You are on page 1of 34

FCCC/SB/2000/XX

English
Page 1

CLEAN DEVELOPMENT MECHANISM


SIMPLIFIED PROJECT DESIGN DOCUMENT
FOR SMALL-SCALE PROJECT ACTIVITIES (SSC-CDM-PDD)
Version 02

CONTENTS

A. General description of the small-scale project activity

B. Baseline methodology

C. Duration of the project activity / Crediting period

D. Monitoring methodology and plan

E. Calculation of GHG emission reductions by sources

F. Environmental impacts

G. Stakeholders comments

Annexes

Annex 1: Information on participants in the project activity

Annex 2: Information regarding public funding

Annex 3: Minutes of the Stakeholder Meeting


Revision history of this document

Version Date Description and reason of revision


Number
01 21 January Initial adoption
2003
02 8 July 2005 • The Board agreed to revise the CDM SSC PDD to reflect
guidance and clarifications provided by the Board since version
01 of this document.
• As a consequence, the guidelines for completing CDM SSC
PDD have been revised accordingly to version 2. The latest
version can be found at
<http://cdm.unfccc.int/Reference/Documents>.

2
SECTION A. General description of the small-scale project activity

A.1. Title of the small-scale project activity:


>>
Bondoc Realty Methane Recovery and Electricity Generation Project
Version 2
Completed 04 June 2007

A.2. Description of the small-scale project activity:


>>
The Bondoc Realty Methane Recovery and Electricity Generation Project (hereafter, the “Project”)
developed by Philippine Bio-Sciences Co., Inc. (hereafter referred to as the “Project Developer” or
“PhilBIO”) is an anaerobic digestion (AD) swine wastewater treatment project at the Bondoc
Realty farrow to finish swine farm located in the Candelaria, Philippines (hereafter referred to as
the “Host Country”).

The Bondoc farm operation currently employs normal scraping and hose down cleaning of waste.
The farm manages waste with a series of concrete lagoons (oxidation ponds). This material
degrades anaerobically in the facility’s lagoon system producing significant amounts of methane.

The Project Developer will implement a turnkey ‘covered in-ground anaerobic reactor’ (CIGAR)
that will utilise organic material currently treated in the wastewater ponds to produce biogas. The
CIGAR system will treat organically laden waste-water to reduce the amount of COD (Chemical
Oxygen Demand) it contains prior to the waste water reaching the main pond system. The biogas
produced in the project’s anaerobic digester will be used to generate electricity for use on site.
Currently the farm relies on electricity from Meralco, the electricity distributor in Luzon, but with
the implementation of the project activity, that electricity will henceforth be supplied by renewable
biogas utilised in generators to produce electricity. No emissions reductions will be claimed in the
project activity from displacing grid electricity.

Development of the Project will directly reduce greenhouse gas emissions produced by the release
of methane from the concrete lagoons, and will reduce carbon dioxide and other GHG emissions
from the Luzon grid. The methane emissions were calculated ex-ante using the IPCC 2006 Tier II
approach to calculate the amount of raw material that would decay anaerobically in the absence of
the project activity. The project is predicted to reduce emissions by 1,785 tons of CO2 equivalent
per year.

The Project is helping the Host Country fulfil the sustainable development goals outlined in
Philippine Agenda 21. The Project will act as a clean technology demonstration project within the
wastewater management sector, which could be replicated across the Philippines and the region;

3
• The project is an important capacity building activity, demonstrating the use of a new financial
mechanism for funding of the renewable energy and waste management sector via the CDM;
• The project increases diversity and security of energy supplied through energy self
sufficiency;
• The project will result in significant reduction in levels of BOD, COD and TSS and in turn
will result in cleaner effluents. These effluents can be recycled on-site or off-site as irrigation
water thereby benefiting the adjoining communities. Benefits shall also accrue to the
communities in terms of cleaner water ways;
• The project will make the farm more competitive and thus ensure long term employment to the
local residents, and will be a source of local taxes for the LGU which in turn will improve
delivery of basic services to the community;
• The multiplier effect of this investment is likely to bring additional benefits, such as
employment opportunities, particularly in the agro-industrial sector;
• The project will make use of methane rich biogas through a closed loop process, thereby
reducing greenhouse gas emissions; and,
• The project will improve local air quality and significantly reduce odour, which in turn will
directly benefit the adjoining communities.

A.3. Project participants:


>>
Please list project participants and Party(ies) involved and provide contact information in Annex 1.
Information shall be indicated using the following tabular format.
Kindly indicate if the
Name of Party involved (*) Private and/or public entity(ies) Party involved
((host) indicates a host Project participants (*) wishes to be
(as applicable) considered as project
Party)
participant

The Philippines (host) Bondoc Realty Farm No

The Philippines (host) Philippine BioSciences Co., Inc. (PhilBIO) No

United Kingdom of Great


EcoSecurities Group Ltd
Britain and Northern No
Ireland
United Kingdom of Great
EcoSecurities Group Plc
Britain and Northern No
Ireland
(*) 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.
Note: When the PDD is filled in support of a proposed new methodology (forms CDM-NBM and
CDM-NMM), at least the host Party(ies) and any known project participant (e.g. those proposing a
new methodology) shall be identified.

A.4. Technical description of the small-scale project activity:


>>

4
The ‘covered in-ground anaerobic reactor’, or ‘CIGAR’, breaks down organic contaminants
through a three-step biological process where wastewater is treated in the absence of oxygen. The
wastewater is stored in the reactor for at least 30 days where specialized bacteria consume the
waste and release methane that is utilised as biogas for on-site electricity generation (see figure 1).

Figure 1: CIGAR pond reactor1

HDPE (High Density Polyethylene) liners and covers are used to provide a ‘gas seal’ to prevent
leachate from escaping to the underground aquifer and to prevent methane from escaping to the
atmosphere. The CIGAR system is covered 100% of the time with 1.0mm HDPE liners. This
process results in at least 95% destruction of harmful BOD, and 80% reduction of COD.
Suspended solids, dissolved solids and color are all improved in the CIGAR. Longer retention
time (number of days in the CIGAR) at 35 degrees Celsius kills off all pathogenic material.
Methane gas makes up at least 60% of the biogas by volume. In the CIGAR for the Project the
average biogas off-take is predicted to be approximately 1,100 cubic meters per day. The biogas
will be used to generate electricity for the farm through a 100 KW generator.

The project uses CIGAR anaerobic digestion technology utilizing HDPE, a high quality, resilient
plastic with a long history of durability in sunlight and rainy weather. The product, HUITEX from
Taiwan, is made from carbon black resins from Chevron Singapore. The power plant is a
combination of a quality power train engine from a 100 KW Stamford Electric Generator.

A.4.1. Location of the small-scale project activity:


>>
A.4.1.1. Host Party(ies):
>>
The Philippines

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


>>
Quezon Province

A.4.1.3. City/Town/Community etc:


>>
Candelaria

A.4.1.4. Detail of physical location, including information allowing the unique identification
of this small-scale project activity(ies):

1
Source: “Cost Estimation of Biogas Plants in Piggeries: A Manual for Hog Raisers”, prepared by the Development Bank of the
Philippines.

5
>>
The project is located in the municipality of Candelaria, in the province of Quezon in the
Philippines. The address of the project is: Bondoc Realty Farm, Brgy. Taguan, Candelaria ,
Quezon, the Philippines.

The GPS coordinates of the farm are: N 13°55’77 and E 121°23’84.

A.4.2. Type and category(ies) and technology of the small-scale project activity:
>>
The category for the project activity according to the UNFCCC’s published “Appendix B -
Indicative Simplified Baseline and Monitoring Methodologies for Selected Small-Scale CDM
Project Activities” is:

• Type III.D (reference AMS-III.D version 11) – “Methane recovery” – for the methane
recovery component of the project activity.

The project conforms to project category III.D since the project both reduces anthropogenic
emissions by sources, and results in emission reductions lower than 60,000 tCO2e annually. A
detailed discussion of the technology of the project activity can be found in Section A.4.

A.4.3. Brief explanation of how the anthropogenic emissions of anthropogenic greenhouse


gas (GHGs) by sources are to be reduced by the proposed small-scale project activity,
including why the emission reductions would not occur in the absence of the proposed small-
scale project activity, taking into account national and/or sectoral policies and
circumstances:
>>
In the absence of the project activity, fugitive emissions of methane from the pond system and
direct emissions from the Luzon power grid would continue unabated2. The project will engineer
a more sustainable waste treatment solution that dramatically reduces fugitive methane emissions,
and makes available carbon neutral biogas for electricity generation. Under the business as usual
scenario there would be continuing release of methane from the pond system and continued
emissions production from the power grid. The current market situation and common practice in
the industry is discussed in greater detail in Section B.3.

It is unlikely that anaerobic digestion projects would be developed in the Host Country in the
absence of the CDM project activity due to unfavourable market conditions and the existence of
significant technological and market barriers for such projects. To date there has been limited
development of such projects in the Host Country, and the majority of installations have been
implemented as CDM projects. In addition, the proposed project activity faces significant barriers
to investment that drives a continuation of the prevailing business practice in the Host Nation.
These barriers are discussed and further elaborated in Section B.

A.4.3.1 Estimated amount of emission reductions over the chosen crediting period:
>>
Please indicate the chosen crediting period and provide the total estimation of emission reductions
as well as annual estimates for the chosen crediting period. Information on the emissions
reductions shall be indicated using the following tabular format.

2
Reduced grid emissions are a co-benefit, but the project will not credit for the renewable energy
component.

6
For type (iii) small-scale projects the estimation of project emissions is also required.
Years Annual estimation of emission reductions in
tonnes of CO2e
2007 744
2008 1,785
2009 1,785
2010 1,785
2011 1,785
2012 1,785
2013 1,785
2014 1,041
*After the initial 7-year crediting period, the
baseline will be reassessed, generating a new
estimate of emissions reductions yet to be
determined.
Total estimated reductions (tonnes of CO2e) 12,492
Total number of crediting years 7 (renewable up to 21 years)
Annual average over the crediting period 1,785
of estimated reductions (tonnes of CO2e)

A.4.4. Public funding of the small-scale project activity:


>>
The project has not received and is not seeking public funding.

A.4.5. Confirmation that the small-scale project activity is not a debundled component of a
larger project activity:
>>
Based on the information provided in Appendix C of the Simplified modalities and procedures for
small-scale clean development mechanism project activities, this Project is not a debundled
component of a larger project activity since the project participants have not registered nor
operated another project in the region surrounding the project boundary.

SECTION B. Application of a baseline methodology:

B.1. Title and reference of the approved baseline methodology applied to the small-scale
project activity:
>>
Project activity type III.D (reference AMS-III.D version 11) - Methane recovery.

B.2 Project category applicable to the small-scale project activity:


>>
The category for the project activity according to Appendix B of the UNFCCC’s published
simplified procedures for small-scale activities is:
Type III: Other Project Activities
Category III.D.: Methane recovery in agricultural and agro industrial activities

The simplified baseline and monitoring methodology AMS III.D., version 11, 23 December 2006,
is applicable. For more information about the methodology, please refer to the following website:

7
http://cdm.unfccc.int/methodologies/SSCmethodologies/approved.html

This selection is appropriate because the alternative to the project activity would be to continue
with the business as usual scenario. The farm would continue to manage waste water through the
existing anaerobic pond system, and would continue to rely on the Luzon power grid exclusively
for electricity.

• Methane Recovery (AMS-III.D, version 11)

For the methane recovery component of the project activity, the baseline has been calculated
according to project activity type III.D (version 11), which states:

“The emission baseline is the amount of methane that would be emitted to the atmosphere during
the crediting period in the absence of the project activity. For each year during the crediting period,
emissions are calculated as specified in paragraph a and paragraph b below and lower of the two values
is used:

(a) Actual monitored amount of methane captured and destroyed by the project activity.

(b) The methane emissions calculated ex ante using the amount of the waste or raw material
that would decay anaerobically in the absence of the project activity, with the most recent
IPCC tier 2 approach (please refer to the chapter ‘Emissions from Livestock and Manure
Management’ under the volume ‘Agriculture, Forestry and other Land use’ of the 2006 IPCC
Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas Inventories).”

B.3. Description of how the anthropogenic emissions of GHG by sources are reduced below
those that would have occurred in the absence of the registered small-scale CDM project
activity:
>>
The Project qualifies to use simplified methodologies and results in emission reductions lower
than 60,000 tCO2e annually.

MARKET SITUATION & NATIONAL POLICIES:

The Philippines has approximately 5 million farms and over 8 million pigs, and it has been
estimated that the amount of livestock manure produced is 28,960 tonnes per day or 10.1 million
tonnes per year. The bulk of the pig population comes from the smallholder farm which accounts
for about 85% of the total hog inventory. According to the Philippine Bureau of Agricultural
Statistics, the livestock industry grew by about 3 percent in 2003, with the hog sector as the major
contributor. Hog production represents about 80 percent of the total Philippine livestock industry.
In 2003, the swine sector grew by 4 percent. Due to continued strong domestic consumption of
pork, hog production will likely continue to grow at a rate of 3 to 4 percent in 2005 and beyond
despite increased feed cost in the world market. Filipinos are large consumers of swine meat and
are known to generally prefer pork to chicken or beef.3

The industry faces a number of obstacles including the spread of economically devastating
diseases, high marketing and transaction costs, erratic supply of imported feed ingredients,
supplements and biologics, and the limited availability of genetically superior breeding stock.4

3
Moog, F. A. , “Promotion and utilization of polyethylene biodigester in smallhold farming systems in the Philippines”, Research
Division, Bureau of Animal Industry, Manila, Philippines, 1997
4
Abuel-Ang, Pia, “Philippines Livestock and Products Annual 2004”, USDA Foreign Agricultural Service, September 2004

8
The main regulatory agencies that monitor the industry are the Bureau of Animal Industry (BAI)
and the National Meat Inspection Commission (NMIC) under the Philippine Department of
Agriculture. Environmental regulations are monitored and enforced by the Department of
Environment and Natural Resources (DENR). The primary environmental laws applicable to the
project are the Clean Water Act (2003) and the Clean Air Act (1999).

ADDITIONALITY:

According to Attachment A to Appendix B of the simplified modalities and procedures for CDM
small-scale project activities, evidence as to why the proposed project is additional is offered
under the following categories of barriers: (a) investment barrier, (b) technological barrier, and (c)
prevailing practice.

a) Investment Barrier

Small swine farms, such as the Bondoc Realty farm, have a difficult time securing financing for
the implementation of biogas waste water management projects. The following factors contribute
to the investment barrier which these projects face:

• Perceived Risk - Most local banks are not interested in these projects primarily because of
lack of knowledge and experience with the technology.
• Current Practice - The current pond based treatment method is considered standard
operating practice in the Philippines and the region for wastewater treatment. Moreover,
for the Project Owner the current pond system (business as usual scenario) is extremely
financially attractive, given that it works to required specification and requires virtually no
management input to achieve the key parameters. All required land is appropriated and
the current system has sufficient capacity to handle additional waste.
• Lowest Cost - The current system represents the lowest cost option, with the only cost
being the opportunity cost of alternative land use.

The inclusion of CER revenues has therefore become an important part of the Project Owner and
Project Developer’s implementation and financing strategy.

(b) Technological Barrier:

The predominant and known technology for piggery waste water management in the Philippines is
through a series of lagoons (oxidation ponds).5 Biological treatment of wastewater to produce
biogas is a new and relatively unknown technology in the host country. The lack of available
knowledge and confidence in the technology, especially among small privately owned swine
farms, makes this type of development difficult to establish. As a result, most swine farm owners
view this technology as risky and prefer to maintain their farms in the traditional fashion. This
risk is reflected in the fact that there were fewer than ten projects of this type in the host country
when this project was started. Moreover, many farmers are concerned that a bio-digester project is
too complex to operate and maintain. The anaerobic digestion and biogas system utilized in the
project scenario is quite different than previous experience in the Philippines. The project scenario
represents a more technologically advanced alternative to the business as usual scenario, and one
that carries higher perceived risk.

5
“Cost Estimation of Biogas Plants in Piggeries: A Manual for Hog Raisers”, prepared by the Development Bank of the Philippines.

9
Anaerobic digestion systems are perceived as relatively high risk, being based upon the function of
a biological system that is neither 100% characterised, nor performance guaranteed. The biological
system is at constant risk of chemical shocks that can wipe out the anaerobes and biological
activity (and subsequently the waste management and energy production regimes, which are both
key to commercial operations). AD systems require constant and ongoing precise management of a
variety of elements, including water flows, pH levels, etc. In general, they are perceived as a risky
solution. Overall, the project scenario involves higher perceived risks due to the performance
uncertainty and a low market share of the new technology.

(c) Prevailing Practice:

The CIGAR technology utilized in the project activity is not common practice in the Philippines
and represents a higher risk alternative to the business as usual scenario. At present, pond
treatment is standard practice in the Philippines and the region for swine farms. There is little
experience of utilising aerobic or anaerobic technologies in a Philippine context, and therefore
these are not considered a high management priority. The highest priority for most in the sector is
the management of their waste discharges to simply maintain compliance with local regulation.
From the operator’s perspective, the existing lagoon system is a cheap and sufficient way to clean
the waste water.

SUMMARY:

The current and expected practice in the host nation, which relies almost exclusively on pond
based waste water treatment facilities for piggeries, as well as the combination of lack of access to
financing and perceived risks of the selected technology, clearly demonstrate that the Project is
additional and therefore not the baseline scenario. The prohibitive barriers that exist in the
Philippines are confirmed by the observed trend in current piggery waste water management
practices.

The barrier analysis above clearly demonstrates that the most plausible baseline scenario is the
prevailing practice of pond systems. The most significant barriers facing the project activity are
technology unfamiliarity, perceived risk of the technology and the relative lack of investment
interest among the key business constituency.

B.4. Description of how the definition of the project boundary related to the baseline
methodology selected is applied to the small-scale project activity:
>>
The project boundary is defined in AMS-III.D. version 11, paragraph 4: “The project boundary is
the physical, geographical site of the methane recovery facility.”

• The project installs a methane recovery system which includes: an anaerobic digester,
associated piping, and a genset. Therefore these elements constitute the project boundary,
as illustrated below.

10
Figure 1. Project Boundary under AMS.III.D.

B.5. Details of the baseline and its development:


>>
SECTION C. Duration of the project activity / Crediting period:

C.1. Duration of the small-scale project activity:


>>
C.1.1. Starting date of the small-scale project activity:
>>
16/10/2004

C.1.2. Expected operational lifetime of the small-scale project activity:


>>
21y-0m

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


>>
C.2.1. Renewable crediting period:
>>
C.2.1.1. Starting date of the first crediting period:
>>
01/08/2007

C.2.1.2. Length of the first crediting period:


>>
7y-0m

C.2.2. Fixed crediting period:


>>

11
C.2.2.1. Starting date:
>>
C.2.2.2. Length:
>>
SECTION D. Application of a monitoring methodology and plan:
>>

D.1. Name and reference of approved monitoring methodology applied to the small-scale
project activity:
>>
Monitoring the amount of methane used as fuel or combusted as described in Appendix B of the
simplified modalities and procedures for small-scale CDM project activities. The approved
monitoring methodologies applied to this project are as follows:

AMS-III.D version 11 – (9) The amount of methane used as fuel or combusted shall be monitored,
using flow meters and analysing the methane content of the combusted gases either online, or with
samples taken at least quarterly, and more frequently if the results show significant deviations
from previous values and, (11) Flow meters, sampling devices and gas analysers shall be subject to
regular maintenance, testing and calibration to ensure accuracy.

D.2. Justification of the choice of the methodology and why it is applicable to the small-scale
project activity:
>>
The methodology was selected as suggested by the Simplified Monitoring Methodologies for
small-scale CDM projects. Measuring the amount of methane recovered and metering the amount
of electricity generated are the most appropriate methods of monitoring the project activity.

12
CDM-SSC-PDD (version 02)

CDM – Executive Board page 13

D.3 Data to be monitored:


>>
(The table below specifies the minimum information to be provided for monitored data. Please complete the table for the monitoring methodology chosen for the
proposed project activity from the simplified monitoring methodologies for the applicable small-scale CDM project activity category contained in appendix B of the
simplified M&P for small-scale CDM project activities. Please note that for some project categories it may be necessary to monitor the implementation of the
project activity and/or activity levels for the calculation of emission reductions achieved. Please add rows or columns to the table below, as needed)

ID number Data type Data Data Measured Recording Proportion How will the For how long is Comment
variable unit (m), frequency of data to be data be archived data to
calculated monitored archived? be kept?
(c) or (electronic/
estimated (e) paper)
1 Electricity E KWh M Continuous 100% Electronic Crediting period Electricity will be metered through the
Generation of and paper plus 2 years use of an electricity meter supplied by
the Project Power Logic.
2 Electricity use Ep KWh C Monthly 100% Electronic Crediting period Biogas is expected to cover all
of the Project and paper plus 2 years electricity consumption. The only
Activity project-associated equipments are
0.25HP blowers used to direct the
collected biogas to the gas handling
system. This requires less than 50kWh
a month and will easily met by the
biogas electricity generation. If and
only of there is an installation of
additional on-site equipment with
significant electricity consumption as
part of the project activity, that
consumption will be monitored and
accounted for as project emissions
where is it greater than renewable
electricity generated. It will be either
metered or estimated based on known
equipment consumption and running
hours.

13
CDM-SSC-PDD (version 02)

CDM – Executive Board page 14

3 Biogas Vf m3/ M Continuous 100% Electronic Crediting period Biogas will be monitored through the
recovered and day and paper plus 2 years use of a thermal mass flow meter
used as fuel supplied by Fluid Components
International of the United States.
4 Methane CCH4 % M Quarterly Sample Electronic Crediting period The methane content of the combusted
content of (more and paper plus 2 years gas will be analysed with quarterly
biogas often, if samples using a portable gas
necessary) analyzer. In the event that the methane
content of the quarterly samples
varies significantly, more frequent
samples will be taken.
5 Number of T Num M Daily 100% Electronic Crediting period Monitoring plan requires that site
Tears ber and paper plus 2 years staff inspect the system daily for
tears. These are noted in service
records.

Two other activities on site will be monitored closely:

1. Digester cover and associated system piping will be checked daily for leaks and tears. If these are found they will be repaired promptly, typically within a
few hours and within two days maximum.
2. Sludge which collects are the bottom of the CIGAR will need to be removed after approximately 10 years. The farm manager has been educated regarding
this requirement and options for proper disposal of sludge. Sludge disposal will likely be on fields as fertilizer, and disposal and will be monitored to ensure
proper disposal of sludge. Sludge disposal will likely be on fields as fertilizer, and disposal and will be monitored to ensure proper, non-anaerobic disposal..

D.4. Qualitative explanation of how quality control (QC) and quality assurance (QA) procedures are undertaken:
>>
Data Uncertainty level of data Explain QA/QC procedures planned for these data, or why such
(High/Medium/Low) procedures are not necessary.
D.3.1 Low Meters will be subject to regular maintenance and testing
D.3.3 Low regime to ensure accuracy.
D.3.2. Low Electricity requirements of installed equipment are well
understood by project contractors and their hours of use will be
apparent.

14
CDM-SSC-PDD (version 02)

CDM – Executive Board page 15

D.3.4 Low The methane content of the combusted gas will be analysed
with quarterly samples. In the event that the methane content of
the quarterly samples varies significantly, the methane
concentration will be measured with greater frequency. A gas
analyzer will be used to sample the biogas and measure the CH4
fraction of biogas.
D.3.5. Low Site staff monitors the system daily for leaks and tears. These
are easily identifiable and do not require QC procedures. Site
staff records backup fuel consumption

15
CDM-SSC-PDD (version 02)

CDM – Executive Board page 16

A monitoring team will make regular site audits to ensure that monitoring and operational
procedures are being observed in accordance with the monitoring plan and monitoring protocol.

D.5. Please describe briefly the operational and management structure that the project
participant(s) will implement in order to monitor emission reductions and any leakage
effects generated by the project activity:
>>
Shift Operator  Shift Manager  Farm General Manager

The farm owner will be responsible for operations, maintenance, and monitoring (OMM), as well
as responsible for monitoring biogas production and electricity generation as part of standard
operating procedure for the project activity. EcoSecurities has developed a monitoring workbook
that the farm owner will use to input all required monitoring data. Both electronic and paper copies
will be kept for back-up purposes, and transferred to EcoSecurities on a monthly basis.
Additionally, calibration and maintenance records of the flow meter and gas analyzer will be
maintained.

The OMM personnel will be skilled technicians, and any additional training required to ensure
accurate and effective monitoring will be provided by EcoSecurities’ monitoring experts prior to
start of crediting. This training will include equipment operation, data monitoring and recording
(including how to reconcile any adjustments and/or data uncertainties), reporting, internal audits of
GHG project based operational requirements, operation, calibration, maintenance, and emergency
procedures, project performance review, and corrective actions.

Calibration of required equipment will be performed by the technology provider or a trained


representative. Procedures will be implemented prior to the start of crediting.

As per the methodology AMS-III.D version 11 paragraph 8 no leakage calculation is required.

D.6. Name of person/entity determining the monitoring methodology:


>>
Jenna Goodward of EcoSecurities; Contact at +1 212 356-0175 or jenna@ecosecurities.com
EcoSecurities Group plc is a project participant.

SECTION E.: Estimation of GHG emissions by sources:

E.1. Formulae used:


>>
E.1.1 Selected formulae as provided in appendix B:
>>
AMS-III.D (v.11):
Annual methane capture from biogas multiplied by the global warming potential (GWP) of
methane (21 tCO2 / tonne methane), and, where lower:

Methane emissions calculated ex ante using the amount of the waste or raw material that would
decay anaerobically in the absence of the project activity, with the most recent IPCC tier 2
approach.

16
CDM-SSC-PDD (version 02)

CDM – Executive Board page 17

E.1.2 Description of formulae when not provided in appendix B:


>>
E.1.2.1 Describe the formulae used to estimate anthropogenic emissions by sources of GHGs
due to the project activity within the project boundary:
>>
For AMS-III.D (version 11), projects should consider the following sources of project emissions:

(i) Methane not captured by the project and released to the atmosphere;
(ii) Methane captured and not flared (e.g. physical leakage, flare inefficiency, flare availability);
(iii) CO2 emissions from combustion of non-biogenic methane;
(iv) CO2 emissions from use of fossil fuels or electricity for the operation of the facility;
(v) The aerobic treatment and/or proper soil application of the sludge leaving the digesters in the
project activity shall also be ensured and monitored. If the sludge is treated and/or disposed
anaerobically, the resulting methane emissions shall be considered as project emissions.

(i). Methane not captured by the project and released to the atmosphere, will be quantified as such:

Project emissions in this category include potential leakage from tears in the cover of the system,
which would result in some of the methane produced in the CIGAR not being captured. The
CIGAR is inspected daily for tears by farm staff. Tears will be monitored, and for each tear project
emissions will be calculated representing the average loss of biogas over a two-day period
(maximum time to repair a tear).

Leakage of methane possible through HDPE liners is negligible according to a study by Stark and
Choi (2005)6, who studied methane leakage under laboratory conditions which were significantly
more conducive to leakage than the project (100% CH4, very high pressure) and found that the the
migration of CH4 through a HDPE geomembrane is on average around 302 ml (STP)/m2*day. The
cover and liner are to be installed by PhilBio, which is ISO-9001 certified for HDPE cover and
liner installation.

In the ex-ante calculations, assuming one tear per year, PEAd- estimate is based on the Tier II
baseline. In the ex-post calculations, it will be based on actual tears recorded.

PEAD,y =GWPCH4 * DCH4 * T * (LFAD)

Parameter Value Unit Comment/Source


GWPCH4 21 tCO2e/tCH4 GWP of methane / IPCC
DCH4 0.00067 t/m3 Density of methane at normal
conditions: temperature (20 ºC)
and 1 atm pressure / ACM0010
LFAD 972.6 m3 Average amount of methane
captured over two days in the

6
Stark, T.D. and H. Choi. “Technical Note: Methane Gas migration through geomembranes”. Geosynthetics
International, 2005, 12, No. 2.

17
CDM-SSC-PDD (version 02)

CDM – Executive Board page 18

crediting period; Ex-ante it is


calculated based on the daily
methane predicted in the Tier II
baseline times two. This figure will
be based ex-post on Vf and CCH4
as calculated in the baseline
calculation.
T 1 Number of tears Ex-post calculation will use
in crediting monitored value for T.
period
PE AD,y 13.68 tCO2e/yr To be taken as project emissions
where the IPCC Tier II calculations
of methane generating potential are
lower than the baseline based on
biogas generation.

(ii) Methane captured and not flared (e.g. physical leakage, flare inefficiency, flare availability);
There is no flare installed in the project, so this section refers to leakage from the biogas piping
system and incomplete combustion of biogas by the generator. Methane emissions from the piping
system are unlikely, but given that the pipeline is 150 meters long, it is conservative to monitor
them and account for project emissions should a leak be found. Leaks will be treated equivalent to
a tear, as described above in section (i). A 90% default is adopted for the combustion efficiency of
the generator, which is conservative given that manufacturer’s defaults for this type of genset are
typicall in the range of 97-99%. Therefore project emissions from methane captured and not
combusted are as follows:

Parameter Value Unit Comment/Source

GWPCH4 21 tCO2e/tCH4 GWP of methane / IPCC

CCH4 60% % Ex-ante this is excluded (see note below) /


60% is the estimate from the project
developer, however the value to be used
ex-post will be based on monitored data.

DCH4 [use ex-post] 0.000715 t/m3 Density of methane at normal metered


conditions: temperature (0 ºC) and 1 atm
pressure (these are the conditions the
meter normalises to). [use ex-post in
relation to the biogas baseline which is
metered]

18
CDM-SSC-PDD (version 02)

CDM – Executive Board page 19

DCH4 [use ex-ante] 0.00067 t/m3 Density of methane at normal conditions:


temperature (20 ºC) and 1 atm pressure /
ACM0010 [use ex-ante in relation to the
Tier II baseline which is methane at 20 C]

Vf 142,005 m3 For ex-ante calculations the Tier II


methane predictions are substituted for Vf.
In project scenario Vf will correspond to
the metered biogas).

fgenset 0.90 % Default genset combustion efficiency

PECH4_IC 199.80 tCO2e/yr

Note that since the methane predicted by the Tier II calculations is used in lieu of metered biogas
for Vf in the ex-ante calculation, it is not multiplied by CCH4 (concentration of methane in the
biogas) because Tier II predicts methane, not biogas.

(iii) CO2 emissions from combustion of non-biogenic methane;

The project activity will not involve, or indirectly result in, combustion of non-biogenic methane.

(iv) CO2 emissions from use of fossil fuels or electricity for the operation of the facility;

There will be zero project emissions of this nature because the very small power needs for
operation of the equipment associated with the CIGAR will be met entirely with renewable biogas.
The only project-associated equipments are 0.25HP blowers used to direct the collected biogas to
the gas handling system. This requires less than 50kWh a month and will easily met by the biogas
electricity generation. If there is an installation of additional on-site equipment with significant
electricity consumption as part of the project activity, that consumption will be monitored and
accounted for as project emissions where it is greater than renewable electricity generated.
Consumption will be either metered or calculated based on known equipment consumption and
running hours.

(v) The aerobic treatment and/or proper soil application of the sludge leaving the digesters in the
project activity shall also be ensured and monitored.

Sludge disposal will be monitored as described in monitoring section above to avoid project
emissions from anaerobic breakdown of sludge.

E.1.2.2 Describe the formulae used to estimate leakage due to the project activity, where
required, for the applicable project category in appendix B of the simplified modalities and
procedures for small-scale CDM project activities

19
CDM-SSC-PDD (version 02)

CDM – Executive Board page 20

>>
For AMS-III.D:
As per the Simplified Procedures for SSC Project Activities AMS-III.D paragraph 8, no leakage
calculation is required.

E.1.2.3 The sum of E.1.2.1 and E.1.2.2 represents the small-scale project activity emissions:
>>

Project emissions + Leakage = Project Activity Emissions

and, Ly = 0
Therefore;

Project Emissions
Project Emissions from Digester
Leakage 13.7 tCO2e/yr
Project Emissions from Incomplete
Combustion 200 tCO2e/yr
Project Emissions from Heat and
Electricity 0 tCO2e/yr
Total Project Emissions 213 tCO2e/yr

E.1.2.4 Describe the formulae used to estimate the anthropogenic emissions by sources of
GHGs in the baseline using the baseline methodology for the applicable project category in
appendix B of the simplified modalities and procedures for small-scale CDM project
activities:
>>

According to AMS-III.D.v11, baseline fugitive methane emissions are calculated ex-ante using
guidance from ACM0010 and the IPCC 2006 Tier II approach to calculate the amount of raw
material that would decay anaerobically in the absence of the project activity. They will be
compared to the actual amount of methane captured and destroyed by the project activity, and the
lower of the two will be taken as the baseline figure.

Where:

20
CDM-SSC-PDD (version 02)

CDM – Executive Board page 21

Parameter Value Unit Comment/Source


GWPCH4 21 tCO2e/tCH4 GWP of methane / IPCC
3
DCH4 0.00067 t/m Density of methane at normal
conditions: temperature (20 ºC) and 1
atm pressure / ACM0010
MCFj 0.8 Annual methane conversion factor
(MCF) for an anaerobic lagoon / IPCC
2006
table 10.17, chapter 10, volume 4
Bo 0.45 kg CH4/Kg VS Maximum methane producing potential
of the volatile solid generated /
Default from IPCC 2006 Tier II
Nbreeding 624 head Number of animals of breeding type for
the year y / Site data in the form of a pig
census form filled out by farm manager
and provided on June 3, 2007.

VSbreeding 186.9 Kg VS/head*yr Annual volatile solid for breeding


livestock type entering AWMS /
Default from IPCC 2006 Tier II scaled
with site data as described below
Nmarket 3,385 head Number of animals of market type for
the year y / Site data in the form of a pig
census form filled out by farm manager
and provided on June 3, 2007.

VSmarket 82.1 Kg VS/head*yr Annual volatile solid for market


livestock type entering AWMS /
Default from IPCC 2006 Tier II scaled
with site data as described below
MSBl,j 100% Fraction of manure handled in system j /
Site data

And where:
VSLT,y was determined by scaling default IPCC values as per guidance in ACM0010, equation (4).
VSdefault was used to adjust for a site-specific average animal weight as shown here:

21
CDM-SSC-PDD (version 02)

CDM – Executive Board page 22

Where:

Parameter Value Unit Source/Comment

Wsite_market kg/head Average animal weight of a defined


37.48 population at the project site in kg / Site
data in the form of a pig census form filled
out by farm manager and provided June 3,
2007.
Wdefault_market kg/head Default average animal weight of a defined
50.00 population in kg from where the data on
VSdefault is sourced
VSdefault_market Kg Default value for the volatile solid excretion
0.30 VS/head*day per day on a dry-matter basis for a defined
livestock /
IPCC default value, function of site
genetics
VSmarket,y Kg Adjusted volatile solid excretion per year on
82.08 VS/head*day a dry-matter basis for market swine at the
project site in kg-dm/animal/yr

Wsite_breed kg/head Average animal weight of a defined


220.40 population at the project site in kg / Site
data in the form of a pig census form filled
out by farm manager and provided June 3,
2007.
Wdefault_breed kg/head Default average animal weight of a defined
198.00 population in kg from where the data on
VSdefault is sourced
VSdefault_breed Kg Default value for the volatile solid excretion
0.46 VS/head*day per day on a dry-matter basis for a defined
livestock /

IPCC default value, function of site


genetics
VSbreed,y Kg Adjusted volatile solid excretion per year on
186.90 VS/head*day a dry-matter basis for breeding swine at the
project site in kg-dm/animal/yr

VSLT,y is calculated using exactly the same equations and sources for both market swine and
breeding swine.

22
CDM-SSC-PDD (version 02)

CDM – Executive Board page 23

The ex-post baseline corresponds to the lower of either: the baseline based on Tier II calculations
and made ex-ante, or the baseline based on metered biogas production. The latter is to be
calculated as follows:

FMbaseline = CCH4 * DCH4 * Vf * GWPCH4

Where:
FM baseline: Baseline fugitive methane emissions (t CO2e / year)
CCH4: Methane content of captured biogas (tonne / year)
DCH4 : Density of methane (tonne/m3)
Vf: Biogas captured,
GWPCH4: Global warming potential of methane (tCO2 / tonne methane)

Baseline Determination

The baseline is the lower of the baselines predicted by the Tier II approach and the biogas-based
one, therefore the baseline predicted ex-ante is determined here as below. In each verification
period the baseline will be determined as such, using monitored data to calculate the biogas
baseline.

Baseline Emissions from Methane


Baseline Source Value Units
Baseline Emissions from 1,998
IPCC defaults tCO2e/yr
Baseline Emissions from
biogas production N/A tCO2e/yr

Total Baseline 1,998


Emissions tCO2e/yr

E.1.2.5 Difference between E.1.2.4 and E.1.2.3 represents the emission reductions due to the
project activity during a given period:
>>
Total emissions reductions = Total baseline emissions - Total project emissions

Therefore, total emissions reductions from the project activity are predicted to be:

Baseline Emissions from Methane

23
CDM-SSC-PDD (version 02)

CDM – Executive Board page 24

1,998
Total Baseline Emissions tCO2e/yr

Total Project Emissions 213 tCO2e/yr


Emission Reductions
CERs/year 1,785 tCO2e/yr

E.2 Table providing values obtained when applying formulae above:


>>

For the IPCC Tier II Baseline corresponding to AMS.III.D.v11 Paragraph (6), section (b):

Value
Value -
Reference Description
Breeder
- Unit Source
Market

Global warming
Approved Global Warming
potential of 21 tCO2/tCH4
Potential for CH4
methane
GWPCH

CH4 density 0.00067 t/m3 ACM0010


DCH4
CH4 density at
conditions used
by the meter to
normalise biogas
flow metered: 0
ºC and 1 atm 0.00072 t/m3 Standard Conditions
pressure. For use
in calculating
PE_CH4,IC and
FMBaseline ex-
DCH4 post only.
Annual methane
conversion factor
for the baseline IPCC2006 table 10.17,
0.80
AWMS chapter 10, volume 4
(anaerobic
MCFj lagoon)
Maximum
IPCC 2006 Guidelines for
methane
National Greenhouse Gas
producing 0.45 m3CH4/kg_dm
Inventories volume 4, chapter
potential of the
10
Bo,LT VS generated

Number of
Site data; Farm Management
animals of type 624 3,385 #
filled out swine census form.
LT for year y
NLT

24
CDM-SSC-PDD (version 02)

CDM – Executive Board page 25

Calculated by scaling default


Annual volatile
IPCC values to adjust site-
solid for livestock kg-
186.90 82.08 specific average animal
LT entering all dm/animal/year
weights using values below
AWMS
VSLT, and Equation (4) of ACM0010
Fraction of
manure handled 100% % Farm Management Personnel
MS%Bl, j in system j
Average animal
weight of a
Site Data; Farm Management
defined 220.40 37.48 kg
filled out swine census form.
population at the
Wsite project site

Default average
animal weight of a
198 50 kg IPCC 2006
defined
population
Wdefault
Default value for
the volatile solid
excretion basis kg-
0.46 0.30 IPCC 2006
for a defined dm/animal/day
livestock
VSdefault population

Number of days
in year y where
365 # Farm Management Personnel
the treatment
plant operational
ndy

Annual average
temperature in 28 °C
Philippines (Cels.)
T www.weatheronline.com.uk

The justification of the use of IPCC defaults corresponding to Western Europe for Bo and VS
defaults is that:
• The genetic source of the production operations livestock originate from an Annex I Party,
The pigs are Landrace, Yorkshire, and Duroc swine, which are genetic strains originating
from Western Europe, specifically England and Sweden.7
• The farm uses formulated feed rations (FFR) which are optimized for the various
animal(s), stage of growth, category, weight gain/productivity and/or genetics,
The host farm employs an animal nutritionist and formulates its feed based on age and
stage of growth meeting or exceeding the U.S. National Res. Council recommendations, as
evidenced by questionnaire completed by the farm owner and presented on April 26, 2007.
• The use of FFR can be validated (through on-farm record keeping, feed supplier, etc.),
The use of FFR can be validated by examining information provided by farm manager or
on-site feedmill production and feeding records;

7
“Tips on Swine Raising Introduction”. Pamphlet published by the Philippines Livestock Development
Council, Department of Agriculture. http://www.ldc.da.gov.ph/pdf_files/Brochures/swine.pdf

25
CDM-SSC-PDD (version 02)

CDM – Executive Board page 26

• The project specific animal weights are more similar to developed country IPCC default
values,
The actual weights of swine on-site are much closer to default weights for developed
countries than for Asia.

For Project Emissions :

Parameter Value Unit Comment/Source

GWPCH4 21 tCO2e/tCH4 GWP of methane / IPCC

DCH4 0.00067 t/m3 Density of methane at normal


conditions: temperature (20 ºC) and 1
atm pressure / ACM0010
LFAD 972.6 m3 Average amount of methane captured
over two days in the crediting period;
Ex-ante it is calculated based on the
daily methane predicted in the Tier II
baseline times two. This figure will be
based ex-post on Vf and CCH4 as
calculated in the baseline calculation.
T 1 Number of tears in Ex-post calculation will use monitored
crediting period value for T.
PE AD,y 13.68 tCO2e/yr To be taken as project emissions where
the IPCC Tier II calculations of methane
generating potential are lower than the
baseline based on biogas generation.

Parameter Value Unit Comment/Source

GWPCH4 21 tCO2e/tCH4 GWP of methane / IPCC

CCH4 60% % Ex-ante this is excluded (see note


below) / 60% is the estimate from the
project developer, however the value to
be used ex-post will be based on
monitored data.

26
CDM-SSC-PDD (version 02)

CDM – Executive Board page 27

DCH4 [use ex-post] 0.000715 t/m3 Density of methane at normal metered


conditions: temperature (0 ºC) and 1 atm
pressure (these are the conditions the
meter normalises to). [use ex-post in
relation to the biogas baseline which is
metered]

DCH4 [use ex-ante] 0.00067 t/m3 Density of methane at normal


conditions: temperature (20 ºC) and 1
atm pressure / ACM0010 [use ex-ante
in relation to the Tier II baseline which
is methane at 20 C]

Vf 142,005 m3 For ex-ante calculations the Tier II


methane predictions are substituted for
Vf. In project scenario Vf will
correspond to the metered biogas).

fgenset 0.90 % Default genset combustion efficiency

PECH4_IC 199.80 tCO2e/yr

Note that since the methane predicted by the Tier II calculations is used in lieu of metered biogas
for Vf in the ex-ante calculation, it is not multiplied by CCH4 (concentration of methane in the
biogas) because Tier II predicts methane, not biogas.

SECTION F.: Environmental impacts:

F.1. If required by the host Party, documentation on the analysis of the environmental
impacts of the project activity:
>>
The host country does not require an analysis of the environmental impacts of the project activity.
However, the farm was issued an environmental compliance certificate (ECC) on May 14, 2004
and has a valid Permit to Discharge.

It should be noted, further, that the project activity generates considerable environmental benefits.
The CIGAR system decreases GHG emissions through two significant avenues. Prior to the
project activity, Bondoc relied on Meralco for electricity generation. With the implementation of
the project activity, biogas collected from the degradation of swine-farm waste is used for
electricity generation, thus eliminating the demand for electricity from the grid. In addition to
directly reducing the emission of GHGs by eliminating a source of fossil fuel combustion, the
project activity captures methane (CH4) from an industrial source, preventing its release into the
atmosphere. Methane is an extremely potent GHG whose greenhouse warming equivalent is 21
times that of carbon dioxide (CO2).

27
CDM-SSC-PDD (version 02)

CDM – Executive Board page 28

In addition to reducing GHG emissions, this closed system of energy production produces
considerable improvements for waste management at Bondoc farm. Wastewater discharge from
piggeries can be hazardous to aquatic ecosystems. The extent to which wastewater discharge
threatens aquatic ecosystems depends on the amount of organic material and solid material
contained within the wastewater as measured by biochemical oxygen demand (BOD), chemical
oxygen demand (COD, suspended solids, and color indicators. The CIGAR system, owing to its
anaerobic digestion properties, reduces COD by approximately 80%, destroys approximately 95%
of harmful BOD, diminishes suspended solids, and improves the color quality of the wastewater.

SECTION G. Stakeholders’ comments:

G.1. Brief description of how comments by local stakeholders have been invited and
compiled:
>>
The comments of stakeholders were articulated in the Stakeholder Consultation Meeting
conducted on December 1, 2005 in Bukal Sur, Taguan, Candelaria, Quezon. There were 23
participants in the stakeholder consultation including the following:

• Mr. Melvin Fabrero the Farm Manager of Bondoc Realty,


• Roland Riofrir and Anthony Laroza of PhilBIO,
• Alan Silayan of EcoSecurities
• Representatives of the Provincial Environment and Natural Resources Office,
• Representatives from the barangay Local Governance Unit, and
• Residents living near the farm

Comments were solicited in a question and answer session after the presentations made. They
were answered at the meeting by PhilBio and EcoSecurities representatives, and a transcript record
of such was made. (See Annex 3)

G.2. Summary of the comments received:


>>
The stakeholders at the meeting for brought up questions and concerns about the following issues:

• Design of the CIGAR and biogas system;


• Possibility of overflow or leaks of methane gas;
• Procedures when the CIGAR requires removal of sludge;
• Effluent odor and disposal; and
• Capital costs of the system.

G.3. Report on how due account was taken of any comments received:
>>

SUMMARY OF ISSUES AND CONCERNS AND RESPONSES/RECOMMENDED


MEASURES TO ADDRESS THE ISSUES

Issues Raised Response/Recommended Measures to Address

28
CDM-SSC-PDD (version 02)

CDM – Executive Board page 29

the Issues

Stakeholders had an interest in the PhilBio will de-seal a portion of the CIGAR and
procedure in case the CIGAR siphon the sludge which can be used as organic
becomes filled with solids. fertilizer.

There were questions about the Effluent may occasionally overflow [through a pipe
possibility of CIGAR overflow. that channels the water into a secondary lagoon] but
solids will remain settled at the bottom of the
CIGAR
There was a question regarding the This is not a concern since methane is a low
possibility for the methane gas to go pressure gas and the system’s pipes are engineered
out through influent canal or effluent and designed for that purpose.
canal.
How are gas leaks ensured against? PhilBio guarantees that the CIGAR is leak proof
and does a proper leak test after installation.

It was asked whether the effluent The effluent still has a slight odor, but it can still be
would be odor-free. used for washing pig pens and in fish ponds.

29
CDM-SSC-PDD (version 02)

CDM – Executive Board page 30

Annex 1

CONTACT INFORMATION FOR PARTICIPANTS IN THE PROJECT ACTIVITY


Organization: EcoSecurities Group PLC.,
Street/P.O.Box: 40 Dawson Street
Building:
City: Dublin
State/Region:
Postfix/ZIP: 02
Country: Ireland
Telephone: +353 1613 9814
FAX: +353 1672 4716
E-Mail: cdm@ecosecurities.com
URL: http://www.ecosecurities.com
Represented by: COO & President
Title: Dr.
Salutation: Sir.
Last Name: Costa
Middle Name: Moura
First Name: Pedro
Department:
Mobile:
Direct FAX:
Direct tel: +44 1865 202 635
Personal E-Mail: cdm@ecosecurities.com

Organization: EcoSecurities Group Ltd.


Street/P.O.Box: 40-41 Park End Street, 1st Floor
Building:
City: Oxford
State/Region:
Postfix/ZIP: OX1 1JD
Country: United Kingdom
Telephone: +44 1865 202 635
FAX: +44 1865 251 438
E-Mail: cdm@ecosecurities.com
URL: http://www.ecosecurities.com
Represented by: COO & President
Title: Dr.
Salutation: Sir.
Last Name: Costa
Middle Name: Moura
First Name: Pedro
Department:
Mobile:
Direct FAX:
Direct tel: +44 1865 202 635

30
CDM-SSC-PDD (version 02)

CDM – Executive Board page 31

Personal E-Mail: cdm@ecosecurities.com

Organization: Philippine Bio-Sciences Co., Inc.


Street/P.O.Box: F. Ortigas Jr. Ave. (formerly Emerald Ave.) Ortigas Center
Building: Strata 100 Bldg. 19th Floor, Unit C
City: Pasig City
State/Region:
Postfix/ZIP: 1605
Country: Philippines
Telephone: +63 2638 2074
FAX: +63 2631 2044
E-Mail: philbio@philbio.com.ph
URL: http://www. philbio.com.ph
Represented by: CEO
Title:
Salutation:
Last Name: Stewart
Middle Name:
First Name: Samuel West
Department:
Mobile: 0917 837 9016
Direct FAX:
Direct tel:
Personal E-Mail:

Organization: Bondoc Realty Farm


Street/P.O.Box: Brgy. Taguan
Building:
City: Candelaria
State/Region: Quezon
Postfix/ZIP:
Country: Philippines
Telephone:
FAX:
E-Mail:
URL:
Represented by:
Title:
Salutation:
Last Name: Wonkyu
Middle Name:
First Name: Park
Department:
Mobile:
Direct FAX:
Direct tel: +63.042-585-3175
Personal E-Mail:

31
CDM-SSC-PDD (version 02)

CDM – Executive Board page 32

Annex 2

INFORMATION REGARDING PUBLIC FUNDING

Not Applicable

-----

32
CDM-SSC-PDD (version 02)

CDM – Executive Board page 33

ANNEX 3: STAKEHOLDERS MEETING – MINUTES OF MEETING

Summary

The forum started with a presentation on the CIGAR biogas technology.. Succeeding
presentations gave participants an overview of the issues concerning climate change,
mitigation of greenhouse gases, CDM, and its process, benefits and what CDM aims to
achieve. It was stressed out that the CIGAR biogas projects developed by PhilBIO can
be considered for CDM because these projects:

• reduce GHG emission


• displace grid-fed electricity
• improve environmental performance of the farm, as the CIGAR reduces : odor,
discharges of biological oxygen demand (BOD) and chemical oxygen demand
(COD) in the wastewater and fire hazards
• utilize sustainable energy; biogas is an indigenous fuel that can be used to
benefit the economic performance of the hog farmers
• contribute to the sustainable development goals of the Philippines

The financial benefits of CDM were also elaborated, particularly the benefits of carbon
cash flow for improvement of capital structure, direct application for debt service and
for reduction in the cost of project capital.

The meeting served as an opportunity for stakeholders and other interested hog
farmers to ask or comment on the activities of Bondoc Realty’s CIGAR Biogas Project
as it is being proposed for CDM. After the presentation, participants raised their
questions and concerns in an open forum.

Open Forum Question and Answer Session Minutes:

Question: What is the design of the your wastewater collection?


Answer: Pig waste enters into the CIGAR Digester, passing through the influent
canal, the natural bacteria in the CIGAR will breakdown the waste with
biogas as the by-product, the treated water goes out through the
effluent canal.

Question: Where does the liquid go then?


Answer: (with a diagram) PhilBIO’s standard design of a CIGAR has a lining in it,
this will prevent seepage. The waste water will go through
aeration lagoons before it is finally discharged.

Question: Is there any possibility that a CIGAR will be full of pig waste and it will
overflow?
Answer: Yes, it will be filled with pig waste and in fact, it will overflow [through
a pipe that channels the water into a secondary lagoon]. But rest
assured that the solids that have settled in the bottom will remain
there. The overflow or effluent is actually the partially treated water.

33
CDM-SSC-PDD (version 02)

CDM – Executive Board page 34

Question: Is there a possibility for the methane gas to go out through influent
canal or effluent canal?
Answer: (with a diagram) No, methane is a low pressure gas and our pipes are
engineered and designed for that purpose.

Question: What if there is a shortage on wastewater supply?


Answer: The design of continuous biogas production is up to 18 hrs, sufficient
enough to supply the biogas genset for 24 hrs. operation.

Question: Do you have a design for backyard farming?


Answer: Currently, we have an ongoing project for backyard farming located in
Brgy. Soro-Soro Ibaba, Batangas City.

Question: What are the design parameters to consider in designing a cigar?


Answer: I’m sorry, but we are not in the liberty to disclose information regarding
our technology, I hope you understand.

Question: What will you do if eventually the CIGAR will be filled with solids?
Answer: We will de-seal a portion of the CIGAR and siphon the sludge which can
be used as organic fertilizer.

Question: How about gas leaks?


Answer: We guarantee that our CIGAR is leak proof. We use a gadget for leak
test.

Question: Can other chemicals like formalin and caustic soda affect the methane
gas??
Answer: No.

Question: Does temperature affect the production of biogas?


Answer: Yes, the hotter it is, the better.

Question: Initial capital?


Answer: It depends on the size and population. The cost includes the complete
system from excavation to generator set.

Question: What is the BOD and COD standards?


Answer: DENR-EMB has water quality standards which is the basis of the type of
waste water treatment to be installed. Like if it is Class A there will be
additional facilities to be installed.

Question: Is the effluent odor free?


Answer: The effluent still has a slight odor, but it can be used for washing pig
pens.

Question: Can we also use the effluent for fish ponds?


Answer: Yes, we have a client who uses the effluent for his fish pond.

34