(CDM-PDD) Version 03

Transkript

PROJECT DESIGN DOCUMENT FORM (CDM PDD) - Version 03
CDM – Executive Board
page 1
0CLEAN DEVELOPMENT MECHANISM
PROJECT DESIGN DOCUMENT FORM (CDM-PDD)
Version 03 - in effect as of: 28 July 2006
CONTENTS
A.
General description of project activity
B.
Application of a baseline and monitoring methodology
C.
Duration of the project activity / crediting period
D.
Environmental impacts
E.
Stakeholders’ comments
Annexes
Annex 1: Contact information on participants in the project activity
Annex 2: Information regarding public funding
Annex 3: Baseline information
Annex 4: Monitoring plan
page 2
SECTION A. General description of project activity
A.1.
Title of the project activity:
>>
Project Title: Sayalar Wind Farm Capacity Addition Project, Turkey
PDD version: 1.0
Date: 13.10.2011
A.2.
Description of the project activity:
>>
Summary:
The Sayalar Wind Farm is located in Agean Region, Manisa – Akhisar Province, Sayalar District in
Turkey and is currently operational with an installed capacity of 34.2 MW (Hereafter referred as existing
power plant. The existing power plant consists of 38 turbines with a capacity of 900 kW each. The
existing 34.2 MW capacity of Sayalar Wind Farm has been registered as a Gold Standard VER project on
01/11/2007 under the registration number GS369 by “Doğal Enerji Elektrik Üretim A.Ş.”1.
The Project Participant is planning to increase the existing 34.2 MW capacity to 54.2 MW installed
capacity with a 20MW capacity addition (hereafter referred as the proposed project activity) to the
existing power plant2. The proposed project activity is developed by “Doğal Enerji Elektrik Üretim A.Ş.”
(Hereafter referred as the project participant) and involves the installation of 10 wind turbines. The
electricity generation from the capacity addition is estimated to reach approximately 55 GWh/year3 and
will be delivered to the national grid via Akhisar Transformer Station.
The project activity aims to reduce GHGs by replacing electricity generation from the Turkish national
grid system with electricity generation from wind energy, which has zero emissions. In accordance with
the applicable methodology ACM0002 “Consolidated baseline methodology for grid connected
electricity generation from renewable sources” v.12.1.0, the baseline emissions include only CO2
emissions from electricity generation in fossil fuel fired power plants that are displaced due to the project
activity. The methodology assumes that all project electricity generation above baseline levels would
have been generated by existing grid-connected power plants.
The annual emission reductions, which will result from the capacity addition, are estimated as 34,477
tCO2eq/year.
Contribution to Sustainable Development:
Renewable wind energy is an energy source that offers various environmental benefits. It does not result
in emissions of pollutants into the atmosphere, nor does it emit residuals that can have an impact on soil
1
Reference: The Gold Standard Foundation Official Webpage, Public Reports, VER Projects /
https://gs1.apx.com/myModule/rpt/myrpt.asp?r=111
2
Reference: Generation License available to the DOE.
3
Reference: Technical Feasibility (micrositing) available to the DOE
page 3
and water. The net result is a reduction of fossil fuel consumption that would occur in power stations
connected to the national grid so as to produce an equivalent amount of energy. At the same time, wind
energy is a renewable source. So it does not endanger the supply of energy for future generations.
The project contributes significantly to the region’s sustainable development in the following ways:
• Wind energy is a renewable energy source. Unlike fossil fuels, it does not reduce the availability
of energy for future generations.
• Reduction of greenhouse gas emissions and other pollutants in Turkey by replacing electricity
otherwise generated by the Turkey’s national grid, which has a large share of fossil fuel power
generation4.
• The project also reduces other emissions than GHG such as emissions of sulfur dioxide, nitrogen
oxides, and particulates. In turn it contributes to local improvement of air quality.
• The project will enable the use of renewable energy in Turkey and attract foreign and private
investment into the Turkey’s power sector.
• The project strengthens the involvement of Turkey in renewable energies and low carbon power
production through the use of market mechanisms.
• Creation of local employment both during the construction and operational phase. Based on 2010
figures, the unemployment rate is above 11% in Turkey5.
• Technology and know-how transfer.
• Power supply improvement to the national grid both for domestic and commercial consumers.
• Diversification of electricity generation technologies in Turkey, which is currently dominated by
natural gas fired power plants.
Additionally, no major negative impacts are expected as confirmed by the Local Stakeholders
Consultation Meeting.
A.3.
Project participants:
>>
Name of Party involved (*)
(host indicates a Host Party)
Turkey (host)
Private and/or public
entity(ies) project participants
(*) (as a applicable)
Doğal Enerji Elektrik Üretim
A.Ş.
Kindly indicate if the Party
involved wishes to be
considered as project
participant (Yes/No)
No
Doğal Enerji Elektrik Üretim A.Ş. is a special purpose company established jointly by Demirer Enerji
Üretim Sanayi ve Ticaret A.Ş.6 and Polat Enerji Sanayi ve Ticaret A.Ş7.
4
80% of the total electricity generation of Turkey is from thermal power plants. Reference: TEIAS (Turkish
Electricity Transmission Co) official webpage, 2009 statistics / http://www.teias.gov.tr/istatistik2009/32(75-09).xls
5
Reference: TUĐK (Turkish Stastical Institute) 2010 Statistical Yearbook Section 11 p193
http://www.teias.gov.tr/istatistik2009/32(75-09).xls
6
Reference: www.demirer.com.tr
7
Reference: http://www.polatenerji.com/polat.php
page 4
OakDanışmanlık is the carbon consultant for this project8.
Full contact information for the project participants are provided in Annex 1.
A.4.
Technical description of the project activity:
A.4.1. Location of the project activity:
A.4.1.1.
>>
Republic of Turkey
A.4.1.2.
Host Party(ies):
Region/State/Province etc.:
>>
Aegean Region, Manisa Province
A.4.1.3.
City/Town/Community etc.:
>>
The proposed project is located in Manisa – Akhisar Province Sayalar District. The closest residential
area is the Deremahallesi Village.
8
OakDanışmanlık is not a project participant
page 5
A.4.1.4.
Details of physical location, including information allowing the
unique identification of this project activity (maximum one page):
>>
Figure 1: The geographic location of the proposed project activity
The coordinates of the centre point of the proposed project activity is 39°11'52.45" N; 27°57'45.55"E.
The coordinates of the turbines are available to the DOE.
page 6
A.4.2. Category(ies) of project activity:
>>
Table 1. Categories of the project activity
Applicable rules and Category
definitions
UNFCCC
Sectoral scope 1, Energy
Industries
(renewable/nonrenewable sources)9.
Gold Standard
Large scale Renewable Energy
Supply10.
Justification
The proposed project activity involves grid
connected electricity generation from
renewable sources.
The project exceeds the small scale project
threshold of 15 MW installed capacity and
involves generation and delivery of energy
services from non-fossil and nondeplatable energy sources.
A.4.3. Technology to be employed by the project activity:
>>
The proposed project activity involves the installation of 10 units of additional wind turbines with a total
installed capacity of 20 MW. The project activity is expected to generate approximately 55 GWh/year of
net electricity. The total capacity addition will be reached by installation of Enercon gearless turbines.
The key technical specifications of the turbines are as follows:
Table2. Key technical specifications of wind turbines
Parameter
Value
Rated Power
2MW
Rotor Diameter
71 - 82 m
Turbine Concept
Gearless, variable speed, single blade adjustment
Rotor Type
Upwind rotor with active pitch control
Number of blades
3
Swept Area
3959 - 5281 m2
Hub Height
78 – 85 m
Blade Material
GRP (epoxy resin); built in lightning protection
Rotational speed
Variable, 6-21 rpm
Pitch Control
Enercon single blade pitch system; one
independent pitch system per rotor blade with
allocated emergency supply
Generator
Enercon direct drive annular generator
Brake Systems
- 3 independent pitch control systems
- Rotor brake
- Rotor lock
Yaw System
Active via yaw gear, load dependent damping
Cut out wind speed
28-34m/s
9
Sectoral scopes related approved methodologies and DOEs: http://cdm.unfccc.int/DOE/scopes.html
10
Gold Standard Toolkit, Chapter 1.2, p 20:
http://www.cdmgoldstandard.org/fileadmin/editors/files/6_GS_technical_docs/GSv2/GSV2_Toolkit.pdf
page 7
A.4.4. Estimated amount of emission reductions over the chosen crediting period:
>>
Years
2012
2013
2014
2015
2016
2017
2018
2019
Total emission reductions (tonnes of CO2eq)
Total number of crediting years
Annual average over the crediting period of
estimated reductions (tonnes of CO2-eq)
Annual estimation of emission
reductions in tonnes of tCO2-eq
14,36511
34,477
34,477
34,477
34,477
34,477
34,477
20,11112
241,338
7
34,477
A.4.5. Public funding of the project activity:
>>
No public funding from the Annex I countries is provided to the proposed project.
11
It is estimated that the crediting period will start on 01.08.2012
12
It is estimated that the first crediting period will end on 01.08.2019
page 8
SECTION B. Application of a baseline and monitoring methodology
B.1.
Title and reference of the approved baseline and monitoring methodology applied to the
project activity:
>>
Applied approved baseline and monitoring methodologies:
• Approved consolidated baseline methodology ACM0002 “Consolidated baseline methodology
for grid-connected electricity generation from renewable sources”, version 12.1.0
Used tools:
• “Tool for the demonstration and assessment of additionality”, version 5.2.1
• “Tool to calculate the emission factor for an electricity system”, version 2.2.0
For more information regarding the methodology please refer to
http://cdm.unfccc.int/methodologies/PAmethodologies/approved.html
B.2.
Justification of the choice of the methodology and why it is applicable to the project
activity:
>>
The project activity involves capacity addition by installation of new wind turbines additional to the
existing power plant and units. The existing power plant/units will continue to operate after the
implementation of the proposed project activity. The applicability of the methodology and tools have
been discussed below.
Applicability of ACM0002 version 12.1.0
The methodology ACM0002 “Consolidated baseline methodology for grid-connected electricity
generation from renewable sources” is applicable to grid-connected renewable power generation project
activities that a) install a new power plant at a site where no renewable power plant was operated prior to
the implementation of the project activity (greenfield); b) involve a capacity addition c) involve a retrofit
of (an) existing plant(s); or d) involve a replacement of (an) existing plant(s).
Since the proposed project activity involves grid connected renewable power generation that involve a
capacity addition, ACM0002 “Consolidated baseline methodology for grid-connected electricity
generation from renewable sources” version 12.1.0 is applicable. The applicability criteria and conditions
are discussed in more detail as follows:
Ref.
A)
Applicability Criteria
The project activity is the installation,
capacity addition, retrofit or replacement of
power plant/unit of one of the following
types: hydro power plant/unit (either with a
run-of-river reservoir or an accumulation
reservoir), wind power plant/unit,
geothermal power plant/unit, solar power
plant/unit, wave power plant/unit or tidal
Justification
The project activity involves capacity addition of
an existing power plant by installation of new
wind power units. The existing power plant is
currently in operation with 34.2 MW and the
capacity will reach approximately 54.2 MW with
an addition of 10 new wind turbine units.
page 9
B)
C)
D)
power plant/unit;
In case of capacity additions, retrofits or
replacements (except for wind, solar wave
and tidal power capacity addition projects
which use Option 2 to calculate the
parameter EGPJ,y): the existing plant started
commercial operation prior to the start of
minimum historical reference period of five
years, used for the calculation of baseline
emissions and defined in the baseline
section, and no capacity expansion or
retrofit of the plant has been undertaken
between the start of this minimum
historical reference period and the
implementation of the project activity.
In case of hydro power plants, one of the
following conditions apply:
- The project activity is implemented
in an existing reservoir, with no
change in the volume of reservoir;
or
- The project activity is implemented
in an existing reservoir, where the
volume of reservoir is increased
and the power density of the
project activity, as per definitions
given in the Project Emissions
sections under the methodology, is
greater than 4W/m2; or
- The project activity result in new
reservoirs and the power density of
the power plant, as per definitions
given in the Project Emissions
sections under the methodology, is
greater than 4W/m2.
The methodology is not applicable to the
following:
- Project activities that involve
switching from fossil fuels to
renewable energy resources at the
site of project activity, since in this
case the baseline may be the
continued us use of fossil fuels at
the site;
- Biomass fired power plants;
- Hydro power plants that result in
new reservoirs or increase in
The proposed project activity involves wind
power capacity addition and use Option 2 for the
calculation of EGPJ,y, where EGPJ,y = EGPJ_ADD,y.
Since the proposed project is the capacity
addition to a wind power plant, this criteria is not
applicable to the proposed project activity.
The proposed project is the capacity addition to a
wind power plant and not involving switching
from fossil fuels to renewable energy resources
neither involved in biomass fired power plants.
page 10
existing reservoirs where the power
density of the power plant is less
than 4W/m2.
Based on the above arguments it could be concluded that the methodology ACM0002 “Consolidated
baseline methodology for grid-connected electricity generation from renewable sources” version 12.1.0 is
applicable to the proposed project activity.
In addition, the methodologies also refer to several tools described under section B.1 “Title and
reference of the approved baseline and monitoring methodology applied to the project activity”. The
applicability of these tools has been discussed below:
Applicability of “Tool for the demonstration and assessment of additionality” v 05.2:
The tool for demonstration and assessment of additionality provides a general framework demonstrating
and assessing additionality and is applicable to a wide range of project types. As referred in ACM0002,
the additionality tool is applicable for the proposed project activity.
Applicability of “Tool to calculate the emission factor for an electricity system” v 02.2:
This methodological tool determines the CO2 emission factor for displacement of electricity generated by
power plants in an electricity system, by calculating the “combined margin” emission factor (CM) of the
electricity system. This tool maybe applied to estimate the OM, BM and/or CM when calculating
baseline emissions for a project activity that substitutes grid electricity. As the proposed project activity
supplies electricity to the national grid, the “Tool to calculate the emission factor for an electricity
system” v 02.2 is applicable to the project activity.
B.3.
Description of the sources and gases included in the project boundary:
>>
Spatial Boundary:
As per ACM0002 version 12.1.0, the spatial extent of the proposed project boundary includes the project
power plant and all power plants connected physically to the electricity system, which the proposed
project activity is connected to13.
Emission Sources:
The greenhouse gases and emission sources included in or excluded from the project boundary are shown
in Table 2 as followed:
Table 3 Emission sources included in or excluded from the project boundary
Source
Gas
Included?
Justification/Explanation
CO2 emissions from
CO2
Yes
Main emission source
Baseline
electricity generation in
CH4
No
Minor emission source
fossil fuel fired power
N2O
No
Minor emission source
plants that are displaced
13
Reference: Turkish National Grid Line Diagram http://www.teias.gov.tr/4grupmd/atcharita.htm
page 11
Project activity
due to the project activity.
For geothermal power
plants, fugitive emissions
of CH4 and CO2 from noncondensable gases
contained in geothermal
steam.
CO2 emissions from
combustion of fossil fuels
from electricity
generation in solar
thermal power plants and
geothermal power plants
For hydro power plants,
emissions of CH4 from
the reservoir
CO2
CH4
N2O
CO2
CH4
N2O
CO2
CH4
N2O
No
No
No
No
No
No
Since the proposed project
activity involves energy
generation from wind energy,
project emissions from project
activity is assumed to be zero.
This is also in line with the
requirements of ACM0002
(version 12.1.0)
No
No
No
Figure 2: Project Boundary
Existing Power
Plant
34.2 MW
Private
Electricity
Meter
Capacity Addition
(Proposed Project
Activity)
20 MW
Private
Electricity
Meter
TEIAS
Electricity
Meter
Akhisar
Transformer
Station
Electricity
System
Project Boundary
page 12
B.4.
Description of how the baseline scenario is identified and description of the identified
baseline scenario:
>>
The proposed project activity is a capacity addition to an existing grid-connected renewable power
plant/unit. The baseline scenario in accordance with ACM0002 v12.1.0 is defined as followed:
In the absence of the proposed VER project activity, the existing facility will continue to supply
electricity to the grid at historical levels. Since the project activity is based on wind energy and Option 2
is chosen for the determination of EGPJ,y, the baseline scenario for the proposed project is the equivalent
annual net electricity generation supplied to the grid by the power units that have been added under the
project activity.
B.5.
Description of how the anthropogenic emissions of GHG by sources are reduced below
those that would have occurred in the absence of the registered CDM project activity (assessment
and demonstration of additionality):
>>
Timeline of the Project:
An overview of the implementation time line of the proposed project is presented in table 3 as followed:
Table 4 Timeline of the proposed project activity
Event
Actual / Expected
Revision of the Generation License
Actual
Board Decision on VER Project
Actual
Development
Local Stakeholders Meeting
Actual
Turbine Purchase Contract
Expected
Start of Construction
Expected
Project Commissioning
Expected
Date
08.04.2010
15.01.2010
06.06.2011
Q4 2011
Q4 2011
Q3 2012
Based on the events listed above, the project entity has been aware of the VER and the decision was
based on VER revenues taken into account. The potential carbon revenue was vital for the project owner
to go ahead with the implementation of the proposed project activity.
Approved consolidated baseline methodology ACM0002 “Consolidated baseline methodology for gridconnected electricity generation from renewable sources” version 12.1.0, requires the use of the latest
“Tool for demonstration and assessment of additionality” (v05.2.1) agreed by the CDM Executive Board
to demonstrate and assess the additionality of the proposed project.
The tool provides for a step-wise approach to demonstrate and assess additionality. These steps include:
• Identification of alternatives to the project activity;
• Investment analysis to determine that the proposed project activity is either 1) not the most
economical or financial attractive, or 2) not economically or financially feasible;
• Barrier analyses; and
• Common practice analysis.
page 13
Step 1. Identification of alternatives to the project activity consistent with current laws and
regulations
According to CDM Validation and Verification Manual14 (version 01.2), the PDD shall identify credible
alternatives to the project activity in order to determine the most realistic baseline scenario, unless the
approved methodology that is selected by the proposed CDM project activity prescribes the baseline
scenario and no further analysis is required. Alternatives to the proposed project is not needed to be
identified as the baseline scenario has been prescribed according to ACM0002 (v12.1.0) under section
B.4.
Step 2. Investment analysis
According to “Tool for the demonstration and assessment of additionality” version 5.2.1, the economical
or financial attractiveness of the proposed project should be determined without taking into consideration
the VER revenues. It should be noted that the guidance provided by the Executive Board on investment
analysis has been taken into account15. The following sub-steps are conducted in order to do the
investment analysis.
Sub-step 2a. Determination of an appropriate analysis method:
According to “Tool for the demonstration and assessment of additionality” version 5.2.1, simple cost
analysis can only be applied to projects that do not generate any other financial benefits than the VER
related incomes. Considering that the electricity produced by the proposed project will be sold to the
national grid and is expected to create revenues, the simple cost analysis is discarded.
A benchmark analysis (option III) has been chosen as the appropriate analysis method.
Sub-step 2b. Option III. Apply benchmark analysis
The following benchmark analysis applies the equity IRR as financial indicator. The Equity IRR is
considered to be a suitable and widely used financial indicator to determine the attractiveness of equity
investments.
When analysing a potential project, investors compare the equity IRR of the project against their required
rate of return.
The approach to determine the benchmark against which the equity IRR shall be evaluated is option (a)
from the “Tool for the demonstration and assessment of additionality” (Version 05.2.1):
"Government bond rates, increased by a suitable risk premium to reflect private investment and/or the
project type, as substantiated by an independent (financial) expert or documented by official publicly
available financial data; ..."
14
Reference: CDM Validation and Verification Manual, page 20 paragraph 105
15
Reference: “Guidelines on The Assessment of Investment Analysis” version 3, EB 51 Annex 58.
page 14
In line with the requirements of “Tool for the demonstration and assessment of additionality” (Version
05.2.1) and its supporting guidelines, the expected return on equity is calculated based on; risk free rate,
equity risk premium and the country risk premium.
Risk Free Rate: The risk free rate of return is the best rate that does not involve a risk. Both the return of
the original capital and the payment of interest are completely certain. Government bonds are considered
a risk free investment option, and their yields can be seen as a risk free rate of return. TCMB (Central
Bank of Turkey) publishes Financial Stability Report periodically, which also includes data on long term
bond rates. The latest and most up to date report is from March 2011. According to the official report the
bond rates are 6.5%16.
Equity Risk Premium: The equity risk premium is the historical risk premium for a mature equity market.
The US stock return over a long term provides the most ideal figure since this is by far the largest and
most liquid market and one which provides data over the longest term. A value of 6.5% is used for the
equity risk premium17.
Country Risk Premium: The risk premium for the host country is derived from Moody’s rating for
Turkey. Turkey has a long-term rating of Ba2 which corresponds to a country risk premium of 4.1%18.
Based on the above data set the required rate of return could be calculated as 17.1% for Turkey.
Table 6 Benchmark for Turkey
Parameter
Value
Risk Free Rate
6.5%
Equity Risk Premium 6.5%
Country Risk
4.1%
Premium
Required Rate of
Return
17.1%
16
Reference: TCMB Financial Stability Report March 2011 Section II page 16
http://www.tcmb.gov.tr/yeni/evds/yayin/finist/bolumII-12.pdf
17
Reference: Guidelines on the assessment of investment analysis version 5
http://cdm.unfccc.int/Reference/Guidclarif/reg/reg_guid03.pdf
18
Reference: New York University Stern School of Business, Risk Premiums for other markets July 2011
http://www.stern.nyu.edu/~adamodar/pc/datasets/ctrypremjuly11.xls
page 15
Sub-step 2c: Calculation and comparison of financial indicators
The main financial indicators are presented in the below table:
Table 5 Key parameters applied in the calculation of the proposed project’s equity IRR:
Parameter
Unit
Value
Total investment
€
24,000,000
Loan
%
85
Equity
%
15
General Overheads
€ / year average
900,000
Yearly electricity Generation
GWh/year
55
Installed capacity
MW
20
Electricity feed in tariff
€cent/kWh
5.07 €cent/kWh
Corporate Tax
%
20
The key assumptions for the calculation of the equity IRR are as follows:
-
-
-
The calculation of the equity IRR of the proposed project activity includes all relevant costs and
revenues19.
The revenue from yearly electricity generation is based on the guaranteed feed in tariff
applicable at the time of the investment decision20. According to the Law, the guaranteed feed in
tariff for electricity generated from wind energy is 7.3 USDcent/kWh, which corresponds to
approximately 5 €cent/kWh21 for the first 10 year period. For the remaining years a conservative
market price of 6€cent/kWh has been applied.
Input values used in the investment analysis are values valid and applicable for 2011.
Only the portion of investment costs which is financed by equity have been considered as the net
cash outflow and the portion of the investment cost which is financed by dept have not been
considered as a cash outflow.
8 €/tCO2eq value has been taken for the GS VER credits, which is an average price for the GS
VERs in the market.
The result of the equity IRR calculation with and without VER revenues are:
Equity IRR without VERs
-12%
Equity IRR with VERs
-2%
It could be seen that the equity IRR of the project activity is below the financial benchmark of 17.1 %
and cannot be considered to be a financially attractive alternative. With the introduction of expected
revenues from VERs, although the equity IRR is still below the benchmark, the feasibility is increases,
which has a positive impact on access to finance and has been the bases of the investment decision.
19
The full financial calculation is available to the DOE.
20
Reference: EMRA (Electricity Market Regulatory Authority) Law on Utilization of Renewable Energy Resources
http://www.epdk.gov.tr/documents/10157/4b360128-53aa-4174-8104-a6c10434ac9c
21
As per 09.09.2011, the euro/dollar exchange rate is observed to fluctuate between 1.43 and 1.45 for the past three
months. An average exchange rate of 1.44 €/USD has been used. Reference: Central Bank of Republic of Turkey
http://www.tcmb.gov.tr/
page 16
Sub-step 2d: Sensitivity Analysis
The objective of the sensitivity analysis is to show whether the conclusion regarding the financial
attractiveness is robust to reasonable variations in the critical assumptions. According to the Annex 5 of
EB 62 “Guidelines on the assessment of Investment analysis” version 5, only variables including the
initial investment cost, that constitute more than 20% of either total project costs or total project revenues
should be subjected to reasonable variation.
In line with the guidelines, important parameters for the feasibility of the proposed project activity are
defined as total investment, electricity price, electricity generation and general overheads. The mentioned
parameters have been tested with a range of ±10% for the sensitivity analysis.
The following table demonstrates the results for a ±10% deviation of selected parameters which increase
the equity IRR.
Table 6 Sensitivity Analysis of the equity IRR with variations in total investment, electricity price,
electricity generation, investment and general overheads.
Parameter
Value Applied
Equity IRR
Equity IRR
Reached
Reached
Without VER WithVER
8,03 USDcent/kWh (+10%)
2%
8%
Electricity Price
60,500 MWh/year (+10%)
-4%
5%
Electricity
Generation
794,000 €/year average (-10%)
-9%
0%
General Overheads
-6%
4%
Total investment
21.6 million € (-10%)
Discussion on the probability of the deviations:
Electricity Price:
One of the most important parameter that has an impact to the equity IRR of the project is the electricity
sales price. For the sensitivity analysis the electricity price was increased 10% from the guaranteed price
of 7,3 to 8,03 USDcent/kWh for the whole assessment period and observed that the equity IRR reaches to
2% without taking into the VER revenues and to 8% taking into account the VER revenues, which is still
below the benchmark value.
The Law on Utilization of Renewable Energy Resources, provides a guaranteed electricity tariff of 7.3
USDcent/kWh to the electricity generated from wind energy resources, which is applicable for a 10 year
period. In addition to this guaranteed price, the Law also introduces an additional incentive to projects
benefiting from local equipment in their project activity. According to the Law, wind energy projects
using local equipment could be rewarded by a plus incentive as indicated under Table II of the Law on
top of the guaranteed price of 7,3 USDcent/kWh. Although it is not for certain that the proposed project
will be eligible for this plus incentive, since the blades and turbine masts used in the proposed project
activity are produced locally, the project activity has a significant chance to be rewarded a +1.4
page 17
USDcent/kWh22. This plus incentive will be applicable only for a 5 year period. If this would be the case
the electricity tariff applicable to the project activity for the first 5 years will be 8.7 USDcent/kWh. If the
equity IRR calculation is re-executed for this price the equity IRR reaches to -9%, which is within the
sensitivity range.
Electricity Generation:
Another important parameter that has an impact on the equity IRR is the net electricity generation
delivered to the electricity system. For the sensitivity analysis, the electricity generation is increased by
10% from the value of 55GWh/year to 60.5GWh/year and observed that the equity IRR reaches to -4%
without taking into the VER revenues and to 5% taking into account the VER revenues, which is still
below the benchmark value. It should be noted that the equity IRR doesn’t reach to the benchmark even
with a net electricity generation of 74.25GWh/year, which corresponds to a 35% of increase.
An average annual electricity generation of 55GWh/year has been estimated based on micro-siting23,
which corresponds to a load factor of 31,4%. Since the existing capacity of 34.2 MW is operational since
2008, an accurate performance of the project location is known to the Project Participant. The actual
readings indicate a capacity factor of approximately 27% load factor for the project and therefore an
increase over 35% of the expected generation (corresponding to a load factor of 42%) is not realistic.
General Overheads:
The impact of a deviation in general overheads is relatively insignificant compared to changes in other
parameters. For the sensitivity analysis, the general overheads are decreased by 10% from the value of
approximately 900,000 €/year average to approximately 794,000 €/year average and observed that the
equity IRR reaches to -9% without taking into the VER revenues and to 0% taking into account the VER
revenues, which is still below the benchmark value. Even if the general overheads are considered to be
“0”, the equity IRR does not reach to the benchmark.
Total Investment:
For the sensitivity analysis, the total investment costs are decreased by 10% from the value of 24 million
€ to 21.6 million € (approximately 1 million €/MW) and observed that the equity IRR reaches to -6%
without taking into the VER revenues and to 4% taking into account the VER revenues, which is still
below the benchmark value. The equity IRR cannot even reach to the benchmark when the total
investment is considered to be as low as 16.8 million €s, which is 30% lower than the estimated
investment. Taking into account the fact that the investment cost of an average turbine is 1.23
million/MW24, a major deviation from the estimated investment costs is not realistic.
22
According to Table II of the Law on Utilization of Renewable Energy Resources, +0.8 USDcent/kWh is rewarded
for locally produced turbine blades and +0.6 USDcent/kWh is rewarded for locally produced turbine masts.
23
24
Technical feasibility is available to the DOE.
Reference: EWEA (European Wind Energy Association) “Wind Energy –The Facts Report, page 13 Part III, The
Economics of Wind Power.
http://www.ewea.org/fileadmin/ewea_documents/documents/publications/WETF/1565_ExSum_ENG.pdf
page 18
Outcome of Step2:
The sensitivity analysis shows that the equity IRR of the proposed project does not overcome the
financial benchmark despite favourable conditions.
The sensitivity analysis further substantiates that the project activity is not a financially attractive
alternative and therefore additional.
Step 3. Barrier analysis
Sub-step 3a. Identify barriers that would prevent the implementation of the proposed CDM project
activity:
Without being registered as a VER project, the proposed project activity faces barriers that would
prevent its implementation. The main barrier towards the implementation of the project activity could be
characterized as “limited access to financing” due to unfavourable investment and financial structure
which results in high risks and limited access to project financing.
Limited access to project financing:
Waste management projects need a high level of financing and long repayment periods. In the proposed
project activity, it is envisaged that 85% of the investment will be realised with debt funding and 15%
from equity. However the project participants face barriers to secure loan from finance institutions /
creditor banks. The additional revenues from potential VER sales are considered to be an important
revenue stream and play an important role on securing a debt funding. Wind energy investments are still
perceived as investments with high risks and unfavourable investment and finance structure. Although
there is a guaranteed electricity tariff for wind energy in Turkey, it is still not enough to secure an
attractive feasibility and therefore extra revenues such as VERs are considered to have a positive impact
on the bankability of the project from the creditors point of view.
Outcome of Step 3a:
“Investment Barriers” is identified as one of the major barriers that prevent the Project Participant from
carrying out the proposed project activity
Step 4: Common practice analysis
Sub-step 4 a: Analyse other activities similar to the proposed project activity:
As per the “Tool for the demonstration and assessment of the additionality” version 5.2.1, an analysis of
any other activities that are operational and that are similar to the proposed project activity must be
provided. Projects are considered similar if they are in the same country/region and/or rely on a broadly
similar technology, are of similar scale, and take place in a comparable environment with respect to
regulatory framework, investment climate, access to technology, access to financing, etc.
The project activities have been tracked from EMRA (Electricity Market Regulatory Authority)
Generation Licenses25. Currently there are 41 wind farm projects that are connected and operational in
25
Reference: EMRA / Development of Wind Energy in Turkey
http://www2.epdk.org.tr/lisans/elektrik/yek/ruzgarprojeleriningelisimi.xls
page 19
Turkey26. The total installed capacity reaches to 1493 MW, which constitutes less than 3% of the total
installed capacity of Turkey27.
A list of the operational wind farms are presented below:
Table 8. Operation wind farms in Turkey
#
Location
Company
1
Đzmir - Çeşme
2
Çanakkale - Đntepe
3
Manisa - Akhisar
4
Çanakkale - Gelibolu
5
Manisa - Sayalar
6
7
8
9
Đstanbul – Çatalca
Izmir - Aliağa
Istanbul - Gaziosmanpaşa
Izmir - Çeşme
10
Istanbul - Hadımköy
11
12
13
14
Đstanbul - Silivri
Balikesir - Bandırma
Balikesir - Şamlı
Muğla - Datça
15
16
17
Hatay - Samandağ
Aydın - Didim
Çanakkale - Ezine
18
Balikesir - Susurluk
19
20
Osmaniye - Bahçe
Izmir Bergama
21
Đzmir - Çeşme
22
23
Balıkesir - Bandırma
26
Alize Enerji Elektrik Üretim
A.Ş.
Anemon Enerji Elektrik
Üretim A.Ş.
Deniz Elektrik Üretim Ltd.
Şti
A.Ş.
A.Ş.
Ertürk Elektrik Üretim A.Ş.
Innores Elektrik Üretim A.Ş.
Lodos Elektrik Üretim A.Ş.
Mare Manastır Rüzgar
Enerjisi Santrali San. Ve Tic.
A.Ş.
Sunjüt Sun’i Jüt San. ve Tic.
A.Ş
Teperes Elektrik Üretim A.Ş.
Yapısan Elektrik Üretim A.Ş.
Baki Elektrik Üretim Ltd Şti
Dares Datça Rüzgar Enerji
Santralı Sanayi ve Ticaret A.Ş
Deniz Elektrik Üretim A.Ş.
Ayen Enerji A.Ş.
A.Ş.
A.Ş.
Rotor Elektrik Üretim A.Ş.
Ütopya Elektrik Üretim
Sanayi ve Ticaret A.Ş.
Mazı-3 Rüzgar Enerjisi
Santrali Elektrik Üretim A.Ş.
Akenerji Elektrik Üretim A.Ş.
Borasco Enerji ve Kimya
Installed
Capacity
(MW)
Business
Model28
1.5
BOT
30.4
VER
10.8
VER
14.9
VER
34.2
VER
60
42.5
24
39.2
VER
VER
VER
VER
1.2
BOT
0,85
30
90
29.6
VER
VER
VER
VER
30
31.5
20.8
VER
VER
VER
20.7
VER
135
30
VER
VER
30
VER
15
57
VER
VER
As per 17.08.2011.
27
The total installed capacity of Turkey is 44,761 MW for year 2009. Reference: TEIAS (Turkish Electricity
Transmission CO) Annual development of Turkeys Installed capacity 2009
http://www.teias.gov.tr/istatistik2009/1.xls
28
Reference: Gold Standard Foundation VER Project Registry Page
https://gs1.apx.com/myModule/rpt/myrpt.asp?r=111
page 20
24
Manisa - Soma
25
26
Hatay - Belen
Tekirdağ - Şarköy
27
Izmir – Urla
28
Balıkesir - Bandırma
29
30
Mersin Mut
Edirne - Enez
31
Izmir - Bergama
32
Hatay - Belen
33
Hatay - Samandağ
34
Manisa - Soma
35
Manisa – Kırkağaç
36
Çanakkale - Ezine
37
38
39
40
Aydin - Çine
Çanakkale - Ezine
Balikesir - Susurluk
Balikesir – Havran
41
Sanayi ve Ticaret A.Ş.
Soma Enerji Elektrik Üretim
A.Ş.
Belen Elektrik Üretim A.Ş.
A.Ş.
Kores Kocadağ Rüzgar Enerji
Santralı Üretim A.Ş.
As Makinsan Temiz Enerji
Elektrik Üretim San. ve Tic.
A.Ş.
Akdeniz Elektrik Üretim A.Ş.
Boreas Enerji Üretim
Sistemleri A.Ş.
Bergama RES Enerji Üretim
A.Ş.
Bakras Enerji Elektrik Üretim
ve Tic. A.Ş.
Ziyaret RES Elektrik Üretim
San. ve Tic. A.Ş.
Bilgin Rüzgar Santrali Enerji
Üretim A.Ş.
A.Ş.
Garet Enerji Üretim ve
Ticaret A.Ş.
Sabaş Elektrik Üretim A.Ş.
Enerjisa Enerji Üretim A.Ş.
Alentek Enerji A.Ş.
A.Ş.
Galata Wind Enerji Ltd. Şti
TOTAL
79.2
VER
36
28.8
VER
VER
15
VER
24
VER
33
15
VER
VER
90
VER
15
VER
35
VER
90
VER
25.6
VER
22.5
VER
24
29.9
45
16
VER
VER
VER
VER
90
VER
1493.15
In line with the requirements of the “Tool for the demonstration and assessment of the additionality”
version 5.2.1, the following scope of assessment has been applied in selecting the “similar project
activities”:
- Turkey as the geographical scope
- Project activities with an installed capacity over 2 MW (project activities with an installed
capacity smaller than 2 MW could be considered as pilot or demo project since it only involves 1
or 2 turbine units)
- In line with the requirements of the tool, VER project activities will be excluded from the
common practice analysis29.
Based on the above information it is clear that there are no similar project activities in Turkey, which are
not developed with a business model excluding VER revenues, hence it can be concluded that wind
projects are not a common practice and the technology has not yet diffused in Turkey.
29
The term CDM and UNFCCC under the tool is interpreteed as VER and Gold Standard respectively (Sub step 4a:
Analyze other activities similar to the proposed Project activity).
page 21
Substep 4 b: Discuss any similar options that are occurring:
There are no similar options occurring which do not rely on VER revenues for their implementation.
The proposed project activity is therefore not common practice and hence proves to be additional.
B.6.
Emission reductions:
B.6.1. Explanation of methodological choices:
>>
The emission reductions for the proposed project activity are calculated according to ACM0002
“Consolidated baseline methodology for grid connected electricity generation from renewable sources”
version 12.1.0.
Emission Reductions
The emission reductions are calculated based on the following formula:
ER y = BEY − PEY
Where:
ERy
BEy
PEy
(1)
Emission reductions in year y (tCO2e/year)
Baseline emissions in year y (tCO2e/year)
Project emissions in year y (tCO2e/year)
Project Emissions
In accordance with the methodology ACM0002 “Consolidated baseline methodology for grid-connected
electricity generation from renewable sources” (version 12.1.0), no project emissions need to be
considered. Project emissions apply only for geothermal power plants, solar thermal power plants and for
some hydro power plants. Therefore
PEy = 0
Baseline Emissions
According to the methodology ACM0002 “Consolidated baseline methodology for grid-connected
electricity generation from renewable sources” (version 12.1.0), baseline emissions include only CO2
emissions from electricity generation in fossil fuel fired power plants that are displaced due to the project
activity. The methodology assumes that all project electricity generation above baseline levels would
have been generated by existing grid-connected power plants and the addition of new grid-connected
power plants. The baseline emissions are calculated as follows:
BE y = EG PJ , y ⋅ EFgrid ,CM
Where:
(2)
page 22
BEy
EG PJ,y
EFgrid,CM
= Baseline emissions in year y (tCO2/year)
= Quantity of net electricity generation that is produced and fed into the grid as a result of
the implementation of the CDM project activity in year y (MWh/yr)
= Combined margin CO2 emission factor for grid connected power generation calculated
using the latest version of the “Tool to calculate the emission factor for an electricity
system”. The combined margin is calculated ex-post and has been fixed for the first
crediting period.
Calculation of EGPJ,y
The calculation of EGPJ,y is different for (a) greenfield plants; (b) retrofits and replacements and; (c)
capacity additions. Since the proposed project activity falls under the description capacity addition, the
following method has been adopted.
Capacity addition to an existing renewable energy power plant
In case of wind energy, it is assumed that the addition of new capacity does not significantly affect the
electricity generated by existing power plant(s) or unit(s). In this case, the electricity fed into the grid by
the added power plant(s) or unit(s) could be directly metered and used to determine EGPJ,y.
If the project activity is a capacity addition, project participants may use one of the following options to
determine EGPJ,y:
Option 1: Use the approach applied to retrofits and replacements as described in the ACM0002
“Consolidated baseline methodology for grid-connected electricity generation from renewable sources”
(version 12.1.0). EGFacility,y corresponds to the total electricity generation of the existing plant(s) or unit(s)
and the added plant(s) and unit(s). A separate metering of the electricity fed into the grid by the added
plant(s) or unit(s) is not necessary under this option.
Option 2: For wind, solar, wave and tidal power plant(s) or unit(s), the following approach can be used
provided that the electricity fed into the grid by the added power plant(s) or unit(s) addition is separately
measured:
EG PJ , y = EG PJ _ ADD , y
Where:
EGPJ,y
EGPJ_ADD,y
(3)
Quantity of net electricity generation that is produced and fed into the grid as a result
of the implementation of the VER project activity in year y (MWh/yr)
Quantity of net electricity generation supplied to the grid in year y by the project
plant/unit that has been added under the project activity (MWh/yr)
The Project Participants choose Option 2, and the electricity fed into the grid by the added power plant(s)
or unit(s) addition will be separately measured.
page 23
Leakage
In line with the requirements of ACM0002 “Consolidated baseline methodology for grid-connected
electricity generation from renewable sources” (version 12.1.0), no leakage emissions are considered.
The main emissions potentially giving rise to leakage in context of electric sector projects are emissions
arising due to activities such as power plant construction and upstream emissions from fossil fuel use
(e.g. extraction, processing and transport). These emission sources are neglected.
Calculation of EFgrid,CM
As referred in ACM0002 “Consolidated baseline methodology for grid-connected electricity generation
from renewable sources” (version 12.1.0), EFgrid,CM is calculated according to the “Tool to calculate the
emission factor for an electricity system” version 02.2.0.
This tool provides the following steps to calculate combined margin (CM) emission factor:
Step 1. Identify the relevant electric systems;
Step 2. Choose whether to include off-grid power plants in the project electricity system (optional);
Step 3. Select an operating margin (OM) method;
Step 4. Calculate the operating margin emission factor according to the selected method;
Step 5. Calculate the build margin (BM) emission factor.
Step 6. Calculate the combined margin (CM) emissions factor.
Step 1. Identification of the relevant electric power system
According to the “Tool to calculate the emission factor for an electricity system” (version 02.2), a project
electricity system has to be defined by the spatial extent of the power plants that are physically connected
through transmission and distribution lines to the project activity and that can be dispatched without
significant transmission constraints.
Similarly, a connected electricity system, e.g. national or international, is defined as an
electricity system that is connected by transmission lines to the project electricity system. Power
plants within the connected electricity system can be dispatched without significant transmission
constraints but transmission to the project electricity system has significant transmission
constraint.
The transmission lines in Turkey are operated by TEĐAŞ (Turkish Electricity Transmission CO), which is
a state owned company. The grid is 48.971 km long and constitutes of 606 transformer stations with a
total transformer capacity of 98,852 MVA and 10 interconnections to neighbour countries30. The
interconnected grid system is operated continuously and there are no electricity price differences
throughout the regions31. Therefore the relevant electric power system is defined as the national grid
system of Turkey.
30
In compliance with the requirements of the applicable tool, the emission factor from neighbouring countries is
considered 0 tCO2eq/MWh for determining the OM.
31
Reference: TEIAŞ (Turkish Electricity Transmission Co) official webpage http://www.teias.gov.tr/
page 24
Step 2. Choose whether to include off-grid power plants in the project electricity system (optional).
According to the applicable tool, Project Participants may choose between the following two options to
calculate the operating margin and build margin emission factor:
Option I: Only grid power plants are included in the calculation.
Option II: Both grid power plants and off-grid power plants are included in the calculation.
The Project Participant chooses Option I and therefore only grid power plants are included in the
calculation.
Step 3. Selection of an operating margin (OM) method
According to the applicable methodological tool, the operating margin emission factor (EF grid, OM, y) is
based on one of the following methods:
a)
b)
c)
d)
Simple OM; or
Simple adjusted OM; or
Dispatch data analysis OM; or
Average OM.
Options b) and c) are not selected since there is no data available for these options. Option d) is not
selected since low-cost/must-run resources do not constitute more than 50% of total grid generation.
According to the tool, Simple OM can only be if low-cost/must-run resources constitute less than 50% of
total grid generation. The low-cost/must-run resources include hydro, geothermal, wind, low-cost
biomass, nuclear, and solar power generation.
The share of the installed capacity of renewable energy sources excluding hydro power is 1.1% of the
total electricity generation and is therefore not taken into consideration. There is no indication that coal is
used as a must-run and no nuclear energy plants are located in Turkey. That leaves hydro power as the
only relevant low-cost must run source for electricity. The electricity generation from hydro power is
18.5% of the total electricity generation. Therefore the requirements for the use of the Simple OM
calculations are satisfied.
Table 9 Breakdown by sources of the electricity generation from the Turkish grid, 200932
2009 Generation
Power plants by fuel type
Generation (MWh)
Natural Gas
96,094,700
Coal
55,685,100
Hydro power
35,958,400
Fuel Oil
4,803,500
Geothermal + Wind
1,931,100
Other Renewable
340,100
Total
194,812,900
32
Share (%)
49.3
28.6
18.5
2.5
1
0.1
100
TEIAS (Turkish Electricity Transmission Company) 2009: http://www.teias.gov.tr/istatistik2009/32(75-09).xls
page 25
For the simple OM, the emissions factor can be calculated using either of the two following data
vintages:
•
Ex ante option: If the ex ante option is chosen, the emission factor is determined once at the
validation stage, thus no monitoring and recalculation of the emissions factor during the crediting period
is required. For grid power plants a 3-year generation-weighted average, based on the most recent data
available at the time of submission of the VER-PDD to the DOE for validation.
•
Ex post option: If the ex post option is chosen, the emission factor is determined for the year in
which the project activity displaces grid electricity, requiring the emissions factor to be updated annually
during monitoring.
For the proposed project activity the ex ante option is selected. Data for calculating the three year
average is obtained from the period 2007 – 2009 which are the most recent data available at the time of
submission of the PDD to DOE.33
Step 4. Calculating 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 (tCO2e/MWh) of all generating power plants serving the system, not including
low-cost / must-run power plants / units. It may be calculated:
Option A:
Based on the net electricity generation and a CO2 emission factor of each power unit; or
Option B:
Based on the total net electricity generation of all power plants serving the system and
the fuel types and total fuel consumption of the project electricity system.
As the fuel consumption and the average efficiency data for each power plant / unit is not available
Option B is used for simple OM calculation.34
Option B: Calculation based on total fuel consumption and electricity generation of the system
As Option B is used, the simple OM emission factor is calculated based on the net electricity supplied to
the grid by all power plants serving the system, not including low-cost/must run power plants/units, and
based on the fuel type(s) and total fuel consumption of the project electricity system as follows:
∑ FC
i, y
EFgrid ,OMsimple, y
Where:
EFgrid,OMsimple,y
FCi,y
× NCVi , y × EFCO2 ,i , y
i
EGy
(4)
Simple operating margin CO2 emission factor in year y (tCO2/MWh)
Amount of fossil fuel type i consumed in the project electricity system in year y (mass
33
The index “y” in the equations refers to the years 2007-2009 to calculate the emission factor ex-ante.
34
There are no nuclear power plants in Turkey and the share of the renewable energy is very small.
page 26
NCVi,y
EFCO2, i,y
EGy
i
y
or volume unit)
Net calorific value (energy content) of fossil fuel type i in year y (GJ / mass or volume
unit)
CO2 emission factor of fossil fuel type i in year y (tCO2/GJ)
Net electricity generated and delivered to the grid by all power sources serving the
system, not including low-cost/must run power plants/units, in year y (MWh)
All fossil fuel types combusted in power sources in the project electricity system in
year y
The three most recent years for which data is available at the time of submission of the
PDD to the DOE for validation (ex-ante option)
For this approach (simple OM) to calculate the operating margin, subscript m refers to the power
plants/units delivering electricity to the grid, not including low-cost/must run power plants/units, and
including electricity imports to the grid.
Step5. Calculation of the build margin emission factor
In terms of vintage of data, project participants can choose between one of the following two options:
Option 1: For the first crediting period, calculate the build margin emission factor ex ante based on the
most recent information available on units already built for sample group m at the time of VER PDD
submission to the DOE for validation. For the second crediting period, the build margin emission factor
should be updated based on the most recent information available on units already built at the time of
submission of the request for renewal of the crediting period to the DOE. For the third crediting period,
the build margin emission factor calculated for the second crediting period should be used. This option
does not require monitoring the emission factor during the crediting period.
Option 2: For the first crediting period, the build margin emission factor shall be updated annually, ex
post, including those units built up to the year of registration of the project activity or, if information up
to the year of registration is not yet available, including those units built up at the latest year for which
information is available. For the second crediting period, the built margin emission factor shall be
calculated ex ante, as described in Option 1 above. For the third crediting period, the built margin
emission factor calculated for the second crediting period should be used.
For the proposed project activity the Project Participant chooses Option 1 in terms of vintage of data.
The sample group of power units m used to calculate the build margin should be determined as per the
following procedure, consistent with the data vintage selected above:
(a) Identify the set of five power units, excluding power units registered as VER project activities,
that started to supply electricity to the grid most recently (SET5-units) and determine their annual
electricity generation (AEGSET-5-units, in MWh).
(b) Determine the annual electricity generation of the project electricity system, excluding power
units registered as VER project activities (AEGtotal, in MWh). Identify the set of power units,
excluding power units registered as VER project activities, that started to supply electricity to the
grid most recently and that comprise 20% of total AEGtotal (if 20% falls on part of the generation
page 27
of a unit, the generation of that unit is fully included in the calculation) (SET>20%) and determine
their annual electricity generation (AEGSET>20%, in MWh);
(c) From SET5-units and SET>20% select the set of power units that comprise the larger annual
electricity generation (SETsample);
Identify the date when the power units in SETsample started to supply electricity to the grid. If none
of the power units in SETsample started to supply electricity to the grid more than 10 years ago,
then use the SETsample to calculate the build margin.
The most recent information available belongs to 2009 and based on TEIAŞ statistics which is the
official information source for the grid35. According to TEIAŞ figure, the annual electricity generation of
the project electricity system excluding power units registered as VER project activities (AEGtotal) is
194,912,900 MWh36. Based on the AEGtotal, the set of power units, excluding power units registered as
VER project activities, that started to supply electricity to the grid most recently and that comprise 20%
of total AEGtotal, have been defined and the AEGSET>20% is determined as 39,022,327 MWh37 and includes
239 units of power plants under SET>20%. Without the need of any further assessment it can be concluded
that the SET5-units << SET>20% and therefore the SET>20% is selected as SETsample38 for the calculation of
the build margin (BM)39.
The built margin (BM) 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 available40,
calculated as follows:
∑ EG × EF
=
∑ EG
m, y
EFgrid , BM , y
EL , m , y
m
m, y
m
Where:
EFgrid,BM,y
EGm,y
35
(5)
Build margin CO2 emissions factor in year y (tCO2/MWh)
Net quantity of electricity generated and delivered to the grid by power unit m in year y
(MWh)
Reference: www.teias.gov.tr
36
Reference: Turkish Electricity Transmission Co / http://www.teias.gov.tr/istatistik2009/41.xls
37
Reference: Turkish Electricity Transmission Company / http://www.teias.gov.tr/istatistikler.htm; year 2009-20082007-2006.
38
None of the power units in SETsample started to supply electricity to the grid more than 10 years ago.
39
Please refer to Annex 3 of the PDD for more detailed information on SETsample.
40
The most recent year for which power generation data is available is 2009. Reference: TEIAŞ Generation and
Transmission Statistics www.teias.gov.tr
page 28
EFEL,m,y
m
y
CO2 emission factor of the power unit m in year y (tCO2/MWh)
Power units included in the build margin
Most recent historical year for which power generation data is available
As per the “Tool to calculate the emission factor for an electricity system” (version 02.2.0), the CO2
emission factor of each power unit m (EFEL,m,y) should be determined as per the guidance from the tool in
step 4 for simple OM, using options A1, A2 or A3, using for y the most recent historical year for which
power generation data is available, where m is the power units included in the build margin.
As plant specific fuel consumption data is not available for Turkey, option A2 has been selected for the
calculation of the CO2 emission factor of each power unit m (EFEL,m,y) as follows:
EFEL ,m, y =
Where:
EFELm,y
EFCO2,m,i,y
ηm,y
m
y
EFCO2 ,i , y ⋅ 3.6
η m, y
(6)
CO2 emission factor of the power unit m in year y (tCO2/MWh)
Average CO2 emission factor of fuel type i used in power unit m in year y (tCO2/GJ)
Average net energy conversion efficiency of power unit m in year y (ratio)
All power units serving the grid in year y except low-cost/must-run power units
The most recent year for which power generation data is available at the time of
submission of the VER-PDD to the DOE for validation (ex-ante option)
Where several fuel types are used in the power unit, the lowest CO2 emission factor for EFCO2,m,i,y has
been used.
Step 6. Calculation of the combined margin emission factor
According to the applicable methodological tool, the calculation of the combined margin (CM) emission
factor (EFgrid, CM) is based on one of the following methods:
(a) Weighted average CM; or
(b) Simplified CM.
In line with the requirements of the applicable tool, the Project Participant chooses option (a), weighted
average CM.
The combined margin emissions factor is calculated as follows:
EFgrid ,CM , y = EFgrid ,OM , y ⋅ wOM + EFgrid , BM , y ⋅ wBM
Where:
EFgrid,CM,y
EFgrid,OM,y
(7)
Combined Margin emission factor (tCO2/MWh)
Operating margin emission factor (tCO2/MWh)
page 29
EFgrid,BM,y
wOM
wBM
Build margin emission factor (tCO2/MWh)
Weight of the operating margin emission factor
Weight of the build margin emission factor
As stated in the “Tool to calculate the emission factor for an electricity system” (version 02.2.0), the
default weights for the operating margin and build margin emission factors for wind power generation is
defined as:
wOM=0.75
wBM=0.25
for the first crediting period and for subsequent crediting periods.
Changes required for the methodology implementation in 2nd and 3rd crediting periods
At the start of the second and third crediting period the Project Proponents will address two issues as
required by the applicable methodology:
• Assess the continued validity of the baseline; and
• Update the baseline as defined above
B.6.2. Data and parameters that are available at validation:
Data/ Parameter:
Data unit:
Description:
Source of data used:
Value applied:
Justification of the
choice of data or
description of
measurement methods
and procedures
actually applied:
Any comment:
Data/ Parameter:
Data unit:
Description:
41
ID.1 / EGgross
MWh
Gross electricity production by fossil fuel power sources (2007-2009)
TEIAS (Turkish Electricity Transmission Company)
The distribution of gross electricity generation by primary energy resources and
the electricity utilities in Turkey (2007, 2008, 2009).
http://www.teias.gov.tr/ist2007/40.xls
http://www.teias.gov.tr/istatistik2009/37(06-09).xls
See calculations of emission factor (B.6.1)
According to “Turkish Statistics Law and Official Statistics Program”41 TEIAS,
the Turkish Electricity Transmission Company is the official source for the
related data, hence providing the most up-to-date and accurate information
available.
The average correction factor between gross/net generation is 95.8%. Its
determination is presented in the Ex-ante calculation sheets.
ID.2 / FCi,y
m3 / tonnes (m3 for gaseous fuels)
Amount of fossil fuel type i consumed in the project electricity system by
TEIAS 2005: http://rega.basbakanlik.gov.tr/Eskiler/2005/11/20051118-1.htm
page 30
generation sources in year y (2007-2009)
Fuels consumed in thermal power plants in Turkey by the electricity utilities
(2007-2009)
Value applied:
choice of data or
description of
measurement methods
and procedures
actually applied:
Any comment:
According to “Turkish Statistics Law and Official Statistics Program” TEIAS,
the Turkish Electricity Transmission Company is the official source for the
related data, hence providing the most up-to-date and accurate information
available.
Data/ Parameter:
Data unit:
Description:
ID.3 / NCVi,y
GJ/tonnes (m3 for gaseous fuels)
Net calorific value (energy content) of fossil fuel type i in year y
Heating values of fuels consumed in thermal plants in Turkey by the electricity
utilities (2007- 2009)
According to “Turkish Statistics Law and Official Statistics Program” TEIAS,
Turkish Electricity Transmission Company is the official source for the related
data, hence providing the most up-to-date and accurate information available
Value applied:
choice of data or
description of
measurement methods
and procedures
actually applied:
Any comment:
Data/ Parameter:
Data unit:
Description:
Value applied:
choice of data or
description of
measurement methods
and procedures
actually applied:
Any comment:
-
ID.4 / EFC02,i,y
tCO2/GJ
CO2 emission factor of fossil fuel type i” used in power unit min year y
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 Volume 2 (Energy) of the 2006
IPCC Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas Inventory
http://www.ipcc-nggip.iges.or.jp/public/2006gl/index.htm
There is no information on the fuel specific default emission factor in Turkey,
hence, IPCC values has been used as referred in the “Tool to calculate the
emission factor for an electricity system (version 2)”.
-
page 31
Data/ Parameter:
Data unit:
Description:
Value applied:
choice of data or
description of
measurement methods
and procedures
actually applied:
Any comment:
Data/ Parameter:
Data unit:
Description:
Value applied:
choice of data or
description of
measurement methods
and procedures
actually applied:
Any comment:
ID.5 / EGm,y
MWh
Net electricity generated by power plant/unit m
Generation units put into operation in 2006; 2007; 2008
http://www.teias.gov.tr/ist2006/8.xls, for 2006
http://www.teias.gov.tr/ist2007/8.xls, for 2007
http://www.teias.gov.tr/istatistik2008/8.xls, for 2008
Annex 3
Once for each crediting period using the most recent three historical years for
which the data is available at the time of submission of the PDD to the DOE for
validation.
ID.6 / η m,y
%
Average net energy conversion efficiency of power unit m in year y
“Environmental Map” published by Environmental Inventory Head Department
under Ministry of Environment and Forestry /
http://www.cedgm.gov.tr/CED/Files/cevreatlas%C4%B1/atlas_metni.pdf
(p.197 table X.3.1; Thermal Plants and Environment)
The average values of thermal plants in Turkey are taken from the report
“Environmental Map” published by the Ministry of Environment and Forestry.
-
B.6.3. Ex-ante calculation of emission reductions:
>>
Estimation of emission reductions prior to validation
According to “Consolidated baseline methodology for grid connected electricity generation from
renewable sources” version 12.1.0, project participants should prepare an estimate of likely emission
reductions for the proposed crediting period. This estimate is based on the same methodology as
described under section B.6.1.
Calculating the operating margin emission factor:
The simple operating margin CO2 emission factor is calculated as per equation (4).
page 32
For the calculation of the Simple OM, the amount of fuel consumption (FCi, y) is taken from website of
TEIAS, which is the official source of related data. The fuel consumption values for relevant years are as
follows:
Table10 Fuel consumption of generation sources connected to the grid (2007-2009)
FCi, y
Units
2007
2008
2009
3
Natural Gas
1000m
20,457,793
21,607,635
20,978,040
Lignite
tonnes
61,223,821
66,374,120
63,620,518
Coal
tonnes
6,029,143
6,270,008
6,621,177
Fuel Oil
tonnes
2,312,360
2,315,183
1,783,366
Total
63,043,468
191,218,459
18,920,328
6,410,909
Turkish specific net calorific values (NCVi, y) values for fossil fuel types have been calculated, however,
data from the IPCC Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas Inventory have been used as the source of
data for the emission factor of the fossil fuel types (EFCO2,i,y).
The NCV and emission factors are as follows:
Table11 NCV and emission factor of fossil fuel type
NCVi (GJ/tonnes)
2007
2008
Natural Gas
36.765
36.634
Lignite
6.861
6.827
Coal
22.303
22.244
Fuel Oil
39.960
39.874
2009
37.177
6.427
22.215
40.091
EFCO2, i
(tonnes/GJ)
0,054
0,091
0,095
0,073
The electricity delivered to the grid by all power sources serving the system, not including lowcost/must-run power plants/units (EGgross,y) is obtained from TEIAS (Turkish Electricity Transmission
Company). The following table shows the gross electricity production for 2007-2009 produced by fossil
fuel power sources.
Table 12 Gross electricity generation by fossil fuel power sources 2007-2009
EGgross,y (MWh)
2007
2008
2009
Natural Gas
95,024,800
98,685,300
96,094,700
Lignite
38,294,700
41,858,100
39,089,500
Coal
15,136,200
15,857,500
16,595,600
Fuel Oil
6,526,800
7,518,500
4,803,500
Total
289,804,800
119,242,300
47,589,300
18,848,800
The gross electricity production includes the electricity consumption of the power plants. To be able to
calculate the net electricity fed into the grid by specific fuel sources, an average correction factor had to
be calculated from the overall gross/net electricity generation data. This relation is derived in in the
following table.
page 33
Table 13 Relation between net and gross electricity generation 2007-2009
2007
2008
Gross generation [MWh]
191,558,000
198,418,000
Net generation [MWh]
183,339,000
189,761,000
Relation
95.7%
95.6%
Average correction factor
95.7%
2009
194,812,900
186,619,300
95.8%
The net electricity delivered to the grid by the fossil fuel plants (EGnet,y) is calculated in Table 14. The
calculation of EFgrid,OM,y requires the inclusion of electricity imports with an emission factor of 0
tCO2/GWh. By including the imports in the electricity production this requirement is fulfilled.
Table 14 Net electricity generation by fossil fuel power plants and electricity imports 2007-2009
2007
2008
2009
Total
Net electricity
Natural Gas
90,951,136
94,454,712
91,975,170 277,381,017
production EGnet,y
Lignite
36,653,026
40,063,665
37,413,753 114,130,444
(MWh)
Coal
14,487,319
15,177,697
15,884,155
45,549,171
Fuel Oil
6,246,999
7,196,186
4,597,576
18,040,762
Electricity imports
864,300
789,400
812,000
2,465,700
Electricity supplied to grid EGy
149,202,780 157,681,659 150,682,654 457,567,094
Based on the above values, the simple operating margin CO2 grid emission factor (EFgrid,OMsimple,y)
calculated through Equation 4 is 0.657 tCO2/MWh.
Calculating the build margin emission factor
The average CO2 emission factor of fuel types (EFCO2,m) and the average net energy conversion efficiency
of the power plants (ηm,y) used for the calculation of emission factor of the power units (EFEL,m,y) through
equation 6 are presented in the below table.
Table 15 Emission factor of the power units
Average emission factor
EFCO2,m,i,y
(tCO2/GJ)
Natural Gas
0,054
Lignite
0,091
Coal
0,095
Fuel Oil
0,073
Hydro
n.a.
Wind
n.a.
Average conversion
efficiency ηm,y
45.97%
32.68%
33.57%
33.19%
n.a.
n.a.
Emission factor of the
power unit EFEL,m,y
(tCO2/MWh)
0.425
1.001
1.014
0.788
0
0
The data on the electricity generated and delivered to the grid by power units (EGm,y) are presented in the
below table.
page 34
Table 16 Electricity generated by the power units included in the build margin calculation
EGm,y (MWh)
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
Natural Gas
415,000
3,102,795
3,343,903
765,780
13,602,509
Lignite
0
7,020,000
3,084
0
3,000
Coal
0
0
0
0
1,923,333
Fuel Oil
52,000
0
722,473
16,362
4,331,777
Hydro
0
212,339
717,432
128,145
1,402,961
Other
0
69,448
0
0
1,189,986
renewable
Total
467,000
10,404,583
4,786,892
910,286
22,453,566
Total
21,229,986
7,026,084
1,923,333
5,122,612
2,460,877
1,259,434
39,022,327
The build margin emission factor EFgrid,BM,y calculated through equation 5 is 0.565 tCO2/MWh.
Calculating the combined margin emission factor
The combined margin emission factor EFgrid,CM,y calculated through equation 7 is 0.634 tCO2/MWh.
Project emissions
In accordance with the methodology ACM0002 “Consolidated baseline methodology for grid-connected
electricity generation from renewable sources” (version 12.1.0), no project emissions need to be
considered.
PEy = 0
Leakage
In line with the requirements of ACM0002 “Consolidated baseline methodology for grid-connected
electricity generation from renewable sources” (version 12.1.0), no leakage emissions are considered
LEy=0
Calculating the baseline emissions
The baseline emissions are calculated based on the quantity of net electricity generation supplied to the
grid in year y by the project plant/unit that has been added under the project activity. The following
simplified formula has been applied based on equation (2) and equation (3).
BE y = EG PJ _ ADD , y ⋅ EFgrid ,CM
Where:
BEy
EGPJ_ADD,y
(8)
Baseline emissions reductions in year y (tCO2/year)
plant/unit that has been added under the project activity (MWh/yr)
page 35
EFgrid,CM
Combined margin emission factor for grid connected power generation (tCO2/MWh)
The proposed project activity is estimated to generate 54,404 MWh/year of electricity, which
corresponds to 34,477 tCO2/year baseline emissions calculated through equation (8).
Calculating the emission reductions
As per equation (1), the annual emission reduction of the Project is estimated as 34,477 tCO2/year.
B.6.4 Summary of the ex-ante estimation of emission reductions:
>>
Table 17 Ex-ante estimation of emission reductions, summary table
Estimation of
Estimation Estimation of
Estimation of
project activity of baseline
leakage
Years
overall emission
emissions
emissions
emissions
reductions(tCO2e)
(tCO2e)
(tCO2e)
(tCO2e)
2012
0
14,365
0
14,365
2013
0
34,477
0
34,477
2014
34,477
34,477
0
0
2015
0
34,477
34,477
0
2016
0
34,477
34,477
0
2017
0
34,477
34,477
0
2018
0
34,477
34,477
0
2019
0
20,111
0
20,111
Number of
7
crediting years
Annual average
over the
crediting period
(tCO2e/y)
B.7.
34,477
Application of the monitoring methodology and description of the monitoring plan:
B.7.1
Data and parameters monitored:
Data / Parameter:
Data unit:
Description:
Source of data to be
ID.9/EGPJ_ADD,y
MWh
plant/unit that has been added under the project activity
Project activity site
page 36
used:
Value of data applied
for the purpose of
calculating expected
emission reductions in
section B.5
Description of
measurement methods
and procedures to be
applied:
QA/QC procedures to
be applied:
Any comment:
54,404 MWh
The monitoring will be done by a private electricity meter, which will monitor
the net electricity generation supplied to the grid by the project plant/unit that
has been added under the project activity. The electricity will be measured
continuously and recorded at least monthly.
Maintenance and calibration of equipment will be carried out according to the
instructions of the manufacturer.
This is applicable as the proposed project activity involves energy generation
from wind sources and option 2 in the baseline methodology is applied.
B.7.2. Description of the monitoring plan:
>>
All monitoring procedures and requirements of the proposed project activity is in accordance with the
methodology ACM0002 “Consolidated baseline methodology for grid-connected electricity generation
from renewable sources” (version 12.1.0).
Metering: The quantity of net electricity generation supplied to the grid by the units that has been added
under the project activity will be monitored continuously by a meter, which will be owned, installed and
maintained by the Project Participant. The measurements will be made at the project site. Data obtained
from measurements will be used in calculations of emission reductions. The losses before this point will
be on the account of the project owner.
Meter readings: Once a month, the project participant will perform data readings. The monthly results
will be recorded by the project participant both manually and electronically.
Data storage: Data will be stored electronically, during the crediting period and at least two years after
the last issuance of credits for the wind farm project activity in the concerning crediting period. The
Project Participant will be responsible for storage of data received from the measuring devices.
Quality assurance and quality control: All metering devices will be calibrated by the project participant
according to the specifications of the manufacturer. The specification of the meters will be in compliance
with the requirements of the host country.
Monitoring frequency: A high level of accuracy of the measurements will be achieved due to the use of
high-precision equipment and due to strict compliance with the recommendations for calibration
frequency of the equipment provider.
Corrective actions and emergency preparedness: The Project Participant will regularly check the
monitoring system on errors. In the case of errors, corrective actions will be undertaken by the Project
Participant, or if required, by the supplier of the monitoring equipment.
page 37
B.8.
Date of completion of the application of the baseline study and monitoring methodology
and the name of the responsible person(s)/entity(ies):
>>
Date of completing the final draft of this baseline section:
13/10/2011
Name of person/entity determining the baseline:
The baseline has been prepared by OakDanışmanlık
Company name:
Visiting Address:
Contact Person:
Telephone number:
E-mail:
OakDanışmanlık
Acıbadem Mah. Şemibey Sok. Belkıs Apt. N:3 D:6
Kadıköy / Istanbul, TURKEY
Ömer Akyürek
+90 216 3471671
[email protected]
SECTION C. Duration of the project activity / crediting period
C.1.
Duration of the project activity:
C.1.1. Starting date of the project activity:
>>
01.11.2011 (Expected)
C.1.2. Expected operational lifetime of the project activity:
>>
49 years
C.2.
Choice of the crediting period and related information:
C.2.1. Renewable crediting period:
C.2.1.1.
Starting date of the first crediting period:
>>
01.08.2012
C.2.1.2.
>>
7 years, renewable
Length of the first crediting period:
C.2.2. Fixed crediting period:
C.2.2.1.
>>
Starting date:
page 38
C.2.2.2.
Length:
>>
SECTION D. Environmental impacts
>>
D.1.
Documentation on the analysis of the environmental impacts, including transboundary
impacts:
>>
In line with the requirements of “Regulation on Environmental Impact Assessment”, the proposed project
has been exempted from performing an Environmental Impact Assessment.42
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:
>>
n.a.
SECTION E. Stakeholders’ comments
>>
E.1.
Brief description how comments by local stakeholders have been invited and compiled:
>>
As required by the Gold Standard a Local Stakeholders Consultation and a Feedback Round has to be
undertaken by the project participant in order to encourage the stakeholders to express their opinion and
incorporate it in the project. In this way, the project developer, together with the public, ensures a project
going along the main principles of sustainability. For more details on both the Local Stakeholder
Consultation (LSC) and the Stakeholder Feedback Round see the LSC report and the GS Passport43.
Local Stakeholder Consultation (LSC)
The proposed project activity is exempted from conducting an Environmental Impact Assesment (EIA)
according to Turkish Law and Regulations however the project participant has organized a Local
Stakeholders Meeting on 06.06.2011 in accordance with the requirements of the Gold Standard
Foundation v2.1. The LSC meeting was held at Dualar Village near the project site. In general the
participation to the meeting was good with more than 41 people and achieved a female participation of
50%. Before the meeting the following documents have been provided to the stakeholders:
+ Non-technical description of the project activity (also submitted along with the invitations);
+ Meeting evaluation forms;
+ Questionnaire regarding the sustainable development indicators and monitoring of the indicators along
with the explanation of the indicators (also submitted along with the invitations).
42
Exemption letter has been provided to the validating DOE
43
Gold Standard v.12 rules and requirements are applicable to the proposed project activity.
page 39
The meeting has started with introduction of the representatives of the Project Participant Mrs. Çağla
Balcı Eriş and Mrs. Sıla Kılıç, explaining the aim of the meeting. Also a brief explanation was made with
regards to the documents provided before the start of the meeting. The introduction followed by the
explanation of the project activity, followed by a question and answer session. Since the proposed project
activity is the extension of an existing power plant, the locals were quite informed about the activities.
There were no concerns on the impact of the proposed project activity to sustainable development and
environmental.
Stakeholder Feedback Round (SFR)
This section will be updated after the completion of the feedback round
E.2.
Summary of the comments received:
>>
The details of the Stakeholders Consultation Process could be found under the GS LSC Report and the
GS Passport.
E.3.
Report on how due account was taken of any comments received:
>>
The details of the Stakeholders Consultation Process could be found under the GS LSC Report and the
GS Passport.
page 40
Annex 1
CONTACT INFORMATION ON PARTICIPANTS IN THE PROJECT ACTIVITY
Organization:
Street/P.O.Box:
Building:
City:
State/Region:
Postcode/ZIP:
Country:
Telephone:
FAX:
E-Mail:
URL:
Represented by:
Title:
Salutation:
Last name:
Middle name:
First name:
Department:
Mobile:
Direct FAX:
Direct tel:
Personal e-mail:
Organization:
Street/P.O.Box:
Building:
City:
State/Region:
Postcode/ZIP:
Country:
Telephone:
FAX:
E-Mail:
URL:
Represented by:
Title:
Salutation:
Last name:
Middle name:
First name:
Department:
Polat Enerji Sanayi Ticaret A.Ş.
Büyükdere Cad.
Polat Holding
Mecidiyeköy / Đstanbul
34387
Turkey
+90 212 2136635
+90 212 2136639
www.polatenerji.com
Sıla Kılıç
Mrs.
Kılıç
Sıla
[email protected]
Demirer Enerji Üretim Sanayi ve Ticaret A.Ş.
Mashar Osman Sokak
9/1
Feneryolu / Kadıköy, Đstanbul
Turkey
+90 216 3360148
+90 216 3300654
[email protected]
Çağl Balcı Eriş
Mrs.
Eriş
Balcı
Çağla
page 41
Mobile:
Direct FAX:
Direct tel:
Personal e-mail:
[email protected] / [email protected]
page 42
Annex 2
INFORMATION REGARDING PUBLIC FUNDING
No public funding from the Annex I countries is provided to the proposed project.
page 43
Annex 3
BASELINE INFORMATION
SETsample
2009
Plant Name
Fuel Type
Ak Gıda San. Ve Tic. A.Ş. (Pamukova)
Aksa Akrilik Kimya San. A.Ş. (Yalova)
Aksa Enerji (Antalya)
Aksa Enerji (Manisa)
Antalya Enerji
Arenko Elektrik Üretim A.Ş. (Denizli)
Bil Enerji (DG+M)(Balgat)
Cam İş Elektrik
Çelikler Taah. İnş. (Rixox Grand)
Dalsan Alçı San. Ve Tic A.Ş.
Delta Enerji Üretim ve Tic. A.Ş.
Delta Enerji Üretim ve Tic. A.Ş.
Desa Enerji Elektrik Üretim A.Ş.
E. Şehir. End. Enerji (DG+M)(Eskişehir-2)
Ege Birleşik Enerji (LPG+DG+M)(Aliağa)
Entek Köseköy (İztek)
Entek Köseköy (İztek)
Falez Elektrik Üretim A.Ş.
Global Enerji (Pelitlik)
Gül Enerji Elkt. Üret. Sn. Ve Tic. A.Ş.
Habaş Aliağa
Hayat Kağıt
Kasar Dual Tekstil San. A.Ş. (Çorlu)
Ken Kipaş Elektrik Üretim (Karen)
Ken Kipaş Elkt. Ür. (Karen) (K.Maraş)
Maksi Enerji EeLEKTRİK Üretim A.Ş.
Marmara Pamuklu Mens. Sn. Tic. A.Ş.
Mauri Maya San A.Ş.
Mauri Maya San A.Ş.
Modern Enerji (B. Karıştıran)
MOSB Enerji Elektrik Üretim Ltd. Şti.
Nuh Çimento San. Tic. A.Ş.
Rasa Enerji (VAN)
Natural Gas
Natural Gas
Natural Gas
Natural Gas
Natural Gas
Natural Gas
Natural Gas
Natural Gas
Natural Gas
Natural Gas
Natural Gas
Natural Gas
Natural Gas
Natural Gas
Natural Gas
Natural Gas
Natural Gas
Natural Gas
Natural Gas
Natural Gas
Natural Gas
Natural Gas
Natural Gas
Natural Gas
Natural Gas
Natural Gas
Natural Gas
Natural Gas
Natural Gas
Natural Gas
Natural Gas
Natural Gas
Natural Gas
Natural Gas
Natural Gas
Added
Installed
Capacity
MW
7.50
70.00
16.20
300.00
300.00
10.50
41.80
12.00
36.60
126.10
2.00
1.20
47.00
13.00
9.80
59.00
12.80
0.80
36.30
11.70
8.60
24.30
224.50
7.50
5.70
41.80
17.50
7.70
34.90
0.30
2.00
96.80
84.80
47.00
78.60
Generation
MWh
61,000
539,000
124,740
2,310,000
2,310,000
83,144
302,096
84,000
255,000
1,008,000
16,000
9,000
365,817
101,183
70,000
452,000
107,000
6,366
288,876
88,000
65,665
170,000
1,796,000
56,000
38,000
180,000
75,359
55,000
271,533
2,478
16,522
595,702
329,000
500,000
page 44
Selkasan Kağıt Paketleme
Sönmez Elektrik (Uşak)
Şahinler Enerji (Çorlu/Tekirdağ)
TAV İstanbul Terminal İşletme A.Ş.
TAV İstanbul Terminal İşletme A.Ş.
Tesko Kipa Kitle Paz. Tic. Ve Gıda A.Ş.
Yurtbay Elektrik Üretim A.Ş.(DG+M)
Zorlu Enerji (B. Karıştıran)
Natural Gas
Natural Gas
Natural Gas
Natural Gas
Natural Gas
Natural Gas
Natural Gas
Natural Gas
Natural Gas 2009 Total
Erdemir (Ereğli-Zonguldak)
Habaş Bilecik Paşalar
Habaş İzmir Habaş
Petkim (Aliağa)
Petkim (Aliağa)
Silopi Elektrik Üretim A.Ş.
Süper Film (G. Antep)
Tire Kutsan (Tire)
Tüpraş Rafineri (Aliağa/İzmir)
Tüpraş O.A. Rafineri (Kırıkkale)
Silopi Elektrik Üretim A.Ş.
Fuel Oil
Fuel Oil
Fuel Oil
Fuel Oil
Fuel Oil
Fuel Oil
Fuel Oil
Fuel Oil
Fuel Oil
Fuel Oil
Fuel Oil
Fuel Oil 2009 Total
Alkim Alkali Kimya
Lignite
Lignite 2009 Total
İçdaş Çelik
İçdaş Çelik
Coal
Coal
Coal 2009 Total
Akçay Hes Elektrik Üretim (Akçay HES)
Akua Enerji (Kayalık Reg ve HES)
Anadolu Elektrik (Çakırlar HES)
Bağışlı REG ve HES (Ceykar Elekt.)
Bağışlı REG ve HES (Ceykar Elekt.)
Bereket Enerji (Koyul Hisar)
Beyobası En. Ür. A.Ş. (Sırma HES)
Cindere HES (Denizli)
Değirmenüstü En (Kahramanmaraş)
Denizli Elektrik (EGE I HES)
Elestaş Elektrik (Yaylabel HES)
Elestaş Elektrik (Yazı HES)
Hydro
Hydro
Hydro
Hydro
Hydro
Hydro
Hydro
Hydro
Hydro
Hydro
Hydro
Hydro
9.90
8.70
26.00
3.30
6.50
2.30
6.90
49.50
1,909.40
73,000
67,057
185,000
27,612
54,388
18,000
50,000
394,970
13,602,509
39.20
18.00
36.00
222.00
52.00
44.80
25.30
8.00
24.70
10.00
135
615.00
240,000
144,000
288,000
1,554,000
364,000
315,000
203,000
37,000
171,777
70,000
945000
4,331,777
0.40
0.40
3,000
3,000
135.00
135.00
270.00
961,667
961,667
1,923,333
28.80
5.80
16.20
9.90
19.70
42.00
5.90
19.10
12.90
0.90
5.10
1.10
45,000
20,000
28,000
15,720
31,280
155,000
11,000
30,000
17,378
2,000
10,000
3,000
page 45
Erva Enerji (Kabaca Reg ve HES)
Erva Enerji (Kabaca Reg ve HES)
Filyos Enerji (Yalnızca Reg ve HES)
Kalen Enerji (Kalen I II HES)
Karel Enerji (Pamukova)
Kayen Alfa Enerji (Kaletepe HES)
Kısık
Lamas II IV HES (TGT Enerji Üretim)
Obruk HES
Öztay Enerji (Günayşe Reg ve HES)
Özyakut Elek. Ür. A.Ş. (Güneşli HES)
Özyakut Elek. Ür. A.Ş. (Güneşli HES)
Reşadiye 3 HES (Turkon MNG Elekt.)
Sarıtepe HES (Genel Dinamik Sis. El)
Sarıtepe HES (Genel Dinamik Sis. El)
Şirikçioğlu El. (Kozak Bendi ve HES)
Taşova Yenidereköy HES (Hameka A.Ş.)
Tektuğ (Erkenek)
Tektuğ (Erkenek)
Tocak I HES (Yurt Enerji Üretim Sn.)
Tüm Enerji (Pınar Reg ve HES)
Uzunçayır HES (Tunceli)
Yapısan (Karıca Reg ve Darıca HES)
Yapısan (Karıca Reg ve Darıca HES)
Yeşilbaş Enerji (Yeşilbaş HES)
ypm Gölova HES (Suşehri / Sivas)
YPM Sevindik HES (Suşehri / Sivas)
Hydro
Hydro
Hydro
Hydro
Hydro
Hydro
Hydro
Hydro
Hydro
Hydro
Hydro
Hydro
Hydro
Hydro
Hydro
Hydro
Hydro
Hydro
Hydro
Hydro
Hydro
Hydro
Hydro
Hydro
Hydro
Hydro
Hydro
Hydro 2009 Total
4.20
4.20
14.40
15.70
9.30
10.20
9.60
35.70
212.40
8.30
0.60
1.20
22.30
2.50
2.50
4.40
2.00
6.00
6.50
4.80
30.10
27.30
48.50
48.50
14.00
1.10
5.70
719.40
7,412
7,412
33,000
23,575
40,000
17,000
20,000
71,000
337,000
14,000
1,333
2,667
88,000
4,592
4,592
7,000
6,000
14,400
15,600
6,000
65,000
49,000
77,000
77,000
26,000
2,000
18,000
1,402,961
Gürmat Elektrik (Gürmat Jeotermal)
Alize Enerji (Sarıkaya RES) (Şarköy)
Baki Elektrik (Şamlı Rüzgar)
Baki Elektrik (Şamlı Rüzgar)
Belen Elektrik Belen Rüzgar-Hatay
Belen Elektrik Belen Rüzgar-Hatay
Borasko Enerji (Bandırma RES)
Borasko Enerji (Bandırma RES)
Cargill Tarım ve Gıda San. Tic. A.Ş.
Ortadoğu Enerji (Kömürcüoda)
Ortadoğu Enerji (Oda Yeri)
Ortadoğu Enerji (Oda Yeri)
Ütopya Elektrik (Düzova RES)
Geothermal
Wind
Wind
Wind
Wind
Wind
Wind
Wind
Biogas
Waste
Waste
Waste
Wind
Renewable 2009 Total
47.40
28.80
36.00
33.00
15.00
15.00
21.00
24.00
0.10
5.80
4.20
5.70
15.00
253.80
313,000
96,000
176,000
161,333
47,500
47,500
83,533
95,467
700
45,000
33,071
44,882
46,000
1,189,986.09
3,768.00
22,453,566
2009 Total
page 46
2008
Plant Name
Fuel Type
MB Şeker Nişasta San A.Ş
Aksa Enerji (Manisa)
Antalya Enerji (İlave)
Ataç İnşaat San. A.S.B. (Antalya)
Bahçivan Gıda (Lüleburgaz)
Can Enerji (Çorlu Tekirdağ) (İlave)
Four Seasons Otel (Atik Paşa Tur A.Ş.)
Fritolay Gıda San. Ve Tic. A.Ş. (İlave)
Melike Tekstil (Gaziantep)
Misis Apre Tekstil Boya En. San.
Modern Enerji (Lüleburgaz)
Polat Turz (Polat Reniassance Ist. Ot.)
Yıldız Sunta (Uzunçıftlik Köseköy)
Sönmez Elektrik
Natural Gas
Natural Gas
Natural Gas
Natural Gas
Natural Gas
Natural Gas
Natural Gas
Natural Gas
Natural Gas
Natural Gas
Natural Gas
Natural Gas
Natural Gas
Natural Gas
Natural Gas
Karkey (Silopi 5) (154kV) (İlave)
Fuel Oil
Fuel Oil 2008 Total
Akköy Enerji (Akköy I HES)
Alp Elektrik (Tınaztepe) Antalya
Cansu Elektrik (Murgul/Artvin)
Çaldere Elk. (Çaldere HES) Dalaman Muğla
Daren HES Elkt. (Seyrantepe Barajı ve HES)
Değirmenüstü En. (Kahramanmaraş)
Gözede HES (Temsa Elektrik) Bursa
H.G.M. Enerji (Keklicek HES) (Yeşilyurt)
Hamzalı HES (Turkon MNG Elektrik)
Hidro KNT. (Yukarı Manahoz Reg. Ve HES)
İç-En Elk. (Çalkışla Regülatörü ve HES)
Kalen Enerjş (Kalen II Regülat. Ve HES)
Maraş Enerji (Fırnıs Regülatörü ve Hes)
Sarmaşık I HES (Fetaş Fethiye Enerji)
Sarmaşık II HES (Fetaş Fethiye Enerji)
Torul
Yeşil Enerji Elektrik (Tayfun HES)
Zorlu Enerji (Mercan)
Hydro
Hydro
Hydro
Hydro
Hydro
Hydro
Hydro
Hydro
Hydro
Hydro
Hydro
Hydro
Hydro
Hydro
Hydro
Hydro
Hydro
Hydro
Hydro 2008 Total
Added
Installed
Capacity
MW
8.80
183.80
52.38
17.46
5.40
1.17
52.38
1.17
0.01
1.58
2.00
13.40
1.60
22.63
8.73
372.50
Generation
MWh
0
133,736
79,183
85,341
10
0
255,164
0
0
0
5,324
70,453
490
136,018
61
765,780
14.78
14.78
16,362
16,362
101.94
7.69
9.18
8.74
49.70
25.70
2.40
8.67
16.70
22.40
7.66
15.65
7.22
21.04
21.58
105.60
0.82
1.28
433.97
21,608
9,245
12,518
11,153
14,370
0
6,107
120
2,936
13,772
3,364
10,281
0
1,472
1,221
18,551
0
1,427
128,145
page 47
2008 Total
821,25
910.286
9.10
5.20
0.70
0.10
0.10
0.10
0.50
0.60
1.30
1.80
2.10
2.10
0.50
3.90
3.20
1.00
1.60
3.90
73.00
16.40
5.00
3.50
2.90
2.20
0.10
43.00
34.80
28.30
48.00
142.80
5.90
1.60
445.30
72,800
38,717
5,567
806
727
263
6,250
5,000
11,000
14,000
17,000
17,000
4,000
33,000
25,000
8,000
11,000
33,000
514,000
43,075
40,000
26,814
7,617
15,200
697
354,802
278,000
233,510
396,059
1,071,000
47,000
13,000
3,343,903
0.80
0.10
7.20
25.60
34.10
24.30
24.40
0.70
2,504
802
54,964
190,000
106,734
180,000
180,000
4,623
2007
HABAŞ (Aliağa-ilave)
Moder Enerji
Arenko
Altınmarka Gıda
Tekboy Enerji
Velsan Akrilik
Acıbadem Sağlık Kadıköy
Acıbadem Sağlık Kozyatağı
Acıbadem Sağlık Bursa
Akateks Tekstil Sanayi
Flokser Tekstil Poliser
Flokser Tekstil Süetser
Fritolay Gıda
Kıvanç Tekstil
Kil San
Superboy Boya San
Swiss Hotel
TAV Esenboğa
Nuh Enerji 2
Boğazlıyan Şeker
Kartonsan
Eskişehşir End. Enerji
Eskişehir Şeker
İgsaş
Bil Enerji
BİS Enerji Üretim
Aliağa Çakmaktepe Enerji
Bis Enerji Üretim
BİS Enerji Üretim
Bosen Enerji Elektrik
Sayenerji Elektrik Üretim A.Ş.
T Enerji Üretim A.Ş.
Natural Gas
Natural Gas
Natural Gas
Natural Gas
Natural Gas
Natural Gas
Natural Gas
Natural Gas
Natural Gas
Natural Gas
Natural Gas
Natural Gas
Natural Gas
Natural Gas
Natural Gas
Natural Gas
Natural Gas
Natural Gas
Natural Gas
Liquid + Natural Gas
Natural Gas
Natural Gas
Natural Gas
Natural Gas
Natural Gas
Natural Gas
Natural Gas
Natural Gas
Akteks
Süper filmcilik
Zorlu Eenerji Kayseri
Siirt
Mardin Kızıltepe
Karen
İdil 2
Desa
Fuel Oil
Fuel Oil
Fuel Oil
Fuel Oil
Fuel Oil
Fuel Oil
Fuel Oil
Naphta
page 48
Dentaş
Ataer Enerji
Naphta
Naphta
Fuel Oil 2007 Total
Uşak Şeker
Lignite
Lignite 2007 Total
Borçka HES
Tektuğ
YPM Ener Yat A.S. Altıntepe Hidro
YPM Ener Yat A.S. Beypınar Hidro
YPM Ener Yat A.S. Konak Hidro
Kurteks Tekstil
Iskur Tekstil
Özgür Elek. A.Ş.
Özgür Elek. A.Ş. (ilave)
Hydro
Hydro
Hydro
Hydro
Hydro
Hydro
Hydro
Hydro
Hydro
Hydro 2007 Total
2007 Total
0.30
0.10
117.60
2,280
566
722,473
1.70
1.70
3,084
3,084
300.60
5.00
4.00
3.60
4.00
2.40
4.60
6.30
6.30
336.80
600,000
20,000
10,000
9,000
1,000
19,000
4,000
27,216
27,216
717,432
901.40
4.786.892
1.93
1.37
21.89
7.52
26.08
8.73
47.62
3.16
17.46
0.45
7.52
8.73
14.25
1.58
34.92
15.04
1.17
126.10
6.18
49.16
1.32
6.91
6.91
416
14,015
9,750
158,302
60,160
180,059
62,499
378,198
24,688
125,712
3,179
54,144
70,241
33,881
12,838
245,140
108,288
8,738
1,008,000
39,897
389,715
11,203
50,072
54,078
3,102,795
2006
Ekoten Tekstil GR-I
Erak Giyim GR-I
Alarko Altek GR-III
Aydın Örme GR-I
Nuh Enerji 2 GR-II
Marmara Elektrik (Çorlu) GR-I
Entek GR-IV
Else Tekstil (Çorlu) GR-I II
Sönmez Elektrik (Çorlu) GR-I II
Denizli Çimento (Düzeltme)
Kastamonu Entegre (Balıkesir) GR I
Boz Enerji GR I
Amylum Nişasta (Adana)
Şık Makas (Çorlu) GR I
Antalya Enerji GR I II III IV
Hayat TEM ve Sağlık GR I II
Eroğlu Giyim (Çorlu) GR I
Cam İş Elktrik (Mersin) GR I
Yıldız Ent. Ağaç (Kocaeli) GR I
Çerkezköy Enerji GR I
Çırağan Sarayı GR I
Akmaya (Lüleburgaz) GR I
Burgaz (Lüleburgaz) GR I
Natural Gas
Natural Gas
Natural Gas
Natural Gas
Natural Gas
Natural Gas
Natural Gas
Natural Gas
Natural Gas
Natural Gas
Natural Gas
Natural Gas
Natural Gas
Natural Gas
Natural Gas
Natural Gas
Natural Gas
Natural Gas
Natural Gas
Natural Gas
Natural Gas
Natural Gas
Natural Gas
page 49
Elbistan B GR III
Elbistan B GR II
Elbistan B GR IV
Lignite
Lignite
Lignite
Lignite 2006 Total
Menderes Elektrik GR-I
Adana Atıksu Arıtma Tesisi
Ekolojik Enerji (Kemerburgaz) GR I
Ertürk Elektrik Tepe RES GR I
Geothermal
Biogaz
LFG
Wind
Renewable 2006 Total
Seyhan I II
Şanlıurfa GR I II
Bereket Enerji Gökyar HES 3 Grup
Molu En. Zamantı Bahçelik GR I II
Su Enerji (Balıkesir) GR I II
Bereket Enerji (Mentaş Reg) GR I II
Ekin (Başaran HES) (Nazilli)
Ere (Sugözü rg. Kızıldüz HES) GR I II
Ere (Aksu Reg. Ve Şahmallar HES) GR I II
Tektuğ (Kalealtı) GR I II
Bereket EN. (Mentaş Reg) GR III
Hydro
Hydro
Hydro
Hydro
Hydro
Hydro
Hydro
Hydro
Hydro
Hydro
Hydro
Hydro 2006 Total
2006 Total
360.00
360.00
360.00
1,080.00
2,340,000
2,340,000
2,340,000
7,020,000
7.95
0.80
0.98
0.85
11
55,657
6,023
5,880
1,889
69,448
0.30
51.80
11.62
4.22
4.60
26.60
0.60
15.43
14.00
15.00
13.30
157
1,171
0
28,048
10,501
4,203
93,333
2,900
7,916
6,600
11,000
46,667
212,339
1,664.06
10,404,583
8.73
50.00
58.73
65,000
350,000
415,000
6.75
6.75
52,000
52,000
65.48
467,000
2005
AKÇA ENERJİ GR-III
BOSEN GR-III
Natural Gas
Natural Gas
KARKEY(SİLOPİ-4) GR-V
Fuel Oil
Fuel Oil 2005 Total
2005 Total
Annex 4
MONITORING INFORMATION
-----

(CDM-PDD) Version 03

Transkript

Benzer belgeler

2011 NY Slip Op 05855 - Courthouse News Service

EYS Politikası

enerji̇ i̇ka

problem definition methodology decision support system result

ELEKTRİK ENERJİ SİSTEMLERİ İÇİN VERİMLİ VE YENİLİKÇİ

BODIPY Couple in Aqueous Media

(t)DEil

traktör föy - demireller kardan

Hanwha SolarOne Wins Contract Following Positive Third

(GS) Annual Report