SEL PDD Version 5

PROJECT DESIGN DOCUMENT FORM (CDM-SSC-PDD) - Version 03
CDM – Executive Board
CLEAN DEVELOPMENT MECHANISM

PROJECT DESIGN DOCUMENT FORM (CDM-SSC-PDD)
Version 03 - in effect as of: 22 December 2006
CONTENTS
A. General description of the small scale 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 proposed small scale project activity
Annex 2: Information regarding public funding
Annex 3: Baseline information
Annex 4: Monitoring Information
1
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>.
03 22 December ·The Board agreed to revise the CDM project design document for
2006 small-scale activities (CDM-SSC-PDD), taking into account
CDM-PDD and CDM-NM.
2
SECTION A. General description of small-scale project activity
A.1 Title of the small-scale project activity:

>>
10 MW Biomass based Power plant in Punjab, India
Version 05
Date: 15/06/2012
A.2. Description of the small-scale project activity:

>>
Project Description
SEL Manufacturing Company Limited (SELML) was incorporated in 2000 as part of the R.S Saluja
Group of Companies as Saluja Exim Limited and was changed to SEL Manufacturing Company Limited in
2004. SELML is a vertically integrated textile company which manufactures and exports cotton yarn,
combed yarn, knitted fabrics and knitted garments. Good environmental practises have always been a prime
consideration for SELML and it seeks to minimize the impact of its operations by constantly seeking new
ways to reduce pollution and lessen wastage of resources.
SELML is now setting up a Greenfield industrial complex at Shekhon Mazara, Punjab, India with a 10
MW biomass based power plant. The power plant will have one number of 50 TPH rated capacity boiler
generating steam at 88 ata pressure and 517°C temperature. There will be one number of Extraction cum
Condensing Turbo-generator (TG) of 10 MW rated capacity, with the extraction outlet parameters of 19.7
TPH, 9.4 ata, and 259.5 °C (It should be noted that the extraction temperature of the steam from the
turbine would be 259.5° C and the temperature of the steam would be reduced to 190° C by de-
superheating for its usage in the process). The purpose of the project activity is to meet the energy demand
of the plant by effective and clean generation of power and steam by utilizing the biomass available in the
region. The project activity is helping in conservation of natural resources like coal and HSD.
Pre-project Scenario
The project activity is located in a completely new campus which had no prior production facility thereby
no existing energy requirement. The production units at this facility were commissioned in a phase wise
manner in parallel to the implementation of the project activity.
The commissioning dates of the production units to which the project activity is supplying the thermal and
electrical energy are as below:
Unit Commissioning Date Energy Requirement

Spinning Unit – I April – May 2008 Electrical
Spinning Unit – II December 2009 Electrical
Terri Towel – I November – December 2008 Thermal & Electrical
Terri Towel – II June 2010 Thermal & Electrical
In the pre project scenario, only the two spinning units which only had an electrical requirement were
commissioned by using the grid electricity. When the Terri Towel Unit I was commissioned in November
2008, the electrical requirement for the same was met by the grid electricity, whereas, a 5 TPH fossil fuel
3
based boiler and 15 lac kCal/hour thermopack were installed in the plant premises to meet the partial
thermal requirement (required by Terri Towel – I) until the commissioning of the project activity.
In order to meet the complete energy requirements of all spinning and territowel units, the project proponent
would have had to install an additional system (i.e., the project activity).
Project Scenario
In the project scenario, SELML has decided to install a biomass based power plant system with a 50 TPH
biomass based boiler and 10 MW TG set. The TG is an extraction cum condensing type with an extraction
stream of 19.7 TPH at 9.4 ata, and 259.5 °C (It should be noted that the extraction temperature of the
steam from the turbine would be 259.5° C and the temperature of the steam would be reduced to 190° C by
de-superheating for its usage in the process). The cogeneration system would thus be meeting the power
and thermal requirements of the above mentioned units (Spinning Unit I & II and Terri Towel I & II).
It is clear that the complete energy requirement for all the four above mentioned units could not have been
met by the facilities existing in the pre project scenario and an additional system would have had to be
installed by the project proponent. This would have been either a fossil fuel or a biomass based
cogeneration system, both of which have been considered in the section B.4 of the PDD below.
Project’s contribution to Sustainable Development
The contributions of project activity towards sustainable development are explained with indicators like
contributions to socio-economic, environmental and technological aspects as follows:
1. Social well being:

The project activity would contribute towards the local employment by employing skilled and un-skilled
personnel for operation and maintenance of the equipment. The plant site is an isolated rural area where
unemployment, poverty and other economic backwardness is prevailing; the project would lead to the
development of the region. During civil works, a lot of construction work is to be taken place, which will
generate employment for local people around the plant site. This will result in the enhanced employment of
the people.
2. Economic well being:

The project will create a business opportunity during construction phase for local stakeholders such as
suppliers, contractors, bankers etc., contributing to economic well-being aspects. It also generates
employment in the local area, leading to the economic prosperity of the local people. The project will also
provide economic value to biomass, agricultural biomass etc. The above benefits due to project activity
ensure that the project would contribute to the economic well being in the region.
3. Environmental well being:

The project activity will displace use of fossil fuel based power by renewable energy (biomass based
power) and thereby result in reduction of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. It will also lead to conservation
of coal and other non-renewable natural resources. A biomass based cogeneration plant also helps in
avoiding the SOx and NOx emissions which would have been emitted in case of a fossil fuel fired
cogeneration system.
4. Technological well being:
4
The project activity utilizes biomass as fuel instead of a fossil fuel to generate steam and electricity for the
captive consumption. The project activity is expected to increase awareness and interest among the industry
players to make investments in similar areas. The project activity is also expected to encourage technology
providers in putting more R&D efforts towards new and renewable technology development. Thus, the
project activity utilizes environmentally safe technology for meeting the power and process steam
requirements at the unit.
A.3. Project participants:

>>
Name of Party involved (*) Private and/or public entity (ies) Kindly indicate if the party
((host) indicates a host party) Project participants (*) involved wishes to be
(as applicable) considered as project
participant
(Yes/No)
Government of India SEL Manufacturing Company No
(Host Country) Limited
(Private entity)
(*) 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:
A.4.1. Location of the small-scale project activity:

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

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

>>
Punjab
A.4.1.3. City/Town/Community etc:

>>
Village : Shekhon Mazara.
Tehsil : Rahon
District: Nawanshahar
5
A.4.1.4. Details of physical location, including information allowing the

unique identification of this small-scale project activity:
>>
Nearest Railway Station: Ludhiana
Nearest Airport: Chandigarh
The geographical coordinates for the project site are:
Latitude: 310 03’ 00” N1

Longitude: 760 07’ 00” E
1
http://www.tageo.com/index-e-in-v-23-d-m2927166.htm
6
A.4.2. Type and category(ies) and technology/measure of the small-scale project activity:
>>
As per ‘Appendix B to the simplified modalities and procedures for small-scale CDM project activities’,
the project activity falls under:
Type: I - ‘Renewable energy projects’

Category: C - ‘Thermal energy production with or without electricity (Version 19, Sectoral Scope
01, EB 61)’.
The project activity meets all the applicability criteria of small-scale CDM project activity category under
Type-I: Renewable Energy Projects (C. Thermal energy for the user with or without electricity) of the
indicative simplified baseline and monitoring methodologies for selected small-scale CDM project activity
categories.
Technology of project activity
The captive cogeneration power plant envisages the installation of One No. (1) 50 TPH biomass fired
AFBC boiler with steam outlet parameters of 88 ata, and 517 °C; One No. (1) extraction cum condensing
turbo generator of 10 MW nominal capacity2. The boiler and the turbo generators are installed with all the
necessary auxiliary plants and systems required for the efficient operation of the plant. The technical
description of these systems is provided below:
Boiler
The steam generating system for the cogeneration plant consists of one biomass fired AFBC boiler with the
following operational parameters:
Parameter Value Unit
Steam Flow 50 TPH
Steam pressure at superheated outlet 88 Ata

0
Steam temperature at superheated outlet 517 +/-5 C
0
Feed water temperature 135 C
0
Airheater outlet gas temperature 140-150 C
The boiler is provided with Superheater, Desuperheater and Economizer. The boiler operates with balanced
draft conditions, with the help of Forced and Induced Draft fans.
Steam Turbine
2
The TG would be run on full load capacity or as per requirement of the plant.
7
The steam generated in the boiler is fed to the 10 MW extraction cum condensing turbo generator (TG)
with the following operational parameters:
Type: Extraction condensing

Rating of Turbine: 10 MW
Generator Rating 10000 kW
Extraction steam parameters:

Flow: 19.7 TPH
Pressure 9.4 ata
Temperature 190 (It should be noted that the °C
extraction temperature of the
steam from the turbine would be
259.5° C and the temperature of
the steam would be reduced to
190° C by de-superheating for its
usage in the process)
The technology and knowhow employed by the project activity is environmentally safe and sound.
The lifetime of the equipments are taken as 20 years.
A.4.3 Estimated amount of emission reductions over the chosen crediting period:
>>
Estimation of annual emission reduction in tonnes
Years
of CO2 e
1st August 2012 to 31st July 2013 58,221
Total estimated reductions
(tonnes of CO2 e) 5,82,210
Total number of crediting years 10 years (Fixed Crediting Period has been
chosen)
8
Annual average of the estimated reduction over

the crediting period (tCO2 e) 58,221
A.4.4. Public funding of the small-scale project activity:

>>
There is no recourse to any public funding and the project proponent hereby confirms that there is no
divergence of Official Development Assistance (ODA) to the project activity.
A.4.5. Confirmation that the small-scale project activity is not a debundled component of a
large scale project activity:
According to paragraph 2 of Appendix C to the Simplified Modalities and Procedures for Small-Scale
CDM project activities (FCCC/CP/2002/7/Add.3), a small-scale project is considered a debundled
component of a large project activity if there is a registered small-scale activity or an application to register
another small-scale activity:
· With the same project participants
· In the same project category and technology
· Registered within the previous two years; and
· Whose project boundary is within 1km of the project boundary of the proposed small scale activity
The Project proponent neither has another project registered nor an application to register in the same
project category within the previous two years or within 1 km of the project boundary of the proposed
project activity. Thus, the project is not a debundled component of a large scale project activity.
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
small-scale project activity:
>>
The title and reference of the approved baseline and monitoring methodology applied to the small-scale
project activity is as follows:
Title: Thermal energy production with or without electricity

Reference: AMS – I.C (Version 19, Sectoral Scope 01, EB 61)
Tools Used: 1. Tool to calculate project or leakage CO2 emissions from fossil fuel combustion
(Version – 2), EB 41, Annex 11.
2. Tool to calculate baseline, project and/or leakage emissions from electricity
consumption (Version – 1), EB 39, Annex 7.
3. Tool to determine the remaining lifetime of equipment (Version – 1), EB 50,
Annex 15.
4. Tool to calculate the emission factor for an electricity system (Version – 2.2.1),
EB 63, Annex 19.
The project activity meets all the applicability criteria of small-scale CDM project activity category under
Type-I: Renewable Energy Projects (C. Thermal energy for the user with or without electricity) of the
indicative simplified baseline and monitoring methodologies for selected small-scale CDM project activity
categories.
B.2 Justification of the choice of the project category:

>>
Justification of the choice of methodology
The project activity meets the applicability conditions of the chosen methodology as follows:
Conditions in the methodology Applicability

1. This methodology comprises renewable The project activity is a biomass based co-
energy technologies that supply users with generating system that will produce heat and
thermal energy that displaces fossil fuel use. electricity.
These units include technologies such as Thus, the project activity satisfies the given
solar thermal water heaters and dryers, applicability condition.
solar cookers, energy derived from
renewable biomass and other technologies
that provide thermal energy that displaces
fossil fuel.
2. Biomass-based co-generating systems are The project activity is a biomass based cogeneration
included in this category. For the purpose of system to meet the thermal and electrical
this methodology “Cogeneration” shall requirements at the unit. Moreover, the project
10
mean the simultaneous generation of activity produces heat and power in a same
thermal energy and electrical and/or elemental process, thereby meeting the given
mechanical energy in one process. Project applicability condition.
activities that produces heat and power in
separate element processes (for example
heat from the boiler and electricity from a
biogas engine) do not fit under the definition
of co-generation project.
3. Emission reductions from a biomass The project activity is a biomass based cogeneration
Cogeneration system can accrue from one system to meet the thermal and electrical
of the following activities: requirements for the captive consumption (on-site
a) Electricity supply to a grid; consumption).
b) Electricity and/or thermal energy (steam or Thus, the project activity satisfies the criteria b) of
heat) for on-site consumption or for the given applicability condition.
consumption by other facilities;
c) Combination of a) and b).
4. The total installed/rated thermal energy As the project activity is a Cogeneration project
generation capacity of the project activity. Thus, the relevant applicability
equipment is equal to or less than 45 MW condition of the project would be as per
thermal (see paragraph 6 for the applicable paragraph 6 of the methodology. The same is
limits for cogeneration project activities) explained below.
5. For co-fired systems, the total installed The project activity is a co-fired system. The total
thermal energy generation capacity of the installed thermal energy generation capacity of the
project equipment, when using both fossil project equipment, when using both fossil and
and renewable fuel shall not exceed 45 MW renewable fuel is less than 45 MW. However, the
thermal project activity would only use the fossil fuel in case
of exigencies.
Option (a) is applicable to the proposed project
6. The following capacity limits apply for activity as the project activity involves both thermal
biomass cogeneration units: and electrical components. The total installed energy
(a) If the project activity includes generation capacity (thermal and electrical) of the
emission reductions from both the project equipment is as below:
thermal and electrical energy
components, the total installed Electrical = 10 MW electrical x 3 = 30 MW thermal
energy generation capacity (thermal Thermal = 13.12 MW thermal = (enthalpy of
and electrical) of the project superheated steam - enthalpy of feed water) *
equipment shall not exceed 45 MW thermal requirement = (2965 – 567.48) * 5.47/1000
thermal. For the purpose of = 13.12 MW thermal (Kindly refer to the capacity
calculating this capacity limit the section under emission reduction calculation sheet
conversion factor of 1:3 shall be for the calculation)
used for converting electrical Total installed capacity (thermal and electrical) =
energy to thermal energy (i.e., for 43.12 MW thermal.
renewable energy project activities,
the maximal limit of 15 MW(e) is Hence, as the total installed energy generation
equivalent to 45 MW thermal capacity (thermal and electrical) of the project
11
output of the equipment or the equipment is less than 45 MW thermal, thereby,

plant); meeting the criterion.
(b) If the emission reductions of the
cogeneration project activity are
solely on account of thermal energy
production (i.e., no emission
reductions accrue from electricity
component), the total installed
thermal energy production capacity
of the project equipment of the
cogeneration unit shall not exceed
45 MW thermal;
(c) If the emission reductions of the
cogeneration project activity are
solely on account of electrical
energy production (i.e., no emission
reductions accrue from thermal
energy component), the total
installed electrical energy
generation capacity of the project
equipment of the cogeneration unit
shall not exceed 15 MW.
7. The capacity limits specified in the above The project activity is a Greenfield project and there
paragraphs apply to both new facilities and is no addition of any renewable energy units at an
retrofit projects. In the case of project existing renewable energy facility involved in this
activities that involve the addition of project activity.
renewable energy units at an existing Thus, this criterion is not applicable to the project
renewable energy facility, the total capacity activity.
of the units added by the project should
comply with capacity limits in paragraphs 4
to 6 and should be physically distinct from
the existing units.
8. Project activities that seek to retrofit or The project activity is a Greenfield biomass based
modify an existing facility for renewable cogeneration facility and does not involve addition
energy generation are included in this of any renewable energy units at an existing
category. renewable energy facility. Thus, this criterion is not
applicable to the project activity.
9. New Facilities (Greenfield projects) and The project activity is the installation of a
project activities involving capacity Greenfield cogeneration unit. Compliance with the
additions compared to the baseline scenario “General Guidelines to SSC CDM methodologies”
are only eligible if they comply with the has been demonstrated at relevant places throughout
related and relevant “General Guidelines to the PDD.
SSC CDM methodologies”.
10. If solid biomass fuel (e.g., briquette) is As solid biomass fuel like briquette is not used thus
used, it shall be demonstrated that it has this condition is not applicable for the project
12
been produced using solely renewable activity.

biomass and all project or leakage
emissions associated with its production
shall be taken into account in emissions
reduction calculation.
11. Where the project participant is not the As mentioned criterion 10 above, the project activity
producer of the processed solid biomass does not involve use of any processed solid biomass
fuel, the project participant and the fuel, therefore no separate biomass production
producer are bound by a contract that shall process or emissions thereof are associated. Hence,
enable the project participant to monitor the this criterion is not applicable.
source of the renewable biomass to account
for any emissions associated with solid
biomass fuel production. Such a contract
shall also ensure that there is no double-
counting of emission reductions.
12. If electricity and/or steam/heat produced by The electricity and steam produced by the project
the project activity is delivered to a third activity shall be used for in-house consumption and
party i.e. another facility or facilities within is not delivered to another facility or facilities within
the project boundary, a contract between the project boundary.
the supplier and consumer(s) of the energy
will have to be entered into that ensures
there is no double-counting of emission
reductions.
13. If the project activity recovers and utilizes The project activity does not involve the use of
biogas for power/heat production and biogas as the fuel, thereby, this criteria is not
applies this methodology on a standalone applicable.
basis i.e. without using a Type III
component of a SSC methodology, any
incremental emissions occurring due to the
implementation of the project activity (e.g.
physical leakage of the anaerobic digester,
emissions due to inefficiency of the flaring),
shall be taken into account either as project
or leakage emissions.
The proposed project activity is not a charcoal
14. Charcoal based biomass energy generation based biomass energy generation project, hence, this
project activities are eligible to apply the given criterion is not applicable.
methodology only if the charcoal is
produced from renewable biomass sources
provided:
(a) Charcoal is produced in kilns
equipped with methane recovery
and destruction facility; or
(b) If charcoal is produced in kilns not
equipped with a methane recovery
and destruction facility, methane
13
emissions from the production of

charcoal shall be considered. These
emissions shall be calculated as per
the procedures defined in the
approved methodology AMS-III.K.
Alternatively, conservative
emission factor values from peer
reviewed literature or from a
registered CDM project activity can
be used, provided that it can be
demonstrated that the parameters
from these are comparable e.g.,
source of biomass, characteristics
of biomass such as moisture,
carbon content, type of kiln,
operating conditions such as
ambient temperature.
Thus, the project activity satisfies all the applicability conditions of the applied methodology and the
project will remain under the limits of SSC during every year of the crediting period.
B.3. Description of the project boundary:

>>
As per paragraph 15 of the methodology, “The spatial extent of the project boundary encompasses:
(a) All plants generating power and/or heat located at the project site, whether fired with biomass, fossil
fuels or a combination of both;
(b) All power plants connected physically to the electricity system (grid) that the project plant is
connected to;
(c) Industrial, commercial or residential facility, or facilities, consuming energy generated by the system
and the processes or equipment affected by the project activity;
(d) The processing plant of biomass residues, for project activities using solid biomass fuel (e.g.
briquette), unless all associated emissions are accounted for as leakage emissions;
(e) The transportation itineraries, if the biomass is transported over distances greater than 200
kilometres, unless all associated emissions are accounted for as leakage emissions;
(f) The site of the anaerobic digester in the case of project activity that recovers and utilizes biogas for
power/heat production and applies this methodology on a standalone basis i.e. without using a Type III
component of a SSC methodology.”
Thus, in line with paragraph 15 (a), 15 (c) and 15 (e)3, the project boundary is illustrated in the following
diagram:
3
As the biomass would be transported from within 200 km of the project activity, leakage emissions on account of
paragraph 15 (e) is not applicable for the project activity.
14
The baseline boundary in line with the methodology is illustrated in the following diagram:
15
The description of sources included in the project boundary is summarised in the following table:
Source Gas Justification / Explanation

Coal based CO2 Included Main emission source.
Baseline
cogeneration CH4 Excluded Excluded for simplification. This is conservative.

system N2O Excluded Excluded for simplification. This is conservative.
On-site fossil CO2 Included Main emission source.

fuel and CH4 Excluded Excluded for simplification. This emission source is
Project Activity
electricity assumed to be very small.

consumption due N2O Excluded Excluded for simplification. This emission source is
to the project assumed to be very small.
activity
(stationary or
mobile)
16
CO2 Included Excluded as the biomass residue are not transported

over a distance of more than 200 kilometres due to the
Off-site
implementation of the project activity and hence the
transportation of
same is neglected.
biomass residue
CH4 Excluded Excluded for simplification.
N2O Excluded Excluded for simplification.
CO2 Excluded It is assumed that CO2 emissions from surplus biomass
do not lead to changes of carbon pools in the LULUCF
Combustion of
sector.
biomass residue
CH4 Included This emission source would be included for the biomass
for electricity and
procured from outside sources for which the methane
/ or heat
emissions due to uncontrolled burning have been
generation
considered.
N2O Excluded Excluded for simplification. This emission source is
assumed to be very small.
CO2 Excluded It is assumed that CO2 emissions from surplus biomass
residue do not lead to changes of carbon pools in the
LULUCF sector.
Storage of
CH4 Excluded Excluded for simplification
biomass residue
CH4 Excluded Excluded for simplification.
17
B.4. Description of baseline and its development:
>>
Baseline scenarios as per the applied methodology:
As per paragraph 19 of applied methodology (AMS – I C, Version 19), project activities producing both
heat and electricity using biomass cogeneration shall use one of the following baseline scenarios:
Option Baseline Alternative Justification/Explanation

(a) Electricity is imported from a grid and This alternative is in compliance with all
thermal energy (steam/heat) is produced using applicable legal and regulatory requirements.
fossil fuel
Therefore, this alternative is taken for further
consideration.
(b) Electricity is produced in an on-site captive This alternative is in compliance with all the
power plant using fossil (with a possibility of applicable legal and regulatory requirements.
export to the grid) and thermal energy However, it would be more efficient to go for a
(steam/heat) is produced using fossil fuel cogeneration system rather than a combination
of onsite captive power plant for electricity and
another boiler for meeting the steam
requirement.
This is because the efficiency of a cogeneration
system is higher than that of a power plant and
a boiler being used separately to meet the same
electricity and steam demand respectively. A
cogeneration system can produce the same
quantity of steam and electricity from a lesser
quantity of fuel and with lower losses4. Thus, a
cogeneration system would be a more preferred
alternative.
Therefore, this alternative is eliminated from

further consideration.
(c) A combination of (a) and (b); Since option (b) has not been considered as a
probable baseline alternative for the project
activity. Hence, the combination of (a) and (b)
has not been considered as a probable baseline
for the project activity.

(d) Electricity and thermal energy (steam/heat) The cogeneration system is more energy
4
“Energy Efficiency in Thermal Utilities” Book 2 by Bureau of Energy Efficiency, Ministry of Power, Government
of India Section 7.2
18
are produced in a cogeneration unit using efficient with respect to individual generation
fossil fuel (with a possibility of export of of electricity and steam and therefore this can
electricity to a grid/other facilities and/or be the baseline alternative. Also, this
thermal energy to other facilities) alternative is in compliance with all applicable
legal and regulatory requirements.

consideration.
(e) Electricity is imported from a grid and/or As explained in the justification for option (b)
produced in an on-site captive power plant above that it would be more efficient to go for
using fossil fuels (with a possibility of export a cogeneration system rather than a
to the grid); steam/heat is produced from combination of onsite captive power plant for
biomass electricity and another boiler for meeting the
steam requirement.
Thus, option (e) can only be considered for

electricity to be imported from the grid and
steam produced from biomass and as this
alternative is in compliance with all applicable
legal and regulatory requirements.

consideration.
(f) Electricity is produced in an on-site captive As explained in the justification for option (b)
power plant using biomass (with a possibility above that it would be more efficient to go for
of export to a grid) and/or imported from a a cogeneration system rather than a
grid; steam/heat is produced using fossil fuel combination of onsite captive power plant for
electricity and another boiler for meeting the
steam requirement.
Thus, option (f) can only be considered for

electricity to be imported from the grid and
steam produced from fossil fuels. But as this
alternative [option (f)] is exactly similar as
option (a) described above in the table, thus,
this alternative [option (f)] is eliminated from
(g) Electricity and thermal energy (steam/heat) As this scenario applies to a project activity
are produced in a biomass fired cogeneration that installs a new grid connected biomass
unit (without a possibility of export of cogeneration system, the same is not applicable
electricity either to a grid or to other facilitiesas an alternative to the project activity as the
and without a possibility of export of thermal project activity is not grid connected and the
energy to other facilities). This scenario steam and electricity generated from the project
applies to a project activity that installs a new activity would be utilized for meeting the
grid connected biomass cogeneration system energy demand of the plant itself.
that produces surplus electricity and this
surplus electricity is exported to a grid. The Therefore, this alternative is eliminated from
19
baseline scenario is that the electricity would further consideration.

otherwise have been generated by the
operation of grid-connected power plants and
by the addition of new generation sources to
the grid.
(h) Electricity and/or thermal energy produced in As the cogeneration system is more energy
a co-fired system efficient with respect to individual generation
of electricity and/or steam and as this scenario
applies to a project activity that installs a co-
fired cogeneration system.
However, as one of the fuels (either fossil fuel

or biomass) will always comes to be a costlier
fuel and hence, having a co-fired system would
always be costlier when compared to a single
fuel (either fossil fuel or biomass) fired system.
Hence, this scenario is not considered as one of
the viable alternative scenarios for the project
activity.

(i) Electricity is imported from a grid and/or As the cogeneration system is more energy
produced in a biomass fired cogeneration unit efficient with respect to individual generation
(without a possibility of export of electricity of electricity and/or steam and as this scenario
either to the grid or to other facilities); applies to a project activity that installs a new
steam/heat is produced in a biomass fired biomass cogeneration system, therefore, this
cogeneration unit and/or a biomass fired can be the baseline alternative. Also, this
boiler (without a possibility of export of alternative is in compliance with all applicable
thermal energy to other facilities). This legal and regulatory requirements.
scenario applies to a project activity that
installs a new biomass cogeneration system Therefore, this alternative is taken for further
that displaces electricity which otherwise consideration.
would have been imported from a grid.
Selection of baseline scenario for the project activity in line with the General Guidelines for SSC
CDM methodologies
SELML identified the following realistic and credible alternatives to the project activity which could be
implemented in order to meet its steam and power requirements. These plausible alternatives were further
analyzed with reference to the implications of implementing the alternatives.
These plausible alternatives are demonstrated in line with paragraph 21 of the General Guidelines for SSC
CDM methodologies (version 18) which states that:
20
“Type II and III greenfield projects (new facilities) may use a Type II and Type III small-scale
methodology provided that they can demonstrate that the most plausible baseline scenario for this
project activity or PoA is the baseline provided in the respective Type II and Type III small-scale
methodology.
The demonstration must include the assessment of the alternatives of the project activity or PoAs using
the following steps:
Step 1:
Identify the various alternatives available to the project proponent that deliver comparable level of
service including the proposed project activity or PoA undertaken without being registered as a CDM
project activity or PoA.
Step 2:
List the alternatives identified per Step 1 in compliance with the local regulations (if any of the identified
baseline is not in compliance with the local regulations, then exclude the same from further
consideration).
Step 3:
Eliminate and rank the alternatives identified in Step 2 taking into account barrier tests specified in
attachment A to Appendix B of the Simplified modalities and procedures for small-scale CDM project
activities.
Step 4:
If only one alternative remains that is:
(a) Not the proposed project activity or PoA undertaken without being registered as a CDM project
activity or PoA; and
(b) It corresponds to one of the baseline scenarios provided in the methodology; then the project activity
or PoA is eligible under the methodology.
If more than one alternatives remain that correspond to the baseline scenarios provided in the
methodology, choose the alternative with the least emissions as the baseline.”
Thus, the baseline for the project activity is identified in line with the above guidelines as follows:
Step 1 of the guidelines: Identification of baseline alternatives available to the project proponent that
deliver output comparable to the level of service provided by the project activity equipment.
Since, the project activity involves installation of biomass based cogeneration plant with steam and power
as output, and in line with the various baseline alternatives selected for consideration in line with the
options illustrated above in line with paragraph 19 of the applied methodology; the following alternatives
are applicable to the project activity:
S. No. Baseline alternative as per paragraph 19 Baseline alternative

of the applied methodology
1. Option (a); Electricity is imported from a Electricity from grid with fossil fuel (coal) based
grid and thermal energy (steam/heat) is boiler for thermal requirement.
produced using fossil fuel.
2. Option (d); Electricity and thermal energy Captive Co-generation unit using fossil fuel (coal)
21
(steam/heat) are produced in a cogeneration as fuel.

unit using fossil fuel (with a possibility of
export of electricity to a grid/other facilities
and/or thermal energy to other facilities).
3. Option (e); Electricity is imported from a Purchasing the electricity from the grid and steam
grid and/or produced in an on-site captive from biomass (rice husk) based boiler.
power plant using fossil fuels (with a
possibility of export to the grid); steam/heat
is produced from biomass.
4. Option (i); Electricity is imported from a Captive Co-generation unit using biomass (rice
grid and/or produced in a biomass fired husk) as primary fuel i.e. project activity without
cogeneration unit (without a possibility of CDM benefit.
export of electricity either to the grid or to
other facilities); steam/heat is produced in a
biomass fired cogeneration unit and/or a
biomass fired boiler (without a possibility
of export of thermal energy to other
facilities). This scenario applies to a
project activity that installs a new biomass
cogeneration system that displaces
electricity which otherwise would have
been imported from a grid.
Step 2 of the guidelines: All alternatives considered above as possible baseline alternatives are consistent
with national and sectoral policies. Thus, all the alternatives have been carried forward for further analysis.
Step 3 of the guidelines: Referring to Attachment A to Appendix B of the simplified modalities and
procedures for small scale CDM project activities:
“Project participants shall provide an explanation to show that the project activity would not have
occurred anyway due to at least one of the following barriers:
(a) Investment barrier: a financially more viable alternative to the project activity would have led to
higher emissions
(b) Technological barrier: a less technologically advanced alternative to the project activity involves
lower risks due to the performance uncertainty or low market share of the new technology adopted for
the project activity and so would have led to higher emissions
(c) Barrier due to prevailing practice: prevailing practice or existing regulatory or policy requirements
would have led to implementation of a technology with higher emissions
(d) Other barriers: without the project activity, for another specific reason identified by the project
participant, such as institutional barriers or limited information, managerial resources, organizational
capacity, financial resources, or capacity to absorb new technologies, emissions would have been
higher.”
Thus, the following alternatives as selected above are analyzed further in the following manner:
22
1. Electricity from grid with fossil fuel (coal) based boiler for thermal requirement (Option (a) as per
paragraph 19 of the applied methodology; Electricity is imported from a grid and thermal energy
(steam/heat) is produced using fossil fuel): This alternative is in compliance with all applicable legal
and regulatory requirements. This alternative may be considered a probable baseline alternative.
Therefore this alternative is taken for further consideration.
2. Captive Co-generation unit using fossil fuel (coal) as fuel [Option (d) as per paragraph 19 of the
applied methodology; Electricity and thermal energy (steam/heat) are produced in a cogeneration
unit using fossil fuel (with a possibility of export of electricity to a grid/other facilities and/or
thermal energy to other facilities)]: Coal is the primary fuel for power generated in the state. Further,
a comparison of the cost of coal and petcoke (as an alternative fossil fuel) the cost for energy supply
are as follows:
Coal Petcoke
NCV (TJ/Gg) 17.295 32.56
Cost (INR/Kg) 3.5757 6.808
Energy Cost (INR/TJ) 206739 209231
Hence, petcoke based cogeneration can be eliminated as a possible alternative fossil fuel as the cost of
energy from coal is lower.
Further, coal is an economical option for power generation as it does not face supply barriers. Price
fluctuations of fuel are not high which makes it a less risky fuel option. The cogeneration system is
more energy efficient with respect to individual generation of electricity and steam and therefore this
can be the best baseline alternative. Also, this alternative is in compliance with all applicable legal and
regulatory requirements.
3. Purchasing the electricity from the grid and steam from biomass (rice husk) based boiler (Option
(e) as per paragraph 19 of the applied methodology; Electricity is imported from a grid and/or
produced in an on-site captive power plant using fossil fuels (with a possibility of export to the grid);
steam/heat is produced from biomass): This alternative is in compliance with all applicable legal and
regulatory requirements. This alternative may be considered a probable baseline alternative.
4. Captive Co-generation unit using biomass (rice husk) as primary fuel i.e. project activity without
CDM benefit (Option (i) as per paragraph 19 of the applied methodology; Electricity is imported
from a grid and/or produced in a biomass fired cogeneration unit (without a possibility of export of
5
Lab Test Reports
6
Default Net Calorific Value of Pet Coke as given by 2006 IPCC Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas
Inventories
7
Quotation for Coal
8
Quotation for Pet Coke
23
electricity either to the grid or to other facilities); steam/heat is produced in a biomass fired
cogeneration unit and/or a biomass fired boiler (without a possibility of export of thermal energy to
other facilities). This scenario applies to a project activity that installs a new biomass cogeneration
system that displaces electricity which otherwise would have been imported from a grid): This
alternative is in compliance with all applicable legal and regulatory requirements. This alternative may
be considered a probable baseline alternative.
Therefore, this alternative is taken for further consideration.
A levelised cost analysis has been carried out by SELML to compare the cost of operation in the
various possible alternatives for the project activity. The same has been summarised below:
Parameters Levelised Cost9

(INR million/TJ)
Coal based Cogeneration plant 2.5996
Electricity: Grid
3.7205
Steam: Coal based Boiler
Electricity: Grid
3.8251
Steam: Rice husk based Boiler
Rice husk based Cogeneration plant 2.9285
From the above analysis, it follows that in absence of project activity the project proponent would
have set up a coal based cogeneration plant, since, this option is economically most attractive and does
not have to face barriers associated with other options mentioned above.
Step 4 of the guidelines: Based on the results of the analysis carried above, the most plausible baseline
scenario for the project activity is alternative 2 (Captive Co-generation unit using fossil fuel (coal) as
fuel), Thus, in the absence of the project activity, SELML would meet its process steam demand and
power requirements from coal based cogeneration plant, hence alternative 2, Captive Co-generation unit
using fossil fuel (coal) as fuel; is selected to be the Baseline for the project activity. Thereby, as per the
guidance laid out in paragraph 19 of version 19 of the approved methodology AMS I C, scenario (d) is
applicable to the 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 small-scale CDM project activity:
>>
In accordance with the “Guidelines on the demonstration and assessment of prior consideration of the
CDM, Version 03” (EB49, Annex 22), for project activities with a start date before 2 August 2008, for
which the start date is prior to the date of publication of the PDD for global stakeholder consultation, the
serious consideration of CDM in the decision to proceed with the implementation of the project activity is
demonstrated as follows:
9
The values are sourced from levelised cost analysis spreadsheet for the project activity.
24
a) The minutes of the meeting, held on 01/02/2008, of the Board of Directors of SELML indicate that
the Board decided to implement the project activity with due consideration of CDM and
specifically authorized its personnel to take serious actions to get the project registered.
b) Communication to UNFCCC on 26/02/2009, stating management intention to undertake project
activity after considering CDM revenues.
The following timeline of implementation of the project activity and timeline of events and actions taken to
achieve CDM registration clearly indicate that continuing and real actions were taken to secure CDM
status for the project in parallel with its implementation:
Table 8: Implementation Timeline of project activity

S.No. Event Date Reference Document
1. Purchase Order for AFBC Boiler 01/03/2008 Purchase Order dated 01/03/2008
2. Purchase Order for 10 MW 07/03/2008 Purchase Order dated 07/03/2008
biomass based Turbo-Generator
3. Work Order for Civil construction 11/10/2008 Work Order dated 11/10/2008
4. Application for grant of EIA/EMP 20/02/2009 Letter from MoEF dated
20/02/2009
5. GoP approval of site 02/04/2009 GoP approval letter dated
02/04/2009
6. IBR permission for erection of 20/05/2009 Letter from the Office of the
Boiler Director of Boilers, Punjab dated
20/05/2009
7. Commissioning of the project 10/01/2010 Meeting Report (Siemens)
activity
CDM Timeline
S.No. Event Date Reference Document
1. Meeting of Board of Directors of 01/02/2008 Certified Copy of Abstracts of
SEL Manufacturing Company the minutes of the Board Meeting
Limited to set up and establish held on 01/02/2008
Biomass based Power plant with
consideration of CDM revenues
2. Work Order signed with CDM 15/01/2009 Appointment of CDM consultant
consultant for the said project
activity
3. Invitations for the Stakeholder 08/07/2009 Letters to the identified
meeting sent to the identified stakeholders inviting them for the
stakeholders stakeholders consultation meeting
4. Stakeholder meeting 13/07/2009 Stakeholder Minutes of meeting
5. NCDMA meeting for host country 29/10/2009 Email correspondence from
approval from DNA MoEF mentioning the date of
meeting as 29/10/2009
6. Appointment of DOE for validation 16/02/2010 Order/Contract for validation of
of the CDM project activity the CDM project activity dated
25
16/02/2010
Hence from the above tables, it can be demonstrated that the project proponent was taking continuing and
real actions to secure CDM for the proposed project. Thus, as per paragraph 6 (a), 6 (b) and 8 (a) of the
Guidelines for the demonstration and assessment of prior consideration of the CDM, Version – 04, it can
be demonstrated that as there is less than 2 years of a gap between documented evidence, it is clear that the
project proponent was taking continuing and real actions to secure the CDM status for the proposed project
activity.
Explanation of how and why the project activity is additional in accordance with the baseline
methodology
In accordance with paragraph 28 of the simplified modalities and procedures for small-scale CDM project
activities, a simplified baseline and monitoring methodology listed in appendix B may be used for a small-
scale CDM project activity if project participants are able to demonstrate that the project activity would
otherwise not be implemented due to the existence of one or more barrier(s) listed in attachment A of
Appendix B as stated below:
“Project participants shall provide an explanation to show that the project activity would not have
occurred anyway due to at least one of the following barriers:
(a) Investment barrier: a financially more viable alternative to the project activity would have led to
higher emissions;
(b) Technological barrier: a less technologically advanced alternative to the project activity involves
lower risks due to the performance uncertainty or low market share of the new technology adopted for
the project activity and so would have led to higher emissions;
(c) Barrier due to prevailing practice: prevailing practice or existing regulatory or policy requirements
would have led to implementation of a technology with higher emissions;
(d) Other barriers: without the project activity, for another specific reason identified by the project
participant, such as institutional barriers or limited information, managerial resources, organizational
capacity, financial resources, or capacity to absorb new technologies, emissions would have been
higher.”
The implementation of the Biomass based Cogeneration activity is a voluntary step undertaken by SELML
with no direct or indirect requirement by law. The requirements laid by the concerned agencies for
Environmental Pollution were already been met by SELML.
SELML was well aware of the various barriers associated with the implementation of the project. But it
was felt that the availability of carbon financing under CDM through sale of carbon credits generated due
to project activity would help in overcoming these barriers. Some of the key barriers of significance are
discussed below:
Investment barriers
During the inception of the project activity, all the feasible options were studied by SELML to ascertain the
different choices to meet its captive electricity and steam demand. The feasibility of options using coal and
rice husk as fuel were compared to evaluate the long term viability of the project. For this purpose,
SELML has done an analysis to determine the unit cost of steam generation using coal and rice husk. The
comparison clearly shows that the unit cost (Rs/kg) of steam generation using rice husk is significantly
more than the unit cost of generation using coal.
26
Based on the calculation of levelised cost of steam generation, coal was deemed to be the most attractive
option for cogeneration. This meant that coal based generation was financially more attractive and
implementing and operating the said project activity would result in a greater burden on the finances of the
project proponent. However, the project proponent being an environmentally conscious organization and
considering the potential for CDM revenues, SELML decided to go ahead with the implementation of the
project.
In line with sub step 2 (a) of Tool for the demonstration and assessment of additionality, the project cannot
use simple cost analysis as it generates financial and economic benefits other than CDM related income,
due to the savings achieved in reduced grid electricity purchase cost. Hence, simple cost analysis cannot be
used and either Investment Comparison analysis or Benchmark analysis has to be selected for the
demonstration of additionality.
In accordance with Paragraph 19 of the “Guidelines on the Assessment of Investment Analysis” Version 05
which states that “If the proposed baseline scenario leaves the project participant no other choice than to
make an investment to supply the same (or substitute) products or services, a benchmark analysis is not
appropriate and an investment comparison analysis shall be used”
The proposed project activity is supplying the thermal and electrical energy to the Greenfield facility where,
the equipments available in the pre project scenario (5 TPH fossil fuel based boiler and 15 lac kCal/ hour
thermopack) could only have provided 138.37 TJ/year of thermal energy to the plant, whereas, the thermal
energy supplied by the project activity is 349.23 TJ/year. Hence, the project participant had no choice but
to make an investment to supply the same level of electrical and thermal energy. Hence, a levelised cost
analysis has been carried out by SELML to compare the cost of operation in the various credible baseline
scenario alternatives identified in section B.4. for the project activity:
· Coal based cogeneration system to meet the steam and electricity requirement of the facility
· Rice husk based cogeneration system to meet the steam and electricity requirement of the facility
(project activity without CDM)
· Electricity is imported from the grid and a coal fired boiler to meet the process steam requirement
· Electricity is imported from the grid and a rice husk fired boiler to meet the process steam
requirement
In accordance with Paragraph 6 of the “Guidelines on the Assessment of Investment Analysis” Version 05,
all input values10 used in the levelised cost analysis were applicable at the time of investment decision taken
by the project proponent. The assumptions that are common to all scenarios in this levelised cost analysis
have been listed below:
Parameter Value Unit Source

Number of hours of 24 Hrs Feasibility Study Report dated January 2008 (Page 11)
operation in a day
Number of days of 330 Days Feasibility Study Report dated January 2008 (Page 11)
10
All the values are sourced from the feasibility report on power cum steam generation plant at SEL
manufacturing company limited.
27
operation in a year
Rice husk 2800 INR/ton Quotation from Rice husk Supplier dated 15 - 12 -
2007
Annual escalation 5% Since the Punjab State Electricity Regulatory
on rice husk Commission’s tariff order does not specifically state the
assumptions to arrive at the tariff rate for biomass
based power. The following tariff orders published by
respective State Electricity Regulatory Commissions for
biomass based power projects in the country have also
considered an annual increment of 5% in prices of
biomass. These orders were also available at the time of
investment decision: 1. Rajasthan: Para 84, Page 36 of
Rajasthan Electricity Regulatory Commission (RERC)
Tariff Order for wind and biomass projects
(http://www.rerc.gov.in/Order/JS_(PO)_Order_RE_Tar
iff_15.03.07.pdf), 2. Maharashtra: Para 5.6, Page 54
of Maharashtra Electricity Regulatory Commission
Tariff Order dated 8th August 2005
(http://www.mercindia.org.in/pdf/Biomass%20Order-
8.8.05.zip), 3. Karnataka: Page 28, Tariff Order
dated 18th January 2005
(http://www.kerc.org/order2005/Order%20on%20NCE
%20Tariff%20(FINAL).doc).
Coal 3575 INR/ton Quotation from Coal Supplier dated 20 - 12 - 2007
Annual escalation 5.35% http://eaindustry.nic.in/wpi_data_display/display_data.a
on coal sp - WPI for coal (Jan 2007 to Dec 2007)
Net Calorific Value 2767 kCal/kg Lab Test Reports dated 24 - 12 - 2007
of rice husk
Net Calorific Value 4131 kCal/kg Lab Test Reports dated 24 - 12 - 2007
of coal
Cost of power from 4.66 Rs./kWh Electricity Bills for Dec 2007 (Issued on 12 - 01 -
grid 2008)
Annual escalation 3.04% Annual Escalation on PSEB electricity bills from Dec
on the grid tariff 2005 to Dec 2007
Depreciation rates for the power generating units
Rate of depreciation (http://taxclubindia.com/simple/depreciation%20rates%
for Building 7.84% 202009-10.pdf) - Page 12 of 19
Rate of depreciation Depreciation rates for the power generating units
for Plant & (http://taxclubindia.com/simple/depreciation%20rates%
Machinery 7.84% 202009-10.pdf) - Page 12 of 19
Depreciation rates for the power generating units
Rate of depreciation (http://taxclubindia.com/simple/depreciation%20rates%
for Spare Parts 7.69% 202009-10.pdf) - Page 13 of 19
RBI PLR
Discount Rate 13% (http://rbidocs.rbi.org.in/rdocs/Wss/PDFs/82830.pdf)
28
The assumptions specific to the different systems considered are given below:
· Coal based cogeneration system to meet the steam and electricity requirement of the facility
Assumptions for Variable costs

Efficiency of boiler % 100%
Assumptions for Fixed Costs
Man power cost
Salary of Man Power INR Million/Year 6.00
Ash Handling Labour cost INR Million/Year 0.00
Total man power cost INR Million/Year 6.00
Increment in man power cost % 5.70%
Operation & Maintenance Expenses
Operation & Maintenance Expenses INR Million/Year 1.50
Increment in Operation & Maintenance Expenses % 5.70%
Depreciation
Building INR Million/Year 1.96
Plant & Machinery INR Million/Year 25.87
Miscellaneous Fixed Assets INR Million/Year 3.85
Total Depreciation INR Million/Year 31.68
The levelised cost analysis shows that the levelised cost of energy production of a coal based cogeneration
system to generate steam as well as power is INR 2.5996 Million per TJ.
· Rice husk based cogeneration system to meet the steam and electricity requirement of the facility
(project activity without CDM)

Man power cost
Ash Handling Labour cost INR Million/Year 0.28
Depreciation
29
The levelised cost analysis shows that the levelised cost of energy production of a rice husk based
cogeneration system to generate steam as well as power is INR 2.9285 million per TJ.
· Electricity is imported from the grid and a coal fired boiler to meet the process steam requirement

Man power cost
Fuel and Ash Handling Labour cost INR Million/Year 0.00
Depreciation
The levelised cost analysis shows that the levelised cost of energy production of a coal fired boiler to
generate steam for process requirement of the plant and withdrawal of electricity from the grid is INR
3.7205 million per TJ.
· Electricity is imported from the grid and a rice husk fired boiler to meet the process steam
requirement

Man power cost
Fuel and Ash Handling Labour cost INR Million/Year 0.28
Depreciation
30
The levelised cost analysis shows that the levelised cost of energy production of a rice husk fired boiler to
generate steam for process requirement of the plant and withdrawal of electricity from the grid is INR
3.8251 million per TJ.
Levelised cost of Percentage

Levelised Cost Analysis Energy Production difference in cost
(INR Million/TJ) of operation
Coal based Cogeneration plant 2.5996 -
Electricity: PSEB
Steam: Coal based Boiler 3.7205 43
Electricity: PSEB
Steam: Rice husk based Boiler 3.8251 47
Rice husk based Cogeneration plant 2.9285 13
Hence, it is clear from the above analysis that coal based cogeneration system was about 13% cheaper than a
similar rice husk based cogeneration system and hence the most favourable scenario for the project
proponent.
Sensitivity Analysis
In accordance with Paragraph 20 and 21 of the “Guidelines on the Assessment of Investment Analysis”
Version 05, variables that constitute more than 20% of either total project costs or total project revenues
should be subjected to reasonable variation. Hence, a range of 10% departure from the price of rice husk
and coal as well as their calorific value along with the project costs was considered in the sensitivity
analysis.
-10% -5% 0% 5% 10%
Parameter Cost of Coal
Coal Cogen 2.3694 2.4845 2.5996 2.7148 2.8299
Grid Power + Coal steam 3.6486 3.6845 3.7205 3.7564 3.7923
Grid Power + Rice husk steam 3.8251 3.8251 3.8251 3.8251 3.8251
Rice Husk Cogen 2.9285 2.9285 2.9285 2.9285 2.9285
Parameter Cost of Rice husk
Coal Cogen 2.5996 2.5996 2.5996 2.5996 2.5996
Rice Husk Cogen 2.6657 2.7971 2.9285 3.0600 3.1914
Parameter Calorific Value of Coal
Coal Cogen 2.8554 2.7208 2.5996 2.4900 2.3903
Rice Husk Cogen 2.9285 2.9285 2.9285 2.9285 2.9285
Parameter Calorific Value of Rice Husk
Coal Cogen 2.5996 2.5996 2.5996 2.5996 2.5996
31
Rice Husk Cogen 3.2206 3.0669 2.9285 2.8034 2.6896
Parameter Project Cost (Cogeneration)
Coal Cogen 2.5801 2.5899 2.5996 2.6094 2.6191
Rice Husk Cogen 2.9090 2.9188 2.9285 2.9383 2.9480
Parameter Project Cost (Grid + L P boiler)
Coal Cogen 2.5996 2.5996 2.5996 2.5996 2.5996
Rice Husk Cogen 2.9285 2.9285 2.9285 2.9285 2.9285
-10% -5% 0% 5% 10%

Percentage difference Cost of Coal
Coal Cogen 0 0 0 0 0
Grid Power + Coal steam 54 48 43 38 34
Grid Power + Rice husk steam 61 54 47 41 35
Rice Husk Cogen 24 18 13 8 3
Percentage difference Cost of Rice husk
Percentage difference Calorific Value of Coal
Percentage difference Calorific Value of Rice Husk
Percentage difference Project Cost (Cogeneration)
Percentage difference Project Cost (Grid + L P boiler)
32
Rice husk cogeneration can become the most economically feasible option (based on levelized cost
analysis) in the following individual conditions:
· Cost of coal increased by 15%.

· Cost of rice husk decreased by 13%.
· Net calorific value of coal decreased by 13%.
· Net calorific value of rice husk increased by 15%.
Further, the likelihood of the occurrence of the variations in the sensitivity analysis has been analysed as
below:
· Cost of coal – As the cost of coal has been conservatively taken from the quotations provided by
coal suppliers (which is higher than its value in the feasibility report), therefore, there is not much
variation envisaged in the cost of coal.
· Cost of rice husk - As the cost of rice husk has been taken from the feasibility report and the
quotations provided by rice husk suppliers, therefore, there is not much variation envisaged in the
cost of rice husk.
· Net calorific value of coal - As the NCV of coal has been taken from the lab test report, therefore,
there is not much variation envisaged in the NCV of coal.
· Net calorific value of rice husk - As the NCV of rice husk has been taken from the lab test report,
therefore, there is not much variation envisaged in the NCV of rice husk.
· Project Cost – As the project cost is taken from the feasibility report and as the project activity is
already commissioned, there is no variation envisaged in the project cost for the project activity.
Thus, from the summary of results obtained in the levelised cost analysis, it is clear that inspite of
consideration of a range of -10% to 10% deviation in rice husk and coal price and calorific value and
project costs, a coal based cogeneration continues to be the more than 3% cheaper than a rice husk based
cogeneration system. Hence, a coal based cogeneration system would be the most favorable scenario for
SELML.
National policies and circumstances relevant to the baseline of the proposed project activity:
The Indian power sector was primarily dominated by the public sector and was regulated by the Electricity
(Supply) Act, 1948 until the amendment of the act in 1991 to create the provision for private generating
companies to setup projects.
These were both replaced by the Electricity Act 2003 which is the applicable regulation for the project
activity. As per Annex 3 of EB 22 it is stated that National and/or sectoral policies or regulations that give
comparative advantages to less emission-intensive technologies need not be considered if implemented after
11th November 2001 need not be considered.
33
However, even considering this act all the above alternatives (as presented in section B.4 of the PDD) are
in compliance with all applicable legal and regulatory requirements as follows:
The implementation of project activity is a voluntary initiative and it is not mandatory or a legal
requirement. For power generation, the Electricity Act 2003 http://www.ippai.org/theElectricityAct2003.pdf
does not restrict or empower any authority to restrict the fuel choice, the applicable environmental
regulations do not restrict the use of biomass energy and there is no legal requirement on the choice of a
particular technology.
Thus, the baseline of the proposed project activity is in compliance with all applicable regulatory policies
and laws.
B.6. Emission reductions:
B.6.1. Explanation of methodological choices:

>>
The equipments available in the pre project scenario (5 TPH fossil fuel based boiler and 15 lac kCal/ hour
thermopack) could only have provided 138.37 TJ/year of thermal energy to the plant, whereas, the thermal
energy supplied by the project activity is 349.23 TJ/year.
Hence, the continued operation of these equipments were not considered as alternatives to the project
activity in section B.4 and B.5 of the PDD as these scenarios would not be able to supply the similar output
to the project activity. This is in accordance the guidance provided in the “Tool for the demonstration and
assessment of additionality, Version 05.2”, which states that
For the purpose of identifying relevant alternative scenarios, the project participant should include the
technologies or practices that provide outputs (e.g. cement) or services (e.g. electricity, heat) with
comparable quality, properties and application areas as the proposed CDM project activity and that
have been implemented previously or are currently being introduced in the relevant country/region.
Thus, the project activity has chosen the following viable alternatives as explained in section B.4:
· Electricity from grid with coal based boiler for thermal requirement.
· Electricity is produced in an on-site coal based power plant with coal based boiler for thermal
requirement.
· Captive Co-generation unit using coal as fuel.
· Purchasing the electricity from the grid and steam from rice husk based boiler.
Thereby, as explained in section B.4 of the PDD, Captive Co-generation unit using coal as fuel; is
selected to be the Baseline for the project activity. Thereby, as per the guidance laid out in paragraph 19 of
version 19 of the approved methodology AMS I C, scenario d) is applicable to the project.
Hence, as per paragraph 27 of the methodology, baseline emissions for electricity and thermal energy
(steam/heat) produced in a cogeneration unit, using fossil fuel, the following equation shall be used:
BEcogen,y = [(EGPJ,thermal,y + EGPJ,electrical,y * 3.6/ BL,cogen] * EFFF,CO2 …… (Equation no.3)
Where,
34
BEcogen,y = Baseline emissions from electricity and thermal energy displaced by the project activity
during the year y; tCO2e
EGPJ,thermal,y = The net quantity of thermal energy supplied by the project activity during the year y; TJ
EGPJ,electrical,y = The amount of electricity supplied by the project activity during the year y; GWh
3.6 = Conversion factor; TJ/GWh
EFFF,CO2 = The CO2 emission factor of the fossil fuel that would have been used in the baseline
cogeneration plant; tCO2 / TJ obtained from reliable local or national data if available, otherwise IPCC
default emission factors are used
BL,cogen = The total annual average efficiency of the cogeneration plant using fossil fuel determined
in accordance with paragraphs 28 and 29 of the methodology
It should be noted that the project activity is a biomass (Rice Husk) based cogeneration project with the
provision of co-firing in the case of any exigency. However, the ex ante determination of baseline emissions
considers the use of 100% rice husk (biomass) for the duration of the entire crediting period. Hence, as per
paragraph 44 of AMS I C (Version 19), the quantity of fossil fuel for the ex ante determination has been
considered as nil and rice husk has been considered as the only fuel for the project activity. This has been
considered in light of the fact that there is sufficient availability of rice husk in the catchment area as
certified in the biomass assessment report.
Any use of fossil fuel in case of exigency would be duly monitored ex post and accounted for in the project
emissions as described below.
Project Emissions
Project emissions could potentially arise from the following activities:

· CO2 emissions from on-site consumption of fossil fuels due to the project activity shall be
calculated using the latest version of .Tool to calculate project or leakage CO2 emissions from
fossil fuel combustion.;
· CO2 emissions from electricity consumption by the project activity using the latest version of “Tool
to calculate baseline, project and/or leakage emissions from electricity consumption”;
· Any other significant emissions associated with project activity within the project boundary;
· For geothermal project activities, project participants shall account for the following emission
sources, where applicable: fugitive emissions of carbon dioxide and methane due to release of non-
condensable gases from produced steam; and, carbon dioxide emissions resulting from combustion
of fossil fuels related to the operation of the geothermal power plant.
Since, the project activity is a biomass based cogeneration project at a Greenfield facility, the project
emissions are considered as zero (ex ante approach).
Project emissions include:
1. CO2 emissions from on-site consumption of fossil fuels due to the project activity
shall be calculated using the latest version of .Tool to calculate project or leakage
CO2 emissions from fossil fuel combustion.;
2. CO2 emissions from electricity consumption by the project activity using the latest
version of .Tool to calculate baseline, project and/or leakage emissions from
electricity consumption.;
3. Any other significant emissions associated with project activity within the project
35
boundary;
4. For geothermal project activities, project participants shall account for the following
emission sources, where applicable: fugitive emissions of carbon dioxide and
methane due to release of non-condensable gases from produced steam; and, carbon
dioxide emissions resulting from combustion of fossil fuels related to the operation
of the geothermal power plant.
As the proposed project activity is a Biomass based Cogeneration plant, there would be zero project
emissions as only carbon neutral biomass would be utilized for energy generation.
1. Though, in case of any exigencies where the fossil fuel might be used, the project
emissions will include the CO2 emissions from on-site consumption of fossil fuels which
would then be calculated using the “Tool to calculate project or leakage CO2 emissions
from fossil fuel combustion”.
Hence, as per the “Tool to calculate project or leakage CO2 emissions from fossil fuel combustion”
(Version – 2) paragraph II under Baseline Methodology Procedure.
CO2 emissions from fossil fuel combustion in process j are calculated based on the quantity of fuels
combusted and the CO2 emission coefficient of those fuels, as follows:
PEFC,j,y = ∑ FCi,j,y * COEFi,y

i
PEFC,j,y = Are the CO2 emissions from fossil fuel combustion in process j during the year y
(tCO2/yr);
FCi,j,y = Is the quantity of fuel type i combusted in process j during the year y (mass or
volume unit/yr);
COEFi,y = Is the CO2 emission coefficient of fuel type i in year y (tCO2/mass or volume unit)
i = Are the fuel types combusted in process j during the year y
The CO2 emission coefficient COEFi,y can be calculated using one of the following two Options,
depending on the availability of data on the fossil fuel type i, as follows:
Option A: The CO2 emission coefficient COEFi,y is calculated based on the chemical composition of the
fossil fuel type i, using the following approach:
If FCi,j,y is measured in a mass unit: COEFi,y = wC,i,y * 44/12
If FCi,j,y is measured in a volume unit: COEFi,y = wC,i,y * ρi,y * 44/12
Where:
COEFi,y = Is the CO2 emission coefficient of fuel type i (tCO2/mass or volume unit);
36
wC,i,y = Is the weighted average mass fraction of carbon in fuel type i in year y (tC/mass unit
of the fuel);
ρi,y = Is the weighted average density of fuel type i in year y (mass unit/volume unit of the
fuel)
Option B: The CO2 emission coefficient COEFi,y is calculated based on net calorific value and CO2
emission factor of the fuel type i, as follows:
COEFi,y = NCVi,y * EFCO2,i,y
Where:
COEFi,y = Is the CO2 emission coefficient of fuel type i in year y (tCO2/mass
or volume unit)
NCVi,y = Is the weighted average net calorific value of the fuel type i in
year y (GJ/mass or volume unit)
EFCO2,i,y = Is the weighted average CO2 emission factor of fuel type i in year
y (tCO2/GJ)
In order to calculate the project emissions for the proposed project activity, Option B would be chosen.
Using this approach, Project Emissions would then be calculated for the onsite consumption of fossil fuel
by the project activity.
2. Moreover, any electricity consumption by the project activity will be calculated in the
following manner:
As per the guidance provided in the Tool to calculate baseline, project and/or leakage emissions from
electricity consumption (Version 1), as there is no fossil fuel based power plant at the project site, the
project participant has chosen ‘Scenario A – Electricity consumption from the grid’ in order to calculate
the emissions resulting from the electricity import by the project activity from the grid by calculating the
combined margin emission factor of the applicable electricity system, using the procedures in the latest
approved version of the “Tool to calculate the emission factor for an electricity system (Version 2.2.1)”
(EFgrid,CM,y).
The Combined Margin is then calculated according to the methodological tool “Tool to Calculate the
Emission Factor for an Electricity System” Version 2.2.1. The data considered for calculation of emission
factor is from “CO2 Baseline Database for the Indian Power Sector” User Guide, Version 5.011 published
by CEA and the emission factor calculated for the NEWNE grid is 0.84 tCO2e/MWh as per the following:
The emission factor of the grid for the ex ante approach is calculated in the following way:
11
http://www.cea.nic.in/planning/c%20and%20e/government%20of%20india%20website.htm
37
In accordance with the “Tool to calculate the emission factor for an electricity system (Version 2.2.1),” the
grid emission factor is calculated using a Combined Margin (CM), comprised of an Operating Margin
(OM) emission factor and a Build Margin (BM) emission factor.
The following procedure was adopted for estimating the grid electricity emission factor:
STEP 1. Identify the relevant electricity systems.

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. Calculate the build margin (BM) emission factor.
STEP 6. Calculate the combined margin (CM) emission factor.
Step 1 – Identify the relevant electric power system
The CEA of the host country has published a delineation of the project electricity system and connected
electricity systems. According to data published by the CEA of India the host country is used and the
project activity falls under NEWNE grid.
Step 2 - Choose whether to include off-grid power plants in the project electricity system (optional)
Off-grid power plants in the project electricity system are excluded.
Step 3 - Select a method to determine the operating margin (OM).
The approved methodological tool recommends the use of one of the following for the calculation of the
operating margin emission factor (EFgrid,OM,y).
a) Simple OM, or
b) Simple adjusted OM; or
c) Dispatch data analysis OM; or
d) Average OM.
The methodological tool recommends the use of dispatch data analysis as the first methodological choice.
However, in India availability of accurate data on grid system dispatch order for each power plant in the
system and the amount of power dispatched from all plants in the system during each hour is practically not
possible. Also, still the merit order dispatch system has not become applicable and is unlikely to be so
during the crediting period.
In view of this it is proposed to apply other choices as suggested in the methodological tool.
Since the power supplied by low cost must run power plants to the NEWNE grid during 2008-09 is
clearly below 50%, the CEA has applied the Simple OM method.
Share of Must-Run (Hydro/Nuclear) (% of Net Generation)

2006-07 2007-08 2008-09
NEWNE 18.5% 19.0% 17.3%
South 28.3% 27.1% 22.8%
India 20.9% 21.0% 18.6%
38
Source: CEA Database version 5.0.
The data vintage option selected is the ex-ante approach, where a 3 year average OM is calculated. The
most recent three year CEA data published on the emission factor of NEWNE grid is considered.
Step 4 – Calculate the operating margin emission factor according to the selected method.
a) Simple OM
In the Simple OM method, the emission factor is calculated as generation weighted average CO2 emissions
per unit net electricity generation (tCO2/MWh) of all generating sources serving the system, not including
low-operating cost and must-run power plants. simple OM can be calculated using any of the three
available methods. Option A has been selected where the data on fuel consumption and net electricity
generation of each power plant/ unit is available. The CEA baseline is derived using the following formulae
to calculate simple OM
Where,
EF grid, OM simple, y = Simple operating margin CO2 emission factor in year y
EG m, y = Net quantity of electricity generated and delivered to the grid by power unit m in year y
(MWh)
EFEL, m, y = CO2 emission factor of power unit m in year y (tCO2/MWh)
m = All power units serving the grid in year y except low-cost / must-run power units
y = Either the three most recent years for which data is available at the time of submission of
the CDM-PDD to the DOE for validation (ex ante option) or the applicable year during
monitoring (Ex post option)
Determination of EFEL, m, y
The emission factor of each power unit m should be determined as follows:
Where,
EF grid,OM,simple,y = simple operating margin CO2 emission factor in year y (tCO2/MWh)
FC i,m,y = amount of fossil fuel type i consumed by power plant / unit m 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
39
unit)
EF co2,I,y = CO2 emission factor of fossil fuel type i in year y (tCO2/GJ)
EG m,y = net electricity generated and delivered to the grid by power plant / unit m in year y
(MWh)
m = all power plants / units serving the grid in year y except low-cost / must-run power
plants / units
i = all fossil fuel types combusted in power plant /unit m in year y
y = either the three most recent years for which data is available at the time of submission
of the CDM-PDD to the DOE for validation (ex-ante)
2006-2007 1.01
NEWNE Grid 2007-2008 1.00
2008-2009 1.01
Average 1.007 t CO2/MWh
Step 5. Calculate the build margin (BM) emission factor.
The build margin emissions factor is the generation of weighted average emission factor (tCO2 /MWh) of
all power units m during the most recent year y for which power generation data is available, calculated as
follows:
Where,
EF grid,BM,y – Build margin CO2 emission factor in year y (tCO2 /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 – CO2 emission factor of power unit m in year y (tCO2 /MWh)
m – Power units included in the build margin
y – Most recent historical year for which power generation data is available
Build Margin emission factor is determined as below:
NEWNE 2008-2009 0.68

Average BM 0.68 t CO2/MWh
Step 6. Calculate the combined margin (CM) emission factor.
The baseline emission factor in year y is calculated as the simple average of the OM and BM emission
factors, i.e. OM and BM are each weighted with 50% for the first crediting period. As noted above, the
resulting Combined Margin is fixed ex ante for the duration of the crediting period:
40
EFy = EF grid, CM, y = wOM * EF grid,OM,y + wBM * EF grid,BM,y
Where,
EF grid,BM,y – Build margin CO2 emission factor in year y (tCO2/MWh)
EF grid,OM,y – Operating margin CO2 emission factor in year y (tCO2/MWh)
wOM – Weighting of operating margin emissions factor(%)
wBM – Weighting of build margin emissions factor(%)
As the proposed project activity is a biomass based energy generation project, the weighting of operating
margin emission factor and weighting of build margin emission factor is considered as 0.5 and 0.5
respectively and calculated combined margin as under:
EFy = EF grid, CM, y = (0.5 * 1.007 + 0.5 *0.68) tCO2 / MWh

= 0.84 tCO2 / MWh
Key Parameter Value Data Source Website
EFgrid,CM,y Combined Margin CEA published baseline www.cea.nic.in

emission factor (0.84 emission factor for
tCO2/MWh) of NEWNE NEWNE grid (CM)
Grid
EGimport,y Net power imported by From Plant and PSEB
the grid by the project Records. Ex Post
activity per annum determination.
Thus, project emissions from the electricity consumption from the grid by the project activity is calculated
as the product of EFgrid,CM,y and EGimport,y.
Thus, the total project emissions from the project activity would be the sum of the project emissions
resulting from point 1 and 2 above.
Leakage
Since there is no energy generating equipment that is transferred from outside the boundary of the project
activity, there is no leakage on account of this.
With reference to the general guidance on leakage in biomass project activities, we have to consider the
possibility of leakage in the case of the project activity as it utilizes biomass residues from external sources.
Leakage may occur because of the diversion of biomass from other activities outside the boundary thus
increasing the fossil fuel combustion outside the boundary. Considering that the biomass requirement for
the project is small and that there is sufficient biomass available in Punjab state, no such leakage is
anticipated. However, as per the latest guidance on leakage due to biomass project activities, a biomass
assessment survey has been undertaken ex-ante to confirm that the biomass used by the project activity
does not lead to leakage in the following manner:
Biomass Availability
41
Generation:
Total biomass generation in the region = 13694237 MT/year
Consumption:
Total biomass consumption in the region = 7181423 MT/year
Biomass requirement of the project activity = 97834 MT/year
Total consumption in the region including the project activity requirement = 7279257 MT/year
Thereby,
Surplus Availability (%) = (Generation – Consumption) * 100/Consumption
Thus, Surplus Availability (%) = (13694237 – 7279257) * 100/7279257

= 89.33 %
The biomass assessment report has been prepared by a reputed third party – Ace Engineers and
Consultants and the same has also been approved by PEDA (Punjab Energy Development Agency)
reflecting the above figures. Moreover, as the biomass assessment study demonstrates that the quantity of
available biomass in the region is more than 25% than the quantity of biomass that is utilized in the project
activity, then this source of leakage due to competing use of biomass has been neglected.
Further, in case collection/processing/transportation of biomass residues is outside the project boundary

CO2 emissions from collection/processing/transportation of biomass residues to the project site needs to be
considered as the leakage emissions if the biomass is transported from more than 200 km away from the
project activity. Thus, as evident from the biomass assessment report, as the biomass is procured within
200 km radius of the project activity due to abundant availability, thus, in accordance to the clarification
given by the SSC WG in response to SSC_329 which guides that the emissions related to transport of
biomass is only required if these are transported over a distance of more than 200 km. This can also be
correlated with the SSC WG 22 paragraph 8 which states that “emissions related to transport of biomass is
only required if these are transported over a distance of more than 200 kilometers” in the case of small
scale projects. Therefore, as the biomass for the project activity is procured from within 200 km of the
project activity, this leakage emission has been neglected for the project activity.
Emission Reductions (ERy)

The emission reduction due to the project activity is thereby estimated by using the following formula:
CO2 emission reduction due to project activity = Baseline Emissions (BEy) - Project Emissions (PEy) -
Leakages (LEy)
42
B.6.2. Data and parameters that are available at validation:
Data / Parameter: EFgrid,CM,y

Data unit: tCO2/MWh
Description: Combined Margin Emission Factor
Source of data used: Central Electric Authority, India (CEA) Version 5, November 2009
Value applied: 0.84
Justification of the This database is prepared as per ACM0002 and "Tool to Calculate the Emission
choice of data or Factor for an Electricity System" and the same will be applicable while
description of calculating the project emissions from the electricity consumption by the project
measurement methods activity from the grid.
and procedures actually
applied :
Any comment: This data will be used ex-ante and will remain fixed during the crediting period
of the project activity.
Data / Parameter: EFCO2

Data unit: tCO2/TJ
Description: CO2 emission factor for coal
Source of data used: IPCC 2006 guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas inventories got stationary
combustion
Value applied: 96.1
Justification of the The emission factor data has been applied as per the latest IPCC 2006 guidelines
choice of data or for national Greenhouse gas inventories for stationary combustion
description of
measurement methods
applied :
Any comment: This value is being fixed ex-ante for the crediting period.
Data / Parameter: η BL cogen

Data unit: %
Description: The total efficiency (thermal and electrical both included) of the cogeneration
plant using fossil fuel that would have been used in the absence of the project
activity
Source of data used: Assumed for conservativeness
Value applied: 100 ( Conservative Assumption)
Justification of the This is the most conservative approach.
choice of data or
description of
measurement methods
applied :
43
Data / Parameter: BRice Husk,y

Data unit: Metric Tonne
Description: Only biomass envisaged to be consumed in the project activity is Rice Husk. The
value used is the ex ante determination of the quantity of rice husk (biomass)
consumed by the project activity.
Source of data used: Ex ante determination
Value applied: 97,834
Justification of the Only biomass envisaged to be consumed in the project activity is Rice Husk. The
choice of data or value used is the ex ante determination of the quantity of rice husk (biomass)
description of consumed by the project activity.
measurement methods
applied :
Data / Parameter: BFossil Fuel,y

Description: Fossil fuel usage in the project activity
Value applied: 0
Justification of the Only biomass (Rice Husk) has been envisaged to be consumed in the project
choice of data or activity. It should be noted that fossil fuel usage has not been envisaged ex ante
description of for the project activity.
measurement methods
applied :
Data / Parameter: BRice Husk,y:BFossil Fuel,y

Data unit: Ratio
Description: Ex ante determination of biomass to fossil fuel ratio
Value applied: -
Justification of the Only biomass (Rice Husk) has been envisaged to be consumed in the project
choice of data or activity. It should be noted that fossil fuel usage has not been envisaged ex ante
description of for the project activity, thereby; biomass to fossil fuel usage cannot be
measurement methods ascertained.
applied :
Any comment: -
B.6.3 Ex-ante calculation of emission reductions:

>>
44
For steam extracted and power generation in the cogeneration unit the emission reductions would be the
baseline emissions that would have occurred in the absence of project activity.
In the absence of project activity, steam and power would have been generated using coal in coal fired
cogeneration unit of similar specifications. The baseline emissions are estimated based on equation
described in section B.6.1 of this document.
BEcogen,y = [(EGPJ,thermal,y + EGPJ,electrical,y * 3.6/ BL,cogen] * EFFF,CO2
Where:
BEcogen,y = Baseline emissions from electricity and thermal energy displaced by the project
activity during the year y (tCO2)
EGPJ,electrical,y = The amount of electricity supplied by the project activity during the year y; GWh
3.6 = Conversion factor (TJ/GWh)
EGPJ,thermal,y = The net quantity of thermal energy supplied by the project activity during the
year y (TJ)
EFFF,CO2 = The CO2 emission factor of the fossil fuel that would have been used in the
baseline cogeneration plant; tCO2 / TJ obtained from reliable local or national
data if available, otherwise IPCC default emission factors are used
ηBL,cogen = The total annual average efficiency of the cogeneration plant using fossil fuel
determined in accordance with paragraphs 28 and 29 of the methodology
Therefore,
EGPJ,thermal
S No. Parameter Value Unit Calculation/Reference

A Average steam supplied to process from 10 MW Process requirement
Cogeneration plant 19.7 TPH
B Enthalpy of steam @ 9.4 ata ; 190 Celsius 2805.8 kJ/kg Steam Table
C Enthalpy of water @ 135 Celsius 567.48 kJ/kg Steam Table
D Net quantity of thermal energy supplied by the project (B-C)*A/10^6
activity 0.04 TJ/hr
E No. of operating hours 24 hrs/day Actual
F Operating Days/year 330 days/yr Actual
G Energy Output (EGPJ,thermal = Net quantity of thermal D*E*F
energy supplied by the project activity * No. of
working hours in an year) 349.23 TJ/yr
EGPJ,electrical
S No. Parameter Value Unit Calculation/Reference

A Power generation from cogeneration plant that Technical specifications
would be displacing grid 10 MW of turbine
B No. of operating hours 24 hrs/day Actual
C Operating Days/year 330 days/yr Actual
45
D Power generation from cogeneration plant that A*B*C

would be displacing grid 79200 MWh/yr
E Auxiliary Consumption 7920 MWh/yr D*10%
F Net Generation 71280 MWh/yr D-E
G Energy Output (EGPJ,electrical) 256.61 TJ/yr F*3600/10^6
Therefore,
BEcogen,y = [(349.23 + 71.28 x 3.6)/100%] x 96.112 = 58,221 tCO2e/annum
As PEy & LEy = 0 tCO2e/annum,
ERy = BEy – PEy – LEy = 58,221 tCO2e/annum
B.6.4 Summary of the ex-ante estimation of emission reductions:

>>
Estimation of Estimation of Estimation of
Estimation
project activity baseline overall emission
Year of leakage
emissions (tCO2 e emissions (tCO2 e reductions (tCO2
(tCO2 e)
) ) e)
1st August 2012 to 31st
0 58,221 0 58,221
July 2013
1 August 2013 to 31st
st
0 58,221 0 58,221
July 2014
0 58,221 0 58,221
July 2015
0 58,221 0 58,221
July 2016
st
0 58,221 0 58,221
July 2017
0 58,221 0 58,221
July 2018
0 58,221 0 58,221
July 2019
st
0 58,221 0 58,221
July 2020
st
0 58,221 0 58,221
July 2021
0 58,221 0 58,221
July 2022
Total (tonnes of CO2 e) 0 5,82,210 0 5,82,210
B.7 Application of a monitoring methodology and description of the monitoring plan:
12
Please refer to the emission reduction spreadsheet for all the numeric values.
46
B.7.1 Data and parameters monitored:

Data / Parameter: QSteam
Data unit: Tons
Description: Quantity of steam supplied to process by the project activity
Source of data to be Plant records/Log books
used:
Value of data 19.7 tonnes per hour
Description of The quantity of steam generated is monitored through the steam flow meter
measurement methods connected to the DCS. It indicates the total quantity (in tonnes) of steam
and procedures to be delivered for process from the extraction stream of the turbine. The same is
applied: monitored after desuperheating of the steam as per process requirement.
Monitoring: Continuous
Data type: Monitored
Archiving procedure: Paper and Electronic
Recording Frequency: Hourly
Responsibility: Operator
Calibration Frequency: Calibration of instrument will be carried out once in a
year.
QA/QC procedures to This data will be used for calculation of emission reductions by project activity.
be applied: Calibration of the meter from external certified agencies would be carried out
annually. The meter has an accuracy of ± 0.075%.
Any comment: The data will be archived until 2 years after the end of crediting period or the last
issuance of CERs for this project activity, whichever occurs later.
Data / Parameter: SP
Data unit: Kg/cm2
Description: Pressure of steam supplied to process
used:
Value of data 9.4
Description ofThe steam pressure would be monitored using the pressure transmitter connected
measurement methods to the DCS. This parameter is used to calculate the enthalpy of steam supplied to
and procedures to beprocess. The same is monitored after desuperheating of the steam as per process
applied: requirement.
Calibration Frequency: Calibration of Pressure transmitter will be carried out once
in a year.
QA/QC procedures to Calibration of the pressure transmitter will be carried out once in a year. The
be applied: uncertainty of measurement would be ± 1.3%.
47
Data / Parameter: TP
Data unit: ºC
Description: The temperature of steam supplied to process
Source of data to be Plant records/Log book
used:
Value of data 190
Description ofThe steam temperature would be monitored using the temperature transmitter
measurement methods connected to the DCS. This parameter is used to calculate the enthalpy of steam
and procedures to besupplied to process. The same is monitored after desuperheating of the steam as
applied: per process requirement.
Calibration Frequency: Calibration of Temperature transmitter will be carried out
once in a year.
QA/QC procedures to Calibration of Temperature transmitter will be carried out once in a year. The
be applied: uncertainty of measurement would be ± 1%.
Data / Parameter: EGPJ,thermal,y

Data unit: TJ
Description: Net quantity of steam/heat supplied to process by the project activity
Source of data to be Plant records
used:
Value of data 349.23
Description of This parameter will be calculated.
measurement methods (EGPJ,thermal = Net quantity of thermal energy supplied by the project activity * No.
and procedures to be of working hours in an year)
applied:
be applied: It is a calculated parameter and hence, does not require any QA/QC procedures.
Data / Parameter: EGgross,y

Data unit: MWh
Description: Gross electricity generated by the project activity
used:
Value of data 79200
Description of Measured in power plant premises and monitored through energy meter.
measurement methods Monitoring: Continuous
48
and procedures to be Data type: Monitored

applied: Archiving procedure: Paper and Electronic
Recording Frequency: Monthly
Calibration Frequency: Calibration of energy meter will be carried out once in an
year.
be applied: Calibration of the meters from external certified agencies would be carried out
annually. The meter will have an accuracy class of at least 0.2.
Any comment: The meter will measure the gross electricity generated in kWh. For the purpose of
ex ante calculation of emission reductions, a plant load factor of 100% for a
period of operation of 7920 hours in the year has been assumed.
The data will be archived until 2 years after the end of crediting period or the last
Data / Parameter: EGaux,y

Data unit: MWh
Description: Power consumed by the auxiliaries
used:
Value of data 7920
Description ofMeasured in power plant premises and monitored through energy meter.
and procedures to beData type: Monitored
Calibration Frequency: Calibration of energy meter will be carried out once in a
year.
be applied: Calibration of the meters from external certified agencies would be carried out
annually. The meter will have an accuracy class of at least 0.2.
Any comment: The meter will measure the auxiliary consumption in kWh. For the purpose of ex
ante calculation of emission reductions, 10% auxiliary consumption has been
assumed.
The data will be archived until 2 years after the end of crediting period or the last
Data / Parameter: EGPJ,electrical,y

Data unit: MWh
Description: Net power supplied by the project activity after subtracting auxiliary consumption
used:
Value of data 71280
Description of It is calculated by subtracting auxiliary consumption from the total electricity
measurement methods generated.
49
and procedures to be EGPJ,electrical,y = EGgross,y - EGaux,y

applied:
Monitoring: Not applicable (Calculated value)
Data type: Calculated
Archiving procedure: Paper
Calibration Frequency: Not applicable (Calculated value)
QA/QC procedures to Since this is a calculated parameter, no QA/QC procedures are to be applied.
be applied:
Data / Parameter: BRice Husk,y

Description: The quantity of rice husk consumed by the project activity
used:
Value of data 97,834
Description ofMonitoring: The quantity of rice husk fed into the boiler will be measured using a
measurement methods load cell and recorded in log book.
and procedures to beData type: Measured
Recording Frequency: Daily
Calibration Frequency: Yearly
QA/QC procedures to The data can be cross checked from the store issue receipts as well. The weighing
be applied: system would be calibrated annually to ensure the accuracy of the measurement.
Data / Parameter: NCVrice husk

Data unit: Kcal/kg
Description: Net calorific value of rice husk
Source of data to be Test reports
used:
Value of data 2767
Description of Monitoring: NCV test certificate from an external laboratory.
measurement methods Archiving procedure: Paper and Electronic
and procedures to be Recording frequency: Annually
applied: Calibration frequency: Not applicable.
QA/QC procedures to The analysis of rice husk will be carried out by an external testing agency as per
be applied: national/international standards.
Data / Parameter: Bfossil fuel,y
50

Description: The quantity of coal that may be used in the power plant during the crediting
period.
used:
Value of data The value of the data will be recorded annually.
Description of Monitoring: The quantity of fossil fuel fed into the boiler will be measured using a
measurement methods load cell and recorded in log book.
and procedures to be Data type: Measured
Recording frequency: Whenever used
QA/QC procedures to The data can be cross checked from the store issue receipts as well. The weighing
be applied: system would be calibrated annually to ensure the accuracy of the measurement.
Data / Parameter: NCVfossil fuel

Data unit: Kcal/kg
Description: The Net calorific value of coal
Source of data to be Test reports
used:
Value of data The value of the data will be determined ex post.
Description of Monitoring: NCV Test certificate from an external laboratory.
measurement methods Archiving procedure: Paper and Electronic
and procedures to be Recording Frequency: Annually
applied: Calibration Frequency: Not applicable.
QA/QC procedures to The analysis of coal will be carried out by an external testing agency.
be applied:
Data / Parameter: Eelectricity from grid, y
Data unit: kWh
Description: The electricity imported from the grid by the project activity
used:
Value of data The value of the data will be determined ex post.
Description of Measured in power plant premises and monitored through energy meter.
and procedures to be Data type: Monitored
Calibration Frequency: Calibration of energy meter will be carried out once in a
year.
QA/QC procedures to This data will be used for calculation of project emissions (emission reductions) by
51
be applied: project activity.
Data / Parameter: FWT

Data unit: ºC
Description: The temperature of feed water supplied to the boiler
Source of data to be Plant records/Log book
used:
Value of data 135
Description ofThe feed water temperature would be monitored using temperature transmitter
measurement methods connected to DCS. This parameter is used to calculate the enthalpy of feed water
and procedures to besupplied to boiler.
applied: Monitoring: Continuous
Calibration Frequency: Calibration of Temperature transmitter/gauge will be
carried out once in a year
QA/QC procedures to Calibration of Temperature transmitter will be carried out once in a year. The
be applied: uncertainty of measurement would be ± 1%.
Data / Parameter: M Rice Husk, y

Data unit: % water
Description: Moisture content of the Rice Husk used in year y
Source of data used: Internal lab test reports
Value applied: To be determined ex post
Justification of the 1) Data Type: Measured
choice of data or 2) Recording Frequency: Monthly
description of 3) Data Archiving: Paper/ Electronic
measurement methods 4) Monitoring: Monitoring will be done through the internal lab report once
and procedures actually in a month.
applied : 5) Calibration Frequency: Yearly
QA/QC procedures to
be applied:
Any comment: Archived data will be kept 2 years beyond the crediting period.
B.7.2 Description of the monitoring plan:

>>
52
SELML has designed a comprehensive monitoring plan as per the guidance provided in the monitoring
section of ‘Indicative simplified baseline and monitoring methodologies for selected small-scale CDM
project activity categories Type I - Category 1.C (Version 19, EB 61).
Description of monitoring plan

As per the requirement of monitoring methodology, the following parameters will be monitored:
· Quantity of rice husk/fossil fuel used
· Quantity of steam supplied to process
· Pressure of steam supplied to process
· Temperature of steam supplied to process
· Net quantity of steam/heat supplied to process
· Gross Electricity generated
· Auxiliary Electricity consumed
· Net calorific Value of rice husk/fossil fuel used
· The temperature of feed water supplied to boiler
· Moisture content of the biomass (rice husk)
There will be a steam flow meter, pressure transmitter and temperature transmitter to record the steam
quantity, pressure and temperature of the steam supplied to process respectively in the project activity. The
enthalpy of steam supplied to process will be calculated from these parameters. As far as steam/heat is
concerned, the monitoring and verification system would mainly comprise of these meters. The steam flow
meter, pressure transmitter and temperature transmitter would be calibrated annually so that the accuracy
of measurement can be ensured at all times.
There will be two separate energy meters to record the gross power produced and auxiliary power
consumed in the project activity. The net electrical energy generated would be calculated by deducting the
auxiliary power consumed from the gross power generated in the power plant. This net electricity would be
used for the calculation of emission reductions of the project activity. As far as electricity is concerned, the
monitoring and verification system would mainly comprise of these meters. The gross power generation
meter and auxiliary power consumption meter will be calibrated annually so that the accuracy of
measurement can be ensured at all times. The quantity of rice husk being fed into the boiler will also be
monitored using the load cell. Input quantity of coal shall be monitored as and when used.
To ascertain the Quality Control and Quality Assurance of the monitored parameters, SELML has
developed an internally accepted set of standards that would ensure accuracy of all monitoring and control
functions. In accordance with this set of standards, the following operational and management structure has
been adopted:
The gross electricity and auxiliary consumption, the quantity of steam supplied to process, its pressure and
temperature would be recorded on hourly basis. The quantity of rice husk consumed would be monitored on
a daily basis, whereas, the quantity of coal would be monitored as and when used. The power plant head
would ensure that the data is properly collected and stored electronically/paper. The monthly report would
be prepared by Shift Engineer by aggregating the daily readings and the same will be verified by the power
plant head. Any discrepancy observed in the readings would be handled responsibly. The power plant
53
personnel are qualified technical professionals. Need based training of employees associated with the
project activity will be carried out as and when felt necessary.
Also, the following chart will depict the operational and management structure for the proposed project
activity:
Shift Operators
Records the observation in the plant log books
on a daily basis.
Shift Engineers
Compiles the data received, prepares a report and sends it to the
Assistant Manager for preliminary review.
Assistant Manager
Reviews the monitored parameters report and presents a daily executive
summary report, duly signed, to the Manager for final review.
Manager
Reviews the final report and sends it to the General Manager.
The report is finally submitted to the

General Manager.
B.8 Date of completion of the application of the baseline and monitoring methodology and the
name of the responsible person(s)/entity(ies)
>>
Date of completion of the application of baseline and monitoring methodology: 09/01/2012
SEL Manufacturing Company Limited has determined the baseline for the project activity. The entity is a
project participant listed in Annex-I where the contact information has also been provided.
54
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:

>>
01/03/2008 (Purchase Order of Boiler)
According to EB 41, “the start date shall be considered to be the date on which the project participant
has committed to expenditures related to the implementation or related to the construction of the project
activity. This, for example, can be the date on which contracts have been signed for equipment or
construction/operation services required for the project activity”. In accordance with this definition the
date of placing the purchase order for boiler is taken as the start date of the project.
C.1.2. Expected operational lifetime of the project activity:

>>
20 years 0 months.
C.2 Choice of the crediting period and related information:

>>
A fixed crediting period of 10 years 0 months has been chosen.
C.2.1. Renewable crediting period

>> Not opted for.
C.2.1.1. Starting date of the first crediting period:

>> Not applicable.
C.2.1.2. Length of the first crediting period:

>> Not applicable.
C.2.2. Fixed crediting period:

>>
C.2.2.1. Starting date:

>>
01/08/2012 or the date of CDM Registration, whichever is later.
C.2.2.2. Length:
>>
10 years 0 months.
55
SECTION D. Environmental impacts

>>
D.1. If required by the host Party, documentation on the analysis of the environmental impacts of
the project activity:
>>
The project activity does not fall under the purview of Environment Impact Assessment notification13 S.O.
1533 (E) [14/09/06] of the Ministry of Environment and Forest, Government of India since it is not listed
in schedule-I of notification. Thus, as per the provisions of the host country legislation, documentation of
environmental impacts of the project activity is not required. The weblink to a circular regarding
Amendment14 to EIA notification 2006 has also been provided for reference.
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:
>>
No adverse impacts have been anticipated to occur as a consequence of the project activity.
13
Environment Impact Assessment Notification S.O.1533(E), http://envfor.nic.in/legis/eia/so1533.pdf
14
http://envfor.nic.in/divisions/iass/Cir/3067_cir.pdf
56
SECTION E. Stakeholders’ comments

>>
E.1. Brief description how comments by local stakeholders have been invited and compiled:
>>
The stakeholders are defined as the public, including individuals, groups or communities, affected, or likely
to be affected, by the proposed CDM project activity. As the project activity is located within the
manufacturing premises of SELML, the relevant local stakeholders include the local villagers, employees
of SELML and biomass suppliers. These identified stakeholders were invited to attend the stakeholders
meeting through the invitation letters (mentioning the meeting date along with the brief note on CDM and
the project activity) to discuss any potential concerns regarding the project activity. In this regard, an
invitation letter, dated 08/07/2009 was sent to the local stakeholders.
Subsequently, a meeting was organized at the premises of SEL Manufacturing Company Limited on
13/07/2009. Representatives from SEL Manufacturing Company Limited facilitated the meeting. The
stakeholders meeting was conducted in the local language (Punjabi) where the stakeholders were explained
the details of the project activity and were given an overview of the greenhouse gases emission, impact of
GHG and CDM etc. They were apprised of how the project activity would lead to GHG emission reduction
and contribute to sustainable development in the region. Following this, certain concerns were raised by the
stakeholders. These have been recorded and mentioned in section E.2 below.
E.2. Summary of the comments received:

>>
Considering that the project activity aids in the conserving the natural resource and aids in providing
employment opportunities to the local people, the stakeholders were very appreciative of the project
activity. A summary of these comments and the clarifications on the same are as follows:
S. No. Question Stakeholder Answer
1. How many local Mr. Joginder Singh (Farmer) Under these project there will be many
people will get opportunities for employment of
business from your unskilled and skilled labors and also
project? indirectly for persons engaged in
business of building materials and
transportation. This project would also
promote new opportunities for local
farmers in Biomass transport and
selling agricultural residues.
2. Please explain in detail Mr. Amrik Singh (Farmer) A) Rice husk will be fed through
the process involved in belt conveyor in to the furnace
the project activity? and its total heat utilizes to
generate the steam. The same
57
steam gets super heated and

feed into the turbine through
pipe lines.
B) Pressure emery of steam

converts into kinetic and again
kinetic energy converts into
electrical through power
transmission.
C) We extract 30% steam from

turbine and utilize in process
for dyeing as well as drying
processing.
D) We also extract 12% steam

from turbine for initial heating
and continue heating of boiler
feed water in to de-aerator.
E) Balance 58% to be condensed

in to condenser and the same
feed in boiler.
3. How the local farmers Mr. Surinder Singh (Farmer) As we will be using agriculture residues
will be benefited from as fuel, the farmers can supply them to
these projects? us at a just price. Also, some
unemployed persons may start business
of biomass trading and Transport.
4. How is the use of Mr. Jaspal Singh (Farmer) All of us know that CO2 is liberated
biomass in place of during combustion of coal, diesel, and
coal and diesel biomass, which is harmful for the
ecofriendly and helps environment and human beings. The
in making environment plants take CO2 and release O2, so when
clean? we use the biomass, the CO2 liberated
during combustion will be mitigated by
the CO2 intake during cultivation of
agricultural crop, thus keep the
environment balanced. If the CO2 level
in the environment will go on
increasing, it will form a thick layer
around the earth and prevent the flow of
heat outside the climate, which results
in continuous global warming.
58
E.3. Report on how due account was taken of any comments received:
>>
There were no adverse comments received from the stakeholders and the net beneficial effects of the project
activity were acknowledged by the stakeholders present.
59
Annex 1
CONTACT INFORMATION ON PARTICIPANTS IN THE PROJECT ACTIVITY
Organization: SEL Manufacturing Company Limited

Street/P.O.Box: 274, GT Road,
Building: Dhandari Khurd
City: Ludhiana
State/Region: Punjab
Postfix/ZIP: 141010
Country: India
Telephone: +91 – 161 – 6611111
FAX: +91 – 161 – 6611112
E-Mail: vkgoyal@selindia.in
URL: -
Represented by: -
Title: Executive Director & CEO
Salutation: Mr.
Last Name: Goyal
Middle Name: Kumar
First Name: Vinod
Department: -
Mobile: +91 – 8872007700
Direct FAX: -
Direct tel: -
Personal E-Mail: vkgoyal1958@gmail.com
60
Annex 2
INFORMATION REGARDING PUBLIC FUNDING
No public funding as part of project financing from parties included in Annex I of the convention is
involved in the project activity.
61
Annex 3
BASELINE INFORMATION
Baseline information is provided in section B.4 and B.6.1.
62
Annex 4
MONITORING INFORMATION
The monitoring plan has been already explained in section B.7.
-----
63

SEL PDD Version 5

Uploaded by

Document Information

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

SEL PDD Version 5

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

PROJECT DESIGN DOCUMENT FORM (CDM-SSC-PDD) - Version 03

CDM – Executive Board

CLEAN DEVELOPMENT MECHANISM

A. General description of the small scale project activity

B. Application of a baseline and monitoring methodology

C. Duration of the project activity / crediting period

Annex 2: Information regarding public funding

Annex 3: Baseline information

Annex 4: Monitoring Information

CDM – Executive Board

Revision history of this document

Version Date Description and reason of revision

CDM – Executive Board

SECTION A. General description of small-scale project activity

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

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

Unit Commissioning Date Energy Requirement

CDM – Executive Board

Project’s contribution to Sustainable Development

1. Social well being:

2. Economic well being:

3. Environmental well being:

4. Technological well being:

CDM – Executive Board

A.3. Project participants:

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

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

A.4.1.1. Host Party(ies):

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

A.4.1.3. City/Town/Community etc:

CDM – Executive Board

A.4.1.4. Details of physical location, including information allowing the

The geographical coordinates for the project site are:

Latitude: 310 03’ 00” N1

CDM – Executive Board

Type: I - ‘Renewable energy projects’

Technology of project activity

Steam pressure at superheated outlet 88 Ata

CDM – Executive Board

Type: Extraction condensing

Parameter Value Unit

Generator Rating 10000 kW

Extraction steam parameters:

Parameter Value Unit

CDM – Executive Board

Annual average of the estimated reduction over

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

CDM – Executive Board

SECTION B. Application of a baseline and monitoring methodology

Title: Thermal energy production with or without electricity

B.2 Justification of the choice of the project category:

Conditions in the methodology Applicability

CDM – Executive Board

CDM – Executive Board

output of the equipment or the equipment is less than 45 MW thermal, thereby,

CDM – Executive Board

been produced using solely renewable activity.

CDM – Executive Board

emissions from the production of

B.3. Description of the project boundary:

CDM – Executive Board

CDM – Executive Board

Source Gas Justification / Explanation

cogeneration CH4 Excluded Excluded for simplification. This is conservative.