Srisangdaw PDD (Revision 1 4) - Clean

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
2006 document for 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:

>>
Srisangdaw Biopower Power Plant Project
Document version: 1.4

Date of completion: 19/11/2012
A.2. Description of the small-scale project activity:

>>
The proposed project activity, to be carried out by Srisangdaw Biopower Co., Ltd. (hereafter referred to
as “Srisangdaw”), involves the installation and operation of a Greenfield biomass-fired power plant in
Suvarnnabhumi District, Roi-Et Province, Thailand (hereafter referred to as the “Project”).
Project background
The purpose of the project activity is to set up a biomass-based power plant that displaces the greenhouse
gas (GHG) emission-intensive fossil fuel-based grid power generation in Thailand. The Project is
designed to use abundant agricultural waste and wood waste products (e.g. rice husk and wood bark1) - as
feedstock fuel for biomass-fired power generation system with gross capacity of 9.9 MW (8.839 MW
net).
In accordance with the project plans, the electricity generated will be sold to the neighbouring affiliated
rice mill – Srisangdaw Mill Limited Partnership (SMLP). After sales to SMLP and also using electricity
for the project plant’s in-house (parasitic) consumption, the remaining/excess electricity will be sold to
the Provincial Electricity Authority (PEA) under a Power Purchase Agreement (PPA) in the Very Small
Power Producer Program2. To ensure the consistency of energy supply to the PEA, Srisangdaw plans to
secure the biomass waste from affiliated and allied rice mills/fuel suppliers.
With combustion of an estimated of 37,600 and 89,600 tonnes of rice husk and wood bark planned
annually, the project activity will produce approximately 70,712 MWh of electricity to be supplied to the
PEA and SMLP. The expected amount of GHGs emission reductions is approximately 40,630 tonnes of
CO2 equivalent per annum.
Contribution of the project activity to sustainable development

The Project will contribute to sustainable development in the host country in several ways:
1. Environmental development
1
Other type of biomass residues, which are also available abundantly in the region set for the leakage analysis (i.e. a radius of
200km around the project plant as mentioned in Section B.6.1), may also be used when necessary. How to appropriately deal
with this issue is elaborated in Section B.6.1.
2
A Very Small Power Producer (VSPP) can be any private entity, government or state-owned enterprise that generates electricity
either (a) from non-conventional sources such as wind, solar and mini-hydro energy or fuels such as waste, residues or biomass,
or (b) from conventional sources provided they also produce steam through cogeneration. As per the VSPP program, the VSPP is
limited to sell no more than 10MW of its electrical power output to the designated distribution utility, such as Metropolitan
Electricity Authority (MEA) and/or Provincial Electricity Authority (PEA).
3
The Project will diversify the sources of electricity generation by displacing conventional fossil
fuel-based grid power generation with carbon neutral biomass-based power generation, and
hence GHGs emissions associated with the combustion of fossil fuels would be reduced.
The Project, by (i) utilizing biomass in a more efficient manner and (ii) avoiding dumping of
biomass, will also contribute to an important step forward in terms of effective and
environmental management of agriculture waste.
2. Social and economic development

The benefits due to the implementation of the Project will extend to the social and economic
aspects by means of (a) increasing the supply of local power generation and alleviating power
shortage in the local areas, (b) increasing the income of local residents through purchasing the
unused biomass residues, and (c) creating employment opportunities to the local population for
various activities involved in the construction, operation and maintenance of power plant and
biomass residues collection and transportation. Thus, the Project contributes to the improvement
of quality of life and economic sustainability to the local community.
3. Conformation to the government policy and strategy of Thailand

The Project conforms to the governmental policy of Thailand and contributes to its national
sustainable development using agro-residues as fuels for renewable energy generation. To
promote the generation of green power, the Thai Government has stipulated a policy, called Very
Small Power Producer Program, to encourage small power producer which generates power with
renewable resources to sell part or all of its output to the regional electricity authority. The
Project is in the line with the Thai governmental policy.
A.3. Project participants:

>>
Name of Party involved Private and/or public Kindly indicate if the Party involved
(*) ((host) indicates a host entity(ies) project wishes to be considered as project
Party) participants (*) (as participant (Yes/No)
applicable)
Thailand (host) Srisangdaw Biopower Co., No
Ltd.
Netherlands Carbon Partners Asiatica No
(Hong Kong) Co., Ltd.
(*) 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.
See contact information in the Annex 1 of this PDD
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):
>>
Thailand
4
A.4.1.2. Region/State/Province etc.:

>>
Roi-Et province
A.4.1.3. City/Town/Community etc:

>>
Sakoo Sub-District, Suvarnabhumi District
A.4.1.4. Details of physical location, including information allowing the

unique identification of this small-scale project activity :
>>
Roi-Et province with an area of 8,299.4 km2 is located in the North-East of Thailand, sharing its borders
with Kalasin, Mukdahan, Yasothon, Sisaket, Surin and Maha Sarakham3. The Project is located at 126
Moo 6, Sakoo Sub-District, Suvarnnabhumi District, Roi-Et Province, Thailand 45130.
The exact coordinates at the site of the Project are: latitude 15 deg 36 min 42.84 sec, longitude 103 deg
47 min 26.17 sec.
Roi-Et
province
Suvarnabhumi
district
Figure 1: Maps showing location of the Project
3
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roi_Et_Province
5
Figure 2: Satellite picture showing the location of the project activity
A.4.2. Type and category(ies) and technology/measure of the small-scale project activity:
>>
Categories of project activity
In accordance with Appendix B of the Simplified Modalities and Procedures for Small-Scale CDM
project activities (“SSC M&P”), the Project type and category are defined as follows:
Type I Renewable energy projects

Category I.F Renewable electricity generation for captive use and mini-grid
Reference Version 2.0, Scope 1, in effect as of June 17, 2011
Scenario existing prior to the project implementation (baseline scenario)

In the absence of this Greenfield project activity, the electricity would have been continuously generated
by other power plants connected to the grid electricity system. The baseline scenario is the same as the
scenario existing prior to the start of the project activity. Without the proposed project activity, this
existing scenario would continue.
Technology to be employed by the project activity

A thermal power plant consisting of a biomass-fired boiler and a condensing steam generator will be
employed by the proposed project activity as a method for power generation. The boiler technology
proposed in this Project is a water tube multi-fuelled boiler with an integrated combustion grate. The
combustion grate has also been designed as to enable use of feedstock fuel with high moisture content
and low calorific value such as wood bark. The plant can operate on a single-fuel or multi-fuel basis.
6
Other equipments that will be employed by the Project to comply with the requirements of the PEA and
industrial environmental standards include, among others, flue gas cleaning system, stack, biomass fuel
handling system, ash handling system and storage, water and wastewater treatment system.
Out of the 8.839MW net output from the power plant, the project activity can be separated into 2 main
components. The first component is the portion of electricity sold to SMLP (anticipated at maximum 1.0
MW4). The second component is the remaining or excess portion that is planned for export to the PEA
grid (maximum at 8 MW as per PPA). It is noted for clarity that the Project plant’s parasitic power
consumption constitutes an estimated 10.72% of total power generation capacity. It is also noted that
SMLP currently buys electricity from the grid.
The key technical specifications of the boiler and the steam turbine generator are summarized in the table
below:
Table 1: Technical specifications of the major equipments

Boiler
Type of boiler Water Tube Vertical
Boiler capacity 45t/h
Operating pressure at outlet (superheated) 67 (±2) bar
Operating temperature at outlet (superheated) 485 (±5) °C
Boiler efficiency 87%
9.9 MW condensing steam turbine generator
Steam Turbine
Type Condensing type
Operating medium Superheated water steam
Rated steam flow into turbine 39.975 t/h
Inlet steam pressure 6.5 MPa(a)
Inlet steam temperature 480 °C
Generator
Type Three-phase synchronous turbo-alternator
Capacity 9.9 MW
Rated voltage 11,000 (±5%) V
Rated frequency 50Hz
Rated rotation speed 1,500rpm
Efficiency 97%
Backup generator (main backup)
Output 1100 kVA (standby rate)
Engine manufacturer Cummins
Alternator model Stamford HCI634H
Backup generator (alternative backup)
Output 250 kVA (standby rate)
Engine model Cummins 6LTAA8.9-G2
Alternator model Stamford UCDI-274K
The Project will employ high efficiency equipments with high levels of environmental integrity. Several
major equipments have been sourced from other countries e.g. the biomass combustion system will be
4
This is based on sales agreement between Srisangdaw and SMLP, as validated during validation process.
7
supplied by LAWI Engineering from Germany. Application of this high efficiency technology will
optimise the power plant operation and also lead to technology transfer.
A.4.3 Estimated amount of emission reductions over the chosen crediting period:
>>
A renewable crediting period of 7 years is chosen for the Project. The total and yearly estimated emission
reductions during the chosen crediting period are represented in the following table:
Table 2: Ex-ante estimation of emission reductions

Years Estimation of annual emission reductions
in tonnes of CO2e
1 (2012/2013) 40,630
2 (2013/2014) 40,630
3 (2014/2015) 40,630
4 (2015/2016) 40,630
5 (2016/2017) 40,630
6 (2017/2018) 40,630
7 (2018/2019) 40,630
Total estimated reductions (tonnes of CO2e) 284,410
Total number of crediting years 7
Annual average of the estimated reductions over the
40,630
crediting period (tCO2e)
A.4.4. Public funding of the small-scale project activity:

>>
The Project does not involve public funding from an Annex I country.
A.4.5. Confirmation that the small-scale project activity is not a debundled component of a
large scale project activity:
As defined in paragraph 2 of Appendix C of the SSC M&P, a proposed small-scale project activity shall
be deemed to be a de-bundled component of a large project activity if there is a registered small-scale
CDM project activity or a request for registration by another small-scale project activity:
• By the same project participants;

• In the same project category and technology/measure;
• Registered within the previous 2 years; and
• Whose project boundary is within 1 km of the project boundary of the proposed small-scale
activity at the closest point.
With reference to the above-mentioned criteria, the Project is not a de-bundled component of any large
scale project activity.
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:
8
>>
The following approved baseline and monitoring methodology is applied:
1. AMS-I.F. Renewable electricity generation for captive use and mini-grid

Version 2.0, valid from June 17, 2011
For more information on this methodology, please refer to the link:

http://cdm.unfccc.int/methodologies/SSCmethodologies/approved.html
In applying the above methodology, the following tools are also applied:
1. Tool to calculate the emission factor for an electricity system, Version 02.2.1
2. Tool to calculate project or leakage CO2 emissions from fossil fuel combustion, version 02.
B.2 Justification of the choice of the project category:

>>
Appendix B of the simplified modalities and procedures for small-scale CDM project activities provides
indicative simplified baseline and monitoring methodologies for selected small-scale CDM project
activity. As per this document, the Project falls under AMS-I.F.
The Project meets all the applicability conditions of the methodology as described below:
Table 3: Applicability conditions of AMS-I.F

Applicability conditions Project case
1 This methodology comprises renewable energy generation Applicable
units, such as photovoltaic, hydro, tidal/wave, wind, The proposed project activity uses rice husk
geothermal and renewable biomass that supply electricity and wood wastes, abundant agricultural waste
to user(s). The project activity will displace electricity products, as the renewable biomass fuel for
from an electricity distribution system that is or would carbon-neutral electricity generation. The
have been supplied by at least one fossil fuel fired electricity generated from the Project will first
generating unit i.e., in the absence of the project activity, be sold to the neighbouring affiliated rice mill
the users would have been supplied electricity from one or (SMLP) as the priority, while the remaining
more sources listed below: (‘excess’) electricity will be exported to the grid
under the VSPP program; both of which are
(a) A national or a regional grid (grid hereafter); considered as displacement of grid electricity,
(b) Fossil fuel fired captive power plant; which in the absence of the project activity,
(c) A carbon intensive mini-grid. would have been supplied by at least one fossil
fuel fired generating unit. Hence the Project
satisfies this applicability condition.
2 For the purpose of this methodology, a mini-grid is Not relevant
defined as small-scale power system with a total capacity The Project does not involve mini-grid.
not exceeding 15 MW (i.e., the sum of installed capacities
of all generators connected to the mini-grid is equal to or
less than 15 MW) which is not connected to a national or
a regional grid.
3 Illustration of respective situations under which each of Applicable
the methodology (i.e. AMS-I.D., AMS-I.F and AMS-I.A) With the Project involving displacement of
applies is included in Table 2 [of the methodology] captive consumption and grid export, AMS-I.F
is adopted for the Project. This is in line with
SSC_565.
9
4 Hydro power plants with reservoirs that satisfy at least Not relevant
one of the following conditions are eligible to apply this The Project does not entail hydro power plant.
methodology ...
5 For biomass power plants, no other biomass other than Applicable
renewable biomass are to be used in the project plant. No biomass types other than renewable biomass
are used in the project plant.
6 This methodology is applicable for project activities that Applicable
(a) install a new power plant at a site where there was no Among the four applicable activities prescribed
renewable energy power plant operating prior to the by the methodology, the proposed project
implementation of the project activity (Greenfield plant); activity belongs to the category (a) of
(b) involve a capacity addition, (c) involve a retrofit of “Greenfield plant” that involves the installation
(an) existing plant(s); or (d) involve a replacement of (an) of a new biomass residue-fired power plant at a
existing plant(s). site where no renewable energy power
generation occurs prior to the Project
implementation.
7 In the case of project activities that involve the capacity Not relevant
addition of renewable energy generation units at an The proposed project activity belongs to the
existing renewable power generation facility, the added category of “Greenfield” plant.
capacity of the units added by the project should be lower
than 15 MW and should be physically distinct6 from the
existing units.
8 In the case of retrofit or replacement, to qualify as a Not relevant
small-scale project, the total output of the retrofitted or The proposed project activity belongs to the
replacement unit shall not exceed the limit of 15 MW. category of “Greenfield” plant.
9 If the unit added has both renewable and non-renewable Not relevant
components (e.g., a wind/diesel unit), the eligibility limit The proposed project activity has only
of 15 MW for a small-scale CDM project activity applies renewable component and does not entail co-
only to the renewable component. If the unit added co- firing of fossil fuel. Nonetheless, its gross
fires fossil fuel, the capacity of the entire unit shall not generation capacity is 9.9 MW, which is
exceed the limit of 15 MW. anyway less than the maximum limit for small-
scale type 1 project of 15 MW.
10 Combined heat and power (co-generation) systems are Not relevant
not eligible under this category. The proposed project activity only produces
electricity output.
11 In case electricity produced by the project activity is Applicable
delivered to a third party i.e. another facility or facilities In satisfying this applicability criterion, an
within the project boundary, a contract between the official agreement between Srisangdaw and
supplier and consumer(s) of the electricity will have to be SMLP has been obtained, to confirm that only
entered that ensures that there is no double counting of Srisangdaw can claim emission reductions from
emission reductions. the electricity displaced.
B.3. Description of the project boundary:

>>
Project boundary
AMS-I.F
The spatial extent of the project boundary includes industrial, commercial facilities consuming energy
generated by the system. In the case of electricity generated and supplied to distributed users (e.g.
residential users) via mini/isolated grid(s) the project boundary may be confined to physical,
geographical site of renewable generating units. The boundary also extends to the project power plant
10
and all power plants connected physically to the electricity system that the CDM project power plant is
connected to.
The pictorial representation of project boundary is given in figure below.
Figure 3: The project boundary
Gases and Sources

For the purpose of determining GHG emissions of the project activity, the CO2 emissions from electricity
generation in the fossil fuel fired power plants in the Thai grid that are displaced due to the Project is
included as the only baseline emissions source.
Regarding project emissions, this shall include CO2 emissions from on-site consumption of fossil fuels
due to the project activity. Moreover, although not explicitly required by the methodology, the project
proponents have also considered the CO2 emissions due to transportation of biomass residues to the
project site as project emissions. Relevant methodological procedures in calculating the same will be
described in section B. 6. Other than this, there are no additional GHG emission sources contributing
more than 1% of expected emission reduction attributable to the project.
B.4. Description of baseline and its development:
>>
Baseline of the project activity
In the absence of the project activity, the same amount of electricity would have been generated from the
connected power plants in the national grid, which are predominantly based on fossil fuels. Hence the
emissions in the baseline scenario would be the emissions from the equivalent amount of electricity
generated by the prevailing generation mix of Thailand’s grid.
Baseline scenario as per baseline methodology
Paragraph 14 of the methodology states that ‘baseline emissions for systems [other than a mini-grid
system where all generators use exclusively fuel oil and/or diesel fuel] are the product of amount
electricity displaced with the electricity produced by the renewable generating unit and an emission
factor’ as follows:
11
BE y = EG BL , y ∗ EFCO 2, y Equation 1
Where:
BEy Baseline emissions in year y (tCO2)
EGBL, y Quantity of net electricity displaced5 as a result of the implementation of the CDM project
activity in year y (MWh)
EFCO2, y CO2 emission factor of the grid in year y (tCO2/MWh). This shall be calculated as per the
procedures provided in AMS-I.D.
It is stated in paragraph 12 of AMS-I.D that the emission factor can be calculated in a transparent and
conservative manner as follows:
(a) A combined margin (CM), consisting of the combination of operating margin (OM) and
build margin (BM) according to the procedures prescribed in the ‘Tool to calculate the
Emission Factor for an electricity system’.
OR
(b) The weighted average emissions (in t CO2/MWh) of the current generation mix. The
data of the year in which project generation occurs must be used.
Option (a) is selected as the method for calculating the emission factor for the Project. The CO2
emissions factor for the grid system is sourced from “The study of emission factor for an electricity
system in Thailand 2009” (hereinafter referred to as the “Study”), published by Thailand Greenhouse
Gas Management Organization (TGO) on June 29, 2011. All data used to calculate the Combined Margin
emission factor is publically available and detailed in Annex 3.
Table below summarised the baseline emission factor of Thailand’s national electricity system.
Table 4: Emission factor of the national grid

Margin Unit Value
Build margin (BM), EFgrid, BM, y tCO2/MWh 0.5477
Operating margin (OM)6, EFgrid, OM, y tCO2/MWh 0.6147
Combined margin (CM), EFgrid, CM, y tCO2/MWh 0.5812
The overall baseline emissions of the Project can mathematically be simplified as follows:
BE y = (EG grid , y + EG SMLP , y − E imported , y ) * EFCO 2, y Equation 2
Where:
BEy Total baseline emissions in year y (tCO2)
5
The net electricity generated by the Project (8.839 MW) will firstly be supplied to SMLP the neighbouring facility (anticipated
at approximately 1.0 MW) to displace its grid electricity import. The excess electricity will be exported to the grid (maximum at
8MW).
6
This is a 3-year average emission factor.
12
EGgrid, y Quantity of net electricity generated and delivered to the grid in year y (MWh)
EGSMLP, y Quantity of net electricity generated and delivered to SMLP in year y (MWh)
Eimported, y Quantity of electricity imported from the grid to the Project in year y (MWh)
For clarity, it should be noted that parameter EGBL, y represents the quantity of net grid electricity
displaced as a result of the implementation of the CDM Project. For the Project, this is calculated as the
difference between measured quantities of (1) total electricity exported to the grid and SMLP, and (2)
grid electricity import i.e. EGBL, y = (EGgrid, y + EGSMLP, y) – Eimported, y.
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:
Consistent with Attachment A to Appendix B of the simplified modalities and procedures for small-scale
CDM project activities, the Project’s additionality can be established to show that the project activity
would not have occurred anyway due to at least one of the following barriers, from which “investment
barrier” is selected for the PDD:
1. Investment barrier;
2. Technological barrier;
3. Barrier due to prevailing practice; and
4. Other barriers
B.5.1. Investment barrier
The project proponents have followed the “Non-binding best practice examples to demonstrate
additionality for SSC project activities” to demonstrate an investment barrier using investment analysis.
Accordingly, a benchmark analysis is applied, following the procedures outlined in “Guidelines on the
Assessment of Investment Analysis” (Version 05).
In line with the Guidelines, the Equity Internal Rate of return (IRR) has been chosen as the financial
indicator to demonstrate the investment barrier. The benchmark is derived from the average ROE (Return
on Equity) of listed companies in the country published by the Stock Market of Thailand7, in accordance
with paragraph 12 of the Guidance, which states “Required/expected returns on equity are appropriate
benchmarks for an equity IRR”.
Because the Project could be developed by an entity other than the project participants, the ROE
benchmark is deemed appropriate as it represents standard returns in the market, considering the specific
risk of the project type, but not linked to the subjective profitability expectation or risk profile of a
particular project developer.
B.5.1.1 Establishing Cost of Equity
7
http://www.set.or.th/en/market/market_statistics.html
13
In the absence of specific benchmarks for renewable biomass electricity projects in Thailand8, the cost of
equity is determined by referring to the ROE values of publically listed companies that are engaged in
similar types of business (“Energy and Utilities” category of the Stock Exchange of Thailand (SET))9. It
is noted that this category comprises of energy and utilities companies that produce electricity, gas,
petrochemical refining, as well as products related to electricity and water utilities. As the Energy and
Utilities category of the SET includes the ROE for non-electricity companies, the ROEs for companies
not involved in the production of electricity have been excluded in calculating the ROE for the sub-
industry of power generation sector.
At the time of PDD production, publically available data on individual companies within each category is
available from year 2007 to 2010 (print screens available). Taking into consideration the project’s
investment decision date 10 , 3-year average (2007-2009) of ROEs for specific companies have been
adopted as the Project’s cost of equity. This approach is in line with CDM rationale that the benchmark
should not include the subjective profitability expectations or risk profile of a particular project
developer. It represents the cost of equity calculated using one of the best financial practices, based on
data sources which can be clearly validated by the DOE while properly justifying all underlying factors.
Moreover, it should be mentioned that the ROE approach in determining cost of equity has been adopted
in a number of registered projects in Thailand, and thus could be considered as an accepted practice by
the CDM-EB.
The table below outlines the listed companies involved in electricity production in the Stock Exchange of
Thailand (SET) and shows 3-year average ROE that result in the expected cost of equity of 17.90%.11
Table 5: Historical ROEs of similar SET listed companies in the power generation sector12
Companies/SET
Company business ROE 2007 ROE 2008 ROE 2009
CODE
Coal-fired power
BANPU 23.66% 24.67% 32.01%
generation
Integrated power
company providing
EGCO 21.86% 16.01% 16.60%
electricity generation
energy services
Generation and
distribution of
GLOW 17.48% 12.14% 13.80%
electricity, IPP and
cogeneration
MDX Real estate and 35.64% 18.74% 2.86%
8
The Thai DNA is currently considering the development of benchmarks for relevant project types in Thailand; however, this is
currently not available. The only benchmark published by a relevant national authority in Thailand relevant to biomass energy is
the National Energy Policy Office (NEPO) report “Thailand Biomass-Based Power Generation and Cogeneration within Small
Rural Industries” which gives an IRR hurdle rate of 23% in 2000. However this document is old and therefore used only as an
indication and not in calculating the benchmark
9
Note that this is in line with paragraph 13 of EB62, Annex 5 that states: “In the cases of projects which could be developed by
an entity other than the project participant the benchmark should be based on parameters that are standard in the market”.
10
This is taken as financial closure date on November 25th, 2009.
11
It is worth highlighting that average ROE of these companies in 2010 is 19.15%
12
www.set.or.th
14
power plant projects

in Thailand, Laos
and China
RATCH Power company 16.15% 16.55% 15.77%
Small Power
Producer (SPP)
producing steam and
SCG 16.59% 13.90% 13.77%
electricity sold to
grid and industrial
park.
Petroleum products
TOP and power 28.20% 0.35% 19.19%
generation projects
3-year average 17.90%
In order to further demonstrate that the applied benchmark is appropriate, a comparative assessment with
other CDM registered projects in Thailand is conducted. The PPs have checked similar projects in
Thailand that have applied AMS-I.F and/or AMS-I.D methodology13. Of these, it was found that six
projects, ref: 4589, 4491, 4089, 4479, 3945 and 3085, have adopted the approach using equity IRR
calculation in which the applied equity benchmarks are 19.73%, 19.73%, 14.60%, 19.73%, 22.84% and
24.1% respectively14 (average at 20.12%). Based on this comparison, it is therefore deemed reasonable to
conclude that Srisangdaw would not make an investment that gives return lower than this ROE
benchmark that has been derived from data that is based on large listed energy companies. Relatively
speaking, Srisangdaw is a small private company investing in a small renewable energy biomass project
that inevitably faces more implementation risks than large energy companies. Taking this into
consideration, the PPs argue that the applied benchmark is conservative and use this as a basis of the
investment analysis of the Project.
B.5.1.2. IRR Calculation and Sensitivity Analysis
The Equity IRR calculation15 is based on the input parameters outlined in the table below. The result of
the investment analysis is a base case IRR of 10.40%. With the applied financial indicator deemed
unfavourable relative to the equity benchmark level, it can reasonably be concluded that the Project faces
capital or investment return constraints and thus acts as a proof of Project’s additionality.
Table 6: Financial parameters relevant to the calculation of Equity IRR

Input Parameters Value Unit Notes
Installed capacity (Gross) 9.9 MW Technical specification
Parasitic load 1.061 MW Per project’s equipment
list16
Plant availability 91.32% Technical specification 17
13
The consideration of AMS-I.D projects is due to the fact that there is a substantial amount of excess electricity from the Project
that is exported to the PEA grid.
14
It should be mentioned that all other projects have conducted investment analysis using project IRR approach; therefore, it is
not relevant to compare the proposed project activity’s equity IRR with their project benchmarks.
15
The IRR calculation coincides with the investment decision / project timeline and does not coincide with the ER estimation
table, the latter which is dictated by the starting date of the crediting period.
16
This has been validated by the DOE.
15
Total cost for CDM project activity 695,000,000 THB Feasibility Study Report
(FSR)
Annual Operation and Maintenance 25,715,000 THB Based on technology
provider confirmation and
PP’s estimation of insurance
cost18
Biomass fuel price
- Rice husk 1,000 THB/t FSR19
- Wood bark 420 THB/t FSR20
Annual amount of electricity generated 70,712,000 kWh/year Based on ex-ante estimation
- Grid 62,712,000 kWh/year

- SMLP 8,000,000 kWh/year
Retail rate Average tariff rates from
Tariff for electricity sold to mill Average: 2.2540 THB/kWh VSPP list (3-yr average year
Ft charge: 0.7724 2007-2009)21. The tariff for
power sold to mill is
assumed same as tariff
which mill purchased from
grid. This is very
conservative.
Wholesale rate Average tariff rates from
Tariff for electricity exported to grid Peak: 2.4761 THB/kWh VSPP list (3-yr average year
Off-peak: 1.0994 2007-2009)21.
Ft charge: 0.7774
PEA Operating charge 2 % of kWh As per PEA’s VSPP
export regulation.
Special adder biomass-based power generation 0.3 THB/kWh As per VSPP provision22
exported to the Grid (for 7 years)
Energy development fund contribution 0.01 THB/kWh As per Thailand Energy
17
It is noted that the chosen plant load factor can be considered as conservative given that the typical load factor for biomass
power plant is in the range of 80% as referred by an Independent Research Paper,
http://www.thaiscience.info/Article%20for%20ThaiScience/Article/3/Ts-
3%20biomass%20energy%20potential%20for%20electricity%20generation%20in%20thailand.pdf
18
The value covers cost of manpower, operation costs, and insurance. It should be noted that the O&M cost of the proposed
project activity represents 3.7% of total investment cost, and this 3.7% falls within the common range of 2.78%-8.57% of that of
similar biomass-based power generation registered CDM projects in Thailand (as per date of this PDD production).
19
Sourced from “Study on CDM case studies in Thailand” published by ONEP,
http://www.onep.go.th/CDM/CDM%20project%20potentials%20in%20Thailand%20Report.pdf. It is noted that the assumed
price is considerably lower than the market price as published by DEDE, Thailand Alternative Energy Situation 2009. This is
conservative.
20
Given no market price for wood bark at the time of feasibility study, rice husk price could be used as a benchmark for
determining a fair price of wood bark. Based on 1,000 THB/t rice husk, the equivalent price of wood bark would be 420 THB/t
taking into consideration the specific energy consumption of both fuel types as provided by the technology supplier [Rice husk
price x (SECrice husk / SECwood bark)]. It is worth highlighting that there are two other registered CDM in Thailand which use wood
bark and have conducted an investment analysis for the purpose of demonstrating additionality (ref: 1020 and 1024); both of
which assumed wood bark price of 700 THB/t. Further evidence to substantiate the market rate applied for wood bark is provided
to the DOE during the course of validation.
21
http://www.eppo.go.th/power/data/index.html
22
http://www.pea.co.th/annoucment/adder.pdf
16
export Regulatory Development23

Fair value 50,000,000 THB Srisangdaw practice
Tax Tax rate The corporate income tax
- Year 1 to 8 0 % privilege rates offered by the
- Year 9 to 13 15 % Board of Investment of
- Year 14 to 20 30 % Thailand. The assumption of
tax privilege is conservative.
Percentage of debt financing 49.48 % Average debt/equity ratio
Percentage of equity financing 50.52 % from similar industries in
the stock market is used for
weighting (3-yr average
2007-2009)
Cost of debt 6.85 % 3-yr average rate (2007-
2009) as published by Bank
of Thailand24
Assessment period 20 Years As per CDM Guidelines on
Investment Analysis
Table 7: IRR calculation showing the feasibility of the Project with and without CER revenues
Develop the Project without CER revenues Equity IRR (%) 10.40 %
Develop the Project with CER revenues Equity IRR (%) 18.20 %
As shown in the table above, without CER revenues, the Equity IRR stands at 10.40%, well below the
benchmark of 17.90%. Only when there is revenue from CER, the Equity IRR will surpass the
benchmark. Accordingly, it is deemed that the registration of the Project under CDM will alleviate the
investment barrier that prevents the proposed project activity from occurring in the business-as-usual
condition.
Sensitivity analysis
The purpose of the sensitivity analysis is to show whether the conclusion regarding the economic
attractiveness is robust to reasonable variations in the critical assumptions. The parameters most likely to
vary are: (1) total investment cost, (2) operation and maintenance cost, (3) biomass fuel cost, (4) plant
availability factor, (5) electricity tariff, and (6) Ft charge.
From the results of the sensitivity analysis as shown in figure below, it can be seen that the financial
returns of the Project would be insufficient to justify the required investment. Therefore, a conclusion
can be reached that the investment barrier faced by the Project is real, credible and fulfilling the
additionality requirements for small-scale CDM projects.
Table 8: Sensitivity analysis of critical assumptions

Parameters Resulting IRR
Base case 10.40%
Decrease capital cost by 10% 13.86%
23
http://www2.erc.or.th/Doc/thailand.pdf
24
It should be noted that vast majority of commercial lending is transacted in a floating rate arrangement whereby the rate goes
up and down according to market fluctuations. Hence, the commercial lending rate prevailing at the time of project start date
may be higher or lower than the cost of debt applicable for the project’s life. Since a fixed rate is needed for the Project’s
investment analysis shown herein, to address this point, 3-yr average rate is adopted.
17
Decrease O&M cost by 10% 11.13%

Decrease biomass fuel cost by 10% 12.53%
Increase power plant availability factor to 100% (8,760 hours) 12.45%
Increase electricity tariff by 10% 13.27%
Increase Ft charge by 10% 11.76%
Benchmark 17.90%
Further, it is worthy of mention that the range of variation is in line with paragraph 21 of the investment
guidelines and is considered as reasonable as it is highly unlikely that any of these parameters would vary
more than +10% and -10% of the assumed values in order to have an effect on the additionality of the
Project. Justification for each parameter is provided here below:
• Capital cost
Average inflation rate in Thailand was 2.5% during years 2000 to 2010, reaching a historical high of
9.2% in July of 2008 and a record low of -4.40% in July 200925. Thus, it is highly unlikely that the
variation of the investment cost due to inflation rate will exceed 10%.
• O&M cost
The O&M cost accounted for 4% (THB 28 million) of the total investment cost, which is already
considered to be on the low side in relation to other similar projects in Thailand registered as CDM
activities. Similar to the investment cost, the project proponents are of the opinion that it is highly
unlikely that the variation of the O&M cost due to inflation rate will exceed 10%. Moreover, since the
current estimate of O&M cost is based on power plant developer, reducing this cost could result in
operation and safety risks due to improper maintenance of the Project.
• Biomass fuel cost
Based on a publication made by Energy for Environment (EfE)26, rice husk price (at mill’s gate, thus
excluding cost of transport) in the neighboring province of Surin is shown to be in the range of 900-1,100
THB/t over the period from December 2008-November2009 (see figure below). With this, a reasonable
conclusion can be made that it is highly unlikely that biomass fuel price will decrease more than 10% of
the assumed value. It is further noted that the applied rice husk unit price of THB 1,000/t (which is
sourced from the FSR) is consistent with the price published by EfE at the time of investment decision
(i.e. November 2009) and that even taking the lowest value (i.e. THB 900/t) for the sensitivity analysis,
the equity IRR without the CDM is still below the benchmark.
25
http://www.tradingeconomics.com/Economics/Inflation-CPI.aspx?symbol=THB
26
www.efe.or.th
18
Figure 4: Rice husk price at mill’s gate in Surin province
• Power plant availability factor
For this parameter, the sensitivity analysis has already assumed the theoretical maximum of 100%
availability factor. Even in such circumstance, the equity IRR did not cross the benchmark.
• Electricity tariff
As shown in table below, the peak and off-peak (wholesale) electricity tariffs from year 2007-2009 are
between 2.4741 – 2.4782 THB/kWh, and 1.0993 – 1.0995 THB/kWh, respectively. These peak and off-
peak tariffs are used as the basis for IRR calculation as they were publically available at the time of
investment decision. Both peak and off-peak tariffs showed a decreasing trend; therefore, it can
reasonably be concluded that it is highly unlikely for the electricity tariff to increase beyond 10%.
Table 9: Power Purchase (Wholesale) Tariff for VSPP and Ft charge27

Year Peak % change Off Peak % change Ft charge % change
2007 2.4782 1.0995 0.7127
2008 2.4759 -0.09% 1.0994 -0.02% 0.7033 -1.32%
2009 2.4741 -0.07% 1.0993 -0.01% 0.9161 30.25%
Average 2.4761 -0.08% 1.0994 -0.01% 0.7774 14.47%
• Ft charge
Ft charge is an additional tariff on top of the electricity tariffs which vary corresponding to the changing
costs of power production (e.g. due to fuel price volatility), thus it is the only parameter which could
reasonably be subjected to greater variation than +10%/-10%. Taking this factor in account, the project
proponents make use of paragraph 21 of the Guidelines on Investment Analysis that states “past trends
may be a guide to determine the reasonable range” of variations in the sensitivity analysis.
27
http://www.eppo.go.th/power/data/index.html
19
Thus, in order to estimate the likely Ft charge fluctuations over time, the variation of the 3-year historic
rates against the average rate (used as input for the IRR calculation) is analyzed. The development of the
Ft charge in the period from 2007 to 2009 shows that the average price in the peak years (maximum and
minimum) fluctuates with maxima of +17.85% and -8.32% around the 3-years average price28. Thus, in
order to further ensure the robustness of the sensitivity analysis, the project proponents have initiated an
expansion of its scope to conduct an analysis using the Ft charge fluctuations of +17.85% whereby the
corresponding Equity IRR is found to be at 12.81%. To give further confidence, an expanded sensitivity
analysis is further conducted in a very conservative manner by assuming 30.25% incremental increase in
Ft charge (as per largest annual increase observed, from 2008 to 2009). The resultant Equity IRR is found
at 14.46%.
B.5.2 Prior consideration and ongoing actions
Consistent with EB62 Annex 13 “Guidelines on the demonstration and assessment of prior consideration
of the CDM” Version 4, which came into effect in 15 July 2011, it is required that where the starting date
of the project activity is on or after 02 August 2008, the project participant must inform a Host Party
DNA and the UNFCCC secretariat in writing of the commencement of the project activity and of their
intention to seek CDM status. Such notification must be made within six months of the project activity
start date and shall contain the precise geographical location and a brief description of the proposed
project activity, using the standardized form F-CDM Prior Consideration.
According to the Glossary of CDM terms, “the starting date of a CDM project activity is the earliest
date at which either the implementation or construction or real action of a project activity begins”.
Based on this definition, the project start date is deemed as the contract signing date between Srisangdaw
and Thermax Limited ENVIRO Division for the procurement of gas cleaning system, on July 7th, 2010.
As the Project’s start date was after 2 August 2008, the only action required is for notifications to be sent
to the UNFCCC and the Host Party DNA (Thailand Greenhouse Gas Management Organisation - TGO),
which the Project did on September 3rd, 2010, well within the 6 months of the project activity start date29.
Thus, it is clear that the Project meets the criteria stipulated in EB62 Annex 13 and a conclusion can be
reached that the project proponents have seriously considered CDM for the proposed project activity and
that the benefits of CDM were decisive for the implementation of the Project.
B.6. Emission reductions:
B.6.1. Explanation of methodological choices:

>>
The following approved baseline and monitoring methodology and tools are applied:
• AMS-I.F., Renewable electricity generation for captive use and mini-grid version 2.0, valid from
June 17, 2011;
• Tool to calculate the emission factor for an electricity system, Version 02.2.1;
28
The calculation has been submitted to the DOE during the validation.
29
It is noted that on the CDM prior consideration page in the UNFCCC website, the date presented for the Project is October 4th,
2010.
20
• Tool to calculate project or leakage CO2 emissions from fossil fuel combustion, version 02
Baseline emissions (BEy)

The methodological choices for baseline emissions are detailed in section B.4.
Project emissions (PEy)
CO2 emissions from on-site consumption of fossil fuels due to the project activity (PEFC, j, y)
The CO2 emissions from fossil fuel consumption in the Project are calculated based on the quantity of
fuels combusted and the CO2 emission coefficient of the fossil fuel, as follows:
It is noted that CO2 emission coefficient of the fossil fuel can be calculated using one of the two options
stated in the ‘Tool to calculate project or leakage CO2 emissions from fossil fuel combustion’, depending
on the availability of data on the fossil fuel type i. Given that the necessary data is not available for
option A, option B as represented in equation 4 below is applied.
Parameter Description Value Source

PE FC , j , y = FCi , j , y × COEFi , y Equation 3
COEFi , y = NCVi , y × EFCO 2,i , y Equation 4

PEFC, j, y CO2 emissions from fossil fuel combustion in Calculated Calculated as per Equation
process j during the year y (tCO2/year) 3
FCi, j, y Quantity of fossil fuel type i in process j during 0 Assume no fossil fuel
the year y (mass or volume unit/year) consumption for ex-ante
estimation. This parameter
will be monitored ex-post.
NCVi, y Weighted average net calorific value of the fuel 43.3 IPCC default value (upper
type i in year y (GJ/mass or volume unit) limit) for diesel oil is
assumed for ex-ante
EFCO2, i CO2 emission factor per unit of energy of the 74.8 IPCC default value (upper
fuel type i that would have been consumed limit) for diesel oil is
onsite by the Project (tCO2/TJ) assumed for ex-ante
CO2 emissions from the transport of biomass residues to the project site (PECO2, TR, y)
Although not explicitly required by the applied methodology, the project proponents have in good faith
chosen to account for the emissions associated with the transport of biomass residues to the project site.
This emission is estimated in the following manner.
Parameter Description Value Source

 Qk , j , y 
PECO 2,TR , y =   × AVD y × EFkm,CO 2 Equation 5
 TL y 
PECO2, TR, y CO2 emissions from off-site transportation of Calculated Refer to Equation 5
biomass residues to the project site; tCO2/yr
21
Qk, j, y Quantity of biomass residues that has been 127,200 Srisangdaw, to be

transported from the biomass supplier j to the monitored.
project during the year y; tonne/yr
Rice husk – 37,600 tonne/yr
Wood bark – 89,600 tonne/yr
TLy Average truck load of the truck used during the 15 Srisangdaw, to be
year y; tonnes / truck monitored30.
AVDy Average round trip distance (from and to) 100 Srisangdaw, to be
between the fuel supply sites and the site of the monitored.
project plant during the year y; km/truck/round
trip
EFkm, CO2 CO2 emission factor from use of fossil fuel type 0.00055 Calculated using IPCC
i for transportation; tCO2/km default values
Therefore, the resultant project emissions are:
PE y = PEFC , j , y + PECO 2,TR, y Equation 6
Leakage (LEy)
No leakage from equipment transfer is included as the technology used does not involve equipment
transferred from another activity.
In addition, as per Attachment C to Appendix B of indicative simplified baseline and monitoring

methodologies for selected small-scale CDM project activity categories, “General guidance on leakage
in biomass project activities (version 03)”, there are three types of emission sources that are potentially
significant and attributable to the project activities:
A. Shifts of pre-project activities. Decreases of carbon stocks, for example as a result of

deforestation, outside the land area where the biomass is grown, due to shifts of pre-project
activities.
B. Emissions related to the production of the biomass.
C. Competing uses for the biomass. The biomass may in the absence of the project activity be used
elsewhere, for the same or a different purpose.
For project activities that collect and use biomass residues or wastes, only source (C), competing uses for
the biomass, needs to be considered.
“If it is demonstrated (e.g., using published literature, official reports, surveys etc.) at the beginning of
each crediting period that the quantity of available biomass in the region is at least 25% larger than the
quantity of biomass that is utilised including the project activity, then this source of leakage can be
neglected otherwise this leakage shall be estimated and deducted from the emission reductions”.
Following this guidance, a leakage analysis was undertaken to determine the available rice husk and
wood wastes biomass in the region surrounding the Project site.
30
This average value has been validated using 4 actual delivery records from rice husk and wood bark suppliers
22
In accordance with the ex-ante estimation, the proposed project activity will generate approximately
71,192 MWh of electricity with combustion of 37,600 tonnes of rice husk and 89,600 tonnes of wood
waste (wood bark) respectively31. In order to demonstrate that the proposed project activity does not
result in the diversion of biomass from other uses that will, in turn, lead to increased fossil fuel usage, a
macro analysis of the entire region is conducted, taking into account the availability of rice husk and
wood bark in the region. Due to large number rice millers and wood waste suppliers in the region, it is
not possible to isolate public data according to distance. Instead, based on the Project’s planned
procurement area, the geographical boundary is defined as Roi-Et and the surrounding provinces of
Yasothorn, Sisaket, Kalasin, Surin and Mahasarakham. These provinces are all within 200 km from the
Project site.
Rice husk
Given that rice husk is a by-product of rice milling, production of rice husk for use in the proposed
project activity is correlated with the production of rice. As per 2009 data from the Office of Agricultural
Economics the Agricultural Statistics, the North Eastern region is regarded as the largest rice production
in area as shown in table below:
Table 10: Rice production in Thailand32

Region Production of Production of Total production of Production of rice
major rice (t) second rice (t) rice (t) husk (t)33
Northern 6,499,264 3,195,241 9,694,505 2,229,736
North-Eastern 10,377,499 1,076,173 11,453,672 2,634,345
Central Plain 5,631,360 3,810,860 9,442,220 2,171,711
Southern 745,128 172,839 917,967 211,132
Total 23,253,251 8,255,113 31,508,364 7,246,924
Over two million tonnes of rice husk are produced annually in the North Eastern region; 1,044,658
tonnes of which are yielded from the planned procurement area34. Use of rice husk include (a) heat
generation for rice mill’s own milling and parboiling, (b) use in chicken farms, (c) brick plants, (d) grid
electricity generation and (e) soil conditioning and food processing industry. These are estimated at (a)
19.8% (206,842 t)35, (b) 0.61% (6,395 t)36, (c) 1.31% (13,717 t)37, (d) 35.90% (375,033 t)38, and (e)
31
It is anticipated that around 50:50 ratio of rice husk and wood waste on a mass basis will be used as Project’s feedstock fuels
for power generation. For simplicity, value shown for wood waste above represents wood bark consumption. Proportion of each
type of biomass consumed shall be monitored ex-post during the monitoring period.
32
Office of Agricultural Economics, 2009, ‘Agricultural Statistics of Thailand 2009’
33
Based on estimate that rice husk makes up 23% by weight of the rice paddy, Prasara, J. Grant, T., 2008, ‘Environmental
Impacts of Alternative Uses of Rice Husks for Thailand’.
34
According to the Agricultural Statistics of Thailand, total 2009 rice production in these provinces are as follows: (1) Roi-Et –
984,400 t, (2) Sisaket – 860,564 t, (3) Yasothorn – 350,010 t, (4) Surin – 999,850 t and (5) Mahasarakham – 696,084 t and (6)
Kalasin – 651,085 t.
35
Based on interviews conducted in conjunction with a regular scale CDM project “A.T. Biopower Rice Husk Power Project in
Pichit, Thailand”
36
Rice husk are only used in broilers farms that have evaporator-controlled systems, whereby the rice husk is used for floor
laying. For conservative estimation, it is assumed that all broiler farms use evaporator-controlled system. Based on interviews
conducted in conjunction with a regular scale CDM project “A.T. Biopower Rice Husk Power Project in Pichit, Thailand”, it is
23
2.58% (26,998 t) 39 . The Project itself requires approximately 37,600 tonnes of rice husk. Thus, the
quantity of available rice husk in the region is approximately 56.72% larger than the quantity of rice husk
demand (including that of the project activity). This is higher than the 25% threshold given in the
Attachment C of Appendix B of the SSC M&P.
Amount of available Amount of rice husk

Percent of rice ( rice husk in the area – that is utilized in the )
husk in surplus = (supply) area (demand) x 100%
(%) Amount of rice husk that is
utilized in the area (demand)
Equation 7
= (1,044,658 – 666,585) / 666,585
= 56.72%
It is further noted that even 100% rice husk is used for Project’s power generation, rice husk surplus is
still estimated at 48.35%. From this, it can reasonably be concluded that the Project does not lead to any
leakage due to competing use of rice husk.
Wood bark
Wood bark is a by-product of eucalyptus timber that is used in paper mills and furniture manufacturers.
According to the latest data from the Land Development Department40, Eucalyptus plantations cover
439,587 rais41 of the planned procurement area. This translates to 292,765 tonnes of wood bark per year,
as shown in Table 12. Based on a study conducted by the Energy for Environment Foundation, wood
bark is only used either as (a) fertilizer, or (b) power generation42. Based on data provided by Provincial
Industrial Offices, it is found that currently wood bark consumption in (a) amount to only 0.08% (220
t)43, and there is null for (b), other than the proposed project activity.
found that 1.21 kg of rice husk per broiler per year will be consumed. And according to the Department of Livestock
(http://www.dld.go.th/certify/certify/page/report/report_page.html), the broiler population in the 6 provinces total approximately
5,284,830 animals; with this, the demand for rice husk in chicken farms is estimated at 6,395 t.
37
Based on data provided by the Provincial Industrial Offices, demand for rice husk in brick factories is as follows: (1) Roi -Et -
5,389 t, (2) Sisaket – 28 t, (3) Yasothorn - 0 t, (4) Surin - 2,000 t, (5) Mahasarakham – 3,268 t and (6) Kalasin: 3,033 t.
38
Based on data from the Provincial Industrial Office, 90,124 t/yr of rice husk is consumed by Mungcharoen Green Power (9.9
MW) in Surin, and 284,909 t/yr are consumed in Roi-Et Province by Roi-Et Green (9.95 MW), Buasommai Power Generation (9
MW), and Buasommai (9 MW). Provincial industrial offices data show no other power plants in the procurement area apart from
the proposed project activity.
39
Based on data provided by the Provincial Industrial Offices, demand for rice husk in this category is as follows: (1) Roi Et -
26,015 t, (2) Sisaket – 135 t, (3) Yasothorn – 500 t, (4) Surin: 348 t, (5) Mahasarakham: 0 t and (6) Kalasin: 0 t.
40
http://www.ldd.go.th/
41
A rai is a unit area equal to 1,600 m2.
42
Based on a survey conducted by the Energy for Environment Foundation (EFE), 2006, ‘Biomass’
43
Only 2 entities in Roi-Et Province are found to be using wood bark; no consumption is found in other provinces in the planned
procurement area.
24
Table 11: Eucalyptus plantation and corresponding wood bark production in Thailand
Yield/rai
Standing Eucalyptus Amount of
Total (tons Wood bark
eucalyptus Timber bark
Provincial timber/rai/yr) component45
Provinces trees 44 Available available
Agricultural
(rais) Eucalyptus (t/yr) % of timber t/yr
Area (rais)
Kalasin 4,341,716 94,599 315,015 63,003
Maha Sarakham 3,307,302 72,622 241,831 48,366
Roi Et 5,187,156 92,080 306,626 61,325
Surin 5,077,535 97,743 3.33 325,484 20% 65,097
Sisaket 5,524,985 42,542 141,665 28,333
Yasothon 2,601,040 40,001 133,203 26,641
Total 26,039,734 439,587 1,463,825 292,765
The Project itself requires approximately 89,600 tonnes of wood bark per year. Accordingly, the quantity
of wood bark in the region is approximately 225.95% larger than the quantity of wood bark utilized
(including the anticipated amount required by the proposed project activity.
Amount of available Amount of wood

Percent of
( wood bark in the area – bark that is utilized )
wood bark in
= (supply) in the area (demand) x 100%
surplus
Amount of wood bark that is
(%)
utilized in the area (demand)
Equation 8
= (292,765 – 89,820) / 89,820
= 225.95%
It is noted that even if 100% wood bark is used for Project’s power generation, wood bark surplus is still
estimated at 63.17%.
Therefore, from the above analysis, it is clear that the surplus for each biomass type represents more than
25% of the estimated consumption and the leakage effect is deemed to be zero.
It should be noted that should different type of biomass residues other than rice husk and wood bark be
used, each type of them will be monitored separately after the Project implementation in order to
demonstrate that there is a surplus of each respective type of biomass in the region. If it cannot be
demonstrated that the quantity of available biomass in the region is at least 25% larger than the quantity
of biomass that is utilized including the project activity, then leakage emissions shall be estimated and
deducted from the emission reductions.
44
Eucalyptus aged 5 years gives timber wood of 16.65 t/rai. Benjachaya S., 2001, ‘The Further Processing of Tropical Timber in
Thailand’.
45
EFE, Ibid
25
Emission Reduction (ERy)

Therefore, the emission reductions are calculated as follows:
ER y = BE y − PE y − LE y Equation 9
B.6.2. Data and parameters that are available at validation:
Reference No.: F1
Data / Parameter: FCi,y
Data unit: Mass or volume unit
Description: Amount of fossil fuel type i consumed in the project electricity system in
year y
Source of data used: “Electricity report 2007-2009” published by EGAT
Value applied: Refer to Table A5 of Annex 3
Justification of the choice of Data choice and calculation method as per the methodological tool “Tool
data or description of to calculate the emission factor for an electricity system (Version
measurement methods and 02.2.1)”.
procedures actually applied :
Any comment: -
Reference No.: F2
Data / Parameter: NCVi,y
Data unit: GJ/mass or volume unit
Description: Net calorific value (energy content) of fossil fuel type i in year y
Source of data used: “Electric Power in Thailand 2008”, published by the Department of
Alternative Energy Development and Efficiency, Ministry of Energy
Justification of the choice of Data choice as per the methodological tool “Tool to calculate the
data or description of emission factor for an electricity system (Version 02.2.1)”.
measurement methods and
Any comment: -
Reference No.: F3
Data / Parameter: EFCO2,i,y
Data unit: tCO2/GJ
Description: CO2 emission factor of fossil fuel type i in year y
Source of data used: IPCC default values at the lower limit of the uncertainty at a 95%
confidence interval as provided in Table 1.4 of Chapter 1 of Vol. 2
(Energy) of the “2006 IPCC Guidelines on National GHG Inventories”
26
Any comment: -
Reference No.: F4
Data / Parameter: EGy
Data unit: MWh
Description: Net quantity of electricity generated and delivered to the grid by all power
sources serving the system, not including low-cost/must run power
plants/units, in year y
Any comment: -
Reference No.: F5
Data / Parameter: FCi,m,y
Data unit: Mass or volume unit
Description: Amount of fossil fuel type i consumed by power plant/unit m in year y
Source of data used: “Electricity report 2009” published by EGAT
Any comment: -
Reference No.: F6
Data / Parameter: EGm,y
Data unit: MWh/yr
Description: Net quantity of electricity delivered to the grid by power plant/unit m
serving the system, not including low-cost/must run units, in year y
Source of data used: “Electricity report 2009” published by EGAT
Any comment: -
Reference No.: F7
Data / Parameter: Specific fuel consumption
Data unit: t biomass/MWh
Description: Specific biomass consumption
Source of data used: Manufacturer’s specification and Srisangdaw
27
Value applied: Rice husk: 0.95

Wood bark: 2.26
Justification of the choice of The specific biomass consumption is calculated ex-ante by dividing the
data or description of feeding quantity (ton biomass/hour) by electricity generation capacity
measurement methods and (MW)
Any comment: -
Reference No.: F8
Data / Parameter: EFkm,CO2,i
Data unit: tCO2/km
Description: CO2 emission factor from use of fossil fuel type i for transportation
Source of data used: This is estimated based on the diesel emission factor and truck fuel
economy.
Value applied: 0.00055
Justification of the choice of The emission factor is calculated by using the following data:
data or description of Data Value Source
measurement methods and Emission 74.8 IPCC default values at upper limit of the
procedures actually applied : factor of tCO2/TJ uncertainty at a 95% confidence interval.
diesel oil
(EFdiesel)
NCV of diesel 0.043 TJ/t
oil
Fuel economy 5,814 km/t The data sources and calculation method for the
of delivery estimation of fuel economy of delivery truck are
truck as follows:
Data sources
1. Fuel consumption value = 5km/l for diesel
vehicles, sourced from note (a) of Table 3.2.2
of the “2006 IPCC Guidelines for National
GHG Inventories” (P.3.21).
2. Diesel oil density = 0.86 kg/l, sourced from a

publication by International Energy Agency46.
Calculation method
Fuel economy of delivery truck
km kg kg km
=5 ÷ 0.86 × 1,000 = 5,814
l l t t
tCO2 TJ t
EFCO 2,diesel,truck = 74.8 × 0.043 ×
TJ t 5,814km
tCO2
EFCO 2,diesel,truck = 0.00055
km
46
http://wds.iea.org/wds/pdf/EPT_documentation_4Q2010.pdf
28
Any comment: It is assumed that heavy duty diesel truck will be used for the purpose of
the PDD. If a different type of vehicle/fuel is used, an appropriate
emission factor will be selected.
Reference No.: F9
Data / Parameter: -
Data unit: Tonnes/yr
Description: Amount of rice husk that is available in surplus in the region
Source of data used: Agricultural Statistics of Thailand 2009
Value applied: 378,073
Justification of the choice of This involves the use of current agricultural statistics of Thailand crop
data or description of sourced from the Office of Agricultural Economics and the data sourced
measurement methods and from the Provincial Industrial Offices and interviews conducted in
procedures actually applied : conjunction with a regular scale CDM project.
Any comment: In line with the requirement of ‘General guidance on leakage in biomass
project activity (Version 03)’, this parameter will be evaluated ex-ante at
the beginning of each crediting period.
Reference No.: F10

Data / Parameter: -
Data unit: Tonnes/yr
Description: Amount of wood bark that is available in surplus in the region
Source of data used: Land Development Department
Value applied: 202,945
Justification of the choice of This involves the use of current data from the Land Development
data or description of Department and the data sourced from the Provincial Industrial Offices
measurement methods and and other reviewed literatures in Thailand.
Any comment: In line with the requirement of ‘General guidance on leakage in biomass
project activity (Version 03)’, this parameter will be evaluated ex-ante at
the beginning of each crediting period.
Reference No.: F11

Data / Parameter: EFgrid,y
Data unit: tCO2/MWh
Description: Grid emission factor in year y
Value applied: 0.5812
Any comment: -
B.6.3 Ex-ante calculation of emission reductions:

>>
Baseline emissions (BEy)
29
The emissions associated with electricity generation from plants connected to the grid are calculated as
per Equation 3 detailed above.
Determination of Combined Margin CO2 emission factor of the grid (EFCO2, grid, y)
Referring to the calculations of baseline emission factor in Annex 3, the resultant CM emission factor of
the Thai grid is 0.5812 tCO2/MWh.
Determination of net quantity of electricity generation (EGBL, y)
According to the project plans, the maximum gross capacity of the power plant is 9.9 MW and the net
electricity output capacity to the grid and SMLP is 8.839 MW47. With the annual operating hours of
8,000 hours48, the net electricity generated by the Project is calculated at 70,712 MWh/year = (62,712 +
8,000 - 0 MWh/year). More details are shown in figure below.
Total capacity kW 9,900 Based on specification

Sold to grid kW 7,839 Calculated (max. at 8MW)
Sold to mill kW 1,000 As per Srisangdaw-SMLP agreement
Parasitic load kW 1,061 As per project's equipment list
COD Jan-12 Anticipated by Srisangdaw
Total hours in year 8,760
Plant availability fraction 91.32% Based on Boiler specification by Asawin
Annual gross power generation kWh 79,200,000 Calculated
a) Annual parasitic consumption kWh 8,488,000 Calculated
b) Annual power exported to mill kWh 8,000,000 Calculated
c) Annual power exported to grid kWh 62,712,000 Calculated
Annual net power generation kWh 70,712,000 Calculated
Figure 5: Summary of Project’s power generation
Applying the Combined Margin emission factor of 0.5812 tCO2/MWh, the baseline emissions for
displacement of grid electricity is calculated as follows:
MWh tCO 2 tCO 2 e

BE y = 70 ,712 × 0 . 5812 = 41, 097
yr MWh yr
Project emissions (PEy)
CO2 emissions from on-site consumption of fossil fuels due to the project activity (PEFC, j, y)
47
The actual amount of electricity generated by the Project (EGBL, y) as well as exported to the grid (EGgrid,y) and SMLP (EGSMLP,
y)
will be monitored after project implementation. The monitored amount of electricity will be used in the calculation of Certified
Emission Reductions (CERs).
48
Consistent with option 3(b) provided in EB48 Annex 11, “Guidelines for the reporting and validation of plant load factors”,
the plant load (availability) factor, which is applied for the ex-ante CER calculation, was determined by a third party contracted
by Srisangdaw. The plant load factor is based on the availability guarantee by “Asawin” which is calculated as follows: (8,760
hours/year – 420 hours/year due to scheduled maintenance inspection – 340 hours/year unscheduled non-availability)/8,760
hours/year = 91.32% (equivalent to 8,000 hours per year).
30
Fossil fuel consumption is expected to be very small during Project operation. For simplicity of ex-ante
estimation, it is therefore assumed that there will be no fossil fuel consumption. Thus: PEFC, j, y = 0
tCO2/year. Monitoring of fossil fuel consumption shall be performed ex-post.
CO2 emissions from the transport of biomass residues to the project site (PECO2, TR, y)
As anticipated by Srisangdaw, the Project is expected to consume 37,600 t/year of rice husk and 89,600
t/year of wood bark, delivered from suppliers with average round trip distance of 100 km from the
Project site49. Assuming the biomass will be transported from suppliers to the power plant by means of
heavy duty truck with loading capacity of 15 tonnes and using 100% diesel oil as fuel50, the emissions
due to transportation of biomass residues from other biomass suppliers are:
 tonne 
127,200 yr  km tCO2 tCO2
PE CO 2,TR , y =  × 100 × 0.00055 = 467
 15 tonne  truck km yr
 truck  roundtrip
Leakage (LEy)
As discussed in section B.6.1., there are no leakage emissions associated with the Project. Therefore, LEy
= 0 tCO2/year
Emission Reduction (ERy)

The resultant emission reductions are calculated as:
tCO 2 e
ER y = 41,097 − (0 − 467) − 0 = 40,630
year
B.6.4 Summary of the ex-ante estimation of emission reductions:

>>
Table 12: Emission reductions
Estimation of Estimation of Estimation of Estimation of annual
Years51 project emissions baseline emissions leakage emissions emission reductions
(tCO2e) (tCO2e) (tCO2e) (tCO2e)
1 (2012/2013) 467 41,097 0 40,630
2 (2013/2014) 467 41,097 0 40,630
3 (2014/2015) 467 41,097 0 40,630
4 (2015/2016) 467 41,097 0 40,630
5 (2016/2017) 467 41,097 0 40,630
6 (2017/2018) 467 41,097 0 40,630
49
The Project emissions associated with biomass transport will be calculated based on the ex-post monitored data of biomass
quantity and transportation distance.
50
It is assumed that heavy duty trucks will be used for the purpose of the PDD. If a different type of vehicle/fuel is used, an
appropriate emission factor will be selected. The estimated emission factor of the heavy duty diesel truck (EFCO2, i) is 0.00055
tCO2/km, as shown in Section B.6.2.
51
Note: Using 12-monthly period from the start of the crediting period.
31
7 (2018/2019) 467 41,097 0 40,630

Total 3,269 287,679 0 284,410
B.7 Application of a monitoring methodology and description of the monitoring plan:
B.7.1 Data and parameters monitored:
The following parameters relevant for the project activity shall be monitored and recorded. Note that the
monitoring plan has taken into account the applicable requirements specified in the General Guidance to
SSC CDM methodologies (e.g. calibration requirements).
Reference no. 1
Data / Parameter: EGgrid, y
Data unit: MWh
Description: Quantity of electricity generated and delivered to the grid in year y
Source of data to be Srisangdaw
used:
Value of data 62,712
Description of Measurement procedures
measurement methods This parameter shall be measured using electricity meters.
and procedures to be
applied: Measurement frequency
Continuously monitoring, hourly measurement and at least monthly recording.
The archived data shall be kept during the crediting period and two years after
the end of the crediting period or the last issuance of CERs for this project
activity, whichever occurs later.
QA/QC procedures to The electricity meter shall be calibrated in accordance with the national
be applied: standards and reference points, or IEC standards, or ANSI standards or other
approved international standards and recalibrated at appropriate intervals
according to the PPA, or national standards, or IEC standards, or ANSI
standards, or manufacturer specifications, or other approved international
standards but at least once in 3 years. The measurement results will be cross-
checked with the purchase receipts between Srisangdaw and PEA to ensure
consistency.
Any comment: Use for the calculations of EGBL, y
Reference no. 2
Data / Parameter: EGSMLP, y
Data unit: MWh
Description: Quantity of electricity generated and delivered to SMLP in year y
used:
Value of data 8,000
measurement methods This parameter shall be measured using electricity meters at the export to
and procedures to be SMLP.
32
applied:
Measurement frequency
checked with the purchase receipts between Srisangdaw and SMLP to ensure
consistency.
Any comment: Use for the calculations of EGBL, y
Reference no. 3
Data / Parameter: Eimported, y
Data unit: MWh
Description: Quantity of electricity imported from the grid to the Project in year y
used:
Value of data 0
measurement methods This parameter shall be measured using electricity meters at Srisangdaw.
and procedures to be
applied: Measurement frequency
checked with the purchase receipts between Srisangdaw and PEA to ensure
consistency.
Any comment: Use for the calculations of EGBL, y. No grid electricity is expected to be
imported because electricity requirements are self-generated by the Project
power plant.
Reference no. 4
Data / Parameter: EGBL, y
Data unit: MWh
33
Description: Quantity of net electricity supplied to the grid as a result of the implementation
of the CDM project activity in year y
Source of data to be Calculated
used:
Value of data 70,712
Description of The net electricity export/supplied to a grid will be determined as the difference
measurement methods between quantities of (1) total electricity exported to the grid and SMLP, and
and procedures to be (2) grid electricity import, which are measured continuously and recorded at
applied: least monthly, as follows:
EGBL, y = (EGgrid, y + EGSMLP, y) – Eimported, y

QA/QC procedures to The calculated result will be cross-checked by the CDM Project Manager,
be applied: where appropriate.
Any comment: -
Reference no. 5
Data / Parameter: Qk, j, y
Data unit: Tonnes
Description: Quantity of biomass type k transported from the biomass supplier j to the
Project in year y
used:
Value of data Quantity (t/yr) Moisture content
Biomass type k (Mk) as received
Received basis Dry basis53
basis (%)52
Rice husk 37,600 33,088 12%
Wood bark 89,600 40,320 55%
measurement methods This parameter will be monitored by weighing bridge or equivalent upon
and procedures to be delivery. The delivery truck will pass the weighing bridge and data is recorded
applied: by calculating the weight difference between the weight of incoming loaded
truck and the weight of the outgoing empty truck.
Data is to be monitored upon each delivery, recorded daily and aggregated
monthly and yearly. It will be archived electronically and kept during the
crediting period and two years after the end of the crediting period or the last
issuance of CERs for this project activity, whichever occurs later.
QA/QC procedures to The weighing bridge or equivalent equipment will be calibrated in accordance
be applied: with the national standards and reference points, or IEC standards, or ANSI
standards or other approved international standards and recalibrated at
appropriate intervals according to the national standards, or IEC standards, or
ANSI standards, or manufacturer specifications, or other approved international
52
Source from the NCV and moisture content test result that was provided by technology supplier; this parameter will be
monitored ex-post.
53
Calculated as: Dry basis = Received basis x (1 – Mk)
34
checked with the purchase receipts between Srisangdaw and the biomass
suppliers, as well as changes in stock. Consistency of measurements shall also
be checked ex-post with annual data on energy generation, (fossil fuels) and
biomass used and the efficiency of energy generation as determined ex-ante.
Any comment: Each type of biomass consumed shall be monitored separately.
Reference no. 6
Data / Parameter: Mk
Data unit: % water
Description: Moisture content of the biomass residues type k (wet basis)
used:
Value of data 12% for rice husk
55% for wood bark
measurement methods Ex-ante values as provided by technology supplier (from test result) is used for
and procedures to be the crediting period.
applied:
The moisture content of biomass of homogenous quality shall be determined
ex-ante. The weighted average should be calculated and used in the
calculations. Data will be archived electronically and kept during the crediting
period and two years after the end of the crediting period or the last issuance of
CERs for this project activity, whichever occurs later.
QA/QC procedures to NA.
be applied:
Any comment: In case of dry biomass, monitoring of this parameter is not necessary.
Reference no. 7
Data / Parameter: NCVk
Data unit: GJ/tonne
Description: Net calorific value of biomass residue type k
used:
Value of data 13.517 for rice husk
5.837 for wood bark
measurement methods Measured in laboratories according to relevant national/international standards.
and procedures to be Measure the NCV based on dry basis.
applied:
Determine once in the first year of the crediting period. Measure quarterly,
taking at least three samples for each measurement. The average value can be
used for the rest of the crediting period. Data will be archived electronically
and kept during the crediting period and two years after the end of the crediting
35
period or the last issuance of CERs for this project activity, whichever occurs
later.
QA/QC procedures to Check the consistency of the measurements by comparing the measurement
be applied: results with relevant data sources (e.g. values in the literature, values used in
the national GHG inventory) and default values by the IPCC. If the
measurements results differ significantly from previous measurements or other
relevant data sources, conduct additional measurements.
Any comment: -
Reference no. 8
Data / Parameter: TLy
Data unit: tonnes/truck
Description: Average truck load of the truck used during the year y
Source of data to be Based on weight record sheet from Srisangdaw
used:
Value of data 15
measurement methods This parameter will be monitored by weighing bridge or equivalent equipment
and procedures to be upon delivery. The delivery truck will pass the weighing bridge and data is
applied: recorded by calculating the weight difference between the weight of incoming
loaded truck and the weight of the outgoing empty truck. The average truck
capacity will be determined periodically or annually by averaging the
monitored data.
Data is to be monitored upon each delivery, recorded daily and aggregated
monthly and yearly. It will be archived electronically and kept during the
crediting period and two years after the end of the crediting period or the last
issuance of CERs for this project activity, whichever occurs later.
QA/QC procedures to The weighing bridge or equivalent equipment will be calibrated in accordance
be applied: with the national standards and reference points IEC standards or ANSI
standards and recalibrated at appropriate intervals according to the national
standards, IEC standards, ANSI standards or manufacturer specifications, but
at least once in 3 years. The measurement results will be cross-checked with
the delivery records between Srisangdaw and the biomass supplier.
Any comment: -
Reference no. 9
Data / Parameter: AVDy
Data unit: km/truck
Description: Average round trip distance (from and to) between the fuel supply sites and the
site of the project plant during the year y
Source of data to be Based on estimated distance to rice husk sources by Srisangdaw
used:
Value of data 100
measurement methods The source of each biomass supplier will be identified and one-off
36
and procedures to be measurement of distance (a return trip) between the biomass supplier sources
applied: and Srisangdaw will be conducted either by map or driving.
The measurement is to be conducted once a new biomass supplier is sourced.
Data is to be aggregated yearly. It will be archived electronically and kept
during the crediting period and two years after the end of the crediting period
or the last issuance of CERs for this project activity, whichever occurs later.
QA/QC procedures to Not applicable.
be applied:
Any comment: -
Reference no. 10
Data / Parameter: FCi, y
Data unit: mass or volume unit/year
Description: Quantity of fossil fuel type i used at the project activity during the year
used:
Value of data 0
measurement methods
and procedures to be • Use either mass or volume meters. In cases where fuel (e.g. diesel oil)
applied: is supplied from an oil truck (tanker) running within the factory
boundary to fill fuel for Project’s equipment (such as backup generator,
folklifts, bulldozers, etc. used at the site). Rulers can be used to
determine mass or volume of the fuel consumed, with the following
conditions: The ruler gauge must be part of the oil truck and calibrated
at most once every 3 years. The amount will be cross-checked with a
purchased oil bill;
Continuously, aggregated at least annually. The archived data shall be kept
during the crediting period and two years after the end of the crediting period or
the last issuance of CERs for this project activity, whichever occurs later.
QA/QC procedures to The ruler gauge shall be calibrated in accordance with the national standards
be applied: and reference points, or IEC standards, or ANSI standards or other approved
international standards and recalibrated at appropriate intervals according to the
national standards, or IEC standards, or ANSI standards, or manufacturer
specifications, or other approved international standards but at least once in 3
years.
Any comment: -
Reference no. 11
Data / Parameter: NCVi
Data unit: GJ/mass or volume unit
Description: Net calorific value of fossil fuel type i
Source of data to be As per the “Tool to calculate project or leakage CO2 emissions from fossil fuel
37
used: combustion”
Value of data 43.3 GJ/tonne (assumed IPCC value for ex-ante calculation)
Description of The following data sources may be used if the relevant conditions apply:
measurement methods
and procedures to be Data sources Conditions for using data sources
applied: a) Values provided by the fuel This is the preferred source
supplier in invoices
b) Measurements by the project If a) is not available
participants
c) Regional or national default If a) is not available. These sources
values shall be based on well-documented,
reliable sources (such as national
energy balances)
d) IPCC default values as provided If a) is not available
in table 1.4 of Chapter 1 of Vol. 2
(Energy) of the 2006 IPCC
Guidelines on National GHG
Inventories
Measurement procedures
For a) and b): Measurements should be undertaken in line with national or
international fuel standards.
For a) and b): The NCV should be obtained for each fuel delivery, from which
the weighted average annual values should be calculated.
For c): Review appropriateness of the values annually
For d): Any future revision of the IPCC Guidelines should be taken into
account
Data will be archived electronically and kept during the crediting period and
two years after the end of the crediting period or the last issuance of CERs for
this project activity, whichever occurs later.
QA/QC procedures to As per the “Tool to calculate project or leakage CO2 emissions from fossil fuel
be applied: combustion”.
Verify if the values under a), b) and c) are within the uncertainty range of the
IPCC default values as provided in Table 1.2, Vol. 2 of the 2006 IPCC
Guidelines. If the values fall below this range collect additional information
from the testing laboratory to justify the outcome or conduct additional
measurements. The laboratories in a), b) or c) should have ISO accreditation or
justify that they can comply with similar quality standards.
Any comment: It is noted that ex-post monitoring of this parameter is not required if no fossil
fuel is consumed on-site after the project implementation (i.e. FCi, j, y = 0).
Reference no. 12
Data / Parameter: EFCO2, i
38
Data unit: tCO2e/GJ

Description: CO2 emission factor of fossil fuel type i
Source of data to be “Tool to calculate project or leakage CO2 emissions from fossil fuel
used: combustion”
Value of data 74.8 (assumed IPCC value for ex-ante calculation)
Description of The following data sources may be used if the relevant conditions apply:
measurement methods
and procedures to be Data sources Conditions for using data sources
applied: a) Values provided by the fuel This is the preferred source
supplier in invoices
b) Measurements by the project If a) is not available
participants
c) Regional or national default If a) is not available. These sources
values shall be based on well-documented,
reliable sources (such as national
energy balances)
d) IPCC default values as provided If a) is not available
in table 1.4 of Chapter 1 of Vol. 2
(Energy) of the 2006 IPCC
Guidelines on National GHG
Inventories
Measurement procedures
For a) and b): Measurements should be undertaken in line with national or
international fuel standards.
For a) and b): The CO2 emission factor should be obtained for each fuel
delivery, from which the weighted average annual values should be calculated.
For c): Review appropriateness of the values annually
For d): Any future revision of the IPCC Guidelines should be taken into
account.
Data will be archived electronically and kept during the crediting period and
two years after the end of the crediting period or the last issuance of CERs for
this project activity, whichever occurs later.
QA/QC procedures to Verify if the values under a), b) and c) are within the uncertainty range of the
be applied: IPCC default values as provided in Table 1.4, Vol. 2 of the 2006 IPCC
Guidelines. If the values fall below this range collect additional information
from the testing laboratory to justify the outcome or conduct additional
measurements. The laboratories in a), b) or c) should have ISO accreditation or
justify that they can comply with similar quality standards.
Any comment: It is noted that ex-post monitoring of this parameter is not required if no fossil
fuel is consumed on-site after the project implementation (i.e. FCi, j, y = 0).
B.7.2 Description of the monitoring plan:

>>
39
Srisangdaw will be responsible for the implementation of the CDM monitoring plan. The objective of the
monitoring plan is to ensure the complete, consistent, clear, and accurate monitoring and calculation of
the emission reductions during the whole crediting period. Note that monitoring procedures may be
adjusted from time to time but will not deviate from the principles described in the monitoring plan:
Monitoring equipments and parameters

Section 7.1 of the PDD describes all monitoring parameters and equipments required by the CDM
approved methodology and tools applied.
Responsibilities for the implementation of the monitoring plan

Srisangdaw understands that having a good operational and management team to execute a well-defined
monitoring plan is extremely important for the Project. From this perspective, Srisangdaw has identified
a tentative operational and management system that will be implemented upon project commissioning.
The responsibility of data monitoring, archiving and analyzing will fall on different members of the
operational and management team. This overall team will be comprised of representatives(s) from the
company’s management, a CDM project manager as well as a group of engineers, operators, technicians
and administrative staffs. The simplified diagram below outlines the structure of operation and
management of the project activity.
Figure 6: Responsible persons/entities for the operation of the Project
Each entity will be responsible in individual task(s) as follows:

Responsible authority Responsibilities
Management team 1. Overall management of the CDM monitoring team to achieve both the
commercial goal and environmental impact reduction target;
2. Ensuring that all requirements of the CDM monitoring plan set forth in the
PDD are met.
3. Review and approve emission reductions estimation prior to submission to
Designated Operational Entity (DOE) for the process of verification.
CDM Project Manager 1. Setting up standard operation procedures;
2. Setting up CDM monitoring procedures as per CDM monitoring plan;
3. Develop training plans;
4. Compilation of all monitoring data for the purpose of ex-post emission
reductions.
Operation and maintenance 1. Operation of the overall power plant;
team 2. Controlling power production as plan;
3. Conduct sampling and checking test results
40
4. Maintaining, recording and archiving all operational and CDM monitoring

parameters;
5. Training of new staff on plant’s operation and relevant CDM process.
6. Daily supervision of plant’s facilities and their overall operation;
7. Update monthly and annually the maintenance system;
8. Preparing spare part list;
9. Maintenance and calibration of relevant equipments;
10. Recording and archiving all maintenance and calibration records.
Data management
Under the supervision of the CDM project manager, data monitoring and archiving will be conducted by
operational staff. All data will be recorded with reference to the data archiving procedures and stored
electronically in a systematic and transparent manner. Data records will be archived for a period of 2
years after the crediting period to which the records pertain. The CDM project manager will review the
data archived and submit a complete set of documentation, which indicates the calculation procedure as
well as the ex-post emission reduction estimate to the senior manager for internal verification regularly.
This documentation will also be verified externally by an independent Designated Operational Entity
(DOE) on a regular basis.
Quality assurance and quality control procedures

The overall performance of the Project will be ensured via appointing consultants and/or technical
support team to carry out the system analysis, equipment calibration and overall maintenance on a regular
basis throughout the crediting period. The analysis and calibration will be carried out in accordance with
national standards or international standards where relevant.
Internal staff training will be provided. These training will be tailored to ensure that the data monitoring
and archiving tasks will be undertaken properly and according to the procedures and requirements as set
in the Project’s monitoring plan.
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 baseline study and monitoring methodology
21/10/2011
Entities determining the baseline and monitoring methodology

Prasit Vaiyavatjamai
Carbon Partners Asiatica Co., Ltd.
E-mail: prasit.vaiyavatjamai@cp-asiatica.com
Carbon Partners Asiatica is the CDM advisor to the Project. It is also a project participant as defined by
the CDM Executive Board. Contact details are provided in Annex 1.
41
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:

>>
07/07/2010. This refers to the contract signing date between Srisangdaw and Thermax Limited ENVIRO
Division for the procurement of gas cleaning system.
C.1.2. Expected operational lifetime of the project activity:

>>
20 years
C.2 Choice of the crediting period and related information:
C.2.1. Renewable crediting period
C.2.1.1. Starting date of the first crediting period:

>>
31/12/2012 or immediately after project registration, whichever is later.
C.2.1.2. Length of the first crediting period:

>>
7 years
C.2.2. Fixed crediting period:
C.2.2.1. Starting date:

>>
This section is intentionally left blank.
C.2.2.2. Length:
>>
This section is intentionally left blank.
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 does not fall under the purview of the Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) notification
of the Ministry of Natural Resources and Environment (MONRE), Government of Thailand with the
42
approval of the National Environmental Board (NEB)54. However, under the rules of the Thai DNA, an
IEE report has to be conducted. Such IEE represents a simplified EIA, addressing potential
environmental and social impacts of CDM projects in Thailand. The IEE for the proposed project activity
will be submitted to the Thai DNA; and its approval will be confirmed by the CDM Letter of Approval
(LoA). Based on the outcome of the Initial Environmental Evaluation (IEE) report, a summary of the
environmental impacts of the Project is featured below.
To avoid any potential impacts caused to our environment due to the project implementation, an
environmental management system will be implemented in several ways and the Project will be fully
compliant with the relevant environmental laws and regulations as follows:
Air quality standards
Table 13: Emission standard from a new biomass fired power plant in all sizes55
Pollutants Legal limit
Sulfur dioxide (SOx) < 60 ppm
Oxides of Nitrogen (NOx) < 200 ppm
Particulate matter < 120 mg/Nm3
Noise standards
Table 14: Ambient noise standard56

Noise Legal limit
Sound level from fluctuating noise < 115 dB(A)
A-weighted equivalent continuous sound level from steady noise < 70 dB(A)
Additionally, an environmental management system will be implemented in the several ways:-
(1) Air pollution control
Biomass residues will be transported from suppliers to power plant by covered conveyer or
truck;
Trees will be planted within the project boundary to avoid spreading of air-borne
particulates; and
Uncontrolled spreading of particles is avoided at the plant as an electrostatic precipitator is
used in the Project to clean the exhaust gas. The electrostatic precipitator is a known
technology with high precipitator efficiency.
(2) Water resources management
54
As per information from MONRE, a power plant under 10 MWe capacity is not required to carry out an EIA
(http://www.onep.go.th/eia/)
55
Information is sourced from the Notification of the Ministry of Industry B.E.2487 (2004), issued under Factory Act B.E.2535
(1992), dated September 28, B.E.2487 (2004). It was published in the Royal Government Gazette, Vol.121, Part 113D, dated
October 7, B.E.2487 (2004).
56
Information is sourced from Pollution Control Department of Ministry of Natural Resources and Environment, Thailand
(http://www.pcd.go.th/info_serv/en_reg_std_airsnd04.html).
43
Water demand for power plant will be sourced from own reservoir. All the wastewater
generated from the power plant is planned to be recycled back for further utilization and it is
expected that the Project will not disturb the community’s water supply.
(3) Waste management
Ashes from biomass residue combustion may be used as fertilizer or soil conditioner in
agricultural area. The Project plans to give away ash to the local community for free of
charge upon demand;
Miscellaneous waste materials will be managed according to the regulations.
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:
>>
The Project does not have any significant environmental impacts.
SECTION E. Stakeholders’ comments

>>
E.1. Brief description how comments by local stakeholders have been invited and compiled:
>>
Since the early stage of project development, the project owner has conducted regular consultations with
the local community to explain the project activity and address any concerns that local stakeholders
might have. Following is a brief summary of some official community consultation programs:
Place and date of the meeting

Two main meetings have been conducted:
• February 19th, 2009 at SML Pavilion at Village No. 6 Sakoo Sub-District, Suvarnabhumi District
(1st meeting)
• February 20th, 2009 at Sawang Poh Thong Temple Pavilion at Village No. 4 Sakoo Sub-District,
Suvarnabhumi District (2nd meeting)
Invitation method
Invitees were identified as to include a broad range of stakeholders, including local residents,
government officials, among others. Local residents living in or around the project site have, to a certain
extent, an existing relationship with Srisangdaw or its affiliated rice mills. Many residents are paddy
farmers and thus often cooperate with these mills for the milling of their paddy. The invitations for these
people were conducted through advertisements that were posted in public and commonly visited
governmental offices. The intention was to ensure that the invitations were extended to a broad range of
stakeholders (age, sex etc.). Local policy makers and representatives of the local authorities e.g. staff
from district and sub-district offices were also invited by mail. An invitation was made around 1 month
prior to the date of the meetings.
Meeting participants
44
The meetings assembled representatives from the project developer, the IEE consultant, local
stakeholders as well as the local press. An invitation together the public information announcement was
made almost 1 month prior the meeting date.
In total, 71 and 31 people attended 1st and 2nd meetings respectively. The original lists of participants are
provided in figures below.
Figure 7: Original participants list of 1st meeting
Figure 8: Original participants list of 2nd meeting
45
Meeting process
During the meeting, detailed information regarding the Project and its influence to the local community
and environment were presented to the stakeholders. The event provided a forum for all stakeholders to
ask questions about the impact of the Project, and to share opinions. The socio-economic and
environmental impacts of the Project were discussed and questions from the people’s representatives
were received.
E.2. Summary of the comments received:

>>
After the presentation, participants were afforded opportunities to ask questions regarding the Project.
The overall response was encouraging and showed positive views of the Project on the local environment
and socio-economic conditions. The stakeholders appreciated that the Project contributes to the transfer
of modern technology, and that it will overall result in an improvement in environmental protection. In
all, no adverse reactions, comments, or clarifications were received during the public participation
meeting. An official letter from the district office, dated March 24th 200957, has been submitted to the
Provincial Industrial Office to confirm the same.
E.3. Report on how due account was taken of any comments received:
>>
No negative comments were received. The stakeholders did not recognise the need to make changes to
the project design and monitoring plan.
57
The letter has been submitted to the DOE during the validation.
46
Annex 1
CONTACT INFORMATION ON PARTICIPANTS IN THE PROJECT ACTIVITY
Organization: Srisangdaw Biopower Co., Ltd.

Street/P.O.Box: 126 Moo 6
Building:
City: Sakoo Sub-District, Suvarnabhumi District
State/Region: Roi-Et Province
Postfix/ZIP: 45130
Country: Thailand
Telephone: +66-43-581-280
FAX: +66-43-532-274
E-Mail: ssd101@hotmail.co.th
URL: -
Represented by:
Title: Managing Director
Salutation: Mr.
Last Name: Panom
Middle Name: -
First Name: Srisangpang
Department:
Mobile: +66-89-899-8929
Direct FAX: +66-43-532-274
Direct tel: +66-43-581-280
Personal E-Mail: -
Organization: Carbon Partners Asiatica (Hong Kong) Co., Ltd.

Street/P.O.Box:
Building: Suite 1402 World Commerce Centre
City: 11 Canton Road, Tsim Sha Tsui
State/Region: Kowloon
Postfix/ZIP:
Country: Hong Kong
Telephone: +852-3101-0131
FAX:
E-Mail: kyoko.tochikawa@cp-asiatica.com
URL: www.cp-asiatica.com
Represented by:
Title: Managing Director
Salutation: Ms.
Last Name: Tochikawa
Middle Name:
First Name: Kyoko
Department:
47
Mobile:
Direct FAX:
Direct tel: +852-3101-0131
Personal E-Mail: kyoko.tochikawa@cp-asiatica.com
48
Annex 2
INFORMATION REGARDING PUBLIC FUNDING
The Project will not receive any public funding.
-----
49
Annex 3
BASELINE INFORMATION
Calculation of the baseline emission factor (EFgrid,CM,y)
The CO2 emissions factor for the grid system is sourced from “The study of emission factor for an
electricity system in Thailand 2009”58 (hereinafter referred to as the “Study”), published by Thailand
Greenhouse Gas Management Organization (TGO) on 29 June 2011. TGO is a public organization under
the Ministry of Natural Resources and Environment (MNRE) and is being the Designated National
Authority for CDM (DNA-CDM) in Thailand. According to this documentation, this grid emission factor
was determined based on the data given in the “Electricity Report 2007 – 2009” and along with the
procedure stipulated in latest methodological tool “Tool to calculate the emission factor for an electricity
system (version 02.2.1)” (hereinafter referred to as the “EF Tool”)
This methodological EF Tool determines the CO2 emission factor for the displacement of electricity
generated by power plants in an electricity system, by calculating the operating margin (OM), the build
margin (BM) as well as the combined margin (CM), as follows:
Step 1: Identify the relevant electricity systems
Consistent with the requirements stipulated in the EF Tool, the delineations of the project electricity
system and connected electricity systems that were published by the host country DNA, TGO, are
applied. Following the Thai DNA delineation, the relevant electric power system of the project activity is
Thailand’s national grid. It is because the electricity transmission system of Thailand is considered as a
single system since the transmission lines are networked throughout the country and owned by the
Electricity Generating Authority of Thailand (EGAT). EGAT is the authority that controls electricity
generation and distribution in Thailand, whereas the Metropolitan Electricity Authority (MEA) and the
Provincial Electricity Authority (PEA) are the authorities that supply the electricity to the users in
Bangkok and provinces, respectively.
The quantity of electricity generated and delivered to the national grid can be obtained from the
"Electricity Report 2007 – 2009” published by EGAT. Data are categorized by electricity generation
system, type of power plant and quantity of electricity generated by LC/MR and Non LC/MR power
plants. Type of power plant includes the power plant of the EGAT, Independent Power Producers (IPPs),
Small Power Producers (SPPs) and imported electricity from neighbouring countries.
Step 2: Choose whether to include off-grid power plants in the project electricity system (optional)
Project participant chosen Option I as provided in Step 2 of the EF Tool, where, only grid power plants
are included in the calculation. It is because in Thailand the generated electricity that is transferred to the
national grid is the only available data. Thus, it is impossible to obtain off-grid electricity generation data.
Step 3: Select a method to determine the operating margin (OM)
58
Data source: http://www.tgo.or.th/download/publication/GEFReport_EN.pdf.
50
The EF Tool offers four methods for the calculation of operating margin emission factor (EFgrid,OM,y),
which include:
(a) Simple OM;
(b) Simple adjusted OM;
(c) Dispatch data analysis OM; or
(d) Average OM.
Out of the four methods, the simple OM method (Option a) is used, as low-cost/must-run (LC/MR)
resources of the national grid was determined to be 6.49% of the total grid generation in average of the
five most recent years, which constitute less than threshold limit of 50%, as shown in Table A1 below.
Table A1: National grid generation in Thailand from 2005 to 2009

Grid Generation (GWh)
Generation System Percentage
EGAT IPP SPP Total
(2009)
Total 66,488.10 64,840.72 13,971.37 145,300.19 -
- Non LC/MR 59,541.66 64,840.72 11,811.42 136,193.80 -
59
- LC/MR 6,946.44 0.00 2,159.95 9,106.39 6.27%
(2008)
Total 63,719.02 67,420.14 14,092.83 145,232.00 -
- Non LC/MR 56,791.19 67,420.14 11,904.81 136,116.14 -
- LC/MR 6,927.83 0.00 2,188.03 9,115.86 6.28%
(2007)
Total 67,704.95 62,233.44 14,426.00 144,364.39 -
- Non LC/MR 59,765.33 62,233.44 11,982.99 133,981.76 -
- LC/MR 7,939.62 0.00 2,443.02 10,382.64 7.19%
(2006)
Total 70,409.11 55,360.65 13,652.19 139,421.94 -
- Non LC/MR 62,480.23 55,360.65 11,619.95 129,460.82 -
- LC/MR 7,928.88 0.00 2,032.23 9,961.12 7.14%
(2005)
Total 66,650.81 51,989.60 13,571.59 132,212.00 -
- Non LC/MR 60,999.89 51,989.60 11,814.22 124,830.70 -
- LC/MR 5,650.93 0.00 1,730.37 7,381.30 5.58%
Average 5 year of LC/MR 6.49%
Between the Ex-ante and Ex-post options of the data vintages, the Ex-ante option of a 3-year generation –
weighted average is chosen for the project activity. The simple OM emission factor is calculated based
on the most recent data available at the time of submission of the CDM-PDD to the DOE for validation,
without requirement to monitor and recalculate the emission factor during the crediting period.
59
LC/MR power plants include hydropower and renewable energy (including biomass, solar and geothermal power).
51
Step 4: Calculate the operating margin emission factor according to the selected method
The simple OM emission factor is calculated as the generation-weighted average CO2 emissions per unit
net electricity generation (tCO2/MWh) of all generating power plants serving the system, not including
LC/MR power plants/units. Option B, which is based on the total net electricity generation of all power
plants serving the system and the fuel types and total fuel consumption of the project electricity system,
provided in Step 4 of the EF Tool was chosen with the following reasons:
(a) The necessary data for Option A is not available (Net electricity generation and a CO2 emission
factor of each power plant unit);
(b) Only nuclear and renewable power generation are considered as LC/MR power sources and
quantity of electricity supplied to the grid by these sources is known; and
(c) Off-grid power plants are not included in the calculation, as per reason provided in Step 2 that
off-grid data in Thailand is not available.
Therefore, the simple OM emission factor (EFgrid,OMsimple,y) is calculated based on the net electricity
supplied to the grid by all power plants serving the system, excluding LC/MR power plants/units and
including electricity imports, and based on the fuel type(s) and total fuel consumption of the project
electricity system, as follow:
Where:
EFgrid,OMsimple,y = Simple operating margin CO2 emission factor in year y (tCO2/MWh)
FCi,y = Amount of fossil fuel type i consumed in the project electricity system in year y
(mass or volume unit)
NCVi,y = Net calorific value (energy content) of fossil fuel type i in year y (GJ/mass or
volume unit)
EFCO2,i,y = CO2 emission factor of fossil fuel type i in year y (tCO2/GJ)
EGy = Net electricity generated and delivered to the grid by all power sources serving
the system, not including LC/MR power plants/units, in year y (MWh)
i = All fossil fuel types combusted in power sources in the project electricity system
in year y
y = The relevant year as per the data vintage chosen in Step 3
The values of CO2 emission from combustion of fossil fuel (per unit of fossil fuel) are shown in Table
A2. Net Calorific Value (NCV) is obtained from data provided by the Department of Alternative Energy
Department and Efficiency (DEDE), Ministry of Energy. The CO2 Emission Factor of fossil fuel follows
IPCC default values as specified in the “2006 IPCC Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas
Inventories”.
Table A2: Net Calorific Values (NCVi,y) and CO2 emission per unit of each type of fossil fuel (EFCO2,i,y)
Net Calorific
Fuel type60 Unit CO2 Emission Factor62 CO2 Emission
Value61
60
See Table A3: Comparison of the name of fuel type sourced from different report
52
(MJ/Unit) (tCO2/TJ) (kgCO2/Unit)

Natural Gas scf. 1.02 54.30 0.055
Lignite ton 10,470.00 90.90 951.723
Bituminous ton 26,370.00 89.50 2,360.115
Bunker liter 39.77 75.50 3.003
Diesel liter 36.42 72.60 2.644
Table A3: Comparison of the name of fuel type sourced from different reports
The Study63 DEDE64 (Thailand) IPCC65
Natural Gas Natural Gas (Dry) Natural Gas
Lignite Lignite (Mae Moh) Lignite
Bituminous Coal Import Other Bituminous Coal
Bunker Fuel Oil Residual Fuel Oil
Diesel Diesel Diesel Oil
The quantity of electricity generated and delivered to the national grid can be obtained from the
“Electricity Report 2007 – 2009”, as shown in Table A4. Data are categorized by electricity generation
system, type of power plant and quantity of electricity generated by non LC/MR power plants. Type of
power plant includes the power plant of the EGAT, IPPs and SPPs. Quantity and type of fossil fuel
consumed in electricity generation are also obtained from the “Electricity Report 2007 – 2009”, as
shown in Table A5.
Table A4: Quantity of electricity generated and delivered to the national grid66 (excluding LC/MR power
plants/units), EGy
Electricity Generated and Delivered to the Grid (EGy, GWh)
Generation System
EGAT IPP SPP Total
(2009)
Total non LC/MR 59,541.66 64,840.72 11,811.42 136,193.80
Thermal 23,463.69 12,388.03 2,225.63 38,077.35
Combined-Cycle 33,164.46 52,452.69 8,752.19 94,369.35
Gas Turbine 309.63 - 833.60 1,143.23
Diesel Engine 1.44 - - 1.44
61
Electric Power in Thailand 2008/Department of Alternative Energy Development and Efficiency, Ministry of
Energy
62
IPCC default values at the lower limit as provided in Table 1.4 of Chapter 1 of Vol. 2 (Energy) of the 2006 IPCC
Guideline for National Greenhouse Gas Inventories
63
The Study of emission factor for an electricity system in Thailand 2009
64
Electric Power in Thailand 2008/ Department of Alternative Energy and Efficiency, Ministry of Energy
65
2006 IPCC Guideline for National Greenhouse Gas Inventories
66
Electricity report 2007 – 2009/ Electricity Generating Authority of Thailand (EGAT)
53
Electricity Import 2,602.43 - - 2,602.43

(2008)
Total non LC/MR 56,791.19 67,420.14 11,904.81 136,116.14
Thermal 26,778.89 14,398.34 1,996.83 43,174.06
Combined-Cycle 26,449.20 53,021.80 9,029.90 88,500.90
Gas Turbine 659.33 - 878.07 1,537.41
(2007)
Total non LC/MR 59,765.33 62,233.44 11,982.99 133,981.76
Thermal 30,265.00 17,453.59 2,168.76 49,887.35
Combined-Cycle 24,124.09 44,779.85 8,935.60 77,839.54
Gas Turbine 884.20 - 878.63 1,762.83
Table A5: Amount of fossil fuel consumed by power plants67 (excluding LC/MR power plants/units), FCi,y
Fuel Consumption
Fuel Type Unit
EGAT IPP SPP Total
(2009)
Natural Gas scf. 369,146,214,392 459,228,417,361 140,550,086,056 968,924,717,809
Lignite ton 15,818,265 - - 15,818,265
Bituminous ton - 3,645,721 1,840,527 5,486,248
Bunker liter 111,039,065 38,180,874 8,797,506 158,017,445
Diesel liter 12,140,891 - 1,685,046 13,825,937
(2008)
Natural Gas scf. 340,739,529,461 490,866,999,785 145,410,364,035 977,016,893,281
Lignite ton 16,407,465 - - 16,407,465
Bituminous ton - 3,711,791 1,866,776 5,578,567
Bunker liter 247,441,682 93,212,260 9,555,452 350,209,394
Diesel liter 6,792,039 43,698,832 1,451,087 51,941,958
(2007)
Natural Gas scf. 342,335,310,261 454,590,745,280 145,512,075,117 942,438,130,658
Lignite ton 16,060,766 - - 16,060,766
Bituminous ton - 3,692,979 1,889,868 5,582,847
Bunker liter 785,979,152 144,198,973 6,042,880 936,221,005
Diesel liter 7,381,996 2,688,851 1,266,337 11,337,184
67
Electricity report 2007 – 2009/ Electricity Generating Authority of Thailand (EGAT)
54
Table A6 summarizes the calculated CO2 emissions from electricity generation in the years 2007 – 2009
categorized by fuel types. The total emissions during the 3-year period were 249,762,588 tCO2. The
results in Table A6 show that the 3-year weighted average simple OM emission factor is 0.6147
tCO2/MWh.
Table A6: Determination of the simple OM emission factor, EFgrid,OMsimple,y

Fuel Consumption CO2 Electricity
NCV of
(FCi,y) Emission Generated
fossil CO2 OM Emission
Factor of and
Fuel type fuels, Emissions Factor
Fossil Fuel, Delivered to
Unit Volume/mass NCVi,y (tCO2) (tCO2/MWh)
EFCO2i,y Grid, EGy
(MJ/Unit)
(tCO2/TJ) (MWh)
(2009)
Total 136,193,800 82,178,673
Natural Gas scf. 968,924,717,809 1.02 54.3 53,664,864
Lignite ton 15,818,265 10,470 90.9 15,054,607
0.6034
Bituminous ton 5,486,248 26,370 89.5 136,193,800 12,948,176
Bunker liter 158,017,445 39.8 75.5 474,469
Diesel liter 13,825,937 36.4 72.6 36,557
(2008)
Total 136,116,140 84,083,369
Natural Gas scf. 977,016,893,281 1.02 54.3 54,113,058
Lignite ton 16,407,465 10,470 90.9 15,615,362
0.6177
Bituminous ton 5,578,567 26,370 89.5 136,116,140 13,166,060
Bunker liter 350,209,394 39.8 75.5 1,051,551
Diesel liter 51,941,958 36.4 72.6 137,339
(2007)
Total 133,981,760 83,500,546
Natural Gas scf. 942,438,130,658 1.02 54.3 52,197,878
Lignite ton 16,060,766 10,470 90.9 15,285,400
0.6232
Bituminous ton 5,582,847 26,370 89.5 133,981,760 13,176,161
Bunker liter 936,221,005 39.8 75.5 2,811,130
Diesel liter 11,337,184 36.4 72.6 29,977
Average simple OM Emission Factor, EFgrid,OMsimple,y, during 2007 - 2009 0.6147
Step 5: Calculate the build margin (BM) emission factor
The build margin is calculated as the generation-weighted average emission factor of a sample group of
power plants. The sample group of power units m used to calculate the build margin consists of either:
• The set of five power units that have been built most recently; or
• The set of power capacity additions in the electricity system that comprise 20% of the system
generation (in MWh) and that have been built most recently.
55
From these two options, the sample group that comprises the larger annual generation is to be chosen. In
the case of the Thailand’s national grid, the annual electricity generation estimated under Option (a)
equals to 28,305,630 MWh, whereas that under Option (b) equals to 38,323,760MWh, which is
equivalent to 26.38% of the total national grid generation in 2009 (145,300,180 MWh). Therefore,
Option (b) is chosen.
Table A7: Annual electricity generation of the set of five power units in Option (a)
Grid Generation
Power Unit Commissioning Date
(MWh)68
1. Bangpakong Power Plant (Unit 05) 16-Sep-09 1,918,110
2. South Bangkok Power Plant (Unit 03) 1-Mar-09 4,745,320
3. Chana Power Plant (Unit 01) 15-Jul-08 4,150,260
4. Ratchaburi Power Company Limited (RPCL) (Unit 1&2) 1-Jul-08 8,153,260
5. Gulf Power Generation Co., Ltd. (Unit 1&2) 1-Mar-08 9,338,680
Total annual electricity generation from five most
- 28,305,630
recently built power plants
Table A8: Annual electricity generation of the set of power units in Option (b)
Grid Accumulated % as of
Commissioning Accumulated
Power Unit Generation total grid generation
Date 69 MWh
(MWh) in 2009
1. Bangpakong Power Plant
16-Sep-09 1,918,110 1,918,110 1.32%
(Unit 05)
2. South Bangkok Power Plant
1-Mar-09 4,745,320 6,663,430 4.59%
(Unit 03)
3. Chana Power Plant (Unit 01) 15-Jul-08 4,150,260 10,813,690 7.44%
4. Ratchaburi Power Company
1-Jul-08 8,153,260 18,966,950 13.05%
Limited (RPCL) (Unit 1&2)
5. Gulf Power Generation Co.,
1-Mar-08 9,338,680 28,305,630 19.48%
Ltd. (Unit 1&2)
6. BLCP Power Co., Ltd. (Unit
1-Feb-07 10,018,130 38,323,760 26.38%70
1&2)
Between the Ex-ante and Ex-post options of the data vintages, the Ex-ante option is chosen for the
project activity. For the first crediting period, the BM emission factor is calculated ex-ante based on the
most recent information available on units already built for sample group m at the time of CDM-PDD
submission to the DOE for validation. For the second crediting period, the BM emission factor should be
updated based on the most recent information available on units already built at the time of submission of
the request for renewal of the crediting period to the DOE. For the third crediting period, the BM
emission factor calculated for the second crediting period should be used. This option does not require
monitoring the emission factor during the crediting period.
68
Electricity Report 2009/Electricity Generating Authority of Thailand
69
Electricity Report 2009/ Electricity Generating Authority of Thailand
70
As per footnote 7 of the EF Tool, “if 20% on part capacity of a unit, that unit is fully included in the calculation”,
therefore, electricity generation from BLCP Co., Ltd (Unit 1&2) was included in the calculation.
56
The build margin emission factor is the generation-weighted average emission factor (tCO2/MWh) of all
power units m during the most recent year y for which power generation data is available. As represented
in above, the six power plants listed in Table A8 comprise 26.38% of total national grid generation
system in 2009, which has the larger generation than the group of power plants listed in Table A7.
Therefore, the group of power plants in Option (b) of Step 5 is chosen and used for build margin
emission factor calculation.
The same calculation method for the operating emission factor in Option A1 of Step 4 as provided in the
EF Tool is applied as follows:
Where:
EFgrid,BM,y = Build margin CO2 emission factor in year y (tCO2/MWh)
FCi,m,y = Amount of fossil fuel type i consumed by power plant/unit m in year y (mass or
volume unit)
NCVi,y = Net calorific value (energy content) of fossil fuel type i in year y (GJ/mass or
volume unit)
EFCO2,i,y = CO2 emission factor of fossil fuel type i in year y (tCO2/GJ)
EGm,y = Net electricity generated and delivered to the grid by power plant/unit m serving
the system, not including LC/MR power plants/units, in year y (MWh)
i = All fossil fuel types combusted in power unit m in year y
y = The relevant year as per the data vintage chosen in Step 5
Table A9: Build margin emission factor (EFgrid,BM,y) in 2009

Fuel Consumption,71 CO2 Emission Electricity
NCV of
FCi,m,y Factor of Generated and CO2
fossil fuels,
Fuel type Fossil Fuel, Delivered to Emissions
Volume/ NCVi,y
Unit EFCO2i,y Grid, EGm,y (tCO2)
mass (MJ/Unit)
(tCO2/TJ) (MWh)
Natural Gas scf. 223,467,679,056 1.02 54.3 12,376,981
Bituminous ton 3,645,721 26,370 89.5 38,323,760 8,604,321
Diesel liter 3,929,038 36.4 72.6 10,389
Total 38,323,760 20,991,690
BM Emission Factor, EFgrid,BM,y (tCO2/MWh) 0.5477
Based on the above calculation, the resultant build margin (BM) emission factor is 0.5477 tCO2/MWh.
Step 6: Calculate the combined margin emission factor
The combined margin emission factor (EFgrid,CM,y) is calculated as follows:
71
Fuel consumptions of the most recently built power plants as listed in Table 8 are sourced from Electricity Report
2009/ Electricity Generating Authority of Thailand.
57
Where:
EFgrid,OM,y = Operating margin CO2 emission factor in year y (tCO2/MWh)
EFgrid,BM,y = Build margin CO2 emission factor in year y (tCO2/MWh)
WOM = Weighting of operating margin emission factor (%)
WBM = Weighting of build margin emission factor (%)
Since the project activity is regarded as ‘other project’, the weighting of OM and BM emissions factor
have been given as 0.5 and 0.5 respectively for the first crediting period and for subsequent crediting
periods. Table A10 demonstrates that the resultant combined margin (CM) CO2 emission factor of
Thailand’s national grid is 0.5812 tCO2/MWh.
Table A10: Baseline emission factor of Thailand’s national grid in 2009

Parameters Other project
OM emission factor, EFgrid,OM,y (tCO2/MWh) 0.6147
Weighting of OM, WOM (tCO2/MWh) 0.5
BM emission factor, EFgrid,BM,y (tCO2/MWh) 0.5477
Weighting of BM, WBM (tCO2/MWh) 0.5
CM emission factor, EFgrid,CM,y (tCO2/MWh) 0.5812
58
Annex 4
MONITORING INFORMATION
No additional information.
-----
59

Srisangdaw PDD (Revision 1 4) - Clean

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Srisangdaw PDD (Revision 1 4) - Clean

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:

Document version: 1.4

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

Contribution of the project activity to sustainable development

CDM – Executive Board

2. Social and economic development

3. Conformation to the government policy and strategy of Thailand

A.3. Project participants:

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

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

CDM – Executive Board

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

A.4.1.3. City/Town/Community etc:

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

Figure 1: Maps showing location of the Project

CDM – Executive Board

Figure 2: Satellite picture showing the location of the project activity

Type I Renewable energy projects

Scenario existing prior to the project implementation (baseline scenario)

Technology to be employed by the project activity

CDM – Executive Board

Table 1: Technical specifications of the major equipments

CDM – Executive Board

Table 2: Ex-ante estimation of emission reductions

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

• By the same project participants;

SECTION B. Application of a baseline and monitoring methodology

CDM – Executive Board

1. AMS-I.F. Renewable electricity generation for captive use and mini-grid

For more information on this methodology, please refer to the link:

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

Table 3: Applicability conditions of AMS-I.F

CDM – Executive Board

B.3. Description of the project boundary:

CDM – Executive Board

The pictorial representation of project boundary is given in figure below.

Figure 3: The project boundary

Gases and Sources

B.4. Description of baseline and its development:

Baseline scenario as per baseline methodology

CDM – Executive Board

Table 4: Emission factor of the national grid

BE y = (EG grid , y + EG SMLP , y − E imported , y ) * EFCO 2, y Equation 2

CDM – Executive Board

B.5.1. Investment barrier

B.5.1.1 Establishing Cost of Equity

CDM – Executive Board

CDM – Executive Board

power plant projects