PDD - Guangdong Shenzhen

PROJECT DESIGN DOCUMENT FORM (CDM PDD) - Version 03
CDM Executive Board

page 1

CLEAN DEVELOPMENT MECHANISM
PROJECT DESIGN DOCUMENT FORM (CDM-PDD)
Version 03 - in effect as of: 28 July 2006

CONTENTS

A. General description of project activity

B. Application of a baseline and monitoring methodology

C. Duration of the project activity / crediting period

D. Environmental impacts

E. Stakeholders comments

Annexes

Annex 1: Contact information on participants in the project activity

Annex 2: Information regarding public funding

Annex 3: Baseline information

Annex 4: Monitoring plan


CDM Executive Board
page 2

SECTION A. General description of project activity

A.1. Title of the project activity:
>>
Title: Guangdong Shenzhen Laohukeng Landfill Gas Utilization Project
Version: 2.2
Date: 14/03/2011

A.2. Description of the project activity:
>>
Guangdong Shenzhen Laohukeng Landfill Gas Utilization Project (hereinafter referred to as
the proposed project) is to collect and utilize the landfill gas (LFG) generated from
Laohukeng landfill site in Shenzhen City, Guangdong Province, P. R. China. Shenzhen
Laohukeng landfill started to receive municipal waste in December 2002, and it had an
average reception of 1,033,059 tonnes
1
of waste per year during 2003 to 2009. The landfill
will reach its maximum designed capacity by 2012.

The proposed project involves the installation of a gas collection system, flaring equipment
and electricity generation system at Laohukeng landfill site. A certain amount of methane in
the LFG will be combusted in the generators to produce electricity for local grid. The
excessive LFG and all the LFG collected during the period when electricity is not produced
will be flared. The generator technology employed is from GE, a world leading company in
manufacturing gas engines and generators. The proposed project will assist in transferring
advanced LFG utilization technology to China. Three GE gas engines (unit capacity of 1.063
MW) will be installed with a total capacity of 3.189 MW at the beginning and gradually
reduced to two generators and finally one generator due to diminishing LFG
2
. The annual
operational hour is 6750 hours and the annual electricity output is 19,373 MWh at the first
crediting period. The electricity generated by the proposed project will be sold to China
Southern Power Grid to replace certain capacity of coal-fired power plants. The annual
emission reduction is estimated to be 196,846 tonnes of CO
2
e for the first crediting period.

The purpose of the proposed project is to utilize landfill gas to generate power and
deliver it to China Southern Power Grid. For the proposed project,

(a) Prior to the start of implementation of the project activity, the LFG is released to
atmosphere directly and there is no power generation unit at the site of the proposed
project, and the electricity was supplied by the China Southern Power Grid which is
dominated by fossil fuel-fired power plants.
(b) The project scenario is the implementation of the proposed project, the installation
and operation of 3 sets of LFG generators with a total capacity of 3.189MW which
will supply an average annual generation of 19,373MWh at the first crediting period
to China Southern Power Grid and replace the same amount of electricity generated
by fossil fuel-fired power plants connected to China Southern Power Grid. The LFG
which is not used in generators will be flared.

1
Source: Statistics data from Urban Administration Bureau of Baoan District, which is the
management organization of Laohukeng landfill.
2
According to the ex-ante estimation, totally three generators will be reduced to two sets in the 11
th

operational year, and then reduced to one set in the 17
th
operational year. The actual generator
reduction year will be based on the actual LFG generation conditions.

CDM Executive Board
page 3

(c) The baseline scenario of the proposed project is the atmospheric release of LFG and
the electricity supply of equal amount as the proposed project from the China
Southern Power Grid. The baseline scenario of the proposed project is the same as
the scenario prior to the start of the implementation of the project activity.

The Project will have several positive social and environmental impacts as indicated in the
following:

1. GHG emission reduction
The proposed project will utilize methane for electricity generation. The electricity generated
by the proposed project will be sold to the China Southern Power Grid to replace the capacity
of fossil fuel power plants.

2. Contribution to environment protection
The main social and environmental contribution of the proposed project will be a positive
effect on the health of people in local community. By managing this landfill properly the air
pollution in the local surroundings will decrease and odour nuisance and health risks of local
people will be reduced.

3. Clean energy demonstration
Advanced foreign technology will be employed, which will enhance technology transfer
activity. The proposed project will provide an example that can be used by others that may
want to develop advanced and more efficient clean electricity generation using landfill gas
throughout China.

4. Job opportunity creation
The newly installed capacity by the proposed project will directly benefit the local region by
creating new jobs and will increase the local resident income and improve their life quality.

In conclusion, the proposed project is consistent with Chinas national energy policy and
sustainable development strategy.

A.3. Project participants:
>>
Name of Party involved
(host) indicates a host
Party)
Private and/or public
entity(ies) project
participants (as applicable)
Kindly indicate if the Party
involved wishes to be
considered as project
participant (Yes/No)
Peoples Republic of
China (host)
Shenzhen Dongjiang Lisai
Recycled Power Co., Ltd.
No
The Netherlands
E.ON Climate & Renewables
GmbH
No
(*) In accordance with the CDM modalities and procedures, at the time of making the
CDM-PDD public at the stage of validation, a Party involved may or may not have
provided its approval. At the time of requesting registration, the approval by the Party (ies)
involved is required.

A.4. Technical description of the project activity:


CDM Executive Board
page 4

A.4.1. Location of the project activity:

A.4.1.1. Host Party(ies):
>>
Peoples Republic of China

A.4.1.2. Region/State/Province etc.:
>>
Guangdong Province

A.4.1.3. City/Town/Community etc:
>>
Baoan District, Songgang Township, Shenzhen City

A.4.1.4. Detail of physical location, including information
allowing the unique identification of this project activity (maximum one page):
>>
The proposed project activity is located at Tangxiayong Laohukeng Landfill site, Songgang
Town, Baoan District, Shenzhen City, Guangdong Province, P. R. China. The geographical
coordinates of the center point of the landfill are east longitude 11350'28.28'' (113.8412) and
north latitude 2249'53.05'' (22.8314). The geographical coordinates of the factory building
are east longitude 11350'27.95'' (113.8411) and north latitude 2249'52.80'' (22.8313).
Geographical location of the project is showed in Figure 1 and Figure 2.

CDM Executive Board
page 5

Figure 1: The proposed project on the map of P. R. China

Figure 2: the proposed project on the map of Guangdong province

A.4.2. Category(ies) of project activity:
>>
Category: Renewable electricity in grid-connected applications
Sectoral Scope: 13 Waste Handling and Disposal

A.4.3. Technology to be employed by the project activity:
>>
The proposed project is to utilize landfill gas for electricity generation in Shenzhen City,
Guangdong Province, P. R. China. The proposed project is a grid-connected renewable
energy project.

CDM Executive Board
page 6

Prior to the start of implementation of the project activity, the LFG is released to atmosphere
directly and there is no power generation unit at the site of the proposed project, and the
electricity was supplied by the China Southern Power Grid. The baseline scenario of the
proposed project is the same as the scenario prior to the start of the implementation of the
project activity.

By replacing the electricity generated from fossil fuel-fired power plants dominated China
Southern Power Grid and the flare of unused landfill gas, the proposed project activity will
achieve considerable greenhouse gas (GHG) emission reductions by reducing CO
2
and CH
4
emissions.

The proposed project consists of LFG recovery and utilization system, including LFG
collection, pre-treatment, electricity generation, flaring, monitoring and data recording.

Gas collection system
The proposed project will apply modern LFG collection system which will consist of newly
installed branch pipes, head pipes, and extraction wells for effective collection of the LFG.
The expected LFG capture efficiency is in the range of 40%~50% (40% when the landfill is
still accepting waste and 50% when the landfill is covered)
3
.

Gas pre-treatment system
Prior to flaring or combustion in generators, captured LFG must be pre-treated to remove its
impurities and moisture. For the LFG to the generator, the pretreatment includes primary filter,
blower and secondary filter. The primary filter can remove both the solid impurities and water
from LFG, and the particle size after treated by primary filter is less than 50m. The LFG
after treated by the secondary filter can meet the requirement of generators and the particle
size in it is less than 5m. For the LFG to the flare, it will go through a primary filter with
blower before it goes into the flare.

Electricity generation system
The proposed project will install 3 generators with capacities of 1,063kW each, which amount
to a total installed capacity of 3.189MW. The selected generators are GE Jenbacher gas
engines. The main technical specifications of the generators are provided in the following
table:

Table A-1, generator specifications
4

Parameter Unit Data
Model - JGS320 GS-L.L
Quantity set 3
Rated power kW 1,063
Rated voltage kV 0.4
Rated air input Nm
3
/h 605
Lifetime Hour 120,000
5

3
Source: Page 22, FSR.
4
Source: generator purchase contract
5
According to the statement from power generator manufacture, the equipment lifetime is 60,000
hours based on standard maintenance schedule. According to the manufacturers maintenance manual,

CDM Executive Board
page 7

Load Factor % 77
6

Generator efficiency % 97.2

Furthermore, a 10kV substation will be constructed on the project site, connecting the
proposed project to Songbei substation via a 10kV line, and then the power produced by the
proposed project can be transmitted to the Guangdong Power Grid, which is an integral part
of the China Southern Power Grid.

The proposed project will use GE Jenbacher gas engines coming from the Europe, thus it
involves international technology transfer to the host party.

Flaring system
An enclosed LFG flaring system is directly connected to the LFG collection system. It is used
to combust the surplus collected LFG. The flaring system consists of tower and flare
equipment. The main specifications of the flare are as follows:

Table A-2, flare specifications
7

Parameter Unit Data
Flow rate Nm
3
/hr 300-3000
Combustion temperature 600-1200
Burn rate >99%

A.4.4. Estimated amount of emission reductions over the chosen crediting
period:
>>
A crediting period of 7 years (01/04/2011- 31/03/2018, renewable twice) is selected for the
project activity. An estimation of expected emission reductions over the crediting period is
provided in the table below.

the operational hours can be repeated with the overhaul after the 60,000 hours. Hence, the lifetime of
the generator is 120,000 hours.
6
Source: page 24, FSR. According to the FSR, the annual total power generation is 21,526MWh for 3
generators (3.189MW), 14,351MWh for 2 generators (2.126MW) and 7,175MWh for 1 generator
(1.063MW). The full load operational hour is 6750 hours. Hence, the plant load factor is 77%
(6750/8760=77%). Considering that the capacity of internal loads are about 450kW (page 44, FSR), it
is estimated that auxiliary consumption and transmission loss will account for 10% of the total power
generation. Hence, the net electricity supplied to the grid by the project is 19,373MWh, 12,915MWh
and 6,458MWh respectively. As the sums of the internal loads (450kW) are more than 10% of the
installed capacity (3.189MW), the 10% auxiliary consumption is conservative.
7
Source: flare purchase contract

CDM Executive Board
page 8

A.4.5. Public funding of the project activity:
>>
There is no public funding for this project.

8
According to FSR, methane generation from the landfill in each year is different, thus the emission
reduction is different in each year. Considering the start date of crediting period is 01/04/2011, so
separate calculations of emission reduction were applied for the first and last year of the crediting
period.
Years
Annual estimation of emission reductions
in tonnes of CO
2
e
8

01/04/2011- 31/12/2011 147,382
01/01/2012-31/12/2012 211,316
01/01/2013-31/12/2013 279,416
01/01/2014-31/12/2014 225,134
01/01/2015-31/12/2015 186,640
01/01/2016-31/12/2016 158,869
01/01/2017-31/12/2017 138,416
01/01/2018-31/3/2018 30,746
Total estimated
reductions (tonnes of
CO
2
e)
1,377,923
Total number of the first crediting years 7
Annual average over the crediting period
of estimated reductions (tonnes of CO
2
e)
196,846

CDM Executive Board
page 9

SECTION B. Application of a baseline and monitoring methodology

B.1. Title and reference of the approved baseline and monitoring methodology
applied to the project activity:
>>
The approved methodology applied in the proposed project activity is ACM0001 (Version 11,
EB47) Consolidated baseline and monitoring methodology for landfill gas project
activities. For more information regarding the methodology please refer to
http://cdm.unfccc.int/methodologies/PAmethodologies/approved.html

The methodology also refers to the latest version of the following tools:
Tool for the demonstration and assessment of additionality (Version 05.2, EB39)
Tool to determine methane emissions avoided from disposal of waste at a solid waste disposal
site (Version 05, EB55)
Tool to determine project emissions from flaring gases containing methane (Version 01, EB28)
Tool to calculate the emission factor for an electricity system (Version 02, EB50)
Tool to calculate project or leakage CO
2
emission from fossil fuel combustion (Version 02,
EB41)
Combined tool to identify the baseline scenario and demonstrate additionality (Version 02.2,
EB28)
Tool to calculate baseline, project and/or leakage emissions from electricity consumption
(Version 01, EB39)

B.2. Justification of the choice of the methodology and why it is applicable to the
project activity:
>>
The approved consolidated methodology: ACM0001 (Version 11) is applicable to landfill gas
capture project activities, where the baseline scenario is the partial or total atmospheric release
of the gas and the project activities include situations such as:
(a) The captured gas is flared; and/or
(b) The captured gas is used to produce energy (e.g. electricity/thermal energy).
(c) The captured gas is used to supply consumers through natural gas distribution
network. If emissions reductions are claimed for displacing natural gas, project
activities may use approved methodology AM0053.

The baseline scenario of the proposed project is the atmospheric release of LFG and the
electricity supply of equal amount as the proposed project from the China Southern Power
Grid. The baseline scenario of the proposed project is the same as the scenario prior to the
start of the implementation of the project activity.

As previously described, the proposed project is to collect LFG and utilize partial LFG for
power generation. The excessive LFG will be flared. The proposed project meets situation (a)
and (b) above and since the project does not involve natural gas it is not related to c) neither.
Therefore, ACM0001 is applicable.

B.3. Description of the sources and gases included in the project boundary:
>>
According to the methodology ACM0001, the project boundary is the site of the project
activity where the gas is captured and destroyed/used.


CDM Executive Board
page 10

If the electricity for project activity is sourced from grid or electricity generated by the LFG
captured would have been generated by power generation sources connected to the grid, the
project boundary shall include all the power generation sources connected to the grid to which
the project activity is connected.

In this case, the electricity for the proposed project is sourced from China Southern Power
Grid and electricity generated by the LFG captured would have been generated by power
generation sources connected to China Southern Power Grid. So the project boundary
includes the whole LFG related system (e.g. LFG collection, LFG flaring, LFG power
generation system, auxiliary equipment, etc.) and all grid-connected power plants connected
to China Southern Power Grid.

According to the Tool to calculate the emission factor for an electricity system (version 02),
the delineation of grid boundaries as provided by the DNA of China
9
is used. China Southern
Power Grid is the project electricity system. The transmission among China Southern Power
Grid and other grids (Central China Power Grid) is taken into account.

Source Gas Included? Justification / Explanation
CH
4
Yes The major source of emissions in the
baseline.
N
2
O No N
2
O emissions are small compared to
CH
4
emissions from landfills. Exclusion
of this gas is conservative.
Emissions
from
decomposition
of waste at the
landfill site
CO
2
No CO
2
emissions from the decomposition
of organic waste are not accounted
CO
2
Yes Electricity may be consumed from the
grid or generated onsite/offsite in the
baseline scenario
CH
4
No Excluded for simplification. This is
conservative.
Emissions
from
electricity
consumption
N
2
O No Excluded for simplification. This is
conservative.
CO
2
No The thermal energy generation is not
included in the project activity.
CH
4
No The thermal energy generation is not
B
a
s
e
l
i
n
e

Emissions
from thermal
energy
generation
N
2
O No The thermal energy generation is not
CO
2
No The fossil fuel consumption is not
included in the project activity. But it
will be monitored if any.
CH
4
No Excluded for simplification. This
emission source is assumed to be very
small.
On-site fossil
fuel
combustion
due to the
project
activity other
than for
electricity
generation
N
2
O No Excluded for simplification. This
small.
P
r
o
j
e
c
t

A
c
t
i
v
i
t
y

Emissions CO
2
Yes May be an important emission source.

9
http://qhs.ndrc.gov.cn/qjfzjz/t20090703_289357.htm

CDM Executive Board
page 11

CH
4
No Excluded for simplification. This
small.
from on-site
electricity use
N
2
O No Excluded for simplification. This
small.

The following figure shows the boundary of the baseline scenario and project activity.

B.4. Description of how the baseline scenario is identified and description of the
identified baseline scenario:
>>
According to ACM0001, the procedures for the selection of the most plausible baseline
scenario are analyzed as follows:

Step 1: Identification of alternative scenarios

Alternatives for the disposal/treatment of the waste in the absence of the project activity, i.e.
the scenario relevant for estimating baseline methane emissions, to be analysed should include,
inter alia:

LFG1: The project activity (i.e. capture of landfill gas and its flaring and/or its use)
undertaken without being registered as a CDM project activity;
LFG2: Atmospheric release of the landfill gas or partial capture of landfill gas and destruction
to comply with regulations or contractual requirements, or to address safety and odour
concerns.

If LFG is used for generation of electric or heat energy for export to a grid and/or to a nearby
industry or used on-site, realistic and credible alternatives should also be separately
determined for:

Power generation in the absence of the project activity
Heat generation in the absence of the project activity.


CDM Executive Board
page 12

For power generation, the realistic and credible alternative(s) may include, inter alia:

P1: Power generated from landfill gas undertaken without being registered as CDM
project activity;
P2: Existing or construction of a new on-site or off-site fossil fuel fired cogeneration
plant;
P3: Existing or construction of a new on-site or off-site renewable based cogeneration
plant;
P4: Existing or construction of a new on-site or off-site fossil fuel fired captive power
plant;
P5: Existing or construction of a new on-site or off-site renewable based captive power
plant;
P6: Existing and/or new grid-connected power plants.

For heat generation,
The proposed project doesnt involve thermal energy generation component. Therefore, all
the alternatives of heat generation are not considered.

Step 2: Identify the fuel for the baseline choice of energy source taking into account the
national and/or sectoral policies as applicable.

There is no existing fossil fuel power plant or plan to construct a new on-site or off-site fossil
fuel fired cogeneration plant or captive power plant. The comparable installed capacity of the
fossil fuel-fired plants with equivalent annual power supply as the project will be lower than
3.189 MW, while coal-fired plants with a capacity of 135 MW or less are prohibited from
development in large grid such as provincial girds
10
according to current regulations in China.
So, alternative P2 and P4 are excluded.

There is no existing renewable based power plant or plan to construct a new on-site or off-site
renewable based cogeneration plant or captive power plant. Construction a new on-site or off-
site renewable based cogeneration plant or captive power plant needs additional investment
and technical efforts. Furthermore there is no hydro, wind
11
or other renewable resource
available in the location of the proposed project for power generation. So, alternative P3 and
P5 are excluded too.

P3 and P5 are in compliance with all applicable legal and regulatory requirements in China.

As described above, plausible alternative scenarios for the proposed project are LFG1, LFG2
for LFG utilization and P1, P6 for power generation.

For LFG1, it is in compliance with all mandatory applicable legal and regulatory requirements
in China.

10
Notice on Strictly Prohibiting the Installation of Fuel-fired Generation with the Capacity of 135MW
or below issued by the General Office of the State Council, decree no. 2002-6
11
According to page 6 and 7, the FSR of the proposed project, there is no river at the project site, the
annual average wind speed is 2.6m/s, its not likely to develop hydro power or wind power project at
the project site.

CDM Executive Board
page 13

For LFG2, Laohukeng landfill was built in 2002, when Technical code for municipal solid
waste sanitary landfill (CJJ17-1988, issued on 23 Dec 1998) and Standard for pollution
control on the landfill site for domestic waste (GB16889-1997, issued on 2 Jul 1997) were
available.

Both regulations specify safety limits for methane concentration in the air and buildings
around landfill sites and document the procedures of venting LFG to remove the gas from the
site and disperse it safely into the atmosphere. They also suggest that LFG should be flared or
where possibly utilized.

However, due to the significant financial and technical difficulties widely recognized in the
sector, the activities of methane recovery and flaring/utilization have not been widely
practiced in China. Although Chinese government encouraged the collection of LFG from
waste dumps in the past few years, but the fact was still that most of the landfills just vent the
gas to atmosphere without any exhaust and flaring system, even more than 90% of thousand
landfills in China just simply dump the waste without sanitation filling
12
. It is still a blank
paper for landfill management to establish landfill gas recovery and utilization systems, as
quoted from China National Action Plan for Recovery and Utilization of landfill Gas which
is sponsored by China State Environment Protection Administration (SEPA), together with
UNDP and GEF.

Most recently, in Feb 2007, the Ministry of Construction issued a circular on the outcome of
nationwide inspection on hazard-free treatment of domestic waste landfill sites, concluding
that the inspection of 372 landfill sites located across 31 provinces, autonomous regions and
municipalities in China revealed that 92.76% of the landfills have no landfill gas recovery and
utilization facilities. Among the 372 landfill sites, a total of 237 were constructed after year
2000
13
. Other landfills, which installed LFG recovery system, were supported by CDM or
other international supporting scheme.

On the basis of above evidence, it is justifiable to conclude that atmospheric release of the
landfill gas is still widespread in China.

Therefore, LFG2 is a plausible alternative and could be considered as a baseline scenario.

For P1, it is in compliance with all applicable legal and regulatory requirements in China.

For P6, it is in compliance with all applicable legal and regulatory requirements in China.

Outcome of step 2:
According to the analysis above, the possible combinations of baseline are as follows:

Table B-2: analysis of the possible baseline options and scenarios combinations
Power generation

P1: Power generated from
landfill gas undertaken
without being registered as
P6: Electricity provided by
China Southern Power Grid

12

http://www.gzuda.gov.cn/news/view.asp?id=XW200302111552083224&fdID=CL2003021115192455
50&tbCo
13
http://www.huanke.com.cn/08/article.asp?articleid=416

CDM Executive Board
page 14

LFG utilization CDM project activity
LFG1: The project activity
undertaken without being
registered as a CDM project
activity
Combination Option 1:
The proposed project
undertaken without being
registered as a CDM project
activity
Not applicable.
If the LFG is utilized to
generate electricity and
replace the electricity from
the power grid, then this part
of electricity generation in
the grid is not necessary
LFG2: Atmospheric release
of the landfill gas
Not applicable.
If the LFG is directly
released to atmosphere, then
no electricity could be
generated.
Atmospheric release of LFG
and use the electricity from
grid

According to the analysis in the table above, the realistic and credible combination baseline
options can be combination Option 1 and 2:

The proposed project is undertaken without being registered as a CDM project activity (LFG1
+ P1).

To release LFG from landfill to atmospheric and use the electricity from grid, which is
business as usual (LFG2 + P6).

Step 3: Step 2 of the latest approved version of Tool for demonstration and assessment of
Additionality shall be used to assess which of these alternatives should be excluded from
further consideration

Based on the financial analysis illustrated in the following Section B.5., without CER revenue
taken into account, the after-tax IRR of total investment of the proposed project is lower than
the benchmark IRR 8%, please see step 2 in B.5. for detailed information. Therefore, if not
undertaken as a CDM project, the proposed project is not financially attractive. Hence,
Combination Option 1 is excluded from further consideration.

Outcome of Step 3:
Only Combination Option 2 is remained as alternative.

Step 4: Where more than one credible and plausible alternative remains, project
participants shall, as a conservative assumption, use the alternative baseline scenario that
results in the lowest baseline emissions as the most likely baseline scenario.

This step is not selected due to Combination Option 2 is the only alternative left.

It can be concluded that the baseline scenario of the project activity is Combination Option 2
consisting of LFG2 and P6.

Baseline Scenario
Landfill gas Electricity Heat
Description of situation
1 LFG2 P6 N/A The atmospheric release of
landfill gas or landfill gas

CDM Executive Board
page 15

is partially captured and
subsequently flared. The
electricity is obtained from
existing and/or new grid-
connected power plants.

Hence, Combination Option 2 (LFG2 + P6), which is the same as the scenario 1 in the
methodology ACM0001 is considered as the baseline scenario of the proposed project.

B.5. Description of how the anthropogenic emissions of GHG by sources are reduced
below those that would have occurred in the absence of the registered CDM project
activity (assessment and demonstration of additionality):
>>
The additionality of the proposed project is demonstrated and assessed by the approved Tool
for the Demonstration and Assessment of Additionality (Version 05.2). Following steps
include:

The following table is the timeline of the proposed project showing that the benefits of CDM
had been taken into account when making the decision to implement the proposed project.

Table B-6 Timeline of the proposed project
Date Key Events Comment
02/2008 Feasibility Study Report (FSR) developed In the FSR, the
implementation of CDM
and CDM revenue had
been taken into
consideration to overcome
the finance
unattractiveness of the
project.
08/10/2008 CDM consultancy contract signed
05/12/2008 The prior consideration of CDM was
submitted to NDRC

08/12/2008
14
The notification of prior consideration of
CDM was approved by NDRC

17/08/2009 EIA was approved by Shenzhen
Environment Protection Bureau

23/09/2009 The project was approved by Shenzhen
Development and Reform Commission

08/03/2010 Emission Reduction Purchase Agreement
signed

10/03/2010 Pre-treatment and flare system contract
signed
Project starting date
18/03/2010 Power generator purchase contract signed
22/03/2010 Construction contract signed
24/03/2010 Loan contract signed
21/05/2010 Chinese LoA obtained

14
The date is quoted from project participant, although it is not indicated in the NDRC's approval
document.

CDM Executive Board
page 16

06/05/2010 Construction started
03/06/2010 Contract on validation signed
08/07/2010 The prior consideration of CDM form was
sent to UNFCCC secretariat

03/08/2010 Dutch LoA obtained

Step 1. Identification of alternatives to the project activity consistent with current laws and
regulations

Sub-step 1a. Define alternatives to the project activities:
Alternatives for the disposal/treatment of the waste in the absence of the project activity,
i.e. the scenario relevant for estimating baseline methane emissions, to be analysed should
include, inter alia:

LFG1: The project activity (i.e. capture of landfill gas and its flaring and/or its use)
undertaken without being registered as a CDM project activity;
LFG2: Atmospheric release of the landfill gas or partial capture of landfill gas and
destruction to comply with regulations or contractual requirements, or to address safety
and odour concerns.

If LFG is used for generation of electric or heat energy for export to a grid and/or to a
nearby industry or used on-site, realistic and credible alternatives should also be separately
determined for:

Power generation in the absence of the project activity
Heat generation in the absence of the project activity.

For power generation, the realistic and credible alternative(s) may include, inter alia:

P1: Power generated from landfill gas undertaken without being registered as CDM
project activity;
P2: Existing or construction of a new on-site or off-site fossil fuel fired cogeneration
plant;
P3: Existing or construction of a new on-site or off-site renewable based cogeneration
plant;
P4: Existing or construction of a new on-site or off-site fossil fuel fired captive power
plant;
P5: Existing or construction of a new on-site or off-site renewable based captive power
plant;
P6: Existing and/or new grid-connected power plants.

For heat generation,
The proposed project doesnt involve thermal energy generation component. Therefore, all
the alternatives of heat generation are not considered.

Sub-step 1b. Enforcement of applicable laws and regulations:
As analyzed in Section B.4. Sub-step 2, the realistic and credible options can be alternative
Combination Option 1 and 2:

The proposed project undertaken without being registered as a CDM project activity.

CDM Executive Board
page 17

To release LFG from landfill to atmosphere, and use the electricity from grid, which is
business as usual.

Step 2. Investment analysis
The purpose of this step is to determine whether the proposed project activity is economically
or financially less attractive than other alternatives without an additional funding that may be
derived from the CDM project activities. The investment analysis was conducted in the
following steps:

Sub-step 2a. Determine appropriate analysis method
The three analysis methods suggested by Tools for the demonstration and assessment of
additionality are simple cost analysis (option I), investment comparison analysis (option II)
and benchmark analysis (option III). Since the proposed project will earn revenues from
not only the CDM but also the electricity output the simple cost analysis method is not
applicable. Investment comparative analysis method is only applicable to the case that
alternative baseline scenario is similar to the proposed project, so that comparative
analysis can be conducted. The alternative baseline scenario of the proposed project is the
China Southern Power Grid rather than a new investment project. Therefore option II is
not an applicable method either. The proposed project will use benchmark analysis method
based on Project IRR.

Sub-step 2b. Apply benchmark analysis (Option III)
According to Clause 1.11, page 2 of the Interim Rules on Economic Assessment of Electric
Engineering Retrofit Projects, the financial benchmark IRR of Chinese power industries,
including waste-to-energy project is 8% of the total investment, which has been used
widely for Feasibility Studies of the power project investments.

Sub-step 2c. Calculation and comparison of financial indicators
Based on the above-mentioned benchmark, the calculation and comparative analysis of
financial indicators for the proposed project are carried out in sub-step 2c.

(1) Basic parameters for calculation of financial indicators
Based on the Feasibility Study Report of the proposed project, basic parameters for
calculation of financial indicators are as follows:

Key parameters for the calculation of financial indicators
Basic parameters Value Data source
Installed capacity (MW) 3.189
15
FSR
Net power supply (MWh) 19,373
16
FSR

15
The installed capacity is 3.189 MW (3*1063kW) at beginning. It will be reduced to 2.126 MW
(2*1063kW) in the 11
th
operational year and to 1.063 MW (1*1063kW) in the 17
th
operational year
due to the decrease of LFG generation.
16
According to the page 24 FSR, the annual total power generation is 21,526MWh for 3 generators
(3.189MW), 14,351MWh for 2 generators (2.126MW) and 7,175MWh for 1 generator (1.063MW).
Considering that the capacity of internal loads are about 450kW (page 44, FSR), it is estimated that
auxiliary consumption and transmission loss will account for 10% of the total power generation. The
net electricity generation is 19,373 MWh at beginning. It will reduce to 12,915 MWh in the 11
th


CDM Executive Board
page 18

Tariff(Yuan/kWh) 0.689 (incl. VAT) in
the initial 15 years;
0.439 (incl. VAT)
after the initial 15
years.
FSR
17

Total static investment
(million Yuan)
54.4852
FSR
Loan ratio 70% FSR
Loan interest rate 5.94%
Government
document
18

Depreciation year 13 FSR
Depreciation rate 7.31%
19
FSR
Residual value rate 5%
20
FSR
Project lifetime(year)
21 (1 year for
construction and 20
years for operation)
FSR
Average annual O&M
(million Yuan)
21

6.02
FSR
Tax FSR
VAT (%) 17% FSR
22

City tax 7% FSR
23

Education tax 3% FSR
24

Income tax (%) 25% FSR
25

operational year and reduce to 6,458 MWh in the 17
th
operational year due to the decrease of power
generator units. As the sums of the internal loads (450kW) are more than 10% of the installed capacity
(3.189MW), the 10% auxiliary consumption is conservative.
17
Based on Tentative Management Measures for Price and Sharing of Expense for Electricity
Generation from Renewable Energy. The nearby projects include (1) Shenzhen Xiaping Landfill Gas
Collection and Utilization Project (Ref. 0887), the tariff of which is 0.63Yuan/kWh; (2) Meizhou
Landfill Gas Recovery and Utilization as Energy (Ref. 0176), the tariff of which is 0.55Yuan/kWh.
18
http://www.pbc.gov.cn/publish/zhengcehuobisi/631/1269/12693/12693_.html, the interest rate
changed from 7.83% (FSR) to 5.94% when the project started.
19
http://www.chinatax.gov.cn/n8136506/n8136593/n8137537/n8138532/8233864.html, which says
the depreciation year for equipments is no less than 10 years. Industrial enterprises have the right to set
a number in this range.
20
Industrial Enterprise Financial Regulation issued by Ministry of Finance, in which the residual rate is
between 3%-5% (Page 5). Industrial enterprises have the right to set a number in this range.
21
Annual O&M includes Water fee, maintenance, salary and welfare, landfill gas utilization fee, repair
fee and miscellaneous cost.
22
The data is from FSR, which is the same as the value in the active regulation - Provisional
Regulations on Value Added Tax (Ref. State Council Order 538)
23
http://www.gov.cn/banshi/2005-08/19/content_24817.htm
24
http://www.gov.cn/jrzg/2005-09/24/content_69824.htm
25
The data is from FSR, which is the same as the value in the active regulation - Income Tax Law (Ref.
President of P.R China Order [2007] No. 63)

CDM Executive Board
page 19

CER
Expected CERs Price
(Euro/tCO
2
e)
8.7 Estimated
Exchange Rate (Yuan/Euro) 9.32 Estimated

(2) Comparison of IRR for the proposed project and the financial benchmark
In accordance with the benchmark analysis (Option III), the proposed project will not be
considered as financially attractive if its financial indicators (such as IRR) are lower than
the benchmark rate.

As shown in Table 1, without the CDM revenue, the IRR of total investment is lower than
the benchmark rate 8%. Thus the proposed project does not look financially attractive to
the investors. However, with the CDM revenue, IRR of the Project is significantly
improved and exceeds the benchmark rate. Therefore, the proposed project with the CDM
revenue can be considered as financially viable to the investors.

Table 1 Financial indicators of the Shenzhen Laohukeng Landfill Gas project
Project IRR (benchmark = 8%)
Without CDM revenue -4.14%
With CDM revenue 27.98%

Sub-step 2d. Sensitivity analysis (only applicable to options II and III):

In accordance with the Tool for demonstration and assessment of additionality (Version
05.2), the objective of sensitivity analysis is to examine whether the conclusion regarding the
financial attractiveness is robust to reasonable variations in the critical assumption. The
investment analysis provides a valid argument in favor of additionality only if consistently
supports (for a realistic range of assumptions) the conclusion that the project activity is
unlikely to be the most financially attractive or is unlikely to be least financially attractive.

According to Guidance on the Assessment of Investment Analysis (Version 03.1), only
variables, including the initial investment cost, that constitute more than 20% of either total
project costs or total project revenues should be subjected to reasonable variation. Therefore,
four parameters of the total static investment, annual O&M cost, net power supply and
tariff were identified as the main variable factors for the proposed project.

The critical factors that influence the Project IRR are mainly as follows:

1) Total static investment;
2) Annual O&M cost;
3) Net power supply;
4) Tariff

Table 2 Fluctuation rates of parameters when the project IRR reaches to 8%

Total static investment O&M cost Tariff Net power supply
-43.1% -38.3% 34.8% 34.8%


CDM Executive Board
page 20

For all four parameters, it is unlikely to increase or decrease to the point the project IRR reach
the benchmark. The detail analysis is as follows:

Total static investment

The total static investment needs to decrease by 43.1% when the project IRR meets the
benchmark of 8%. However, the contracted investment by July 2010 has summed up to
70.60%
26
of total static investment. Therefore, the total static investment is not likely to
decrease by 43.1% to exceed benchmark.

O&M cost

The O&M cost needs to decrease by 38.3% when the project IRR meets the benchmark of 8%.
According to the FSR of the proposed project, the O&M cost is the sum of the repair cost,
maintenance cost, material charge, salary and welfare, LFG utilization fee and miscellaneous
cost, each of the above cost is calculated by some fixed parameters such as the installed
capacity, the normal standard for utilization of equipments etc. Furthermore, according to the
China Statistic Yearbook 2009 (http://www.stats.gov.cn/tjsj/ndsj/2009/indexch.htm), the
Producer Price Index for Manufactured Goods from the year 2004 to 2008 was 106.1, 104.9,
103.0, 103.1 and 106.9 respectively, which indicated that the operation and maintenance cost
is always increasing. So annual O&M cost is unlikely to decrease by more than 38.3%.

Tariff

The tariff needs to increase by 34.8% when the project IRR meets the benchmark of 8%.
According to the Tentative Management Measures for Price and Sharing of Expense for
Electricity Generation from Renewable Energy issued by the NDRC on 05/01/2006, the
electricity tariff for landfill gas utilization power plant is fixed to be the provincial
desulphurization coal-fired power plant benchmark tariff in 2005 plus the subsidy tariff,
which is 0.25RMB/kWh during the initial 15 years. And the subsidy tariff will be cancelled
after 15 years.

The desulphurization coal-fired power plant benchmark tariff in Guangdong province in 2005
was 0.439RMB/kWh (source: http://china.em51.com/news/shownews.asp?id=1848). So, the
tariff of the proposed project is 0.689 RMB/kWh (0.439+0.25=0.689) during the initial 15
years and 0.439RMB/kWh after the initial 15 years. In addition, the tariff of similar LFG
projects shown in Table 3 ranges in 0.42-0.63 RMB/kWh
27
. Therefore, the tariff of the
proposed project is unlikely to reach that high level.

Net power supply

26
The contracted investment has summed up to be 38.47 million RMB by the day of onsite interview,
July 19, 2010. The contracts have been provided to DOE for validation.
27
http://cdm.unfccc.int/Projects/DB/DNV-CUK1135170125.82/view(Ref. 0176);
http://cdm.unfccc.int/Projects/DB/SGS-UKL1169636952.02/view(Ref. 0887);
http://cdm.unfccc.int/Projects/DB/JCI1175576815.21/view(Ref.1075);
http://www.netinform.net/KE/files/pdf/Huizhou_Landfill_Gas_CDM_PDD_ACM0001.pdf

CDM Executive Board
page 21

The net power supply needs to increase by 34.8% when the project IRR meets the benchmark
of 8%, which puts the annual operating hour as high as 9099 hours. Considering that there are
totally 8760 hours in one year, this increase is impossible to happen. Hence, the net power
supply is impossible to increase by 34.8% to make the project IRR reach the 8% benchmark.

The auxiliary consumption and power loss was estimated to be 10% of the total power
generation. As the sums of the internal loads (450kW)
28
were more than 10% of the installed
capacity (3.189MW), the 10% auxiliary consumption is conservative. Moreover, even
assuming that the auxiliary consumption and power loss was 0, the project IRR is 1.59%, still
much lower than the 8% benchmark.

In conclusion of the sensitive analysis, as the financial indicators vary within reasonable range,
the proposed project remains financially unattractive without CDM support and the proposed
project is additional. Hence, the Scenario 1) is not a realistic alternative.

Step 3: Barrier analysis
Not applicable (Only Step 2 is selected).

Step 4. Common practice analysis

Sub-step 4a. Analyze other activities similar to the proposed project activity:

In China, the investment climate (e.g. with regards to taxes, loan policy and electricity tariffs)
is only similar and comparable in the same province. Therefore, the common practice region
and comparable framework is provincial and the proposed project is compared to other
projects in Guangdong Province.

In April 2002, China implemented the policy "Separate power plants from network and
compete in price to enter network
29
The objective of this power sector reform is to establish a
more commercialized power market in China. Power project investment has to be under a
more commercialized condition and considers project investment return more seriously. Since
market condition for power generation project development changes much since April 2002,
this common practice analysis starts from April 2002.

For the proposed project, LFG is collected and used to produce electricity energy, the similar
activities including those LFG collection and destruction (for power generation, thermal
energy production or simply flared) projects.

According to Summary of Urban Garbage Disposal Industry Development in 2007, Tentative
Study on Future Market of Power Generation by Landfill Gas (LFG)
30
and other related
sources, the similar projects are list in the following table:

Table 3 similar LFG utilization projects in Guangdong province
No. Project title Remark
1 Guangzhou Datianshan Landfill Gas Utilization Project
31
Sino-foreign

28
Source: page 44, FSR of the proposed project.
29
China implemented the policy "Separate power plants from network and compete in price to enter
network"
30
Huang Xi, Nonferrous Metals Engineering & Research, 2009 (12): 80-83

CDM Executive Board
page 22

cooperative project &
Built and operated in
1999.
2 Meizhou Landfill Gas Recovery and Utilization as Energy CDM
(Ref. 0176)
3 Shenzhen Xiaping Landfill Gas Collection and Utilization
Project
CDM
(Ref. 0887)
4 Guangzhou Xingfeng Landfill Gas Recovery and Electricity
Generation CDM Project
CDM
(Ref. 1075)
5 Huizhou Landfill Gas Recovery and Utilization Project
32
CDM
(Under validation)

Sub-step 4b. Discuss any similar options that are occurring:

Based on the table above, there are totally five similar projects, four of which are CDM
project activities with 3 registered (No. 2 - 4) and one under validation (No. 5). These projects
are not to be included in this analysis.

The Guangzhou Datianshan Landfill Gas Utilization Project (No. 1) was the first LFG
utilization project in China and was a sino-foreign cooperative project operated by foreign
company in 1999
33
. It was a public funding assistance project and project built and operated
before April 2002, enjoying advantage in access to financing and faced different investment
climate.

In a word, landfill gas utilization project is not common practise in Guangdong province.

In conclusion, the proposed project is additional and the project owner considered applying
for CDM project to overcome the difficulties before the construction of the proposed project.

B.6. Emission reductions:

B.6.1. Explanation of methodological choices:
>>
According to ACM0001, the emission reduction of the proposed project is calculated as
follows:

Baseline emissions

( )
y BL ther y LFG y BL elec y LFG CH y BL y project y
CEF ET CEF EL GWP MD MD BE
, , , , , , 4 , ,
* * + + = (1)
Where:
BE
y
= Baseline emissions in year y (tCO
2
e)
MD
project,y
= The amount of methane that would have been destroyed/combusted
during the year, in tonnes of methane (tCH
4
) in project scenario

31
http://solidwaste.chinaep-tech.com/landfill-gas-power/33196.htm
32

http://cdm.unfccc.int/Projects/Validation/DB/FPXFSQIQTJDSN5X0QLJX13RZ55K8RW/view.html
33
Reference: Comprehensive Utilization of Landfill Gas by Huang Xiaowen and Wu Sanda,
Environmental Sanitation Engineering, 2006 (8):9 - 11

CDM Executive Board
page 23

MD
BL,y
= The amount of methane that would have been destroyed/combusted
during the year in the absence of the project due to regulatory
and/or contractual requirement, in tonnes of methane (tCH
4
)
GWP
CH4
= Global Warming Potential value for methane for the first
commitment period is 21 tCO
2
e/tCH
4

EL
LFG,y
= Net quantity of electricity produced using LFG, which in the
absence of the project activity would have been produced by power
plants connected to the grid or by an on-site/off-site fossil fuel
based captive power generation, during year y, in megawatt hours
(MWh)
CEF
elec,BL,y
= CO
2
emissions intensity of the baseline source of electricity
displaced, in tCO
2
e/MWh. This is estimated as per equation (9)
below
ET
LFG,y
= The quantity of thermal energy produced utilizing the landfill gas,
which in the absence of the project activity would have been
produced from onsite/offsite fossil fuel fired boiler, during the year
y in TJ
CEF
ther,BL,y
= CO
2
emissions intensity of the fuel used by boiler to generate
thermal energy which is displaced by LFG based thermal energy
generation, in tCO
2
e/TJ. This is estimated as per equation (10)
below

Step 1: Calculation of MD
BL,y

In cases where regulatory or contractual requirements do not specify MD
BL,y
or no historic
data exists for LFG captured and destroyed an Adjustment Factor (AF) shall be used and
justified, taking into account the project context:

AF MD MD
y project y BL
*
, ,
= (2)

LFG utilization to energy is not common practice in South China until very recently.
According to ERMs survey, currently less than 5% landfill sites in China have LFG
collection and flaring schemes and even less have gas utilization facilities
34
.

Based on the description above, the LFG recovery and utilization is not common in South
China. They are mainly released to atmosphere without any treatment.

Hence, the value of AF is set as 0% according to ACM0001 that no quantity of methane
would be destroyed without the project activity and will be monitored during the whole
crediting period. Consequently, MD
BL,y
is zero according to equation (2).

Step 2: Calculation of MD
project,y

The methane destroyed by the project activity (MD
project,y
) during a year is determined by
monitoring the quantity of methane actually flared and gas used to generate electricity and/or
produce thermal energy and/or supply to end users via natural gas distribution pipeline, if
applicable, and the total quantity of methane captured.

34
Reference: CDM Umbrella Guidelines for MSW in China
(http://www.frankhaugwitz.info/doks/cdm/2004_05_19_China_CDM_MSW_Guidelines_Final_Draft_
WB.pdf ).

CDM Executive Board
page 24

The sum of the quantities fed to the flare(s), to the power plants(s), to the boiler(s) and to the
natural gas distribution network (estimated using equation (3)) must be compared annually
with the total quantity of methane generated. The lowest value of the two must be adopted as
MD
project,y
.

The following procedure applies when the total quantity of methane generated is the highest.
The working hours of the energy plants(s) and the boiler(s) should be monitored and no
emission reduction could be claimed for methane destruction in the energy plant or the boiler
during non-operational hours.

y PL y thermal y y electricit y flared y project
MD MD MD MD MD
, , , , ,
+ + + = (3)
Where:
MD
flared,y
= Quantity of methane destroyed by flaring (tCH
4
)
MD
electricity,y
= Quantity of methane destroyed by generation of electricity (tCH
4
)
MD
thermal,y
= Quantity of methane destroyed for the generation of thermal energy
(tCH
4
)
MD
PL,y
= Quantity of methane sent to the pipeline for feeding to the natural gas
distribution network (tCH
4
)

According to the proposed project activity, in the case that the power generation units are
under maintenance and/or landfill gas captured exceed the demand for power generation, the
remaining part of the landfill gas will be fed into a flare to be destructed. Therefore, the
annual amount of methane destruction by flaring can be estimated by the following formula:

( ) ( )
4 , 4 , 4 , ,
/ * *
CH y flare CH y CH y flare y flared
GWP PE D w LFG MD = (4)
Where:
LFG
flare,y
= Quantity of landfill gas fed to the flare(s) during the year measured in
cubic meters (m
3
)
w
CH4,y
= Average methane fraction of the landfill gas as measured during the year
and expressed as a fraction (in m
3
CH
4
/m
3
LFG)
D
CH4
= Methane density expressed in tonnes of methane per cubic meter of
methane (tCH
4
/m
3
CH
4
)
PE
flare,y
= Project emissions from flaring of the residual gas stream in year y
(tCO
2
e) determined following the procedure described in the Tool to
determine project emissions from flaring gases containing Methane. If
methane is flared through more than one flare, the PE
flare,y
shall be
determined for the flare using the tool

According to the description in Tool to determine project emissions from flaring gases
containing Methane, the project emission from flaring gases is calculated as follows:

1000
) 1 (
4
,
,
8760
1
,
CH
h flare
h RG h
y flare
GWP
TM PE =
=
q (5)
Where:
PE
flare,y
= Project emissions from flaring of the residual gas stream in year y
(tCO
2
e)
TM
RG,h
= Mass flow rate of methane in the residual gas in the hour h (kg/h)
flare,h
= Flare efficiency in hour h

CDM Executive Board
page 25

GWP
CH4
= Global Warming Potential of methane valid for the commitment period

According to tool to determine project emissions from flaring gases containing methane, in
case of enclosed flares and use of the default value for the flare efficiency, the flare efficiency
in the hour h (qflare,h) is 90%, if the temperature in the exhaust gas of the flare (Tflare) is
above 500 for more than 40 minutes during the hour h and the manufacturers
specifications on proper operation of the flare are met continuously during the hour h.
According to the technical specifications provided by the manufacture of the flare equipment,
the combustion temperature of the flare ranges from 600 to 1200 , which is above 500
. Hence, the default value of 90% is selected. The quantity of methane flow rate in the
residual gas flowing into the flare is calculated as following:
n CH h RG CH h RG h RG
fv FV TM
, 4 , , 4 , ,
= (6)
Where:
TM
RG,h
= Mass flow rate of methane in the residual gas in the h (kg/h)
FV
RG,h
= Volumetric flow rate of the residual gas in dry basis at normal conditions in
hour h (m
3
/h)

fv
CH4,RG,h
= Volumetric fraction of methane in the residual gas on dry basis in hour h
CH4,n
= Density of methane at normal conditions (0.716 kg/m
3
)

The volumetric fraction of the methane in the residual gas is equal to the volumetric fraction
of the methane measured in gas analyzer G.

For the ex-ante estimation of proposed project, the values of FV
RG,h
and fv
CH4,RG,h
are constant
yearly ignoring the hourly change.

The annual amount methane destruction in power plant can be estimated by the following
formula:

4 , 4 , , CH y CH y y electricit y y electricit
D w LFG MD - - = (7)

Where:
MD
electricity,y
= Quantity of methane destroyed by generation of electricity
w
CH4,y
= Volumetric fraction of methane in LFG
LFG
electricity,y
= Quantity of landfill gas fed into electricity generator
D
CH4

= Density of methane at normal conditions

According to FSR, the methane fraction of the same kind of landfill gas in China ranges in
40%-60%, with mostly greater than 50%. Therefore, the w
CH4,y
of the proposed project is set
to be 50% . According to Tool to determine methane emissions avoided from disposal of
waste at a solid waste disposal site, D
CH4
is 0.0007168 tCH
4
/m
3
CH
4
at 0 and 1013 bar.

The proposed project doesnt involve heat generation component and feeding to the natural
gas distribution network component, therefore MD
thermal,y
and MD
PL,y
is set as 0.

Ex-ante estimation of the amount of methane that would have been destroyed/combusted
during the year, in tonnes of methane (MD
project,y
)
The ex-ante estimation of the amount of methane that would have been destroyed/combusted
project,y
) will be done with the latest version of the

CDM Executive Board
page 26

approved Tool to determine methane emissions avoided from disposal of waste at a solid
waste disposal site, considering the following additional equation:

4 , , 4 ,
/
CH y SWDS CH y project
GWP BE MD = (8)

Where:
BE
CH4,SWDS,y
= Methane generation from the landfill in the absence of the project
activity at year y (tCO
2
e), calculated as per the Tool to determine
methane emissions avoided from disposal of waste at a solid waste
disposal site. The tool estimates methane generation adjusted for, using
adjustment factor (f) any landfill gas in the baseline that would have been
captured and destroyed to comply with relevant regulations or
contractual requirements, or to address safety and odor concerns. As this
is already accounted for in equation 2, f in the tool shall be assigned a
value 0

Furthermore the following guidance should be taken into account:
In the tool x will refer to the year since the landfill started receiving wastes [x
runs from the first year of landfill operation (x=1) to the year for which
emissions are calculated (x=y)];
Sampling to determine the different waste types is not necessary, the waste
composition can be obtained from previous studies.

The efficiency of the degassing system which will be installed in the project activity should
be taken into account while estimating the ex-ante estimation.
The landfill gas collection system will not collect 100% of the gas from the landfill site.
According to the FSR, 40% of the landfill gas will be collected when the landfill is open and
50% when it is closed. Therefore, as a conservative measure we will use this collection
efficiency for the emission reduction estimations.

The amount of methane that would in the absence of the project activity be generated from
disposal of waste at the solid waste disposal site (BE
CH4,SWDS,y
) is calculated with a multi-phase
model. The calculation is based on a first order decay (FOD) model recommended by the
Revised 2006 IPCC Guideline for National Greenhouse Gas Inventory. The model
differentiates between the different types of waste j with respectively different decay rates k
j

and different fractions of degradable organic carbon (DOC
j
). The model calculates the
methane generation based on the actual waste streams W
j,x
disposed in each year x, starting
with the first year after the start of the project activity until the end of the year y, for which
baseline emissions are calculated (years x with x = 1 to x = y).

According to the Tool to determine methane emissions avoided from disposal of waste at a
solid waste disposal site, the amount of methane produced in the year y (BE
CH4,SWDS,y
) is
calculated as follows:
=

=
y
x j
k x y k
j x j f CH y SWDS CH
j j
e e DOC W MCF DOC F OX GWP f BE
1
) (
, 4 , , 4
) 1 (
12
16
) 1 ( ) 1 (

(9)

Where:
BE
CH4,SWDS,y
= Methane emissions avoided during the year y from preventing waste

CDM Executive Board
page 27

disposal at the solid waste disposal site (SWDS) during the period from
the start of the project activity to the end of the year y (tCO
2
e)
= Model correction factor to account for model uncertainties (0.9)
f = Fraction of methane captured at the SWDS and flared, combusted or
used in another manner
GWP
CH4
= Global Warming Potential (GWP) of methane, valid for the relevant
commitment period
OX = Oxidation factor (reflecting the amount of methane from SWDS that is
oxidised in the soil or other material covering the waste)
F = Fraction of methane in the SWDS gas (volume fraction) (0.5)
DOC
f
= Fraction of degradable organic carbon (DOC) that can decompose
MCF = Methane correction factor
W
j,x
= Amount of organic waste type j prevented from disposal in the SWDS in
the year x (tons)
DOC
j
= Fraction of degradable organic carbon (by weight) in the waste type j
k
j
= Decay rate for the waste type j
j = Waste type category (index)
x = Year during the crediting period: x runs from the first year of the first
crediting period (x = 1) to the year y for which avoided emissions are
calculated (x = y)
y = Year for which methane emissions are calculated

Step 3: Determination of CEF
elec,BL,y
In case the baseline is electricity generated by plants connected to the grid the emission factor
should be calculated according to Tool to calculate the emission factor for an electricity
system.
Therefore,

y CM grid y BL elec
EF CEF
, , , ,
= (10)

This methodological tool Tool to calculate the emission factor for an electricity
system(version 02) determines the CO
2
emission factor for the displacement of electricity
generated by power plants in an electricity system, by calculating the operating margin
(OM) and build margin (BM) as well as the combined margin (CM). The operating
margin refers to a cohort of power plants that reflect the existing power plants whose
electricity generation would be affected by the proposed CDM project activity. The build
margin refers to a cohort of power units that reflect the type of power units whose
construction would be affected by the proposed CDM project activity.

The Tool to calculate the emission factor for an electricity system provides procedures to
determine the following parameters:

Parameter SI Unit Description
EF
grid,CM,y
tCO
2
/MWh Combined margin CO
2
emission factor for the project electricity
system in year y
EF
grid,BM,y
tCO
2
/MWh Build margin CO
2
emission factor for the project electricity system in
year y
EF
grid,OM,y
tCO
2
/MWh Operating margin CO
2
emission factor for the project electricity

CDM Executive Board
page 28

system in year y

The following seven steps are applied to calculate the emission factor for an electricity system:
STEP 1: Identify the relevant electricity system.
STEP 2: Choose whether to include off-grid power plants in the project electricity system
(optional)
STEP 3: Select a method to determine the operating margin (OM).
STEP 4: Calculate the operating margin emission factor according to the selected method.
STEP 5: Identify the group of power units to be included in the build margin (BM).
STEP 6: Calculate the build margin emission factor.
STEP 7: Calculate the combined margin (CM) emissions factor.

Step 1: Identify the relevant electricity system

The DNA of the host country has published a delineation of the project electricity system and
connected electricity systems, this delineation is used. Following the DNA delineation, the
project electricity system is the China Southern Power Grid (SCPG), which consists of
Guangdong Province, Guangxi Autonomous Region, Yunnan Province and Guizhou Province
Power Grids.

For the purpose of determining the operating margin emission factor, use one of the following
options to determine the CO
2
emission factor(s) for net electricity imports (EF
grid,import,y
) from
a connected electricity system within the same host country(ies):

(a) 0 tCO
2
/MWh, or

(b) The weighted average operating margin (OM) emission rate of the exporting
grid, determined as described in step 4 (d) below; or

(c) The simple operating margin emission rate of the exporting grid, determined
as described in step 4 (a), if the conditions for this method, as described in
step 3 below, apply to the exporting grid; or

(d) The simple adjusted operating margin emission rate of the exporting grid,
determined as described in step 4 (b) below.

The option (c) is selected to calculate the CO
2
emission factor for net electricity imports
(EF
grid,import,y
) from other power grid.

Step 2. Choose whether to include off-grid power plants in the project electricity system
(optional)
According to the Approval of electricity connection to China Southern Power Grid, all the
power generated by the project activity will be supplied to the power grid company. Thus, the
proposed project does not include off-grid power plants in the project electricity system
referred in apply to Tool to calculate the emission factor for an electricity system.

Step 3. Select a method to determine the operating margin (OM)
The calculation of the operating margin emission factor (EF
grid,OM,y
) is based on the
following methods:
(a) Simple OM, or


CDM Executive Board
page 29

(b) Simple adjusted OM, or

(c) Dispatch Data Analysis OM, or

(d) Average OM.

Any of the four methods can be used, however, the simple OM method (option a) can only be
used if low-cost/must-run 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.

SCPG only possesses 26.726% of its total electricity generation that comes from renewable
energy sources in 2007, 26.292% in 2006, 30.938% in 2005, 29.912% in 2004, 41.752% in
2003, 32.938% in 2002 and 33.705% in 2001
35
. Hence, the low operating cost/must run
sources is much less than 50% of the total grid generation, which accords with the defined
condition of Option (a), but not Option (d). Consequently, Option (a) is selected to calculate
the operating margin emission factor of the proposed project.

For the simple OM, the simple adjusted OM and the average OM, the emissions factor can be
calculated using either of the two following data vintages:

Ex ante option: If the ex ante option is chosen, the emission factor is determined
once at the validation stage, thus no monitoring and recalculation of the
emissions factor during the crediting period is required. For grid power plants,
use a 3-year generation-weighted average, based on the most recent data
available at the time of submission of the CDM-PDD to the DOE for validation.
For off-grid power plants, use a single calendar year within the 5 most recent
calendar years prior to the time of submission of the CDM-PDD for validation

Ex post option: If the ex post option is chosen, the emission factor is determined
for the year in which the project activity displaces grid electricity, requiring the
emissions factor to be updated annually during monitoring. If the data required to
calculate the emission factor for year y is usually only available later than six
months after the end of year y, alternatively the emission factor of the previous
year (y-1) may be used. If the data is usually only available 18 months after the
end of year y, the emission factor of the year proceeding the previous year (y-2)
may be used. The same data vintage (y, y-1 or y-2) should be used throughout all
crediting periods.

The data vintage chosen should be documented in the CDM-PDD and not be changed during
the crediting periods.

The ex-ante option is selected for the proposed project and the three most recent years
available at the time of submission of the CDM-PDD to the DOE for validation are 2005-
2007. EF
grid,OM,y
is fixed during the first crediting period.

Step 4. Calculate the operating margin emission factor according to the selected method
The Simple OM emission factor is calculated as the generation-weighted average CO
2

emissions per unit net electricity generation (tCO
2
/MWh) of all generating power plants

35
China Electric Power Yearbook, 2002-2008

CDM Executive Board
page 30

serving the system, not including low-cost / must-run power plants / units. The simple OM
may be calculated:

- Option A: Based on the net electricity generation and a CO
2
emission factor of each
power unit, or

- Option B: Based on the total net electricity generation of all power plants serving
the system and the fuel types and total fuel consumption of the project electricity
system.

For the proposed project activity, the required data for the exercise of Option A is not
available and those of Option B can be obtained from official sources, and off-grid power
plants are not included in the calculation, therefore, Option B is chosen to calculate the
operating margin emission factor:

For Option B, the Simple OM emission factor is calculated based on the net electricity
supplied to the grid by all power plants serving the system, not including low-cost / must-run
power plants / units, and based on the fuel type(s) and total fuel consumption of the project
electricity system.

Option B Calculation based on total fuel consumption and electricity generation of the
system

Under this option, the simple OM emission factor is calculated based on the net electricity
supplied to the grid by all power plants serving the system, not including low-cost / must-run
power plants / units, and based on the fuel type(s) and total fuel consumption of the project
electricity system, as follows:

y
y i CO y i
i
y i
y OMsimple grid
EG
EF NCV FC
EF
, , , ,
, ,
2

=

(11)

Where:
EF
grid,OMsimple,y
= Simple operating margin CO
2
emission factor in year y (tCO
2
/MWh)
FC
i,y
= Amount of fossil fuel type i consumed in the project electricity system
in year y (mass or volume unit)
NCV
i,y
= Net calorific value (energy content) of fossil fuel type i in year y (GJ /
mass or volume unit)
EF
CO2,i,y
= CO
2
emission factor of fossil fuel type i in year y (tCO
2
/GJ)
EG
y
= 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)
i = All fossil fuel types combusted in power sources in the project
electricity system in year y
y = The relevant year as per the data vintage chosen in Step 3

Step 5. Identify the group of power units to be included in the build margin
The sample group of power units m used to calculate the build margin consists of either:

(a) The set of five power units that have been built most recently, or

CDM Executive Board
page 31

(b) The set of power capacity additions in the electricity system that comprise 20%
of the system generation (in MWh) and that have been built most recently.

Project participants should use the set of power units that comprises the larger annual
generation.

However, it is very difficult to obtain the data of the five power plants built most recently
because these data are considered as confidential information by the company itself and the
Grid in China. Therefore, a deviation
36
approved by the EB is applied here in the calculation
that is to calculate the new capacity additions and the proportion of each technology of power
generation. Then the weighing of capacity additions of different technologies will be worked
out. Finally the emission factor will be calculated by employing the efficiency factor
representing the best technology commercially available.

In terms of vintage of data, project participants can choose between one of the following two
options:

Option 1. For the first crediting period, calculate the build margin emission factor ex-ante
based on the most recent information available on units already built for sample group m at
the time of CDM-PDD submission to the DOE for validation. For the second crediting period,
the build margin emission factor should be updated based on the most recent information
available on units already built at the time of submission of the request for renewal of the
crediting period to the DOE. For the third crediting period, the build margin emission factor
calculated for the second crediting period should be used. This option does not require
monitoring the emission factor during the crediting period.

Option 2. For the first crediting period, the build margin emission factor shall be updated
annually, ex-post, including those units built up to the year of registration of the project
activity or, if information up to the year of registration is not yet available, including those
units built up to the latest year for which information is available. For the second crediting
period, the build margin emissions factor shall be calculated ex-ante, as described in option 1
above. For the third crediting period, the build margin emission factor calculated for the
second crediting period should be used.

For the proposed project, Option 1 is chosen to calculate build margin emission factor.

Step 6. Calculate the build margin emission factor
The build margin emission factor is the generation-weighted average emission factor
(tCO
2
/MWh) of all power units m during the most recent year y for which power generation
data is available, calculated as follows:

=
m
y m
m
y m EL y m
y BM grid
EG
EF EG
EF
,
, , ,
, ,
(12)

Where:

36
Source: http://cdm.unfccc.int/Projects/Deviations/index.html?p=3

CDM Executive Board
page 32

EF
grid,BM,y
= Build margin CO
2
emission factor in year y (tCO
2
/MWh)
EG
m,y
= Net quantity of electricity generated and delivered to the grid by power unit m in year y
(MWh)
EF
EL,m,y
= CO
2
emission factor of power unit m in year y (tCO
2
/MWh)
m = Power units included in the build margin
y = Most recent historical year for which power generation data is available

No matter which options for calculating BM factor mentioned in Step 5 was adopted for the
proposed project; the same issue on data availability must be addressed. Currently, it is very
difficult to get the capacity margin data of power plants in China, since these data as well as
net quantity of electricity generated and delivered to the grid and fuel consumption data in
power unit m are regarded as commercial secrets or only for internal usage. The following
deviation was adopted to calculate the Build Margin emission factor.

Sub-step 1: With the energy balance sheet in China Energy Statistical Yearbook for the
most recent year, calculating the respective percentages of CO
2
emissions from coal fired
power generation, oil fired power generation, and gas fired power generation against total
CO
2
emissions from fossil fuel fired power generation:

=
e
j i
y i CO y i y j i
j COAL i
y i CO y i y j i
y Coal
EF NCV F
EF NCV F
,
, , , , ,
,
, , , , ,
,
2
2

(13)

=
e
j i
y i CO y i y j i
j OIL i
y i CO y i y j i
y Oil
EF NCV F
EF NCV F
,
, , , , ,
,
, , , , ,
,
2
2

(14)

=
e
j i
y i CO y i y j i
j GAS i
y i CO y i y j i
y Gas
EF NCV F
EF NCV F
,
, , , , ,
,
, , , , ,
,
2
2

(15)

Where:
F
i,j,y
= The amount of fuel i (in a mass or volume unit)consumed in province j in year y;
NCV
i,y
= Net calorific value (energy content) of fossil fuel type i (GJ/mass or volume unit) in
year y;
EF
CO2,i
= CO
2
emission factor of fossil fuel type I in year y (tCO
2
/GJ)
COAL, OIL and GAS are aggregation of various kinds of coal, oil and gas as fossil fuels.

Sub-step 2: Calculation of emission factor of relevant thermal power

y Adv Gas Gas y Adv Oil Oil y Adv Coal Coal y Thermal
EF EF EF EF
, , , , , , ,
+ + =
(16)

Where:
EF
Coal,Adv,y
, EF
Oil,Adv,y
and EF
Gas,Adv,y
refer to the emission factors representing best
technologies commercially available for coal, oil and gas fired power plants, respectively.
(See Annex 3 for detailed calculation).


CDM Executive Board
page 33

i,
, , 6
,
3.6
10
y
Coal Adv y
best coal
NCV OXID
EF
GENE

(17)
i,
, , 6
, /
3.6
10
y
Oil Adv y
best oil gas
NCV OXID
EF
GENE

(18)
i,
, , 6
, /
3.6
10
y
Gas Adv y
best oil gas
NCV OXID
EF
GENE

(19)

Where:
, best coal GENE and , / best oil gas GENE refer to the optimum commercial, coal, oil and gas fired
power supply efficiency.
OXID refers to Carbon Oxidation Factor of fossil fuel type i consumed by the power plants
in the China Southern Power Grid.

Use the share of different type of capacity in total capacity addition as weight, the weighted
average of emission factors of different type capacity is calculated as the Build Margin
emission factor EF
grid,BM,y
of China Southern Power Grid(see Annex 3 for detailed calculation):

Sub-step 3: Calculation of BM of the Grid

y Thermal
y Total
y Thermal
y BM grid
EF
CAP
CAP
EF
,
,
,
, ,
=
(20)

Where:
CAP
Total,y
= The total newly added electricity generation capacity (MW)
CAP
Thermal,y
= The newly added electricity generation capacity of thermal power (MW)

Step 7. Calculate the combined margin emission factor
The combined margin emission factor is calculated as follows:

BM y BM grid OM y OM grid y CM grid
w EF w EF EF + =
, , , , , ,
(21)

Where:
EF
grid,BM,y
= Build margin CO
2
emission factor for the project electricity system in year y
(tCO
2
/MWh)
EF
grid,OM,y
= Operating margin CO
2
emission factor for the project electricity system in year y
(tCO
2
/MWh)
w
OM
= Weighting of operating margin emissions factor (%)
w
BM
= Weighting of build margin emissions factor (%)

For the proposed project, the default values of w
OM
and w
BM
are:
w
OM
= w
BM
= 0.5 for the first crediting period.
The default weights are adopted for the proposed project, the baseline emission factor is:
BM y BM grid OM y OM grid y CM grid
w EF w EF EF + =
, , , , , ,

= 0.9987 0.5 + 0.5772 0.5 = 0.78795tCO
2
/MWh

Step d: Calculation of ET
LFG,y
Because the proposed project doesnt involve heat component, ET
LFG,y
is assumed to be zero.

CDM Executive Board
page 34

Project Emissions
Considering when electricity generators will be under regular maintenance and sometimes
shut down, the electricity will be purchased form the SCPG during this period of time.
Therefore, there will be project emissions and calculated following the latest version of Tool
to calculate project emissions from electricity consumption.

y j FC y EC y
PE PE PE
, , ,
+ = (22)

Where:
PE
EC,y
= Emissions from consumption of electricity in the project case. The project emissions
from electricity consumption (PE
EC,y
) will be calculated following the latest version
of Tool to calculate baseline, project and/or leakage emissions from electricity
consumption. If in the baseline a part of LFG was captured then the electricity
quantity used in calculation is electricity used in project activity net of that
consumed in the baseline.
PE
FC,j,y
= Emissions from consumption of heat in the project case. The project emissions from
fossil fuel combustion (PE
FC,j,y
) will be calculated following the latest version of
Tool to calculate project or leakage CO
2
emissions from fossil fuel combustion.
For this purpose, the processes j in the tool corresponds to all fossil fuel combustion
in the landfill, as well as any other on-site fuel combustion for the purposes of the
project activity. If in the baseline part of a LFG was captured then the heat quantity
used in calculation is fossil fuel used in project activity net of that consumed in the
baseline.

In the project design stage, the electricity consumption of electricity in the proposed project
(PE
EC,j,y
) is very small and can be neglected, so it is set to be 0. But PE
EC,j,y
caused by
auxiliary consumption will be monitored during the crediting period and deducted form the
CERs if any.

The proposed project doesnt involve consumption of heat (PE
FC,j,y
), therefore, PE
FC,j,y
is set
as 0.

Leakage

According to ACM0001, no leakage emission needs to be accounted.

Emission Reduction

Emission reductions are calculated as follows:

y y y
PE BE ER = (23)

Where:
ER
y
= Emission reductions in year y (tCO
2
e/yr)
BE
y
= Baseline emissions in year y (tCO
2
e)
PE
y
= Project emissions in year y (tCO
2
e/yr)

B.6.2. Data and parameters that are available at validation:
>>

CDM Executive Board
page 35

Data/Parameter: Regulatory requirements relating to landfill gas
Data unit: -
Description: Regulatory requirements relating to landfill gas
Source of data used: Publicly available information of the host countrys regulatory requirements
relating to landfill gas.
Value applied: -
Justification of the
choice of data or
description of
measurement methods
and procedures actually
applied :
-
Any comment: The information though recorded annually, is used for changes to the
adjustment factor (AF) or directly MD
BL,y
at renewal of the credit period.
Relevant regulations for LFG project activities shall be updated at renewal of
each credit period. Changes to regulation should be converted to the amount of
methane that would have been destroyed/combusted during the year in the
absence of the project activity (MD
BL,y
). Project participants should explain how
regulations are translated into that amount of gas.

Data / Parameter: GWP
CH4
Data unit: tCO
2
e/tCH
4
Description: Global warming potential of CH
4
Source of data used: IPCC
Value applied: 21
choice of data or
description of
measurement methods
applied :
21 for the first commitment period. Shall be updated according to any future
COP/MOP decisions.
Any comment: -

Data / Parameter: D
CH4
Data unit: tCH
4
/m
3
CH
4
Description: Methane Density
Source of data used: Tool to determine methane emissions avoided from dumping waste at a solid
waste disposal site
Value applied: 0.0007168
choice of data or
description of
measurement methods
applied :
At standard temperature and pressure (0 degree Celsius and 1,013 bar) the
density of methane is 0.0007168 tCH
4
/m
3
CH
4

Any comment:

Data / Parameter:
flare,h

Data unit: -
Description: Flare efficiency in hour h

CDM Executive Board
page 36

Source of data used: The default value of Tool to determine project emissions from flaring gases
containing methane
Value applied: 90%
choice of data or
description of
measurement methods
applied :
The default value of Tool to determine project emissions from flaring gases
containing methane
Any comment: -

Data / Parameter: MD
Hist

Data unit: tCH4
Description: Amount of methane destroyed historically for the previous year before the start of
project activity.
Source of data used: Project proponent
Value applied: 0
choice of data or
description of
measurement methods
applied :
LFG recovery and utilization is not common in South China. They are mainly
released to atmosphere without any treatment. Therefore, no quantity of
methane would be destroyed without the project activity.
Any comment: This parameter could be used for the estimation of AF

Data / Parameter: Other flare operation parameters (the temperature of the flare)
Data unit: -
Description: To judge whether the flare is normally working according to the technological
requirements given by the manufacture
Source of data used: Manufacture
Value applied: 500 1000
choice of data or
description of
measurement methods
applied :
Continually monitored and recorded
Any comment: -

Data / Parameter:
Data unit: -
Description: Model correction factor to account for model uncertainties
Source of data used: Tool to determine methane emissions avoided from disposal of waste at a
solid waste disposal site
Value applied: 0.9
choice of data or
description of
Default value of Tool to determine methane emissions avoided from disposal
of waste at a solid waste disposal site

CDM Executive Board
page 37

measurement methods
applied :
Any comment: Oonk et el. (1994) have validated several landfill gas models based on 17
realized landfill gas projects. The mean relative error of multi-phase models
was assessed to be 18%. Given the uncertainties associated with the model and
in order to estimate emission reductions in a conservative manner, a discount
of 10% is applied to the model results.

Data / Parameter: OX
Data unit: -
Description: Oxidation factor (reflecting the amount of methane from SWDS that is
oxidized in the soil or other material covering the waste)
Source of data used: Conduct a site visit at the solid waste disposal site in order to assess the type of
cover of the solid waste disposal site. Use the IPCC 2006 Guidelines for
National Greenhouse Gas Inventories for the choice of the value to be applied.
Value applied: 0.1
choice of data or
description of
measurement methods
applied :
According to the Tool to determine methane emissions avoided from disposal
of waste at a solid waste disposal site, use 0.1 for managed solid waste
disposal sites that are covered with oxidizing material such as soil or compost;
use 0 for other types of solid waste disposal sites.

The proposed project is a managed solid waste disposal site, therefore 0.1 is
applied.
Any comment: -

Data / Parameter: F
Data unit: -
Description: Fraction of methane in the SWDS gas (volume fraction)
Source of data used: IPCC 2006 Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas Inventories
Value applied: 0.5
choice of data or
description of
measurement methods
applied :
-
Any comment: This factor reflects the fact that some degradable organic carbon does not
degrade, or degrades very slowly, under anaerobic conditions in the SWDS. A
default value of 0.5 is recommended by IPCC.

Data / Parameter: DOC
f
Data unit: -
Description: Fraction of degradable organic carbon (DOC) that can decompose
Value applied: 0.5
choice of data or
description of
measurement methods
-

CDM Executive Board
page 38

applied :
Any comment: -

Data / Parameter: MCF
Data unit: -
Description: Methane correction factor
Value applied: 1.0
choice of data or
description of
measurement methods
applied :
Use the following values for MCF:
1.0 for anaerobic managed solid waste disposal sites. These must have
controlled placement of waste (i.e., waste directed to specific deposition
areas, a degree of control of scavenging and a degree of control of fires)
and will include at least one of the following: (i) cover material; (ii)
mechanical compacting; or (iii) leveling of the waste.
0.5 for semi-aerobic managed solid waste disposal sites. These must
have controlled placement of waste and will include all of the following
structures for introducing air to waste layer: (i) permeable cover material;
(ii) leachate drainage system; (iii) regulating pondage; and (iv) gas
ventilation system.
0.8 for unmanaged solid waste disposal sites deep and/or with high
water table. This comprises all SWDS not meeting the criteria of
managed SWDS and which have depths of greater than or equal to 5
meters and/or high water table at near ground level. Latter situation
corresponds to filling inland water, such as pond, river or wetland, by
waste.
0.4 for unmanaged-shallow solid waste disposal sites. This comprises all
SWDS not meeting the criteria of managed SWDS and which have depths
of less than 5 meters.

The proposed project involves controlled placement of waste and cover
material. Therefore, MCF is set as 1.0.
Any comment: The methane correction factor (MCF) accounts for the fact that unmanaged SWDS
produce less methane from a given amount of waste than managed SWDS,
because a larger fraction of waste decomposes aerobically in the top layers of
unmanaged SWDS.

Data / Parameter: DOC
j
Data unit: -
Description: Fraction of degradable organic carbon (by weight) in the waste type j
Source of data used: IPCC 2006 Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas Inventories (adapted from
Volume 5, Tables 2.4 and 2.5)
Value applied: According to IPCC, the DOC
j
for wet waste is applied as following:
Wood and wood products: 43%
Pulp, paper and cardboard (other than sludge): 40%
Food, food waste, beverages and tobacco (other than sludge): 15%
Textiles: 24%
Garden, yard and park waste: 20%
Glass, plastic, metal, other inert waste: 0

CDM Executive Board
page 39

choice of data or
description of
measurement methods
applied :
Apply the following values for the different waste types j:

Waste type j DOC
j

(% wet waste)
DOC
j

(% dry waste)
Wood and wood products 43 50
Pulp, paper and cardboard (other
than sludge)
40 44
Food, food waste, beverages and
tobacco (other than sludge)
15 38
Textiles 24 30
Garden, yard and park waste 20 49
Glass, plastic, metal, other inert
waste
0 0

If a waste type, prevented from disposal by the proposed CDM project activity,
can not clearly be attributed to one of the waste types in the table above, project
participants should choose among the waste types that have similar characteristics
that waste type where the values of DOC
j
and k
j
result in a conservative estimate
(lowest emissions), or request a revision of / deviation from this methodology. In
the case of empty fruit bunches (EFB), as their characteristics are similar to garden
waste, the parameter value correspondent of garden shall be used.
Any comment: -

Data / Parameter: k
j
Data unit: -
Description: Decay rate for the waste type j
Source of data used: IPCC 2006 Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas Inventories (adapted from
Volume 5, Tables 3.3)
Value applied: The MAT of Shenzhen city is 22.2C and MAP is 1879.8mm. Therefore,
according to IPCC, k
j
is applied as following:
Pulp, paper and cardboard (other than sludge), textiles: 0.07
Wood and wood products and straw: 0.035
Food, food waste, sewage sludge, beverages and tobacco: 0.4
choice of data or
description of
measurement methods
applied :
Apply the following default values for the different waste types j:

Boreal and
Temperate
(MAT20C)
Tropical
(MAT>20C)
Waste type j
Dry
(MAP/P
ET<1)
Wet
(MAP/P
ET>1)
Dry
(MAP<10
00mm)
Wet
(MAP>10
00 mm)
Pulp, paper
and cardboard
(other than
sludg )
0.04 0.06 0.045 0.07
S
l
o
w
l
y

d
e
g
r
a
d
i
n
g

Wood, wood
products and
straw
0.02 0.03 0.025 0.035

CDM Executive Board
page 40

M
o
d
e
r
a
t
e
l
y

d
e
g
r
a
d
i
n
g

Other (non-
food) organic
putrescible
garden and
park waste
0.05 0.10 0.065 0.17
R
a
p
i
d
l
y

d
e
g
r
a
d
i
n
g

Food, food
waste, sewage
sludge,
beverages and
tobacco
0.06 0.185 0.085 0.40
NB: MAT mean annual temperature, MAP Mean annual precipitation, PET
potential evapotranspiration. MAP/PET is the ratio between the mean annual
precipitation and the potential evapotranspiration.

If a waste type, prevented from disposal by the proposed CDM project activity,
can not clearly be attributed to one of the waste types in the table above, project
participants should choose among the waste types that have similar characteristics
that waste type where the values of DOC
j
and k
j
result in a conservative estimate
(lowest emissions), or request a revision of / deviation from this methodology. In
the case of empty fruit bunches (EFB), as their characteristics are similar to garden
waste, the parameter value correspondent of garden shall be used.
Any comment: Document in the CDM-PDD the climatic conditions at the SWDS site
(temperature, precipitation and, where applicable, evapotranspiration). Use long-
term averages based on statistical data, where available. Provide references.

Data / Parameter: FC
i,y
, FC
i,j,y
Data unit: Mass or volume unit
Description: Amount of fossil fuel type i consumed by power plant / unit (or in the project
electricity system in case of FC
i,y
) in year y, or the amount of fuel type i
consumed by province j
Source of data used: China Energy Statistical Yearbook 2006-2008
Value applied: See Annex 3
choice of data or
description of
measurement methods
applied :
Simple OM: For each crediting period using the most recent three historical
years for which data is available at the time of submission of the CDM PDD to
the DOE for validation (ex-ante option).

BM: For the first crediting period, following the EB guidance.
Any comment: -

Data / Parameter: NCV
i,y
Data unit: GJ / mass or volume unit
Description: Net calorific value (energy content) of fossil fuel type i in year y
Source of data used: China Energy Statistical Yearbook 2008
choice of data or
description of
measurement methods


CDM Executive Board
page 41

applied :
Any comment: -

Data / Parameter: EF
CO2,i,y
Data unit: tCO
2
/ GJ
Description: CO
2
emission factor of fossil fuel type i in year y
Source of data used: 2006 IPCC Guidelines
choice of data or
description of
measurement methods
applied :

Any comment: -

Data / Parameter: EG
y
Data unit: MWh
Description: Net electricity generated and delivered to the grid in year y
Source of data used: China Electric Power Yearbook 2006-2008
choice of data or
description of
measurement methods
applied :

Any comment: -

Data / Parameter: Power generation

Data unit: MWh
Description: Power generation by source
choice of data or
description of
measurement methods
applied :

Any comment: -

Data / Parameter: Installed capacity

Data unit: MW
Description: Installed capacity in the grid
choice of data or
description of

CDM Executive Board
page 42

measurement methods
applied :

Any comment: -

Data / Parameter: Internal power consumption of power plants

Data unit: %
Description: Internal power consumption of power plants (fraction)
choice of data or
description of
measurement methods
applied :

Any comment: -

Data / Parameter: , best coal GENE , , / best oil gas GENE
Data unit: %
Description: Best commercial available efficiency of coal, gas, oil fuel power plant
Source of data used: Chinese DNAs Guideline of emission factors of Chinese grids
Value applied: , best coal GENE
=
38.10%
, / best oil gas GENE
=
49.99%
choice of data or
description of
measurement methods
applied :
Official statistic value
Any comment: Applied for calculating BM

Data / Parameter: Electricity imports from other connected grids

Data unit: MWh
Description: Electricity imports from other connected grids

Source of data used: China Energy Statistics Yearbook
choice of data or
description of
measurement methods
applied :
China Southern Power Grid imported electricity from Central China Power
Grid from 2005 to 2007.
Any comment: -

Data / Parameter: Carbon Oxidation Factor(OXID)
Data unit: %
Description: Carbon Oxidation Factor of fossil fuel type i consumed by the power plants in
the China Southern Power Grid

CDM Executive Board
page 43

Source of data used: 2006 IPCC Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas Inventories
Value applied: See Annex 3 for details
choice of data or
description of
measurement methods
and
procedures actually
applied:
IPCC default value

Any comment: -

Data / Parameter: Emission coefficient of fossil fuel type i in best commercial plant
Data unit: kgCO
2
/TJ
Description: Emission coefficient of fossil fuel type i in best commercial plant
Source of data used: 2006 IPCC Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas Inventories
choice of data or
description of
measurement methods
and
procedures actually
applied:
IPCC default value
Any comment: -

Data / Parameter: F
j,j,y

Data unit: tonne, m
3

Description: Amount of fossil fuel type i consumed in province j in year y (mass or volume
unit)
Source of data used: China Energy Statistical Yearbook (2006-2008)
choice of data or
description of
measurement methods
and
procedures actually
applied:
Official statistical data
Any comment: -

Data / Parameter: CAP
Total,y

Data unit: MW
Description: The total newly added electricity generation capacity (MW)
Source of data used: China Electric Power Yearbook (2006-2008)
choice of data or
description of


CDM Executive Board
page 44

measurement methods
and
procedures actually
applied:
Any comment: -

Thermal,y

Data unit: MW
Description: The newly added electricity generation capacity of thermal power (MW)
Source of data used: China Electric Power Yearbook (2006-2008)
choice of data or
description of
measurement methods
and
procedures actually
applied:

Any comment: -

j,y
Data unit: MW
Description: The installed capacity of the fuel j based station in year y

choice of data or
description of
measurement methods
applied :

Any comment: -

Data / Parameter: Collection Efficiency
Data unit: %
Description: Capture efficiency of the system used in the project activity
Source of data used: Feasibility study Report
Value applied: 40% when landfill side is open
50% when landfill side is closed
choice of data or
description of
measurement methods
applied :
Ex-ante estimation of the capture efficiency used for ex-ante calculations of
emissions reductions, based on the physical conditions of the landfill, the
characteristics of the cover and the density of wells that will be installed.
Any comment: -

B.6.3. Ex-ante calculation of emission reductions:

CDM Executive Board
page 45

>>

MD
project,y
will be determined ex post by metering the actual quantity of methane captured and
destroyed once the project activity is operational.

The ex-ante estimation of the amount of methane that would have been destroyed/combusted
project,y
) will be done with the latest version of the
approved Tool to determine methane emissions avoided from disposal of waste at a solid
waste disposal site.

Following the formula above, the results of baseline emissions and the emission reductions
from the project are summarized below.

Table B-1: Waste amounts (only in year 2003-2012)
37

Year Waste amounts disposed / expected to be disposed
(tonnes)
2003 199,500.00
2004 766,058.18
2005 981,546.00
2006 1,306,030.67
2007 1,435,172.75
2008 1,305,260.36
2009 1,237,844.26
2010 1,299,736.20
2011 1,364,723.01
2012 1432,959.16

Table B-2: Waste contents (%) of Laohukeng landfill
38

Food Paper Textile Wood
37.57 12.17 9.36 2.81

Table B-3: Ex-ante estimation of the amount of methane that would have been
destroyed/combusted by the project taking collection efficiency into account
Year BE
CH4,SWDS,y
(tCO
2
e) MD
project,y
(tCH
4
)
01/04/2011-31/12/2011 135,933 6,473
2012 196,051 9,335
2013 264,151 12,578
2014 209,869 9,993
2015 171,375 8,160
2016 143,605 6,838
2017 123,151 5,864
01/01/2018-31/03/2018 26,930 1,282

37
The amount of waste in 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008 and 2009 are history records of the
landfill, which was sourced from the statistics data from Urban Administration Bureau of Baoan
District, which is the management organization of Laohukeng landfill. The amount of waste from 2010
to 2012 was estimated based on the annual 5% increase rate according to FSR.
38
Source: Page 18, FSR of the proposed project.

CDM Executive Board
page 46

Table B-4Total emission reduction by the project activity
Year MD
project,y

(tCH
4
)
EL
LFG,y

(MWh)
BE
y
(tCO
2
e) PE
y
(tCO
2
e) ER
y
(tCO
2
e)
01/04/2011-31/12/2011 6,473 14,530 147,382 0 147,382
2012 9,335 19,373 211,316 0 211,316
2013 12,578 19,373 279,416 0 279,416
2014 9,993 19,373 225,134 0 225,134
2015 8,160 19,373 186,640 0 186,640
2016 6,838 19,373 158,869 0 158,869
2017 5,864 19,373 138,416 0 138,416
01/01/2018-31/03/2018 1,282 4,843 30,746 0 30,746

B.6.4. Summary of the ex-ante estimation of emission reductions:
>>
Based on the methodology, the proposed project uses 7 years crediting period, from
01/04/2011 to 31/03/2018. The summary of the ex-ante estimation of emission reductions is
presented in Table A.3 as following:

Year

Estimation of
project activity
emissions
(tonnes of
CO
2
e)
Estimation of
baseline
emissions
(tonnes of CO
2
e)

Estimation of
leakage
(tonnes of
CO
2
e)

Estimation of
overall emission
reductions
(tonnes of
CO
2
e)
01/04/2011-31/12/2011 0 147,382 0 147,382
2012 0 211,316 0 211,316
2013 0 279,416 0 279,416
2014 0 225,134 0 225,134
2015 0 186,640 0 186,640
2016 0 158,869 0 158,869
2017 0 138,416 0 138,416
01/01/2018-31/03/2018 0 30,746 0 30,746
Total 0 1,377,923 0 1,377,923

B.7. Application of the monitoring methodology and description of the monitoring
plan:

B.7.1 Data and parameters monitored:
>>
Data / Parameter: LFG
total,y

Data unit: M
3

Description: Total amount of LFG captured at Normal Temperature and Pressure
Source of data to be
used:
Measured continuously by flow meter (F1)
Value of data applied
for the purpose of
calculating expected
emission reductions in
See B.6.3


CDM Executive Board
page 47

section B.6
Description of
measurement methods
and procedures to be
applied:
Data will be measured continuously with a flow meter by the project developer.
Data to be aggregated monthly and yearly. The flow meter will be maintained
and calibrated regularly in line with the manufacturer's requirements.
QA/QC procedures to
be applied:
Flow meters have to be subject to a regular maintenance and testing regime, in
accordance with the manufactures recommendations, to ensure accuracy.
According to the specification of the current manufacturer, the accuracy of flow
meter is 1%. The flow meter will be calibrated every two years. The calibration
of flow meters employs the appropriate national standard, such as the standard
equipment calibrating gas flow rate using sound daffle method.
Any comment:

flared,y

Data unit: M
3

Description: The amount of LFG flared at Normal Temperature and Pressure
used:
for the purpose of
section B.6
See B.6.3

Description of
measurement methods
applied:
Data have to be aggregated monthly and annually. The flow meter will be
maintained and calibrated regularly in line with the manufacturer's requirements.
According to the specification of the current manufacturer, the accuracy of flow
meter is 1%. The flow meters will be calibrated every two years. The calibration
of flow meters employs the appropriate national standard, such as the standard
equipment calibrating gas flow rate using sound daffle method.
QA/QC procedures to
be applied:
Flow meters have to be subject to a regular maintenance and testing regime to
ensure accuracy.
Any comment:

electricity,y

Data unit: M
3

Description: The amount of LFG combusted in power plant at Normal Temperature and
Pressure
used:
for the purpose of
section B.6
See B.6.3

Description of
measurement methods
applied:
and calibrated regularly in line with the manufacturer's requirements. Data have
to be aggregated monthly and annually. According to the specification of the
current manufacturer, the accuracy of flow meter is 1%. The flow meters will be

CDM Executive Board
page 48

calibrated every two years. The calibration of flow meters employs the
appropriate national standard, such as the standard equipment calibrating gas
flow rate using sound daffle method.
QA/QC procedures to
be applied:
ensure accuracy.
Any comment:

Data / Parameter: w
CH4

Data unit: m
3
CH
4
/ m
3
LFG
Description: Methane fraction in the LFG
used:
To be measured continuously by project participants using the gas analyzer (G)
for the purpose of
section B.6
50%

Description of
measurement methods
applied:
Methane content will be measured continuously with a fixed gas analyzer by the
project participants. The fixed gas analyzer can directly measure methane
contenting the landfill gas.

QA/QC procedures to
be applied:
The gas analyzer will be maintained and calibrated regularly in line with the
manufacturer's requirements in order to ensure that factory standards of accuracy
are maintained. That is, analyzers must be calibrated according to the
manufacturers recommendations. A zero check and a typical value check will be
performed by comparison with a standard certified gas. According to the
specification of the current manufacturer, the accuracy of gas analyzer is 3%. The
gas analyzer will be calibrated once a year. The appropriate national calibration
standard, such as JJG635-1999 will be applied for the gas analyzer.

Any comment: Used to determine the methane concentration in the landfill gas fed to the flare.
In accordance with the Tool to determine project emissions from flaring gases
containing methane only the methane content of the landfill gas is monitored
and the remaining part is considered as N2. Further wCH4 is considered to be
equivalent to the variable fvCH4,h (Volumetric fraction of the component CH
4
in
the landfill gas in the hour h).

Data / Parameter: fv
CH4,RG,h

Description: This parameter is the same as w
CH4
, but stands for the volumetric fraction of CH
4
in the residual gas to the flaring system.
used:
The value is equal to the volumetric fraction of CH
4
measured by project
participants using a continuously gas analyzer (G)
for the purpose of
section B.6
-
Description of Methane fraction will be measured continuously with a fixed gas analyzer by the

CDM Executive Board
page 49

measurement methods
applied:
project participants. The fixed gas analyzer can directly measure methane
fraction the landfill gas.

QA/QC procedures to
be applied:
The gas analyzer will be maintained and calibrated regularly in line with the
manufacturer's requirements in order to ensure that factory standards of accuracy
are maintained. According to the specification of the current manufacturer, the
accuracy of gas analyzer is 3%. The gas analyzer will be calibrated once a year.
The appropriate national calibration standard, such as JJG635-1999 will be
applied for the gas analyzer.
Any comment: Only the methane fraction content is measured and consider the remaining part as
N
2

Data / Parameter: FV
RG,h

Data unit: m
3
/h
Description: Volumetric flow rate of the residual gas in dry basis at normal conditions in the
hour h
used:
The value is calculated by the reading of flow meter (F2) times the moisture
content which is calculated by relative humidity measured by the hygrometer (H)
for the purpose of
section B.6

Description of
measurement methods
applied:
and calibrated regularly in line with the manufacturer's requirements. According
to the specification of the current manufacturer, the accuracy of flow meter is 1%
and the accuracy of hygrometer is 3%. Data have to be aggregated monthly and
annually.
QA/QC procedures to
be applied:
ensure accuracy. The accuracy of flow meter is 1%. The flow meters will be
calibrated every two years. The calibration of flow meters employs the
appropriate national standard, such as the standard equipment calibrating gas
flow rate using sound daffle method. According to the specification of the current
manufacturer, the accuracy of hygrometer is 3%. The hygrometer will be
calibrated once a year. The appropriate national standard such as JJF1076-2001
will be applied for the hygrometer.
Any comment: -

Data / Parameter: T
Data unit:
Description: Temperature of the landfill gas.
used:
Measured continuously by flow meter (F1-F3)
for the purpose of
section B.6
-

CDM Executive Board
page 50

Description of
measurement methods
applied:
Continuously measured to determine the density of methane DCH4.

QA/QC procedures to
be applied:
Measuring instruments will be subject to a regular maintenance and testing
regime in accordance to appropriate national standards. The readings of T will be
calibrated together with the flow meter.
Any comment: No separate monitoring of temperature is necessary when using flow meters that
automatically measure temperature and pressure, expressing LFG volumes in
normalized cubic meters.

Data / Parameter: P
Data unit: Pa
Description: Pressure of the landfill gas.
used:
Measured continuously by flow meter (F1-F3)
for the purpose of
section B.6
-
Description of
measurement methods
applied:
Continuously measured to determine the density of methane DCH4.

QA/QC procedures to
be applied:
Measuring instruments will be subject to a regular maintenance and testing
regime in accordance to appropriate national standards. The readings of P will be
calibrated together with the flow meter.
Any comment: No separate monitoring of pressure is necessary when using flow meters that
automatically measure temperature and pressure, expressing LFG volumes in
normalized cubic meters.

Data / Parameter: RH
Data unit: -
Description: Relative humidity
used:
Measured continuously by project proponents using hygrometer (H)
for the purpose of
section B.6
-
Description of
measurement methods
applied:
Continuously measured to determine the moisture content of the LFG
QA/QC procedures to
be applied:
The hygrometer will be maintained and calibrated in line with the manufacturer's
requirements in order to ensure that factory standards of accuracy are maintained.
According to the specification of the current manufacturer, the accuracy of
hygrometer is 3%. The hygrometer will be calibrated once a year. The

CDM Executive Board
page 51

appropriate national standard, such as JJF1076-2001 will be applied for the
calibration of hygrometer.

Any comment: The relative humidity is used to calculate MC.

Data / Parameter: MC
Data unit: -
Description: Moisture content
used:
Calculated from the parameters RH, T and P.
for the purpose of
section B.6
-
Description of
measurement methods
applied:
-
QA/QC procedures to
be applied:
-

Any comment: MC is used to convert flow rate/methane fraction from wet basis to dry basis,
please refer to Annex 4 for detail calculating procedures.

Data / Parameter: EL
LFG

Data unit: MWh
Description: Net amount of electricity generated using LFG
used:
Measured by a bidirectional meter (M1) at Songbei Substation of power grid, and
calculation from EG
output,y
and

EG
import,y

for the purpose of
section B.6
See B.6.3
Description of
measurement methods
applied:
The net electricity generated by the proposed project will be calculated through
electricity supplied to the grid by the proposed project (EG
output,y
) minus
electricity purchased from the grid by the proposed project (EG
import,y
).
Electricity supplied to the Grid and electricity purchased from the Grid will be
measured and recorded by electricity meters installed at the Songbei Substations.
The readings of the electricity meter will be continuously measured and monthly
recorded. Data will be archived for 2 years following the end of the last crediting
period by means of electronic and paper backup. The accuracy of electricity
meter will be not lower than 0.5s. The appropriate national calibration standard,
such as DL/T 448-2000 will be applied for the electricity meter. The calibration
frequency is once a year.
QA/QC procedures to
be applied:
Electricity meter will be maintained and calibrated regularly to assure high level
of accuracy.
Any comment: Required to estimate the emission reductions from electricity generation from
LFG.


CDM Executive Board
page 52

outputt,y

Data unit: MWh
Description: Electricity supplied to the Grid by the proposed project during year y
used:
Measured by Project participants using the electricity meter (M1)
for the purpose of
section B.6
0
Description of
measurement methods
applied:
recorded. Data will be archived for 2 years following the end of the crediting
meter will be not lower than 0.5s.The appropriate national calibration standard,
such as DL/T 448-2000 will be applied in the project. The calibration frequency
is once a year. The records of any electricity imported in the baseline too should
be recorded at the start of project.
QA/QC procedures to
be applied:
of accuracy.
LFG.

import,y

Data unit: MWh
Description: Electricity purchased from the Grid by the proposed project during year y
used:
Measured by Project participants using the electricity meter (M1)
for the purpose of
section B.6
0
Description of
measurement methods
applied:
recorded. Data will be archived for 2 years following the end of the crediting
meter will be not lower than 0.5s.The appropriate national calibration standard,
such as DL/T 448-2000 will be applied in the project. The calibration frequency
is once a year. The records of any electricity imported in the baseline too should
be recorded at the start of project.
QA/QC procedures to
be applied:
of accuracy.
LFG.

Data / Parameter: Operation of the power plant
Data unit: Hour
Description: Operation of the power plant
used:
Measured by project participants using the generator operation hours timer
embedded in the generator (O)

CDM Executive Board
page 53

for the purpose of
section B.6
6750
Description of
measurement methods
applied:
Data will be recorded annually by the project developer to ensure methane
destruction is claimed for methane used in electricity plant when it is operational.

QA/QC procedures to
be applied:
Equipment will be maintained in line with manufacturers recommendations to
assure high quality output.
Any comment:

Data / Parameter: T
flare

Data unit:
Description: Temperature in the exhaust gas of the flare
used:
Measurements by project participants using the temperature meter (T)
for the purpose of
section B.6
Above 500 C
Description of
measurement methods
applied:
Data will be continuously measured with a type N thermocouple.
A temperature above 500 C indicates that a significant amount of gases are still
being burnt and that the flare is operating.

QA/QC procedures to
be applied:
According to the specification of the current manufacturer, the accuracy of the
thermocouple is 0.5%. The thermocouple should be replaced or calibrated once a
year according to the appropriate national standard or the manufacturers
recommendation.
Any comment: Required to determine project emissions from methane flaring and indicate
operating hours of the flare and its adequate operation. An excessively high
temperature at the sampling point (above 700 C) may be an indication that the
flare is not being adequately operated or that its capacity is not adequate to the
actual flow.

Data / Parameter: f
Data unit:
Description: Fraction of the methane captured at the SWDS and flared, combusted or used in
another manner.
used:
Written information from the operator of the solid waste disposal site and/or
Site visit at the solid waste disposal site
for the purpose of
section B.6
0
Description of
measurement methods
Written information from the operator of the solid waste disposal site and/or
Site visit at the solid waste disposal site

CDM Executive Board
page 54

applied:
QA/QC procedures to
be applied:
-
Any comment: Annually measured

Data / Parameter: Wx
Data unit: tons
Description: Total amount of organic waste prevented from disposal in year x (tons)
used:
Measured by the project participant, as the project participant will monitor the
data through collecting the measurement results from the local government,
which is consistent with the condition during 2003-2009.
for the purpose of
section B.6
The waste amount from 2003 to 2009 was sourced from the statistics data from
Urban Administration Bureau of Baoan District, which is the management
organization of Laohukeng landfill. The amount of waste from 2010 to 2012 was
estimated based on the annual 5% increase rate according to FSR.
Year Waste Acceptance (tons)
2003 199,500.00
2004 766,058.18
2005 981,546.00
2006 1,306,030.67
2007 1,435,172.75
2008 1,305,260.36
2009 1,237,844.26
2010 1,299,736.20
2011 1,364,723.01
2012 1432,959.16
Description of
measurement methods
applied:
Continuously, aggregated at least annually.
QA/QC procedures to
be applied:
-
Any comment: The amount of waste in 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007,2008 and 2009 are
historical records of the landfill. The project participant is not the owner of the
landfill. Therefore, the project participant cannot collect the sample for
measurement from the landfill directly.

Data / Parameter: P
n,j,x

Data unit: -
Description: Weight fraction of the waste type j in the sample n collected during the year x
used:
data through collecting the measurement results from the local government
for the purpose of
Food 37.57%
Paper 12.17%
Textile 9.36%
Wood 2.81%

CDM Executive Board
page 55

section B.6
Description of
measurement methods
applied:
The parameter will be measured by the project participant. The project participant
will monitor the data through obtaining the measurement results from the
government before the landfill is closed.
QA/QC procedures to
be applied:
-
Any comment: This parameter only needs to be monitored if the waste prevented from disposal
includes several waste categories j, as categorized in the tables for DOC
j
and k
j
.
Methane emissions from preventing disposal of waste at the SWDS can only be
claimed if there is no gas from the SWDS being captured and flared or
combusted.
The project participant is not the owner of the landfill. Therefore, the project
participant can not collect the sample for measurement from the landfill directly,
and can not control what kind of waste received either. Thus the project
participant can only get the latest data measured by the local government.

Data / Parameter: Z
Data unit: -
Description: Number of samples collected during the year x
used:
data through collecting the measurement results from the local government
for the purpose of
section B.6
4
Description of
measurement methods
applied:
The parameter will be measured by the project participant. The project participant
will monitor the data through obtaining the measurement results from the
government before the landfill is closed.
QA/QC procedures to
be applied:
-
Any comment: This parameter only needs to be monitored if the waste prevented from disposal
includes several waste categories j, as categorized in the tables for DOC
j
and k
j
.
Methane emissions from preventing disposal of waste at the SWDS can only be
claimed if there is no gas from the SWDS being captured and flared or
combusted.
The project participant is not the owner of the landfill. Therefore, the project
participant can not collect the sample for measurement from the landfill directly,
and can not control what kind of waste received either. Thus the project
participant can only get the latest data measured by the local government.

Data / Parameter: PE
EC,y

Data unit: tCO
2

Description: Project emissions from electricity consumption by the project activity during the
year y
used:
Measured by the project participant, and calculated as per the Tool to calculate
baseline, project and/or leakage emissions from electricity consumption
Value of data applied 0

CDM Executive Board
page 56

for the purpose of
section B.6
Description of
measurement methods
applied:
As per the Tool to calculate baseline, project and/or leakage emissions from
electricity consumption
QA/QC procedures to
be used
As per the Tool to calculate baseline, project and/or leakage emissions from
electricity consumption
Any comment: Annually measured

B.7.2. Description of the monitoring plan:
>>
This Monitoring plan will set out a number of monitoring tasks in order to ensure the
complete, consistent, clear and accurate monitoring and the accurate calculation of the
emission reduction in the crediting period. This plan is mainly implemented by the project
owner with the cooperation of the grid company.

1. Monitoring data
According to the monitoring methodology of ACM0001, the parameters to be monitored are
listed in section B.7.1, mainly including the LFG flow rate captured as well as the LFG flow
rates to the flare and to power generation, the temperature and pressure of the LFG, methane
fraction of LFG, temperature in the exhaust gas of the flare, and the electricity supplied (net
generation) by the project activity. Humidity of the LFG will be monitored to convert the
LFG from wet basis to dry basis follow the standard approach
39
. Please refer to Annex 4 for
the detail calculation procedure of conversions from wet basis to dry basis.

2. Monitoring plan implementation
A CDM management team will be formed to manage all the CDM related business in the
Project Activity. The operational and monitoring manager of the plant, the Financial Chief
and the Technical Chief are responsible for collecting the information and data required by
the Monitoring Plan. When the operational manager collects and records the data, the
Financial Chief and the Technical Chief will cooperate with him to review and record the data
on the site. The internal audit will be carried on monthly. The collected information will be
documented and sent to the CDM manager or responsible staffs of the Company for the cross-
check monthly. The CDM manager will in charge of the implementation of the Monitoring
Plan and report to the General Manager of the company. The General Manager of the
Company will make the confirmations on monitoring, calculation data and reports.

The responsibilities for carrying out these tasks are illustrated in the table below:

39
According to ACM0001, methane fraction of the landfill gas and LFG flow have to be measured on
same basis (either wet or dry). In case the Tool to determine project emissions from flaring gases
containing methane is used, follow the standard approaches to convert the flow on wet basis to dry
basis. For example, refer to the procedures provided in the book Fundamentals of Classical
Thermodynamics; Gordon J. Van Wylen, Richard E. Sonntag and Claus Borgnakke; 4 Edition, 1994,
John Wiley & Sons, Inc.

CDM Executive Board
page 57

3. Installation of the Monitoring Meters
Monitoring equipments are shown as in the following schematic.

Figure: Monitoring parameters and meters

Where:
F1 Flow meter to continuously measure the flow rate of LFG captured, and also
automatically measure the pressure and temperature of LFG
G Gas analyzer to measure methane fraction in LFG
H Hygrometer to measure the humidity of the LFG in order to convert the flow
rate/methane fraction from wet basis into dry basis
F2 Flow meter to continuously measure the flow of LFG fed to the flare, also
automatically measure the pressure and temperature of LFG
T Thermal couple to measure the temperature of the Exhaust Gas of the flare
F3 Flow meter to continuously measure the flow of LFG fed to the generators
and also automatically measure the pressure and temperature of LFG
General Manager
CDM Project Manager
Technical Chief Financial Chief Plant Operational
Manager in Charge of
Monitoring

CDM Executive Board
page 58

O Generator Operation hours timer embedded in the generator
M1 Electricity meter installed at Songbei Substation of power grid to measure the
electricity supplied to and imported from the grid
M2 Backup electricity meter installed at Songbei Substation of power grid

4. Data reporting
Since the proposed project adopts intelligent monitoring meters, the operation data could be
recorded and saved automatically. The CDM engineer is in charge of daily, weekly and
monthly management of the monitoring data, and submits a monthly monitoring report to
CDM management team.

5. QC/QA (Quality Control and Quality Assurance)

The proposed project will be implemented according to the manufactures recommended
maintenance procedures. The maintenance schedule given by the manufacture shall be
followed. The precision of the flow, the electricity and methane fraction measuring meters are
the key factors of monitoring quality.

The reliability of monitoring system is determined by precision and quality of measuring
meters, all the meters shall be purchased from professional manufacturers with national
metering certificates and QA qualified pass. The meters shall be calibrated periodically by
qualified metering instrument institutions, so as to assure the precision and steadiness of the
metering results.

The flow meters and gas analyzers will be subject to a regular maintenance and testing regime,
in accordance with the manufactures recommendations, to ensure accuracy. The gas analyzer
and the hygrometer will be calibrated once a year and the flow meters will be calibrated every
two years. The calibration frequency of power meter will be once a year, and the
thermocouple used to measuring the temperature in the exhaust gas of the flare will be
replaced or calibrated every year. All calibrations will be carried out by qualified calibration
entity(s).

Daily inspections of flow meters, gas analyzer and other devices will allow for controlling
equipment failure. If equipment fails, the supplier will be notified and repairs will be carried
out. If the damaged equipment cannot be repaired, it will be replaced at the earliest by the
same or an equivalent unit (standby tool), which has been calibrated and can be used for the
monitoring. In such case, this data will be recorded manually.

Emergency Procedure:
In case the electricity meter (M1) fails to work properly, the backup meter (M2) could be used.
The net electricity generated by the proposed project will be determined according to the
Power Purchase Agreement (PPA) which will be signed between the project owner and the
grid company. The difference of power supply due to transmission loss etc. will be
determined according to the PPA.

For other meters, mostly the meter in malfunction will be replaced by standby tool until
repaired if possible. When standby tools are not enough, a backup method will be used to
achieve the readings. For example, if the flow meter F2 is in malfunction, then the readings of
F2 will be calculated as the difference of readings of F1 and F3. If there is no data recorded
during the emergency period, the project owner will not claim any emission reduction.


CDM Executive Board
page 59

6. Data Management System
To keep safely the record of the data collected during monitoring, this project will set up a
complete data management system.

The project will perfect the whole monitoring procedure by developing the CDM manual,
tracking information from the primary source to the end-data calculations in paper document
format. It is the responsibility of the proposed project owner to provide additional necessary
data and information for validation and verification requirements of respective DOE. Physical
documentation such as paper-based maps, diagrams and environmental assessment will be
collated in a central place, together with this monitoring plan. All paper-based information
will be stored by the proposed project owner and kept at least one copy.

At the end of each month, the monitoring data will be filled in a spreadsheet and stored on a
hard disk or CD-ROM, and archiving of the printout of the spreadsheet is optional.
Furthermore, the project owner collects the sales receipts for the electricity supplied to the
grid as a cross-check, and compiles the monitoring report including the monitoring data and
relevant evidence at the end of each crediting year.
All the data will be kept for two years following the end of the last crediting period.

7. Monitoring Report
After the CDM project manager collects and sorts the monitored data, the monitoring report is
prepared by the project developer alone or with designated third party. The project developer
and/or the designated third party have to make sure that the format and content of the
monitoring report are consistent with the monitoring methodology in the PDD.

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 of baseline study and monitoring methodology: 13/01/2010

Name of person/entity determining the baseline:

Ms. Lin, Wei
Easy Carbon Consultancy Co., Ltd.
13-801, Jianwai SOHO, 39 Dongsanhuan Zhonglu, Chaoyang District, Beijing 100022,
P.R.China
Phone/fax: +86 1058697045-604/59000064
Email: tonilin@easy-carbon.com

Mr. Guan, Yisong
Easy Carbon Consultancy Co., Ltd.
13-801, Jianwai SOHO, 39 Dongsanhuan Zhonglu, Chaoyang District, Beijing 100022,
P.R.China
Phone/fax: +86 1058697045-603/59000064
Email: gyisong@ easy-carbon.com

Above persons are not Project Participants.


CDM Executive Board
page 60

SECTION C. Duration of the project activity / crediting period

C.1. Duration of the project activity:

C.1.1. Starting date of the project activity:
>>
10/03/2010 (The pre-treatment and flaring system contract date)
40

C.1.2. Expected operational lifetime of the project activity:
>>
20 years

C.2. Choice of the crediting period and related information:

C.2.1. Renewable crediting period:

C.2.1.1. Starting date of the first crediting period:
>>
01/04/2011

C.2.1.2. Length of the first crediting period:
>>
7 years

C.2.2. Fixed crediting period:

C.2.2.1. Starting date:
>>
Not applicable

C.2.2.2. Length:
>>
Not applicable

40
The pre-treatment and flaring system contract was signed on 10/03/1010, the construction contract
was signed on 22/03/2010, the loan contract was signed on 24/03/2010, and the construction started on
06/05/2010. Therefore, the earliest real action of the proposed project was the date of the pre-treatment
and flaring system contract signed on 10/03/1010

CDM Executive Board
page 61

SECTION D. Environmental impacts

D.1. Documentation on the analysis of the environmental impacts, including
transboundary impacts:
>>
The environmental impact assessment (EIA) of the proposed project activity was conducted
by City Environmental Engineering, Science & Technology Center on October 14
th
, 2008,
considering the active national standard GB16889-2008 Solid Waste Landfill Pollution
Control Standard, and then was approved by Shenzhen Environmental protection on 17
th

August 2009. A summary of the report is listed below:

Air Quality - LFG flares or electricity generators can also produce nitrogen oxides emissions.
Emissions will be in compliance with host country legislation such as the Boiler Air
Pollutant Emissions Standards (GB13271-2001) set forth in the Chinese environmental
guidelines. However, these emissions are viewed as significantly less harmful than the
continued uncontrolled release of LFG. The Project will significantly reduce odor and
greenhouse gas emissions.

Water Quality Domestic water caused by the proposed project is fairly small and will be
merged into sewage pipe network of the Laohukeng Environmental Park and be properly
treated. The condensate mainly generated from the LFG transmission and pre-treatment
processes will be discharged into the existing leachate treatment system. Wastewater after
treated can meet the local standard DB44/27-2001. Therefore, the impact of the proposed
project to the local water quality is limited and mitigated.

Noise There will be some increase in noise from the site associated with energy recovery,
although the engines will be housed to reduce noise emissions. The impacts are likely to be
marginal given the noise typically associated with operations at the landfills. The proposed
project is fulfilling the Industry Company and Factory Noise Standards" (GB12348-90)
Level I noise standard.

Solid Waste The production process does not generate solid waste, only workers garbage
which will be sent to Laohukeng Integrated Municipal Solid Waste Disposal Center and
would not have impact on the environment.

Local land use The proposed project is located in Laohukeng Environmental Park. The
project owner signed a land use agreement with the Urban Administration Bureau of Baoan
District, Shenzhen City, in which stated that the implementation of the proposed project
would occupy the land from Laohukeng Environmetal Park for free during the agreed period.
The Laohukeng Environmental Park was owned by the local government, the land acquisition
was carried out by the government. The relevant compensation was settled before the
implementation of the proposed project. Hence, there is no requirement of compensation due
to land acquisition and resettlement.

Hence, the project has little impact on the environment.

D.2. If environmental impacts are considered significant by the project participants
or the host Party, please provide conclusions and all references to support
documentation of an environmental impact assessment undertaken in accordance with
the procedures as required by the host Party:

CDM Executive Board
page 62

>>
The environmental impacts of Guangdong Shenzhen Laohukeng Landfill Gas Utilization
Project are not considered significant.


CDM Executive Board
page 63

SECTION E. Stakeholders comments

E.1. Brief description how comments by local stakeholders have been invited and
compiled:
>>
In April 2009, staff from the project owner carried out a survey of the local residents (e.g.
Tangxiachong village) 6km away from the project location. The staff introduced the
background of the proposed project and then sent out 50 copies of questionnaire in a random
way, 50 pieces of reply were received. Among the interviewees, 8 of them are farmers, 15 are
workers, 6 is governmental official, 7 are students, 3 are teacher and 11 others. 26 of them
had junior high school education or below, 12 had high school level education, 9 had college
level education, 1 with master degree and 2 with other education level.

A consultation results discussion meeting for stakeholder comments was later issued by the
project developer, 15 representatives of local stakeholders, including governmental officials
of Local County and local residents, etc attended the meeting on Apr. 17 2009 to discuss the
questionnaires collected and further introduce the project. No negative opinion on
construction of the project is heard and environmental considerations expressed by
stakeholders are discussed on the meeting.

The questions regarding the proposed project were mainly as follows:

E.2. Summary of the comments received:
>>The summary of questionnaire survey is listed as the following:
- 5(10%) of them think the Laohukeng landfill has great impact on the everyday life,
15(30%) think it has impact, 13(26%) think it has a little impact, 14(28%) think it
does not has impact and 3 (6%) of them are unsure;
- 14(28%) of them think the Laohukeng landfill has great impact on the local
environment and air quality, 12(24%) think it has impact, 6(12%) think it has little
impact and 4(8%)of them are unsure;
- 5 (10%) of them think the proposed project will greatly improve the quality of life of
local residents , 27 (54%)think it will improve the quality of life, 10(20%) think it has
Does the Laohukeng landfill impact on your everyday life?
Does the Laohukeng landfill impact on the local environment and air quality?
Is the proposed project going to improve the quality of life of local residents?
Is the proposed project going to improve the local environment and air quality?
Is the proposed project going to help improve the local economy?
Do you support the proposed project?
What is your suggestion on choose of environment protection measure by the proposed project?
What is your suggestion on the construction of the proposed project?

CDM Executive Board
page 64

a little effect, 3(6%) think it will not improve the quality of life and 5(10%) of them
are unsure;
- 22 (44%) of them think the proposed project will greatly improve the local
environment and air quality, 20(40%) of them think it will improve the local
environment and air quality, 3(6%) think it has a little effect on improving the local
environment and air quality, 5(10%) of them are unsure;
- 6(12%) of them think the proposed project will greatly contribute to the local
economic development, 19(38%) think it will contribute to the local economic
development, 19(38%) think it will has a little effect on the local economic
development, 2(4%) think it will not contribute the local economic development,
2(4%) of them are unsure and 2(4%) of them have no comment.
- 48(96%) of them support the implementation of the proposed project and 2(4%) of
them dont care;

The summary of local stakeholders meeting:
The local community possesses basically positive comments on the effects of the proposed
project. The interviewees considered that local social, economic and environmental
development would be beneficial from the proposed project. The response was overall
supportive to the project implementation.

E.3. Report on how due account was taken of any comments received:
>>
No negative comments have been received on the project. Moreover, the local community
possesses strong positive comments on the effects that the proposed project will make on the
local economy and infrastructure. During the survey some people express their concerns
about the environmental impacts of the project, such as LFG diffusion, groundwater pollution
and production safety. These concerns have been well analysed and treated in the EIA report,
and measures for mitigating the negative impacts on local bio-environment and domestic
living of local people have been well planned. With good implementation of the above-
mentioned measures, the proposed project will not have significant negative impact on the
local environment. There has, therefore, been no reason to modify the plans due to comments
received.

CDM Executive Board
page 65

Annex 1

CONTACT INFORMATION ON PARTICIPANTS IN THE PROJECT ACTIVITY

Organization: Shenzhen Dongjiang Lisai Recycled Power Co., Ltd.
Street/P.O. Box: Lao Hu Keng Environmental Industrial Park
Building:
City: Songgang Town, Baoan District, Shenzhen City
State/Region: Guangdong Province
Postfix/ZIP: 518015
Country: P.R. China
Telephone: +86-755-23475195
FAX: +86-755-23475195
E-Mail: andy.long@dongjiang.com.cn
URL:
Represented by: Long Shenghua
Title:
Salutation:
Last Name: Long
Middle Name:
First Name: Shenghua
Department:
Mobile: +86-13715291860
Direct FAX: +86-755-23475195
Direct tel: +86-13715291860
Personal E-Mail: andy.long@dongjiang.com.cn


CDM Executive Board
page 66

Organization: E.ON Climate & Renewables GmbH
Street/P.O. Box: Vlklinger Str. 4
Building:
City: Dusseldorf
State/Region: North Rhine - Westphalia
Postfix/ZIP: D-40219
Country: Germany
Telephone: +49 211 4579-6078
FAX: +49 211 4579-3723
E-Mail: eliano.russo@eon.com
URL:
Represented by: Eliano Russo
Title: Head of Carbon Sourcing
Salutation:
Last Name: Russo
Middle Name:
First Name: Eliano
Department:
Mobile:
Direct FAX: +49 211 4579-3723
Direct tel: +49 211 4579-6078
Personal E-Mail:


CDM Executive Board
page 67

Annex 2

INFORMATION REGARDING PUBLIC FUNDING

There is no public funding for the Guangdong Shenzhen Laohukeng Landfill Gas Utilization
Project.

CDM Executive Board page 68

Annex 3

BASELINE INFORMATION

All the tables related to the calculation of baseline emission reduction are presented below:

Emission Factor of China Southern Power Grid
Calculation of Operating Margin (OM):
Table A1. Simple OM Emission Factor of China Southern Power Grid in 2005
Fuel types

Unit
Guangdon
g
Guangxi Guizhou
Yunna
n
Subtotal

Carbon
Content

Oxidation
rate

Emission
Coefficien
t of Fuel

Average low
Caloric value

CO
2
emission
tCO
2
e

tc/TJ

% (kgCO
2
/TJ)
MJ/t,km3

J=EHI/10000
0 (unit of
mass
A B C D
E=A+B+C+
D
F G H I

J=EHI/10000
(unit of volume)
Raw coal

10000 ton
6,696.47 1,435 3,212.31
1,975.5
5 13,319.33 25.8 100 87,300 20,908 243,113,522
Cleaned coal 10000 ton 0.15 0.15 25.8 100 87,300 26,344 3,450
Other washed
coal
10000 ton
10.39 33.88 44.27 25.8 100 87,300 8,363 323,211
Coke 10000 ton 4.79 8.05 12.84 29.2 100 95,700 28,435 349,406
Coke oven gas 108m3 0.79 0.79 12.1 100 37,300 16,726 49,287
Other coal gas 108m3 1.87 15.96 17.83 12.1 100 37,300 5,227 347,626
Crude oil 10000 ton 10.91 10.91 20 100 71,100 41,816 324,367


Gasoline 10000 ton 0.68 0.68 18.9 100 67,500 43,070 19,769
Diesel 10000 ton 31.96 2.02 1.81 35.79 20.2 100 72,600 42,652 1,108,250
Fuel oil 10000 ton 887.21 887.21 21.1 100 75,500 41,816 28,010,178
LPG 10000 ton 0 17.2 100 61,600 50,179 0
Refinery gas 10000 ton 4.92 4.92 15.7 100 48,200 46,055 109,217
Natural gas 10
8
m3 0.93 0.93 15.3 100 54,300 38,931 196,598
Other oil product 10000 ton 1.7 1.7 20 100 75,500 41,816 53,671
Other coking
product
10000 ton
0 25.8 100 95,700 28,435 0
Other fuel 10000 ton 104.66 133.15 59.72 297.53 0 0 0 0 0
Subtotal 274,008,552
Source: China Energy Statistical Yearbook 2006
TableA2. Thermal Power Generation of China Southern Power Grid in 2005
Province
Power
Generation
(MWh)
Ratio of Self
Power
Consumption
of Plant (%)
Power Supply(MWh)
Guangdong 176,453,000 5.58 166,606,923
Guangxi 25,023,000 7.95 23,033,672
Guizhou 58,430,000 7.34 54,141,238
Yunnan 27,281,000 6.94 25,387,699
Total 269,169,532
Source: China Electric Yearbook 2006
Table A3. Emission Factor of China Southern Power Grid in 2005
Parameter Unit Value Source
A
Net Import from Central
China Power Grid to
MWh 20,264,000


Southern China Power
Grid (MWh)
B
Average Emission
Factor of Central China
Power Grid
tCO
2
e /MWh 1.16148
Calculation based on data from China Electric Power
Yearbook and China Energy Statistical Yearbook
C
Total Power Supply of
China Southern Power
Grid
MWh 289,433,532 C= Total Power Generation of China Southern Power GridA
D
Total Emissions of
Grid
tCO
2
e 297,544,857
China Electric Power Yearbook and China Energy Statistical
Yearbook
E
Emission Factor of
Grid
tCO
2
e /MWh 1.02802 E=D/C
China Energy Statistical Yearbook 2006


Fuel types

Unit Guangdong Guangxi Guizhou Yunnan Subtotal

Carbon
Content

Oxidation
rate

Emission
Coefficient
of Fuel

Average
low
Caloric
value

CO
2
emission
tCO
2
e

tc/TJ

% (kgCO
2
/TJ)
MJ/t,km
3

J=EHI/100000
unit of mass
A B C D
E=A+B+
C+D
F G H I
J=EHI/10000
(unit of volume)
Raw coal

10000 ton 7303.19 1490.01 4001.54 2735.88 15530.62 25.8 100 87,300 20,908 283,475,499
Cleaned coal 10000 ton 0 25.8 100 87,300 26,344 0
Other washed
coal
10000 ton
19.53 45.8 65.33 25.8 100 87,300 8,363 476,968
Coal Briquette 10000 ton 133.75 133.75 26.6 100 87,300 20,908 2,441,296
Coke 10000 ton 1.31 1.31 29.2 100 95,700 28,435 35,648
Coke oven gas 108m
3
0.84 2.06 2.9 12.1 100 37,300 16,726 180,925
Other coal gas 108m
3
0.89 19.15 20.04 12.1 100 37,300 5,227 390,714
Crude oil 10000 ton 0.87 0.87 20 100 71,100 41,816 25,866
Gasoline 10000 ton 0 18.9 100 67,500 43,070 0
Diesel 10000 ton 29.92 1.26 3 34.18 20.2 100 72,600 42,652 1,058,396
Fuel oil 10000 ton 685.85 0.09 685.94 21.1 100 75,500 41,816 21,655,867
LPG 10000 ton 0 17.2 100 61,600 50,179 0
Refinery gas 10000 ton 0 15.7 100 48,200 46,055 0
Natural gas 108m
3
7.92 7.92 15.3 100 54,300 38,931 1,674,251
Other oil
product
10000 ton
0.67 0.67 20 100 75,500 41,816 21,153
Other coking
product
10000 ton
0 25.8 100 95,700 28,435 0
Other fuel 10000 ton 93.54 189.68 20.29 303.51 0 0 0 0 0


Table A5. Thermal Power Generation of China Southern Power Grid in 2006
Province
Power
Generation
(MWh)
Ratio of Self
Power
Consumption of
Plant (%)
Power Supply(MWh)
Guangdong 188,429,000 5.27 178,498,792
Guangxi 27,967,000 4.45 26,722,469
Guizhou 76,039,000 6.06 71,431,037
Yunnan 39,791,000 4.12 38,151,611
Total 314,803,908
A
China Power Grid to
Southern China Power Grid
(MWh)
MWh 21,730,840
B
Average Emission Factor of
Central China Power Grid
tCO
2
e /MWh 1.12157
C
Total Power Supply of China
Southern Power Grid
D
Total Emissions of China
Southern Power Grid
tCO
2
e 335,809,186
E
Emission Factor of China
Southern Power Grid
tCO
2
e /MWh 0.99784 E=D/C


Fuel types

Unit
Guangd
ong
Guangxi Guizhou Yunnan Subtotal

Carbon
Content

Oxidation
rate

Emission
Coefficient
of Fuel

Average
low
Caloric
value

CO
2
emission
tCO
2
e

tc/TJ

% (kgCO
2
/TJ)
MJ/t,km
3

J=EHI/100000
unit of mass
A B C D
E=A+B+
C+D
F G H I
J=EHI/10000
(unit of volume)
Raw coal

10000 ton 8214.78 1750.63 4298.8 3170.79 17435 25.8 100 87,300 20,908 318,235,546
Cleaned coal 10000 ton 3.46 3.46 25.8 100 87,300 26,344 79,574
Other washed
coal
10000 ton
0.65 21.58 14.64 36.87 25.8 100 87,300 8,363 269,184
Coal Briquette 10000 ton 271.25 271.25 26.6 100 87,300 20,908 4,951,041
Coke 0.04 1.69 2.15 3.88 29.2 100 95,700 28,435 105,584
Coke oven gas 10
8
m
3
0.96 3.19 1.8 5.95 12.1 100 37,300 16,726 371,208
Other coal gas 10
8
m
3
30.77 21.63 52.4 12.1 100 37,300 5,227 1,021,628
Crude oil 10000 ton 0 20 100 71,100 41,816 0
Gasoline 10000 ton 0 18.9 100 67,500 43,070 0
Diesel 10000 ton 21.37 2.13 2.29 25.79 20.2 100 72,600 42,652 798,596
Fuel oil 10000 ton 467.97 0.41 468.38 21.1 100 75,500 41,816 14,787,262
LPG 10000 ton 0 17.2 100 61,600 50,179 0
Refinery gas 10000 ton 0.37 0.37 15.7 100 48,200 46,055 8,213
Natural gas 10
8
m
3
32.17 32.17 15.3 100 54,300 38,931 6,800,588
Other oil
product
10000 ton
8.47 8.47 20 100 75,500 41,816 267,407
Other coking
product
10000 ton
0 25.8 100 95,700 28,435 0
Other fuel 10000 ton 118.04 81.89 44.1 50.3 294.33 0 0 0 0 0


Table A8. Thermal Power Generation of China Southern Power Grid in 2007
Province
Power
Generation
(MWh)
Ratio of Self
Power
Consumption of
Plant (%)
Power Supply(MWh)
Guangdong 215.700.000 6.01 202,736,430
Guangxi 36.100.000 7.42 33,421,380
Guizhou 84.300.000 6.62 78,719,340
Yunnan 47.400.000 7.23 43,972,980
Total 358,850,130
A
China Power Grid to
Southern China Power Grid
(MWh)
MWh 24,237,240
B
Average Emission Factor of
Central China Power Grid
tCO
2
e /MWh 1.10197
C
Total Power Supply of China
Southern Power Grid
D
Total Emissions of China
Southern Power Grid
tCO
2
e 374,404,628
E
Emission Factor of China
Southern Power Grid
tCO
2
e /MWh 0.97733 E=D/C
Table A10. Operating Margin Emission Factor of China Southern Power Grid
Year 2005 Year 2006 Year 2007 Total


A Emissions (tCO
2
e /year) 297,544,857 335,809,186 374,404,628 1,007,758,671
B Power Supply (MWh) 289,433,532 336,534,748 383,087,370 1,009,055,649
C
CO
2
Emission Factor
(tCO
2
e/MWh)
C = A/B 0.9987

Calculation of Build Margin (BM):
Step 1. Calculation of weights of CO
2
emissions of solid, liquid and gas fuel in total emissions for power generation
2
2
, , , , ,
,
,
, , , , ,
,
i j y i y CO i y
i COAL j
Coal y
i j y i y CO i y
i j
F NCV EF
F NCV EF
e

=

2
2
, , , , ,
,
,
, , , , ,
,
i j y i y CO i y
i OIL j
Oil y
i j y i y CO i y
i j
F NCV EF
F NCV EF
e

=

2
2
, , , , ,
,
,
, , , , ,
,
i j y i y CO i y
i GAS j
Gas y
i j y i y CO i y
i j
F NCV EF
F NCV EF
e

=

Where:
FC
i,j,y
: Amount of fossil fuel type i consumed in province j in year y (mass or volume unit, for solid and wet fuel, the unit is ton, for gas fuel, the unit is m
3
);
NCV
ij
: Net thermal value of fuel type i in year y (for solid and wet fuel, the unit is GJ/t, for gas fuel, the unit is GJ/m
3
);


EF
CO2,i,y
: CO
2
emission factor of fossil fuel type i in year y (tCO
2
/GJ);
COAL, OIL and GAS respectively refers to the group of solid, liquid, and gas fuels.

Based on China Energy Statistical Yearbook 2008, the calculation of the weights of solid, liquid, and gas fuels in China Southern Power Grid are:
Coal
=93.08%
Oil
=4.56%
Gas
=2.36%

Step 2: Calculation of Emission Factor of Relevant Thermal Power
Adv Gas Gas Adv Oil Oil Adv Coal Coal Thermal
EF EF EF EF
, , ,
+ + =
Where: EF
Coal,Adv
, EF
Oil,Adv
and EF
Gas
Adv
respectively refers to the emission factor representing best technology commercially available for fuel of coal, oil or gas fired power
plants. For specific workings, see the following:
Table A11. Emission factor representing best technology commercially available for fuel of coal, oil or gas fired power plants

Variable
Efficiency
of Power
Supply
Emission
Coefficient of Fuel
(kgCO
2
/TJ)
Oxidation
Rate
Emission Factor
(tCO
2
e/MWh)
A B C D=3.6/A/1,000,000BC
Coal-fired
Power Plant
EF
Coal,Adv
38.10% 87,300 1 0.8249
Gas-fired
Power Plant
EF
Gas,Adv
49.99% 75,500 1 0.5437
Oil-fired
Power Plant
EF
Oil,Adv
49.99% 54,300 1 0.3910

Adv Gas Gas Adv Oil Oil Adv Coal Coal Thermal
EF EF EF EF
, , ,
+ + = =0.8018 (tCO
2
/MWh)


Step 3: Calculation of BM of the Grid
,
, , ,
,
Thermal y
grid BM y Thermal y
Total y
CAP
EF EF
CAP
=
Where: CAP
Total
is the total of new capacity additions, and CAP
Thermal
is the new capacity addition of thermal power.
Table A12. Installed Capacity of China Southern Power Grid in 2007
Installed Capacity Unit Guangdong Guangxi Guizhou Yunnan Total
Thermal Power MW
44,710 9,310 15,960 10,630 80,610
Hydropower MW
10,110 10,440 8,210 11,580 40,340
Nuclear Power MW
3,780 0 0 0 3,780
Wind Power and Others MW
250 0 0 0 250
Total MW
58,850 19,750 24,170 22,210 124,980
Source: China Power Yearbook 2008
Thermal Power
MW
40,615 5,434 14,350 8,564 68,963
Hydropower MW
9,320 7,624 7,534 9,698 34,176
Nuclear Power MW
3,780 0 0 0 3,780
183 0 0 0 183


Total
53,898 13,058 21,884 18,262 107,102
Thermal Power MW
35,182.6 4,931.2 9,634.8 4,758.4 54,507.0
Hydropower MW
9,035.7 6,085.3 7,233.0 7,993.1 30,347.1
Nuclear Power MW
3,780.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 3,780.0
83.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 83.4
Total MW
48,081.7 11,016.5 16,867.8 12,751.5 88,717.5
Table A15. Calculation of BM of China Southern Power Grid (MW)

Installation in year
2005
2006
2007
New Additions from
2005 to 2007
Ratio in New
Additions
A B C D=C-A
Thermal PowerMW 54,507.0 68,963.0 80,610 26,103 71.98%
Hydro PowerMW 30,347.1 34,176.0 40,340 9,992.9 27.56%
Nuclear PowerMW 3,780.0 3,780.0 3,780 0.0 0.00%
Wind Power and OthersMW 83.4 183.0 250 166.6 0.46%
TotalMW 88,717.5 107,102.0 124,980 36,262.5 100.00%
Percentage compared with
installation of 2007
70.99% 85.70% 100.00%
EF
grid,BM,y
=0.801871.98%=0.5772 tCO
2
/MWh


Table A16. Baseline Emission Factor of China Southern Power Grid

Parameter Unit Amount
A Operating Margin Emission Factor tCO
2
/MWh 0.9987
B Build Margin Emission Factor tCO
2
/MWh 0.5772
C
Combined Emission Factor
(C=0.5*A+0.5*B)
tCO
2
/MWh 0.78795


CDM Executive Board

Annex 4

MONITORING PLAN

Please refer to B.7.2. in the PDD.

Calculation procedure of conversions from wet basis to dry basis

The approved methodology ACM0001 (Version 11) - Consolidated baseline and monitoring
methodology for landfill gas project activities- is applied to the Guangdong Shenzhen
Laohukeng Landfill Gas Utilization Project (hereinafter referred to as the proposed project).
The methodology states that: methane fraction of the landfill gas and LFG flow has to be
measured on same basis (either wet or dry). In case the Tool to determine project emissions
from flaring gases containing methane is used, follow the standard approaches to convert
the flow on wet basis to dry basis. For example, refer to the procedures provided in the book
Fundamentals of Classical Thermodynamics; Gordon J. Van Wylen, Richard E. Sonntag
and Claus Borgnakke; 4 Edition, 1994, John Wiley & Sons, Inc.

This procedure provides procedures to measure the moisture content (MC) of the landfill gas
(LFG) and convert the LFG from wet basis to dry basis follow the procedures provided in the
book Fundamentals of Classical Thermodynamics; Gordon J. Van Wylen, Richard E.
Sonntag and Claus Borgnakke; 4 Edition, 1994, John Wiley & Sons, Inc.

The relative humidity (RH) is measured by hygrometer and the temperature and pressure at
the same point are measured simultaneously. The partial pressure of vapor is determined by
multiplying the relative humidity with the saturation pressure of the vapor, which could be
read from a vapor pressure table at given temperature. The moisture content equals the ratio
of partial pressure of vapor and the absolute pressure of the LFG.

1. The partial pressure of vapor, P
v
,

* Pv RH Ps =
41

Where:

P
v
The partial pressure of vapor
P
s
Saturation pressure of the vapor at the same temperature T. It can be
read from the vapor pressure table at given temperature.
RH Relative humidity

2. Moisture content (volume ratio), MC

Vv Pv
MC
V P
= =
42

Where:

41
Reference: Page 384, Fundamentals of Classical Thermodynamics, Gordon J. Van Wylen and
Richard E. Sonntag
42
Reference: Page 380, Fundamentals of Classical Thermodynamics, Gordon J. Van Wylen and
Richard E. Sonntag

CDM Executive Board

MC Moisture content
V
v
The volume of vapor in the mixture
V The total volume of the mixture
P The absolute pressure of the mixture

3. LFG in dry basis,

*(1 )
dry wet
LFG LFG MC =
43

4. Methane fraction in dry basis, w
dry

1
wet
dry
w
w
MC
=
44

Where:

w
dry
Methane fraction in dry basis
W
wet
Methane fraction in wet basis

- - - - -

43
Reference: http://www.epa.gov/apti/bces/module2/dry/dry.htm#gas_wet
44
Reference: http://www.epa.gov/apti/bces/module2/dry/dry.htm#gas_wet

PDD - Guangdong Shenzhen

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

PDD - Guangdong Shenzhen

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

PROJECT DESIGN DOCUMENT FORM (CDM PDD) - Version 03

CDM Executive Board

You might also like