24 These premises are analysed below: ad (a) Option A requires data on power plant/unit specific fuel consumption or, alternatively, power plant/unit specific average electric efficiency data. ad (b) As stated above, coal cannot be considered a must-run resource in Turkey, so only renewable power generation is considered as low-cost/must-run power source (nuclear power plants are not in operation in Turkey). Also, data on renewable power generation in Turkey is available. ad (c) As indicated in Step 2 above, off-grid power plants are not included. So, all prerequisites for choosing Option B are met. The equation used when applying simple OM calculations according to Option B is: equation (6a) EF grid ,OMsimple , y = where EFgrid,OMsimple,y = FCi,y = NCVi,y = EFCO2,i,y EGy = = i = y = ∑ ( FC i , y⋅NCV i , y⋅EF CO ,i , y ) 2 i EG y Simple operating margin CO2 emission factor in year y (tCO2/MWh) Amount of fuel type i consumed in the project electricity system in year y (mass or volume unit) Net calorific value (energy content) of fuel type i in year y (GJ/mass or volume unit) CO2 emission factor of fuel type i in year y (tCO2/GJ) Net electricity generated and delivered to the grid by all power sources serving the system, not including low-cost/must-run power plants/units, in year y (MWh) All fossil fuel types combusted in power sources in the project electricity system in year y The three most recent years for which data is available at the time of submission of the PDD to the validator So actually the emission factor is calculated by relating the total emissions to the total generation for the power plants included in the OM. As fuel consumption data is provided by TEİAŞ Statistics not only on a mass/volume unit base but also on a heating value base, NCVs are not necessary for calculating the OM emissions. It is easier to directly convert the heating values provided by TEİAŞ Statistics from Tcal to TJ: equation (7) where FCHV,i,y FC i , y⋅NCV i , y =FC HV ,i , y [TJ]=FC HV ,i , y [Tcal] ⋅ 4.1868 = Amount of energy contained in the amount of fossil fuel type i consumed in the project electricity system in year y (TJ) The conversion of the raw data is presented in C below in Appendix 4. UNFCCC/CCNUCC CDM – Executive Board Page 25 Inserting equation (7) into equation (6a) leads to: equation (6) EF grid ,OMsimple , y = ∑ ( FC HV ,i , y⋅EF CO ,i , y ) 2 i EG y Data on emission factors (EFCO2,i,y) is not available on a country or plant specific base. Thus, IPCC default values at the lower limit of the uncertainty at a 95% confidence interval are applied as in compliance with the EF Tool. The respective values are applied in 14 below (Step 4 Section B.6.3) and 17 below (Step 5 Section B.6.3) As EGy represents only the electricity produced by sources which are not considered as mustrun or low-cost, the generation amount of the latter must be subtracted from the whole Turkish electricity generation. However, electricity imports need to be included, so the determination of EGy takes the following shape: equation (8) where: EGy,GROSS EG y ,GROSS = EG TOTAL , y ,GROSS EI y −EG LC −MR , y , GROSS = EGTOTAL,y,GROSS = EIy = EGLC-MR,y,GROSS = Gross electricity generated and delivered to the grid by all power sources serving the system (including electricity imports), not including low-cost/must-run power plants/units, in year y (MWh) Gross electricity generated and delivered to the grid by all power sources serving the Turkish system (not including electricity imports) in year y (MWh) Electricity imports to Turkish system in year y (MWh) Gross electricity generated and delivered to the grid by low-cost/mustrun sources (i. e. hydro power plants, wind power plants, biogas plants, geothermal plants) in year y (MWh) The EF Tool explicitly refers to net generation with respect to EGy. However, TEİAŞ Statistics only provide for gross generation data, so net generation of the relevant sources has to be estimated by an approximation. The approach used here is to apply the overall Turkish net to gross generation relation of a certain year y to the total net generation of the plants included in OM calculations. The equation is: EG y = EG y ,GROSS ⋅ equation (9) where: EGTOTAL,y,NET = EG TOTAL , y , NET EG TOTAL , y , GROSS Net electricity generated and delivered to the grid by all power sources serving the Turkish system (not including electricity imports) in year y (MWh) UNFCCC/CCNUCC CDM – Executive Board Page 26 Step 5 Calculation of the Build Margin Emission Factor (Methodological Choices) As for data vintage, there are two options for calculating the BM emission factor. Here, option 1 ex-ante calculation is chosen (instead of annually updating of the BM emission factor) for reasons of simplicity and data availability. To calculate the BM emission factor, the following equation will be used: ∑ EG m , y⋅EF EL, m , y EF grid , BM , y = m ∑ EG m, y equation (10) m where EFgrid,BM,y EGm,y = = EFEL,m,y m y = = = Build margin CO2 emission factor in year y (tCO2/MWh) Net quantity of electricity generated and delivered to the grid by power unit m in year y (MWh) CO2 emission factor of power unit m in year y (tCO2/MWh) Power units included in the build margin Most recent historical year for which power generation data is available. Electricity generation EGm The sample group of power units m used to calculate the BM is determined in Section B.6.3 Step 5 below in accordance with the procedure specified in the EF Tool. It contains EÜAŞ power plants as well as IPP and Autoproducer plants, see also D below in Appendix 4. For EÜAŞ plants included in the BM plant cohort, complete data on power generation EGm in 2011 is available on a plant specific level in TEİAŞ Statistics. For capacity additions m from other types of power producers (i.e. Autoproducers and IPP), projected generation in 2011 as displayed in TEİAŞ Projection is used to estimate actual current generation, because this is the most current data source. 30 This document also displays firm generation for each single power plant operated under BOT, BOO, IPP, or Autoproducer business model. As negative deviations of firm from projected generation mostly occur with emission neutral hydro power and wind power plants, the choice for projected generation leads to the tendency of an overestimation of the generation share of carbon neutral energy sources, and thus represents the application of a conservative approach. In cases where capacity additions of any kind comprise only parts of complete power plants and, as a result, only values for these complete power plants can be found in the most current data source, the part generation is determined using a rule of three calculation, i.e. as the product of total plant generation and the capacity of the part, divided by the total plant capacity. As the EF Tool explicitly refers to net generation while this data is not available on a plant specific level, the parameter must again be estimated. Similar to the approach presented in equation (9), the overall net to gross relation is applied to each single plant: EG m , y =EG m , y , GROSS ⋅ equation (11) where EGm,y,GROSS 30 = EG TOTAL , y , NET EG TOTAL , y ,GROSS Gross quantity of electricity generated and delivered to the grid by power unit m in year y (MWh) See TEİAŞ Projection, pp. 92-101. UNFCCC/CCNUCC CDM – Executive Board Page 27 CO2 emission factor EFEL,m,y The EF Tool states that EFEL,m,y must be "determined as per the guidance in Step 4 (a) for the simple OM, using options A1, A2 or A3, using for y the most recent historical year for which power generation data is available, and using for m the power units included in the build margin." Option A1 is applicable, if for a power unit m data on fuel consumption and electricity generation is available. Option A2 is applicable, if for a power unit m data on electricity generation and fuel types used is available. Option A3 is applicable, if for a power unit m only data on electricity generation is available. As for the power units m in the Turkish system data on electricity generation and the fuel types used is available, the emission factor will be determined according to Option A2 which provides for the following equation: EF EL ,m , y = equation (12) where: EFEL,m,y EFCO2,m,i,y = = ηm,y = EF CO 2 ,m ,i , y ⋅ 3.6 ηm , y CO2 emission factor of power unit m in year y (tCO2/MWh) Average CO2 emission factor of fuel type i used in power unit m in year y (tCO2/GJ) Average net energy conversion efficiency of power unit m in year y (%) To assure a conservative approach and in compliance with the EF Tool, plants for which several fuels are disclosed in the data source were assigned to the least emission intensive fuel. Plants for which no fuel type data is disclosed are deemed emission neutral. As no plant specific efficiency data (ηm,y) is available, the default values for grid power plants provided in Annex 1 of the EF Tool are used, based on the following assumptions/information: 600 MW import coal fired plant İÇDAŞ ÇELİK is operated as supercritical plant.31 This is also the case for the second and third unit (600 MW respectively) of EREN ENERJİ ELEKTRİK ÜRETİM A.Ş. plant. The first component (160MW) of EREN ENERJİ ELEKTRİK ÜRETİM A.Ş. is operated as CFBS plant.32 • For Lignite, Natural Gas and Fuel Oil plants, the most conservative values are applied for ηm,y, i.e. Lignite 50%, Natural Gas 60%, Fuel Oil 46%. The respective calculations are represented in 17 below (Step 5 Section B.6.3) • • 31 32 http://www.icdas.com.tr/icdas/enerji_tr.htm http://www.cmec.com/html/news_project_details.php?id=144731; http://www.erenholding.com.tr/eren-enerji_2_15 UNFCCC/CCNUCC CDM – Executive Board Page 28 Step 6 CM emission factor calculation (Methodological choices) The basic equation for calculating EFgrid,CM,y as represented in the EF Tool is: equation (13) Where: EFgrid,BM,y EFgrid,OM,y wOM wBM EF grid ,CM , y =EF grid ,OM , y⋅w OM EF grid , BM , y⋅w BM = = = = Build margin CO2 emission factor in year y (tCO2/MWh) Operating margin CO2 emission factor in year y (tCO2/MWh) Weighting of operating margin emissions factor (%) Weighting of build margin emissions factor (%) According to the EF Tool, for wind power project activities the following default values for wOM and wBM should be used: wOM = 0.75 and wBM = 0.25. B.6.2. Data and parameters fixed ex ante Date / Parameter FCHV,i,y Unit Tcal Description Amount of fuel combusted for electricity production in Turkey in the years 2009-2011. Source of data TEİAŞ Statistics; http://www.teias.gov.tr/T%C3%BCrkiyeElektrik %C4%B0statistikleri/istatistik2011/yak%C4%B1t46-49/49.xls Value(s) applied See C on p. 46 below (Appendix 4). Choice of data or Measurement methods and procedures Data source is an official document published by TEİAŞ. Purpose of data Calculation of baseline emissions Additional comment N/A Date / Parameter EFCO2,i,y / EFCO2,i,m,y Unit tCO2/TJ Description Carbon emission factors of fuels used for combustion for electricity production by fuel type (IPCC default values at the lower limit of the uncertainty at a 95% confidence interval) Source of data 2006 IPCC Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas Inventories, table 1.4, pp. 1.23 and 1.24. Value(s) applied See 14 on p. 31 below (Step 4 Section B.6.3) for OM. See 17 on p. 34 below (Step 5 Section B.6.3) for BM. Choice of data or Measurement methods and procedures Data source is applicable according to the EF Tool. Purpose of data Calculation of baseline emissions Additional comment N/A UNFCCC/CCNUCC CDM – Executive Board Page 29 Date / Parameter EGTOTAL,y,GROSS Unit GWh Description Gross electricity production in Turkey in 2009-2011. Source of data TEİAŞ Statistics; http://www.teias.gov.tr/T%C3%BCrkiyeElektrik %C4%B0statistikleri/istatistik2011/uretim%20tuketim(22-45)/23.xls Value(s) applied See 15 on p. 32 below (Step 4 Section B.6.3) Choice of data or Measurement methods and procedures Data source is an official document published by TEİAŞ. Purpose of data Calculation of baseline emissions Additional comment Date / Parameter EGTOTAL,y,NET Unit GWh Description Net electricity production in Turkey in 2009-2011. Source of data TEİAŞ Statistics; http://www.teias.gov.tr/T%C3%BCrkiyeElektrik %C4%B0statistikleri/istatistik2011/uretim%20tuketim(22-45)/33(84-11).xls Value(s) applied See 15 on p. 32 below (Step 4 Section B.6.3) Choice of data or Measurement methods and procedures Data source is an official document published by TEİAŞ. Purpose of data Calculation of baseline emissions Additional comment Date / Parameter EGLC-MR,y,GROSS Unit GWh Description Gross electricity production from low-cost/must-run sources in Turkey 20092011. Source of data TEİAŞ Statistics; http://www.teias.gov.tr/T%C3%BCrkiyeElektrik %C4%B0statistikleri/istatistik2011/uretim%20tuketim(22-45)/23.xls Value(s) applied See 15 on p. 32 below (Step 4 Section B.6.3) Choice of data or Measurement methods and procedures Data source is an official document published by TEİAŞ. Purpose of data Calculation of baseline emissions Additional comment Date / Parameter EIy Unit GWh Description Gross electricity imports to the Turkish national grid 2009-2011. Source of data TEİAŞ Statistics; http://www.teias.gov.tr/T%C3%BCrkiyeElektrik %C4%B0statistikleri/istatistik2011/uretim%20tuketim(22-45)/23.xls Value(s) applied See 15 on p. 32 below (Step 4 Section B.6.3) Choice of data or Measurement methods and procedures Data source is an official document published by TEİAŞ. Purpose of data Calculation of baseline emissions Additional comment UNFCCC/CCNUCC CDM – Executive Board Page 30 Date / Parameter Capacity additions Unit N/A Description Power plants most recently added to the Turkish electricity system and representing at least 20% of total current (i.e. 2011) generation (without generation of plants using the carbon market) Source of data For 2010: TEİAŞ: Türkiye elektrik enerjisi 10 yıllık üretim kapasite projeksiyonu (2011–2020); pp. 102-106. http://www.teias.gov.tr/KAPASITEPROJEKSIYONU2011.pdf For 2011: TEİAŞ Projection; pp. 124-125. Commissioning dates (before 29/10/11) were obtained directly from TEİAŞ. Plants commissioned between 29/10/11 and 31/12/11 are deemed to have been commissioned on 01/11/11. Value(s) applied See D below (Appendix 4). Choice of data or Measurement methods and procedures Data sources are official documents published by TEİAŞ. Purpose of data Calculation of baseline emissions Additional comment N/A Date / Parameter EGm,y,GROSS Unit GWh Description Annual gross generation of the power plants most recently added to the system and representing 20% of total current (i.e. 2011) gross generation in Turkey. Source of data For EÜAŞ plants: TEİAŞ Statistics http://www.teias.gov.tr/T%C3%BCrkiyeElektrik %C4%B0statistikleri/istatistik2011/kguc(1-12)/10-11.xls http://www.teias.gov.tr/T%C3%BCrkiyeElektrik %C4%B0statistikleri/istatistik2011/kguc(1-12)/12.xls For all other plants: TEİAŞ Projection, pp. 113-123. Value(s) applied See 18 on p. 35 below (Step 5 Section B.6.3) Choice of data or Measurement methods and procedures Data sources are official documents published by TEİAŞ. Purpose of data Calculation of baseline emissions Additional comment N/A B.6.3. Ex-ante calculation of emission reductions Emission reduction calculation comprises first the calculation of the combined margin emission factor EFgrid,CM,y following Step 4, Step 5, and Step 6 of the EF Tool. Second, the reductions will be calculated by multiplying EFgrid,CM,y with the projected power production of the proposed GS VER project activity according to equation (4) in Subsection "Emission reductions" in Section B.6.1 above. Calculation of EFgrid,CM,y Step 1 Identification of the relevant power system See Step 1 above (Section B.6.1). Step 2 Choose whether to include off-grid power plants in the project electricity system (optional) See Step 2 above (Section B.6.1). UNFCCC/CCNUCC CDM – Executive Board Page 31 Step 3 Selection of an OM method See Step 3 above (Section B.6.1). Step 4 Calculation of the OM emission factor As deduced in Step 4 above (Section B.6.1), simple OM emission factor is calculated according to: equation (6) EF grid ,OMsimple , y = ∑ ( FC HV ,i , y⋅EF CO ,i , y ) 2 i EG y The numerator represents the total emissions from the power sources to be included in the OM. Their calculation is presented in Table 14: CO2 Emissions from power production in Turkey 2009-2011 Fuel type/year FCHV [TJ] EFCO2,i,y [tCO2/yr] Emissions [ktCO2] (FCHV · EFCO2 / 1000) Hard Coal+Imported Coal 147,081 89.5 13,164 Lignite 408,848 90.9 37,164 Fuel Oil 63,471 75.5 4,792 7,663 72.6 556 5 61.6 0 353 69.3 24 779,858 54.3 42,346 Diesel Oil LPG Naphta Natural Gas Subtotal 2009 98,047 Hard Coal+Imported Coal 165,573 89.5 14,819 Lignite 404,240 90.9 36,745 Fuel Oil 35,877 75.5 2,709 Diesel Oil 877 72.6 64 Naphta 440 69.3 30 814,279 54.3 44,215 Natural Gas Subtotal 2010 98,582 Hard Coal+Imported Coal 241,023 89.5 21,572 Lignite 448,865 90.9 40,802 Fuel Oil 22,106 75.5 1,669 649 72.6 47 846,002 54.3 45,938 Diesel Oil Natural Gas Subtotal 2011 110,027 Total 2009 – 2011 306,657 For the conversion of FCHV from Tcal to TJ see C below (Appendix 4). UNFCCC/CCNUCC CDM – Executive Board Page 32 As for the denominator in equation (6), EGy is calculated in several consecutive steps according to EG y ,GROSS = EG TOTAL , y ,GROSS EI y −EG LC −MR , y , GROSS equation (8) and EG y = EG y , GROSS ⋅ equation (9) EG TOTAL , y , NET EG TOTAL , y ,GROSS The respective calculations are presented in Table 15: Calculation of Net Electricity Generation in Turkey (GWh) not including lowcost/must-run sources and including electricity imports for the years 2009-2011 unit: GWh 2009 2010 2011 I EGTOTAL,y,GROSS 194,813 211,208 229,395 II EGTOTAL,y,NET 186,619 203,046 217,558 III=II/I net-to-gross relation 95.79% 96.14% 94.84% IV Geothermal and Wind 1,931 3,585 5,418 V Hydro 35,958 51,796 52,339 EGLC-MR,y,GROSS 37,889 55,380 57,757 812 1,144 4,556 EGy,GROSS 157,736 156,971 176,194 EGy 151,101 150,906 167,102 VI=IV+V VII EIy XIII = I – VI+VII IX=XIII*III TOTAL 2009-2011 469,109 As the OM emission factor is to be determined based on a 3-year generation-weighted average, it must be calculated as follows: EF grid ,OMsimple , y = 306,657 ktCO2 tCO2 = 0.654 469,109 GWh MWh UNFCCC/CCNUCC CDM – Executive Board Page 33 Step 5 Calculation of the Build Margin emission factor The sample group of power units m used to calculate the BM is determined according to the procedure as outlined in the EF Tool: (a) Identify the set of five power units, excluding power units using the carbon market, that started to supply electricity to the grid most recently (SET5-units) and determine their annual electricity generation (AEGSET-5-units, in MWh): SET5-units cannot be clearly identified, because neither TEİAŞ Statistics nor TEİAŞ Projection display commissioning dates for capacity additions in 2011, and information obtained from the authority directly only covers plants commissioned until October 2011. However, no combination of any five power plants added to the Turkish System after October 2011 would reach 20% of AEGtotal. The maximum value for AEGSET-5-units would be reached by the following power plants: 1. BEKİRLİ TES (İÇDAŞ ELEKTRİK EN.) 2. AKSA ENERJİ (Antalya) 3. ALİAĞA ÇAKMAKTEPE ENERJİ (İlave) 4. YEDİGÖZE HES (YEDİGÖZE ELEK.) (İlave) 5. TİRENDA TİRE ENERJİ ÜRETİM A.Ş. with a total annual electricity generation of AEGSET-5-units = 9,856,6901 MWh/yr. See also D below in Appendix 4. (b) Determine the annual electricity generation of the project electricity system, excluding power units using the carbon market (AEGtotal, in MWh). Identify the set of power units, excluding power units using the carbon market, that started to supply electricity to the grid most recently and that comprise 20% of AEGtotal, (if 20% falls on part of the generation of a unit, the generation of that unit is fully included in the calculation) (SET≥20 per cent) and determine their annual electricity generation (AEGSET-≥20 per cent, in MWh): AEGtotal = EGTOTAL;2011,gross - AEGcarbon = 229,395,100 MWh – 13,427,300 MWh = 215,967,800 MWh For determination of AEGcarbon see also E below in Appendix 4. SET≥20% is presented in detail in D below in Appendix 4, comprising plants commissioned in the years 2010-2011 in Turkey, starting with ETİ SODA 24 MW lignite fired Autoproducer plant commissioned on 22/01/2010. This set leads to: AEGSET-≥ 20 per cent = 43,266,480 MWh This is 20.03% of AEGtotal. 20% fall on part of the capacity of ETİ SODA 24 MW lignite power plant. Excluding it would lead to AEGSET-≥20 per cent = 43,122,480 MWh/yr, i.e. 19.97% of AEGtotal. (c) From SET5-units and SET≥20 per cent select the set of power units that comprises the larger annual electricity generation (SETsample); Identify the date when the power units in started to supply electricity to the grid. If none of the power units in SETsample started to supply electricity to the grid more than 10 years ago, then use SETsample to calculate the build margin. SET≥20 per cent clearly comprises the larger annual electricity generation, so SET≥20 per cent = SETsample. None of the power units contained in it started to supply electricity more than 10 years ago, see D below in Appendix 4. Concluding, SETsample is used to calculate the build margin. UNFCCC/CCNUCC CDM – Executive Board Page 34 As explained in Section B.6.1 Step 5 above, calculation of the BM emission factor is done by applying ∑ EG m , y⋅EF EL, m , y EF grid , BM , y = m ∑ EG m, y equation (10) m As the EF Tool refers to net generation, the approximation approach already used in the OM calculations is applied again: equation (11) EG m , y =EG m , y , GROSS ⋅ EG TOTAL , y , NET EG TOTAL , y ,GROSS The calculation of net generation of BM plants according to equation (11) is represented in: Table 16: Annual net generation of BM plants EGm,y,GROSS [GWh] 43,266.48 net-to-gross relation 94.84% EGm,2009 [GWh] 41,033.93 As explained in Step 5 above (Section B.6.1), EFEL,m,y is determined in compliance with equation (12) EF EL ,m , y= EF CO , m ,i , y ⋅ 3.6 η m, y 2 The respective calculations are represented in Table 17: Calculation of EFEL,m,y Fuel type ηm,y EFCO2,m,i,y [t CO2/TJ] EFEL,m,y [t CO2/MWh] Fuel Oil 46.00% 75.50 688.10 Lignite 50.00% 90.90 839.08 Natural Gas 60.00% 54.30 325.80 Supercritical Coal 45.00% 89.50 716.00 CFBS Coal 40.00% 89.50 805.50 UNFCCC/CCNUCC CDM – Executive Board Page 35 The resulting calculations of the numerator of equation (10) above are represented in Table 18: Calculation of BM emissions Fuel type EGm,y,GROSS [GWh] net/gross relation EGm,y [GWh] EFEL,m,y [tCO2/MWh] Emissions [kt CO2] Fuel Oil 296.76 94.84% 281.44 590.87 166.29 Lignite 144.00 94.84% 136.57 654.48 89.38 Natural Gas 24,992.94 94.84% 23,703.30 325.80 7,722.54 Supercritical Coal 12,331.76 94.84% 11,695.45 716.00 8,373.95 1,068.24 94.84% 1,013.12 805.50 816.06 CFBS Coal Total BM emissions 17,168.21 The final calculation of the BM emission factor is: EF grid , BM , y = 17,168.21 ktCO 2 tCO 2 = 0.418 41,033.93 GWh MWh Step 6 Calculation of the combined margin emission factor As stated above in Step 6 above (Section B.6.1), the equation for calculating the CM emission factor is: equation (13) EF grid ,CM , y =EF grid ,OM , y⋅w OM EF grid , BM , y⋅w BM Applying the weights derived in Step 6 above, as well as the results from calculating the OM emission factor displayed above in Step 4 and from calculating the BM emission factor, leads to: EF grid ,CM , y = 0.654 tCO 2 tCO 2 tCO2 ⋅ 0.75 + 0.418 ⋅ 0.25 = 0.595 MWh MWh MWh Calculation of emission reductions: As stated in Subsection "Conclusion for emission reductions" above (Section B.6.1), emission reductions are equal to the baseline emissions: equation (1) ER y = BE y Calculation of baseline emissions is done according to equation (4): BE y =EG BL , y⋅EF grid ,CM , y Concluding, emission reductions are calculated as follows: ER y = BE y = EG BL , y ⋅ EF grid , CM , y = 34,690 tCO 2 tCO 2 MWh ⋅ 0.595 = 20,641 yr MWh yr UNFCCC/CCNUCC CDM – Executive Board B.6.4. Page 36 Summary of the ex-ante estimation of emission reductions Year Estimation of project activity emissions (tonnes of CO2e) Estimation of baseline emissions (tonnes of CO2e) Estimation of leakage (tonnes of CO2e) Estimation of overall emission reductions (tonnes of CO2e) 10/03/2012 - 31/12/2012 0 16,795 0 16,795 01/01/2013 - 31/12/2013 0 20,641 0 20,641 01/01/2014 - 31/12/2014 0 20,641 0 20,641 31/12/2015 0 20,641 0 20,641 01/01/2015 01/01/2016 - 31/12/2016 0 20,641 0 20,641 01/01/2017 - 31/12/2017 0 20,641 0 20,641 01/01/2018 - 31/12/2018 0 20,641 0 20,641 01/01/2019 - 09/03/2019 0 3,845 0 3,845 0 144,486 0 144,486 Total 2012 - 2019 UNFCCC/CCNUCC CDM – Executive Board B.7. Page 37 Monitoring plan B.7.1. Data and parameters to be monitored As the ex-ante approach has been chosen for determining the baseline emission factors, all baseline connected data is at hand. Thus, monitoring efforts can be limited to measuring the electricity amount fed into the grid by the proposed GS VER project activity. Kar-demir will be responsible for monitoring. Data/Parameter EGBL,y Unit MWh/yr Description Net electricity supply equal to electricity delivered to the grid minus electricity consumed by Kar-demir Bozyaka RES 12 MW. Source of data Metering devices Value(s) applied 34,690 MWh/yr Measurement methods and procedures Continually measured by one main digital, bidirectional electricity meter of the type ELSTER A 1500, with a 0.5s accuracy class, serial number 00436809. A backup electricity meter with equal specifications is also installed, serial number 00436808. Data is read out daily via remote access and electronically archived by a software system. Monitoring frequency Continuous QA/QC procedures Electricity meters have been calibrated by ELSTER33 and will be recalibrated after 10 years under the responsibility of TEİAŞ, as in accordance with Turkish regulations.34 To mitigate risk of failure, a back-up meter with equal characteristics is installed at the substation. To allow for cross-checks, the SCADA system installed on each turbine will be used and evaluated by responsible Kar-demir staff. Purpose of data Calculation of baseline emissions Additional comment N/A B.7.2. N/A Sampling plan B.7.3. Other elements of monitoring plan Monitoring is conducted according to AMS-I.D. in connection with the EF Tool, see also Section B.1 above. TEİAŞ has installed one main electricity meter and one back-up electricity meter at the substation to which Kar-demir Bozyaka RES 12 MW wind power plant is connected. Both electricity meters have 0.5s accuracy level and comply with TS EN 62053-22 standard. They have been calibrated by ELSTER on 03/03/201135. These meters represent the primary data source for monitoring. On a daily basis, TEİAŞ performs remote read-out on these electricity meters and publishes the results online on the PMUM website in Kar-demir's account. The PMUM website provides for each power producer access to data concerning their own power plants, including gross electricity generation and consumption.36 Also on a daily basis, Kar-demir performs a direct read-out of the electricity meters, checks the account entries online and then cross-checks with 33 34 35 36 Calibration certificates are provided to the DOE for Validation. See http://www.mevzuat.gov.tr/Metin.Aspx?MevzuatKod=7.5.6381&MevzuatIliski=0&sourceXmlSearch=. The calibration reports are provided to the DOE for Validation. See http://dgpys.teias.gov.tr/dgpys/. UNFCCC/CCNUCC CDM – Executive Board Page 38 data from the SCADA system as described further below. In case of significant deviations, a complaint will be issued to TEİAŞ within one working day after online publication. TEİAŞ then conducts a review and revises the data, as the case may be. The data source for cross-checks in terms of quality assurance and quality control is the SCADA system installed on each of the turbines. Kar-demir staff has been trained by turbine supplier Nordex in using the SCADA system for monitoring wind farm performance along with other relevant data. The SCADA system thus serves as secondary data source for monitoring and as reference for comparison of primary monitoring data. As evidence and documentation of the monitoring results, the following procedures are followed. 1. Screen-shots of the PMUM account are prepared and printed monthly and stored electronically and as hard copy by Kar-demir staff at the company headquarters for at least 2 years after the end of the last crediting period as required by AMS-I.D. 2. Screen-shots of the SCADA system are prepared and printed monthly and stored electronically and as hard copy by Kar-demir staff at the company headquarters for at least 2 years after the end of the last crediting period as required by AMS-I.D. 3. Invoices to TEİAŞ are stored as hard copy at Kar-demir premises for at least 2 years after the end of the last crediting period. 4. Results of data read outs are compiled monthly by Kar-demir in a data read out protocol which is stored as hard copy and scanned and stored as electronic file at the company headquarters, both for at least 2 years after the end of the last crediting period. 5. Final data for gross electricity production and own electricity consumption is inserted into an electronic spreadsheet file, which will be archived electronically and kept at least for 2 years after the end of the last crediting period. UNFCCC/CCNUCC CDM – Executive Board Figure 7: Page 39 Flow diagram of monitoring structure Kar-demir TEİAŞ Substation kWh Power Plant kWh Back up Main No Read out (remote) SCADA System Main Meter working Yes No Yes Read out (on site) Document & Store Publish Online Database Scan Protocol Screen Shot Hard Copy Scan Invoice Obtain TEİAŞ Data Document & Store TEİAŞ and SCADA Data Compare Data Difference significant Yes Perform Review No Require Review Issue Invoice Pay Invoice Compile Data Consultant Prepare Report Auditor Monitoring Report Verify Verification Report UNFCCC/CCNUCC CDM – Executive Board Page 40 The main responsible person for monitoring will be the chief coordinating manager for Kar-demir Bozyaka RES 12 MW, i.e. Mr. Cihan İlker. He will also supervise the on-site technical manager, who will also have access to the SCADA system. Figure 8: Organisational Chart Nevzat Karalp (President) T. Önder Karalp (Vice President) Özge Yastı Cihan İlker (Finance & GS) Fatih Ünnü (Finance) (Project Manager) Yiğit Mungan M. Kemal (Environment) (Site Manager) Özgür Tezel (Technician) Nurtekin Çolak (Security) Sedat Tarhan (Technician) Bilal Özkalsın (Security) Murat Kılıç (Technician) Ahmet Öner (Technician) 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: 23/03/2015. Responsible for determining the baseline: enveco GmbH, Münster, Germany Tel: +49 (251) 315810 Fax: +49 (251) 3833516 E-mail: alex.cotanidis@enveco.de Enveco GmbH is not a project participant. UNFCCC/CCNUCC CDM – Executive Board Page 41 SECTION C. Duration and crediting period C.1. Duration of project activity C.1.1. Start date of project activity 19/06/2010 The starte date of the project activity is the time of first real action on implementing the project, i.e. the signature date of the turbine supply contract. It also represents the date of investment decision. The wind farm is fully operational since 10/03/2012. C.1.2. Expected operational lifetime of project activity 20 years and 0 months. C.2. Crediting period of project activity C.2.1. Type of crediting period Renewable crediting period. First crediting period. C.2.2. Start date of crediting period 10/03/2012 C.2.3. Length of the first crediting period: 7 years and 0 months. SECTION D. Environmental Impact: D.1. Analysis of environmental impacts Kar-demir contracted the Ankara based expert office EN-ÇEV Enerji Çevre Yatırımları ve Danışmanlığı Ltd. Şti. for preparing the PTD. The PTD was finalised in August 2008 and submitted to the İzmir province office of TÇOB. UNFCCC/CCNUCC CDM – Executive Board Page 42 Figure 9: Relief from duty to perform full EIA The examination of the project's environmental impact has revealed that a) no sensitive or protected areas according to Annex 5 of the Turkish EIA regulation are affected by the project b) no sites with a high value w.r.t. to cultural history are affected by the project (particularly the four most important sites located in Aliağa district) c) an adequate management system will be applied during construction to comply with Turkish regulations and provisions w.r.t. solid and liquid waste, dust and noise emissions, and excavation. The PTD contains in its sections 1c and 1e comprehensive lists with precautionary measures. d) a detailed field study on local flora and fauna at the project site taking into consideration the the Red Data Book of Turkish Plants, the Turkish environmental law, the convention on the conservation of European Wildlife, and the Central Hunting Commission of TÇOB, has revealed that no endemic or endangered flora species and no threatened animal species exist within the project area e) potential negative effects on Avifauna are unlikely, as the project site is at a far distance from bird migration routes. However, potential negative effects on birds may be caused by the high and medium voltage transmission lines. Adequate protection measures will be taken by Kar-demir. As demonstrated in 9 above, the Ministry of Environment and Forestry has - upon assessing the PTD - released the project from the duty to perform a complete EIA according to Turkish environmental law. UNFCCC/CCNUCC CDM – Executive Board D.2. Page 43 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: N/A SECTION E. Local stakeholders consultation E.1. Solicitation of comments from local stakeholders Stakeholder consultation for the proposed VER GS project activity was conducted in accordance with the rules and guidelines of Gold Standard version 2.1. 37 In a first step, a local stakeholder consultation (LSC) was conducted by inviting selected relevant stakeholders as well as the interested public to attend a meeting held on 10/03/2010 at Aliağa Public Meeting Hall. The invitation also provided for contact data to allow for giving comments in case attendance was impossible. The meeting was held with 25 attendants and showed important results and helpful suggestions as to improve the project design. The project was presented and then attendants were asked to assess it with respect to its environmental, social, and technoeconomic impacts on the region and on the country. A report on the meeting (LSC report) has been prepared (in English and Turkish language). An additional stakeholder feedback round was conducted according to Gold Standard version 2.2.38 Revised documentation was uploaded to a website and provided as hard copy at the Muhtar's office in Horozgediği village 20/09/2013 until 19/11/2013. For specific issues like monitoring of sustainability perfomance of the project and implementation of a continuous input and grievance mechanism, key stakeholders were identified and proactively approached for feedback. All details are given in the Gold Standard Passport (GSPP). E.2. Summary of comments received At the meeting, the participants have generally scored the project positively or neutrally with respect to certain environmental, social, technological and economic indicators. Details are given in the LSC report. The generally positive reaction was confirmed during the stakeholder feedback round. Details are given in the GSPP. E.3. Report on consideration of comments received The project owner has been grateful for all comments and has taken them into account. The ongoing process in the course of the CIGM will assure that all stakeholders will continually have the opportunity to raise comments, and that the project owner can accurately take them into account. SECTION F. Approval and authorization N/A 37 38 See http://www.cdmgoldstandard.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/10/GSv2.1_Requirements-11.pdf; http://www.cdmgoldstandard.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/10/GSv2.1_Toolkit_Clean-11.pdf and http://www.cdmgoldstandard.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/10/Annex_J.pdf. http://www.goldstandard.org/energy/rules-requirements. UNFCCC/CCNUCC CDM – Executive Board Appendix 1 Page 44 Contact Information of project participants Organization: Kar-demir Haddecilik San. ve Tic. Ltd. Şti. Street/P.O.Box: Yeni Foça yolu 5. Km. Building: City: Aliağa State/Region: İzmir Postcode/ZIP: Country: Turkey Telephone: FAX: E-Mail: URL: Represented by: Title: Salutation: Mr. Last name: İlker Middle name: First name: Cihan Department: Mobile: +90 530 408 16 18 Direct FAX: +90 232 625 19 42 Direct tel: +90 232 625 22 22 / 179 Personal e-mail: cihani@kar-demir.com.tr Appendix 2 Affirmation regarding public funding No public funding is involved in the financing of the proposed project activity. Appendix 3 N/A Applicability of selected methodology UNFCCC/CCNUCC CDM – Executive Board Appendix 4 Page 45 Further background Information on ex ante calculation of emission reductions Baseline description The following tables represent the two 10 year capacity projection scenarios 39 which are the data base for 5 and 6, respectively, in Section A.3 above. Table A: Projected Turkish electricity generation, 2012-2021 (scenario 1). Unit: Gwh Year 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 52,683 52,861 53,185 57,261 61,236 61,333 61,333 61,333 61,333 61,333 Hard Coal+Asf. 3,967 3,967 3,967 4,939 5,911 5,911 5,911 5,911 5,911 5,911 Imported Coal 26,821 26,780 26,281 30,790 37,901 39,626 39,673 39,673 39,673 39,673 Fuel Type Lignite Natural Gas 150,688 152,777 158,748 169,522 175,072 175,154 176,011 175,785 176,011 176,011 Geothermal 802 912 1,212 1,402 1,402 1,402 1,402 1,402 1,402 1,402 9,224 9,224 9,224 9,224 9,224 9,224 9,224 9,224 9,224 9,224 148 148 148 148 148 148 148 148 148 148 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4,200 12,600 21,000 1,408 1,408 1,408 1,408 1,408 1,408 1,408 1,408 1,408 1,408 945 1,111 1,166 1,196 1,196 1,196 1,196 1,196 1,196 1,196 Hydro 65,463 72,934 79,651 Wind 6,315 7,001 8,343 Fuel Oil Diesel Oil Nuclear other Biogas+Waste TOTAL 90,522 104,443 112,708 115,779 116,558 116,558 116,558 9,208 9,208 9,208 9,208 9,208 9,208 9,208 318,464 329,123 343,333 375,620 407,149 417,318 421,293 426,046 434,672 443,072 Table B: Projected Turkish electricity generation, 2012-2021 (scenario 2). Unit: Gwh Year 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 52,675 52,853 53,185 54,299 56,549 57,883 57,883 57,883 57,883 57,883 Hard Coal+Asf. 3,967 3,967 3,967 4,939 5,911 5,911 5,911 5,911 5,911 5,911 Imported Coal 26,821 26,780 26,281 26,530 29,381 31,106 35,413 39,673 39,673 39,673 Fuel type Lignite Natural Gas Geothermal 149,403 150,545 156,703 167,848 174,498 175,154 176,011 175,785 176,011 176,011 802 912 1,057 1,247 1,402 1,402 1,402 1,402 1,402 1,402 9,224 9,224 9,224 9,224 9,224 9,224 9,224 9,224 9,224 9,224 148 148 148 148 148 148 148 148 148 148 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4,200 12,600 21,000 1,408 1,408 1,408 1,408 1,408 1,408 1,408 1,408 1,408 1,408 872 1,038 1,166 1,196 1,196 1,196 1,196 1,196 1,196 1,196 Hydro 64,158 70,698 76,555 84,380 Wind 6,231 6,812 7,820 8,790 Fuel Oil Diesel Oil Nuclear other Biogas+Waste TOTAL 39 96,511 106,626 113,652 116,558 116,558 116,558 9,208 9,208 9,208 9,208 9,208 9,208 315,709 324,385 337,514 360,009 385,436 399,266 411,456 422,596 431,222 439,622 See TEİAŞ Projection, p. 57 and p. 64, respectively. UNFCCC/CCNUCC CDM – Executive Board Page 46 Operate Margin For calculation of operate margin emissions, NCVs were not used due to the availability of direct data on fuel use in the electricity sector in Turkey. The data had merely been converted from Tcal to TJ to allow for direct application of the CO 2 emission factors expressed in t CO2/TJ. The conversion follows equation (7) FC i , y⋅NCV i , y =FC HV , i , y [TJ]=FC HV , i , y [Tcal] ⋅ 4.1868 as presented in Step 4 above in Section B.6.1 The results of the conversion are presented in Table C: Conversion of fuel use data in Turkish electricity sector 2009-2011 from Tcal to TJ 2009 [Tcal] 2010 [TJ] [Tcal] 2011 [TJ] [Tcal] [TJ] Hard Coal+Imported Coal+Asphaltite 35,130 147,081 39,546 165,573 57,567 241,023 Lignite 97,652 408,848 96,551 404,240 107,210 448,865 Fuel Oil 15,160 63,471 8,569 35,877 5,280 22,106 1,830 7,663 209 877 155 649 1 5 0 0 0 0 84 353 105 440 0 0 186,266 779,858 194,487 814,279 202,064 846,002 Diesel Oil LPG Naphta Natural Gas Build Margin The compilation below lists all plants included in the build margin. They represent a total annual average gross generation of 43,266,480 MWh which amounts to 20.03% of annual electricty generation of the project electricity system, excluding power units using the carbon market, i.e. AEGtotal = 215,967,800 MWh. Table D: Power Plants included in the Build Margin Calculation40 Power Unit Cap. (MW) Bus. model Fuel type AEG (GWh) CoD ETİ SODA 24.00 Autopr. Lignite 144.00 22/01/10 CAN TEKSTİL 13.00 Autopr. N.Gas 100.00 28/01/10 ALTINMARKA 4.60 Autopr. N.Gas 35.90 28/01/10 BAYBURT HES (BAYBURT ENERJİ ÜRET.) 14.60 IPP Hydro 51.00 28/01/10 UZUNÇAYIR HES (Tunceli) (İlave) 27.35 IPP Hydro 107.40 28/01/10 ALAKIR HES (YURT ENERJİ ÜRETİM) 2.10 IPP Hydro 6.00 29/01/10 GAZİANTEP ÇÖP BİOGAZI 1.13 IPP REN 7.34 01/02/10 AKBAŞLAR 1.54 Autopr. N.Gas 12.08 18/02/10 PETA MÜHENDİSLİK EN. (MURSAL II HES) 4.50 IPP Hydro 19.00 19/02/10 ASA ENERJİ (KALE REG.ve HES) 9.60 IPP Hydro 32.00 19/02/10 HETAŞ HACISALİHOĞLU (YILDIZLI HES) 1.20 IPP Hydro 5.00 23/02/10 ODA YERİ 4.20 IPP REN 32.81 24/02/10 40 Except where other reasons are noted, all crossed out plants are using VERs. UNFCCC/CCNUCC CDM – Executive Board Power Unit ASMAKİNSAN (BANDIRMA 3 RES) Page 47 Cap. (MW) Bus. model Fuel type AEG (GWh) CoD 20.00 IPP Wind 70.83 26/02/10 GLOBAL ENERJİ (PELİTLİK) 3.50 IPP N.Gas 26.17 26/02/10 KONYA ŞEKER SAN. VE TİC. A.Ş. 6.00 Autopr. Lignite 0.00 26/02/10 26.20 IPP N.Gas 166.69 03/03/10 SOMA ENERJİ ÜRETİM (SOMA RES) 4.50 IPP Wind 15.39 10/03/10 ROTOR ELEKTRİK (OSMANİYE RES) 17.50 IPP Wind 66.11 10/03/10 3.10 IPP Hydro 10.00 11/03/10 DENİZ ELEKTRİK (SEBENOBA RES) 10.00 IPP Wind 36.67 12/03/10 AKDENİZ ELEKTRİK (MERSİN RES) 33.00 IPP Wind 100.00 19/03/10 AKSA ENERJİ (ANTALYA) 25.00 IPP N.Gas 150.00 20/03/10 RASA ENERJİ (VAN) DOĞUBAY ELEKTRİK (SARIMEHMET HES) MENDERES GEOTERMAL DORA-2 9.50 IPP REN 73.00 26/03/10 NURYOL ENERJİ (DEFNE REG. VE HES) 7.23 IPP Hydro 22.09 26/03/10 ASMAKİNSAN (BANDIRMA 3 RES) 4.00 IPP Wind 14.17 26/03/10 ÖZGÜR ELEKTRİK (AZMAK I REG.VE HES) 5.90 IPP Hydro 21.50 01/04/10 BİRİM HİDR. ÜRETİM AŞ. (ERFELEK HES) 3.25 IPP Hydro 8.95 03/04/10 BEYTEK El. ÜR. A.S. (ÇATALOLUK HES) 9.50 IPP Hydro 31.00 07/04/10 NİSAN E.MEKANİK EN. (BAŞAK REG. HES) 6.90 IPP Hydro 22.00 09/04/10 BOREAS ENERJİ (OREAS I ENEZ RES) 15.00 IPP Wind 49.00 09/04/10 BERGAMA RES EN. ÜR. A.Ş. ALİAĞA RES 52.50 IPP Wind 207.08 09/04/10 ROTOR ELEKTRİK (OSMANİYE RES) 17.50 IPP Wind 66.11 09/04/10 UZUNÇAYIR HES (Tunceli) (İlave) 27.35 IPP Hydro 107.40 11/04/10 FIRTINA ELEKTRİK ÜR. A.Ş. (SÜMER HES) 21.60 IPP Hydro 70.00 16/04/10 FRİTOLAY 0.06 Autopr. REN 0.45 21/04/10 FRİTOLAY 0.33 Autopr. REN 2.48 21/04/10 BAKRAS EN. ELKT.ÜR. A.Ş. ŞENBÜK RES 15.00 IPP Wind 47.00 22/04/10 YILDIZLI ENTEGRE AĞAÇ (Kocaeli) 12.40 Autopr. N.Gas 92.67 22/04/10 1.80 IPP Wind 6.35 28/04/10 12.41 IPP Hydro 56.05 30/04/10 1.40 IPP REN 10.93 30/04/10 ALİZE ENERJİ (KELTEPE RES) KAR-EN KARADENİZ EL.A.Ş. ARALIK HES ITC-KA ENERJİ (SİNCAN) ATAER ENERJİ ELEKTRİK ÜRETİM A.Ş. 49.00 IPP N.Gas 277.89 05/05/10 3.25 IPP Hydro 8.95 14/05/10 101.95 IPP N.Gas 819.36 22/05/10 KARADENİZ EL.ÜRET. (UZUNDERE-1 HES) 31.10 IPP Hydro 82.50 27/05/10 AKIM ENERJİ (CEVİZLİK REG. VE HES) 91.40 IPP Hydro 330.00 28/05/10 ÇAKIT HES (ÇAKIT ENERJİ A.Ş.) 20.20 IPP Hydro 96.00 01/06/10 CEYHAN HES (OŞKAN HES) (ENOVA EN.) 23.90 IPP Hydro 98.00 03/06/10 ERENLER REG. ve HES (BME BİR.MÜT.EN.) 45.00 IPP Hydro 85.00 04/06/10 ROTOR ELEKTRİK (GÖKÇEDAĞ RES) 20.00 IPP Wind 75.56 05/06/10 SOMA ENERJİ ÜRETİM (SOMA RES) 7.20 IPP Wind 24.62 10/06/10 PAŞA REG. VE HES (ÖZGÜR ELEKTRİK) 8.70 IPP Hydro 34.00 11/06/10 BİRİM HİDR. ÜRETİM AŞ. (ERFELEK HES) CENGİZ ENERJİ SAN. VE TİC. A.Ş. (Tekkeköy) UNFCCC/CCNUCC CDM – Executive Board Power Unit GÜZELÇAY-I HES (İLK ELEKTRİK ENERJİ) Page 48 Cap. (MW) Bus. model Fuel type AEG (GWh) CoD 3.14 IPP Hydro 16.67 15/06/10 KALE REG. VE HES (KALE ENERJİ ÜR.) 34.10 IPP Hydro 116.00 16/06/10 BERGAMA RES EN. ÜR. A.Ş. ALİAĞA RES 37.50 IPP Wind 147.92 16/06/10 MAZI-3 RES ELEKT.ÜR. A.Ş. (MAZI-3 RES) 7.50 IPP Wind 26.25 18/06/10 UĞUR ENERJİ ELKTRİK ÜRETİM TİC. VE SAN. A.Ş. 48.20 IPP N.Gas 405.14 21/06/10 ERİKLİ-AKOCAK REG. ve AKOCAK HES 41.25 IPP Hydro 128.50 30/06/10 5.65 IPP Hydro 12.63 30/06/10 BORASKO ENERJİ (BANDIRMA RES) 12.00 IPP Wind 48.00 30/06/10 AKSA ENERJİ (ANTALYA) 25.00 IPP N.Gas 150.00 01/07/10 4.40 IPP Hydro 15.00 03/07/10 DAMLAPINAR HES (CENAY ELEKTRİK ÜR.) 16.40 IPP Hydro 92.00 08/07/10 DİM HES (DİLER ELEKTRİK ÜRETİM) 38.30 IPP Hydro 123.00 08/07/10 ALTEK ALARKO ELKTRİK SANTRALLARI 60.10 IPP N.Gas 415.57 10/07/10 ÖZGÜR ELEKTRİK (AZMAK I REG.VE HES) 5.90 IPP Hydro 21.50 10/07/10 KİRPİLİK REG. VE HES (ÖZGÜR ELEKTRİK) 6.20 IPP Hydro 22.00 11/07/10 YAVUZ REG. VE HES (MASAT ENERJİ) 22.50 IPP Hydro 83.00 14/07/10 EREN ENERJİ ELEKTRİK ÜRETİM A.Ş. 160.00 IPP CFBS 1,068.24 15/07/10 12.50 IPP Wind 45.65 15/07/10 N.Gas 42.00 17/07/10 Hydro 49.00 21/07/10 ÇAMLIKAYA REG. VE HES DİNAR HES (ELDA ELEKTRİK ÜRETİM) ZİYARET RES (ZİYARET RES ELEKTRİK) FLOKSER TEKSTİL (Çerkezköy/TEKİRDAĞ) KAYABÜKÜ REG. VE HES (ELİTE ELEKT.) 5.20 Autopr. 14.60 IPP RB KARESİ İTHALAT İHRACAT TEKSTİL 8.60 Autopr. N.Gas 65.00 23/07/10 SOMA ENERJİ ÜRETİM (SOMA RES) 7.20 IPP Wind 24.62 28/07/10 SOMA ENERJİ ÜRETİM (SOMA RES) 6.30 IPP Wind 21.54 28/07/10 41.25 IPP Hydro 128.50 29/07/10 101.95 IPP N.Gas 819.36 31/07/10 GÖK REG. ve HES (GÖK ENERJİ EL. SAN.) 10.01 IPP Hydro 43.04 06/08/10 BULAM REG. VE HES (MEM ENERJİ ELK.) 7.03 IPP Hydro 33.14 10/08/10 KESKİNOĞLU TAVUKÇULUK VE DAM. İŞL. 3.50 Autopr. N.Gas 25.00 11/08/10 32.50 IPP Wind 110.86 13/08/10 2.00 IPP N.Gas 13.00 17/08/10 29.10 IPP N.Gas 203.00 19/08/10 N.Gas 12.00 19/08/10 12.60 IPP Hydro 51.50 20/08/10 2.40 IPP Hydro 14.00 25/08/10 33.24 IPP N.Gas 256.28 26/08/10 1.60 IPP Hydro 8.00 28/08/10 12.60 IPP Hydro 51.50 28/08/10 ITC ADANA BİOKÜTLE SANT. 9.90 IPP REN 72.72 02/09/10 BELEN ELEKTRİK BELEN RÜZGAR-HATAY 6.00 IPP Wind 19.00 02/09/10 40.50 IPP Hydro 106.00 03/09/10 ERİKLİ-AKOCAK REG. ve AKOCAK HES CENGİZ ENERJİ SAN. VE TİC. A.Ş. (Tekkeköy) SOMA RES (BİLGİN RÜZGAR SAN. EN.ÜR.) BİNATOM ELEKTRİK ÜRETİM A.Ş. CAN ENERJİ ELEKTRİK ÜR. A.Ş.(Tekirdağ) KURTOĞLU BAKIR KURŞUN SAN. A.Ş. CEYHAN HES (BERKMAN HES)(ENOVA EN.) GÜDÜL I REG. VE HES (YAŞAM ENERJİ) SÖNMEZ ELEKTRİK(UŞak) KARŞIYAKA HES (AKUA ENERJİ ÜRET.) CEYHAN HES (BERKMAN HES)(ENOVA EN.) TEKTUĞ ELEKTRİK (ANDIRIN HES) 1.60 Autopr. UNFCCC/CCNUCC CDM – Executive Board Power Unit Page 49 Cap. (MW) Bus. model Fuel type AEG (GWh) CoD ÜTOPYA ELEKTRİK (DÜZOVA RES) 15.00 IPP Wind 46.00 03/09/10 SELEN ELEKTRİK (KEPEZKAYA HES) 28.00 IPP Hydro 124.00 06/09/10 REŞADİYE 2 HES (TURKON MNG ELEKT.) 26.10 IPP Hydro 110.00 17/09/10 4.00 IPP Hydro 9.00 21/09/10 SOMA RES (BİLGİN RÜZGAR SAN. EN.ÜR.) 27.50 IPP Wind 93.81 23/09/10 KIRKA BORAKS(Kırka) (Eti Maden İŞl.) (İlave) 10.00 Autopr. Fuel Oil KOZAN HES (SER-ER ENERJİ) 65.93 29/09/10 KAHRAMAN REG. VE HES (KATIRCIOĞLU) 1.40 IPP Hydro 6.00 30/09/10 NARİNKALE REG. VE HES (EBD ENERJİ) 3.10 IPP Hydro 9.99 30/09/10 SOMA ENERJİ ÜRETİM (SOMA RES) 9.00 IPP Wind 30.78 01/10/10 ENERJİ-SA (BANDIRMA) 930.80 IPP N.Gas 7,540.00 07/10/10 ERENKÖY REG. VE HES (TÜRKERLER) 21.50 IPP Hydro 87.00 07/10/10 UĞUR ENERJİ ELKTRİK ÜRETİM TİC. VE SAN. A.Ş. 12.00 IPP N.Gas 100.86 07/10/10 ZİYARET RES 22.50 IPP Wind 82.17 13/10/10 KAHTA I HES (ERDEMYILDIZ ELEK. ÜRT.) 7.10 IPP Hydro 35.00 14/10/10 ROTOR ELEKTRİK (GÖKÇEDAĞ RES) 2.50 IPP Wind 9.44 15/10/10 48.51 IPP Hydro 180.46 27/10/10 7.40 IPP Hydro 21.00 28/10/10 4,005.88 01/11/10 ULUABAT KUVVET TÜNELİ VE HES SABUNSUYU II HES (ANG ENERJİ ELK.) EREN ENERJİ ELEKTRİK ÜRETİM A.Ş. 600.00 IPP BURÇ BENDİ VE HES (AKKUR ENERJİ) 27.30 IPP Hydro 113.00 04/11/10 KARADENİZ EL.ÜRET. (UZUNDERE-1 HES) 31.10 IPP Hydro 82.50 07/11/10 GÜZELÇAY-II HES (İLK ELEKTRİK ENERJİ) 4.96 IPP Hydro 26.33 11/11/10 KUYUCAK RES (ALİZE ENERJİ ÜRET.) 8.00 IPP Wind 34.38 11/11/10 MURGUL BAKIR (Ç.Kaya) (İlave) 19.60 IPP Hydro 40.50 11/11/10 SOMA RES (BİLGİN RÜZGAR SAN. EN.ÜR.) 30.00 IPP Wind 102.33 11/11/10 MARMARA PAMUKLU MENSUCAT (İlave) 26.20 Autopr. N.Gas 203.53 25/11/10 ULUABAT KUVVET TÜNELİ VE HES 48.51 IPP Hydro 180.46 25/11/10 REŞADİYE 1 HES (TURKON MNG ELEKT.) 15.70 IPP Hydro 126.00 26/11/10 EGEMEN 1 HES (ENERSİS ELEKTRİK) 8.82 IPP Hydro 31.91 26/11/10 ALİAĞA ÇAKMAKTEPE ENERJİ (İlave) 69.90 IPP N.Gas 526.25 26/11/10 155.33 IPP Hydro 474.94 02/12/10 2.56 IPP N.Gas 19.74 07/12/10 KUYUCAK RES (ALİZE ENERJİ ÜRET.) 17.60 IPP Wind 75.63 09/12/10 UMUT III REG. VE HES (NİSAN ELEKTR.) 12.00 IPP Hydro 26.00 13/12/10 5.82 15/12/10 YEDİGÖZE HES (YEDİGÖZE ELEKTRİK) SÖNMEZ ELEKTRİK(UŞak) Supercrit. TÜPRAŞ RAFİNERİ (İZMİT) 0.90 Autopr. Fuel Oil POLYPLEX EUROPA POLYESTER FİLM 7.81 Autopr. N.Gas 61.41 16/12/10 ALTEK ALARKO ELKTRİK SANTRALLARI 21.90 IPP N.Gas 151.43 18/12/10 SARES RES (GARET ENERJİ ÜRETİM) 15.00 IPP Wind 60.67 22/12/10 FEKE 2 BARAJI VE HES (AKKUR ENERJİ) 69.30 IPP Hydro 223.00 24/12/10 EGEMEN 1B HES (ENERSİS ELEKTRİK) 11.10 IPP Hydro 40.16 28/12/10 4,005.88 29/12/10 EREN ENERJİ ELEKTRİK ÜRETİM A.Ş. 600.00 IPP Supercrit. UNFCCC/CCNUCC CDM – Executive Board Power Unit Page 50 Cap. (MW) Bus. model Fuel type AEG (GWh) CoD RASA ENERJİ (VAN) 10.10 IPP N.Gas 64.26 29/12/10 KALKANDERE REG. VE YOKUŞLU HES 14.54 IPP Hydro 68.29 30/12/10 TURGUTTEPE RES (SABAŞ ELEKTRİK ÜR.) 22.00 IPP Wind 64.17 30/12/10 İNTERNATİONAL HOSPİTAL İSTANBUL AŞ. 0.80 Autopr. N.Gas 6.00 31/12/10 AKSU HES 5.20 IPP Hydro 16.00 12/01/11 ÇEŞMEBAŞI HES 8.20 IPP Hydro 28.00 12/01/11 CEVHER I-II HES 16.36 IPP Hydro 65.00 17/01/11 BAYRAMHACILI HES 47.00 IPP Hydro 175.00 20/01/11 SÖĞÜTLÜKAYA (POSOF HES) YENİGÜN EN. 6.13 IPP Hydro 31.00 20/01/11 FRAPORT IC İÇTAŞ 8.00 Autopr. N.Gas 64.00 24/01/11 N.Gas 366.00 27/01/11 N.Gas 32.00 31/01/11 142.28 IPP Hydro 360.00 03/02/11 ÇANAKKALE RES 29.90 IPP Wind 92.00 11/02/11 SUSURLUK RES 45.00 IPP Wind 112.00 13/02/11 ÇAKIRMAN HES 6.98 IPP Hydro 22.00 19/02/11 KUMKÖY HES 17.49 IPP Hydro 98.00 23/02/11 DURU 2 HES 4.49 IPP Hydro 22.00 25/02/11 KULP I HES 22.92 IPP Hydro 78.00 04/03/11 261.27 IPP Hydro 828.00 10/03/11 N.Gas 67.00 19/03/11 HG ENERJİ SABİHA GÖKÇEN HAVAALANI HACININOĞLU HES ALKUMRU HES BOYTEKS 52.38 IPP 4.00 Autopr. 8.60 Autopr. EŞEN-1 HES 60.00 IPP Hydro 240.00 23/03/11 AYRANCILAR HES 32.10 IPP Hydro 128.00 25/03/11 CENGİZ ENERJİ (Tekkeköy/SAMSUN) 35.00 IPP N.Gas 281.29 30/03/11 ÇAMLICA III HES 27.62 IPP Hydro 43.00 01/04/11 YAPRAK II HES 10.80 IPP Hydro 32.00 03/04/11 OTLUCA I HES 37.54 IPP Hydro 177.00 07/04/11 İNCESU HES 15.00 IPP Hydro 48.00 08/04/11 KESME HES 4.61 IPP Hydro 16.00 14/04/11 ÇATALTEPE RES 16.00 IPP Wind 52.00 19/04/11 SARAÇBENDİ HES 25.48 IPP Hydro 101.00 06/05/11 7.20 IPP N.Gas 54.07 14/05/11 93.00 IPP Wind 400.00 19/05/11 KARASU I HES 3.84 IPP Hydro 19.00 19/05/11 YAŞIL HES 3.79 IPP Hydro 15.00 20/05/11 İNCİRLİ HES 25.20 IPP Hydro 126.00 25/05/11 DARCA HES 8.91 IPP Hydro 63.00 26/05/11 ÖREN REG. HES 6.64 IPP Hydro 29.00 26/05/11 KARASU II HES 3.08 IPP Hydro 13.00 03/06/11 33.00 IPP Hydro 141.00 10/06/11 ZORLU ENERJİ (B.Karıştıran) ŞAH RES TEFEN HES UNFCCC/CCNUCC CDM – Executive Board Power Unit CENGİZ ENERJİ Page 51 Cap. (MW) Bus. model 131.34 IPP Fuel type AEG (GWh) CoD N.Gas 985.00 14/06/11 ALDAŞ ALTYAPI 1.95 Autopr. N.Gas 15.00 15/06/11 GÖKMEN HES 2.87 IPP Hydro 13.00 15/06/11 ÜZÜMLÜ HES 11.36 IPP Hydro 41.00 23/06/11 1.07 IPP Hydro 5.00 30/06/11 KÖYOBASI HES AKRES 43.75 IPP Wind 165.00 01/07/11 TUZTAŞI HES 1.61 IPP Hydro 10.00 04/07/11 OTLUCA II HES 6.36 IPP Hydro 27.00 13/07/11 KNAUF İNŞAT 1.56 Autopr. N.Gas 12.00 15/07/11 HASIRCI TEKSTİL 2.00 Autopr. N.Gas 15.00 16/07/11 YAMAÇ HES 5.46 IPP Hydro 17.00 20/07/11 SEYİTALİ RES 30.00 IPP Wind 110.00 22/07/11 YAPISAN (KARICA REG. ve DARICA I HES) 13.32 IPP Hydro 45.41 26/07/11 ŞANLIURFA OSB 116.76 IPP N.Gas 800.00 26/07/11 SAMSUN TEKKEKÖY 131.34 IPP N.Gas 980.00 28/07/11 LOKMAN HEKİM 0.51 Autopr. N.Gas 4.00 29/07/11 KARASU 5 HES 4.10 IPP Hydro 24.00 03/08/11 BALKONDU I HES 9.19 IPP Hydro 33.00 05/08/11 KARASU 4-3 HES 4.60 IPP Hydro 22.00 05/08/11 KORUKÖY HES 3.03 IPP Hydro 22.00 05/08/11 GORDİON AVM 2.01 Autopr. N.Gas 15.00 05/08/11 BORASKO BANDIRMA RES 3.00 IPP Wind 12.00 11/08/11 ÇANAKÇI HES 9.27 IPP Hydro 39.00 25/08/11 BOLU ÇÖP TOP. TES 1.13 IPP REN 7.50 26/08/11 ASLIM BİYOKÜTLE 5.66 IPP REN 44.50 09/09/11 BOSEN ENERJİ 235.82 IPP N.Gas 1,770.00 10/09/11 BOĞUNTU HES 3.80 IPP Hydro 17.00 16/09/11 POYRAZ HES 2.66 IPP Hydro 10.00 16/09/11 İNNORES ELEKTRİK YUNTDAĞ Wind 10.00 IPP Wind 30.67 27/09/11 GOREN-1 48.65 IPP N.Gas 277.00 30/09/11 KOZDERE HES 3.15 IPP Hydro 14.00 08/10/11 SEFAKÖY HES 33.11 IPP Hydro 121.00 12/10/11 KİLLİK RES 20.00 IPP Wind 43.00 13/10/11 YEDİGÖL HES 21.90 IPP Hydro 77.00 13/10/11 SARAY HALI 4.29 Autopr. N.Gas 33.00 15/10/11 AYVACIK RES 5.00 IPP Wind 17.00 23/10/11 NİL ÖRME 2.68 Autopr. N.Gas 21.00 25/10/11 MURATLI HES 26.70 IPP Hydro 94.00 27/10/11 ODAŞ DGKÇS 54.96 IPP N.Gas 415.00 28/10/11 BAKİ ELEKTRİK ŞAMLI Wind (İlave) 24.00 IPP Wind 92.63 01/11/11 UNFCCC/CCNUCC CDM – Executive Board Power Unit Page 52 Cap. (MW) Bus. model Fuel type AEG (GWh) CoD BANDIRMA ENERJİ (BANDIRMA RES) 3.00 IPP Wind 12.00 01/11/11 KİLLİK RES (PEM ENERJİ A.Ş.) (İlave) 20.00 IPP Wind 43.00 01/11/11 SARES RES (GARET ENERJİ ÜRETİM) 7.50 IPP Wind 30.33 01/11/11 36.80 IPP Wind 125.84 01/11/11 TURGUTTEPE RES (SABAŞ ELEKTRİK) 2.00 IPP Wind 5.83 01/11/11 ZİYARET RES (ZİYARET RES ELEKTRİK) 22.50 IPP Wind 82.17 01/11/11 AYDIN/GERMENCİK JEOTERMAL 20.00 IPP REN 150.00 01/11/11 CEV ENERJİ ÜRETİM(GAZİANTEP ÇÖP BİOGAZ) 4.52 IPP REN 29.34 01/11/11 ITC ADANA ENERJİ ÜRETİM (İlave) 1.42 IPP REN 10.43 01/11/11 ITC-KA ENERJİ (SİNCAN) (İlave) 1.50 IPP REN 11.71 01/11/11 ITC-KA ENERJİ MAMAK KATI ATIK TOP. 2.83 IPP REN 18.94 01/11/11 KAYSERİ KATI ATIK DEPONİ SAHASI 1.60 IPP REN 12.00 01/11/11 BEKİRLİ TES (İÇDAŞ ELEKTRİK EN.) 600.00 IPP 4,320.00 01/11/11 SOMA RES (SOMA ENERJİ) (İlave) MENGE BARAJI VE HES (ENERJİSA ENERJİ) Supercrit 44.71 IPP Hydro 102.00 01/11/11 SEYRANTEPE HES (Düzeltme)) 7.14 IPP Hydro 26.02 01/11/11 BATMAN 0.48 EÜAŞ Hydro 0.92 01/11/11 ÇAMLIKAYA REG.VE HES (ÇAMLIKAYA EN) 2.82 IPP Hydro 6.30 01/11/11 ÇUKURÇAYI HES (AYDEMİR ELEKTRİK ÜR.) 1.80 IPP Hydro 8.00 01/11/11 HASANLAR HES (DÜZCE ENERJİ BİRLİĞİ) 4.70 IPP Hydro 21.00 01/11/11 KALKANDERE REG. VE YOKUŞLU HES 23.36 IPP Hydro 109.71 01/11/11 KARASU 4-2 HES (İDEAL ENERJİ ÜRETİMİ) 10.40 IPP Hydro 58.00 01/11/11 9.74 IPP Hydro 41.00 01/11/11 NARİNKALE REG. VE HES (EBD ENERJİ) 30.40 IPP Hydro 98.01 01/11/11 SARIKAVAK HES (ESER ENERJİ YAT. AŞ.) 8.06 IPP Hydro 43.00 01/11/11 SAYAN HES (KAREL ELEKTRİK ÜRETİM) 14.90 IPP Hydro 47.00 01/11/11 TEKTUĞ (Erkenek) 0.51 IPP Hydro 1.96 01/11/11 ULUABAT KUV. TÜN. VE HES (Düzeltme) 2.98 IPP Hydro 11.09 01/11/11 155.33 IPP Hydro 474.94 01/11/11 KIRAN HES (ARSAN ENERJİ A.Ş.) YEDİGÖZE HES (YEDİGÖZE ELEK.) (İlave) MARDİN-KIZILTEPE (AKSA ENERJİ) 32.10 IPP Fuel Oil 225.00 01/11/11 AKSA AKRİLİK (İTHAL KÖM.+D.G) 25.00 IPP N.Gas 175.00 01/11/11 AKSA ENERJİ (Antalya) 600.00 IPP N.Gas 3,600.00 01/11/11 ALİAĞA ÇAKMAKTEPE ENERJİ (İlave) 139.70 IPP N.Gas 1,051.75 01/11/11 GLOBAL ENERJİ (PELİTLİK) 0.50 IPP N.Gas 3.74 01/11/11 GÜLLE ENERJİ(Çorlu) (İlave) 3.90 Autopr. N.Gas 17.97 01/11/11 N.Gas 168.76 01/11/11 N.Gas 33.00 01/11/11 N.Gas 347.86 01/11/11 HAMİTABAT (Lisans Tadili) ISPARTA MENSUCAT (Isparta) MOSB Enerji Elektrik Üretim Ltd. Şti.(İlave) 36.00 EÜAŞ 4.30 Autopr. 43.50 IPP POLYPLEX EUROPA POLYESTER FİLM 3.90 Autopr. N.Gas 30.67 01/11/11 SAMUR HALI A.Ş. 4.30 Autopr. N.Gas 33.00 01/11/11 N.Gas 410.00 01/11/11 TİRENDA TİRE ENERJİ ÜRETİM A.Ş. 58.38 IPP UNFCCC/CCNUCC CDM – Executive Board Page 53 Power Unit Cap. (MW) TÜPRAŞ O.A. RAFİNERİ (Kırıkkale) (İlave) Bus. model 12.00 Autopr. Fuel type AEG (GWh) CoD N.Gas 84.78 01/11/11 YENİ UŞAK ENERJİ ELEKTRİK SANTRALI 8.73 IPP N.Gas 65.00 01/11/11 ETİ BOR (Borik Asit)(Emet) (Düzeltme) 0.60 Autopr. N.Gas 4.47 01/11/11 The power units in Turkey that use the carbon market and thus are to be excluded when determining AEGtotal (see Step 5 above in Section B.6.3) are compiled in Table E: Power units in Turkey using the carbon market (Status 2011)41 Power Unit ANEMON ENERJİ (İNTEPE) DOĞAL ENERJİ (BURGAZ) ERTÜRK ELEKT. (ÇATALCA) ALİZE ENERJİ (KELTEPE) ITC-KA ENERJİ MAMAK MARE MANASTIR ROTOR (OSMANİYE RES-GÖKÇEDAĞ RES) SAYALAR RÜZGAR (DOĞAL ENERJİ) TUZLA JEO. ASMAKİNSAN (BANDIRMA-3 RES) BELEN HATAY DEĞİRMENÜSTÜ (KAHRAMANMARAŞ) BORASKO BANDIRMA ERİKLİ-AKOCAK REG.(AK EN.) GÜZELÇAY-I HES(İLK EN.) ITC-KA ENERJİ ADANA (BİYOKÜTLE) AYEN ENERJİ (AKBÜK) AKRES (AKHİSAR RÜZGAR) BERGAMA RES (ALİAĞA RES) ALİZE ENERJİ (ÇAMSEKİ) KAR-EN KARADENİZ ELEK.(ARALIK HES) AK ENERJİ AYYILDIZ (BANDIRMA) MENDERES JEOTERMAL AYRANCILAR (MURADİYE ELEK.) BALKONDU I HES (BTA ELEK.) BOLU BEL.ÇÖP (CEV MARMARA) BOREAS EN.(ENEZ RES) BULAM BURÇBENDİ (AKKUR EN.) ANADOLU ÇAKIRLAR ÇAKIT HES ÇALDERE ELEKTRİK DALAMAN MUĞLA ÇAMLICA ÇANAKKALE RES (ENERJİ-SA) BEYTEK(ÇATALOLUK HES) 41 AEG Standard (GWh) 92.00 GS 48.00 GS 210.00 GS 73.00 GS 170.00 GS 129.00 GS 510.00 GS 108.00 GS 55.00 GS 85.00 GS 114.00 GS 106.00 VCS 240.00 GS 257.00 VCS 43.00 GS 83.00 GS 123.00 GS 165.00 GS 355.00 GS 82.00 GS 56.00 GS 51.00 GS 56.00 VCS 128.00 VCS 33.00 VCS 7.50 GS 49.00 GS 33.00 GS 113.00 VCS 60.00 GS 96.00 VCS 35.00 VCS 43.00 VCS 92.00 GS 31.00 GS Link View View View View View View View View View View View View View View View View View View View View View View View View View View View View View View View View View View View Projects were identified by cross-checking TEİAŞ Projection pp. 109-123 with http://www.vcsprojectdatabase.org/, http://mer.markit.com/br-reg/public/index.jsp?q=Turkey&s=cp, and http://www.netinform.de/KE/Wegweiser/Ebene1_Projekte2.aspx?mode=4. UNFCCC/CCNUCC CDM – Executive Board Page 54 Power Unit ÇATALTEPE (ALİZE EN.) DAMLAPINAR(CENAY ELEK.) DARCA HES (BÜKOR EL.) DATÇA RES YAPISAN KARICA DARICA MENDERES JEOTERMAL DORA-2 ÜTOPYA ELEKTRİK EGEMEN 1 HES (ENERSİS ELEK.) TEKTUĞ-ERKENEK FEKE 2 (AKKUR EN.) CEV EN.(GAZİANTEP ÇÖP) UZUNÇAYIR CEYKAR BAĞIŞLI CEVHER (ÖZCEVHER) ÖZTAY GÜNAYŞE HAMZALI HES (TURKON MNG ELEK.) HASANLAR (DÜZCE) KALE HES ASA EN.(KALE REG.) TEKTUĞ-KALEALTI HES KARASU I HES (İDEAL EN.) KARASU 4-2 HES (İDEAL EN.) KARASU 4-3 HES (İDEAL EN.); KARASU 5 HES (İDEAL EN.) TEKTUĞ-KARGILIK KAYSERİ KATI ATIK (HER EN.) TEKTUĞ-KEBENDERESİ LODOS RES (TAŞOLUK)KEMERBURGAZ SELEN EL.(KEPEZKAYA HES) KİLLİK RES (PEM EN.) ITC-KA ENERJİ KONYA (ASLIM BİYOKÜTLE) KORES KOCADAĞ BEREKET (KOYULHİSAR) KOZDERE (ADO MAD.) KUMKÖY HES (KUMKÖY EN.) KUYUCAK (ALİZE ENER.) TGT EN. LAMAS III-IV ORTADOĞU ENERJİ (Oda yeri) ; ORTADOĞU ENERJİ (KÖMÜRCÜODA) AYDIN GERMENCİK JEO.(MAREN MARAŞ) MAZI 3 MENGE (ENERJİ-SA) AKDENİZ ELEK. MERSİN RES OTLUCA I HES (BEYOBASI) ; OTLUCA II HES (BEYOBASI) PAŞA HES(ÖZGÜR EL.) SÖĞÜTLÜKAYA (POSOF HES) YENİGÜN EN. POYRAZ HES(YEŞİL EN.) REŞADİYE III HES(TURKON MNG EL. REŞADİYE II HES(TURKON MNG EL. ŞAH RES (GALATA WIND) AEG Standard (GWh) 52.00 GS 92.00 VCS 63.00 GS 84.00 GS 376.00 VCS 73.00 GS 92.00 GS 72.00 GS 50.00 VCS 223.00 VCS 37.00 GS 322.00 VCS 99.00 VCS 65.00 GS 29.00 GS 117.00 GS 21.00 GS 116.00 VCS 32.00 GS 52.00 VCS 19.00 GS 58.00 GS 46.00 GS 83.00 VCS 12.00 GS 32.00 VCS 85.00 GS 124.00 VCS 86.00 GS 44.50 GS 56.00 GS 329.00 VCS 14.00 GS 98.00 VCS 110.00 GS 150.00 VCS 177.80 GS 150.00 GS 105.00 GS 102.00 VCS 100.00 GS 204.00 VCS 34.00 GS 31.00 GS 10.00 GS 115.00 GS 110.00 GS 400.00 GS Link View View View View View View View View View View View View View View View View View View View View View View View View View View View View View View View View View View View View View View View View View View View View View View View View UNFCCC/CCNUCC CDM – Executive Board Page 55 Power Unit SARAÇBENDİ (ÇAMLICA) SARES (GARET ENER.) ALİZE ENERJİ (SARIKAYA ŞARKÖY) SARIKAVAK (ESER) SAYAN (KAREL) SEFAKÖY (PURE) HİDRO KONTROL (SELİMOĞLU HES) BAKRAS ELEK.ŞENBÜK RES SEYİTALİ RES (DORUK EN.) ITC-KA ENERJİ SİNCAN BEYOBASI (SIRMA) SOMA RES (BİLGİN ELEK.) SOMA RES SUSURLUK (ALANTEK EN.) AKIM (CEVİZLİK HES) KALKANDERE-YOKUŞLU HES(AKIM EN.) TURGUTTEPE RES (SABAŞ ELEK.) ULUBAT KUVVET TÜN.(AK EN.) FİLYOS YALNIZCA HES YAVUZ HES (MASAT EN.) ELESTAŞ YAYLABEL ELESTAŞ YAZI YEŞİLBAŞ İNNORES ELEK. YUNTDAĞ ZİYARET RES BAKİ ELEKTRİK ŞAMLI RÜZGAR ÖZGÜR ELEKTR.AZMAK I; ÖZGÜR ELEKTR.AZMAK II; KİRPİLİK HES (ÖZGÜR ELEK.) NİSAN EN.(BAŞAK HES) CEYHAN HES (BERKMAN HES-ENOVA); CEYHAN HES (OŞKAN HES-ENOVA) YPM GÖLOVA; YPM SEVİNDİK UMUT III HES(NİSAN EL.) YAPRAK II HES (NİSAN EL. ENERJİ) EŞEN-I (GÖLTAŞ) MARAŞ ENERJİ (FIRNIS) SEBENOBA (DENİZ ELEK.)SAMANDAĞ DENİZLİ ELEKT. (Karakurt-Akhisar) BARES (BANDIRMA) Appendix 5 AEG Standard (GWh) 101.00 VCS 91.00 GS 96.00 GS 43.00 GS 47.00 GS 121.00 VCS 35.00 GS 47.00 GS 110.00 GS 44.50 GS 23.00 VCS 307.00 GS 397.00 GS 112.00 GS 330.00 VCS 178.00 VCS 70.00 GS 372.00 VCS 67.00 GS 83.00 GS 20.00 VCS 6.00 VCS 56.00 VCS 213.00 GS 210.00 GS 440.00 GS VCS View 22.00 201.00 39.00 26.00 32.00 240.00 36.00 110.00 28.00 105.00 VCS VCS VCS VCS VCS VER+ VER+ VER+ VER+ VER+ View View View View View View View View View View Further background Information on monitoring plan Appendix 6 View View View View View View View View View View View View View View View View View View View View View View View View View View 85.00 N/A N/A Link Summary of post registration changes