project design document

Transkript

UNFCCC/CCNUCC
CDM – Executive Board
Page 1
PROJECT DESIGN DOCUMENT FORM
FOR SMALL-SCALE CDM PROJECT ACTIVITIES (F-CDM-SSC-PDD)
Version 04.1
PROJECT DESIGN DOCUMENT (PDD)
Title of the project activity
Kar-demir Bozyaka RES 12 MW
Version number of the PDD
7.1
Completion date of the PDD
23/03/2015
Project participant(s)
Kar-demir Haddecilik ve Elektrik Üretim San. Tic. Ltd. Şti.
Host Party(ies)
Turkey
Sectoral scope(s) and selected
methodology(ies)
01 Energy industries (renewable - / non-renewable
sources)
AMS-I.D.: Grid connected renewable electricity
generation --- Version 17.0
Estimated amount of annual
average GHG emission
reductions
20,641 tCO2/yr
UNFCCC/CCNUCC
Page 2
SECTION A. Description of project activity
A.1.
Purpose and general description of project activity
Kar-demir Haddecilik San. ve Tic. Ltd. Şti. (referred to as Kar-demir from here on) is operating
as a steel producing company in Turkey for roughly 40 years. As its first project of this kind the
company has developed the Kar-demir Bozyaka RES 12 MW wind farm project close to
Horozgediği community in Aliağa district in İzmir province in Turkey. The project area is very
remote, with a distance of roughly 1 km from the closest residential buildings in Horozgediği
village. Exact details of the project location are given in Section A.2 below.
The purpose of the project activity is to deliver carbon neutral power to the Turkish electricity
grid and thus to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by displacing power mainly from fossil fuel
fired power plants. The situation prior to the implementation of the proposed project activity is
represented by the current and expected power generation mix delivering electricity to the
Turkish grid. This mix is clearly dominated by fossil fueled plants, see 4 in Section A.3. below.
This situation mainly corresponds to the baseline scenario, i.e. electricity delivered to the grid by
the project activity would have otherwise been generated by the operation of grid-connected
power plants and by the addition of new generation sources into the grid.
According to the initial plans which envisaged to operate the power plant under the
Autoproducer business model, the Autoproducer licence for an installed capacity of 12 MW has
been obtained from the Energy Market Regulatory Authority (Turkish: Enerji Piyasası
Düzenleme Kurumu, EPDK) in May 2008. Upon respective application, a change to
Independent Power Producer (IPP) was granted on 19/01/2011. Also, by decision of the Turkish
Ministry of Environment and Forestry (Turkish: Türkiye Cumhuriyeti Çevre ve Orman Bakanlığı,
TÇOB), the project was released from the duty to perform an Environmental Impact
Assessment.
The wind farm comprises five turbines of the type Nordex N-100 with a nominal capacity of
2.5 MW each.1 As the above-mentioned EPDK licence refers to only 12 MW, the wind farm –
though having a total rated generator capacity of 12.5 MW – will be operated under this
maximum output restriction. From the wind yield assessment prepared by EMD for the project, a
33% plant load factor was concluded. This leads to an estimated net annual electricity
production of 34,690 MWh/yr (for further details, see 2 below in Section A.3.). With an emission
factor of 0.595 tCO2/MWh (see Step 6 below in Section B.6.3), the expected emission
reductions over the first crediting period (see Section C.2 below) are:
1
In the technical description of the used turbine, the power factor is given as: “1.00 as default setting”, and the
nominal power of the generator is 2,500kW, i.e. 2.5 MW, so 1.00 * 2.5 MW = 2.5 MW.
UNFCCC/CCNUCC
Page 3
Year
Annual estimation of emission
reductions in tonnes of CO2e
10/03/2012
-
31/12/2012
16,795
01/01/2013
-
31/12/2013
20,641
01/01/2014
-
31/12/2014
20,641
31/12/2015
20,641
01/01/2015
01/01/2016
-
31/12/2016
20,641
01/01/2017
-
31/12/2017
20,641
01/01/2018
-
31/12/2018
20,641
01/01/2019
-
09/03/2019
3,845
Total estimated reductions
(tonnes of CO2e)
Total number of crediting years
Annual average over the crediting
period of estimated reductions
(tonnes of CO2e)
144,486
7
20,641
As a renewable energy project, Kar-demir Bozyaka RES 12 MW falls under sectoral scope
no. 01 Energy industries (renewable - / non-renewable sources). As a renewable energy project
activity with a maximum output capacity of 15 MW, it qualifies as Type I project in accordance
with Clause 81 of the Clean development mechanism project standard Version 4.0 valid as of
29/07/2013.2
Contribution to sustainable development
Building a wind farm contributes to a sustainable expansion path of the Turkish energy system,
as it serves the steadily growing electricity demand in an environmentally suitable way. The
project will contribute to dissemination of state-of-the-art new renewable energy (REN)
technology. This helps strengthening those pillars of Turkish energy supply that are based on
ecologically sound and domestically sourced technology.
No significant negative ecological impacts can be expected from the proposed project activity.
Rather, there will be essential positive effects, as highly polluting electricity generation
technologies will be displaced by the project. This refers not only to greenhouse gases but also
to other local air pollutants (such as SO2, NOx, etc.).
As for social impacts, significant positive employment effects are expected especially during the
construction and installation period, not only directly in terms of temporary construction worker
employment, but as well indirectly. In fact, material supplies such as foundations, cables and
access roads will be locally sourced so that the project will also contribute to employment of
external supplier companies. Operation and maintenance of the wind farm will have positive job
effects, too. The experiences with operating a wind farm in Turkey will help building capacity
and know-how on state-of-the-art REN technology.Technical description of the small-scale
project activity:
A.2.
Location of project activity
A.2.1. Host Party(/ies)
Republic of Turkey
2
http://cdm.unfccc.int/sunsetcms/storage/contents/stored-file-20130729142713423/reg_stan01.pdf
UNFCCC/CCNUCC
Page 4
A.2.2. Region/State/Province
İzmir province
A.2.3. City/Town/Community etc.
Town and district of Aliağa, Horozgediği village
A.2.4. Physical / Geographical location
Please refer to the maps below for a description of the physical location of the project activity:
Figure 1:
Location of Izmir province in Turkey
Figure 2:
Location of Horozgediği village in Aliağa district in İzmir province
UNFCCC/CCNUCC
Page 5
The detailed locations of every single plant are visualised in
Figure 3:
Layout of Kar-demir Bozyaka RES 12 MW
The exact coordinates are summarized in
Table 1:
Wind farm layout coordinates
WEC no.
Longitude (N)
Latitude (E)
Elevation
[m]
1
38°44'44.00"N
26°56'15.00"E
55
2
38°44'45.00"N
26°56'26.00"E
80
3
38°44'49.00"N
26°56'37.00"E
87
4
38°44'54.00"N
26°56'47.00"E
28
5
38°44'16.00"N
26°56'10.00"E
49
UNFCCC/CCNUCC
Page 6
A.3.
Technologies and/or measures
The proposed project activity will involve the transfer of state-of-the-art REN technology for gridconnected generation of electricity in the host country by adding highly developed wind energy
converter technology to the current generation mix. The general technical information on the
proposed project activity, including the expected energy flow and type and level of services is
given in
Table 2: Technical data of Kar-demir Bozyaka RES 12 MW
Total power
12.0 MW
Total rated generator capacity
12.5 MW
Turbine
Nordex N-100
Rated power of turbine
2.5 MW
No. of turbines
5
Annual net production
34,690 MWh
Capacity factor
33 %3
Expected lifetime
20 years4
By annually delivering an expected amount of 34,690 MWh to the Turkish grid, the proposed
project activity contributes to reductions in greenhouse gas emissions, because this electricity
would otherwise be generated by the operation of grid-connected power plants and by the
addition of new generation sources into the grid.
By applying state-of-the-art wind energy technology the project involves significant transfer of
environmentally safe and sound technology to the host country. Moreover, tower construction
was conducted in the host country, which contributes to additional and sustainable long-term
transfer of technology and know-how.
3
4
Capacity factor was applied as indicated in EMD Wind Yield Assessment. The latter is provided to the DOE for
validation.
See http://www.nordex-online.com/fileadmin/MEDIA/Gamma/Nordex_Gamma_en.pdf.
UNFCCC/CCNUCC
Page 7
A more detailed compilation of the power production technologies and equipment involved is
given in
Table: 3
Technical data of Nordex N-100
Rotor
Rotor blades
Number of rotor blades
3
Length
48.7 m
Rotor speed
9.6-14.9 rpm
Material
GRP
Rotor diameter
100 m
Weight
C. 9,800 kg
Swept area
7,854 m²
Power regulation
Pitch
Brakes
Cut-in wind speed
3 m/s
Primary
Rotor blade pitch
Cut-out wind speed
20 m/s
Secondary
Hydraulic disc brake
Rated power from
13 m/s
Survival wind speed
52.5 m/s
Tower
Pitch regulation
Individual rotor blade pitch
Type
Modular tubular steel tower
Weight
C. 56,500 kg
Hub height
100 m, certificate DIBt 2, IEC 3a
Gearbox
Type
Planetary/spur gear or differential gear box
Gear ratio
1:77.4 (50 Hz) / 1:92.9 (60 Hz)
Generator
Power
2,500 kW
Voltage
660 V
Type
Double-fed asynchronous generator with partial frequency converter
Frequency
50 or 60 Hz
Yaw system
Bearing
Ball bearing
Brake
Hydraulic disc brake
Drive
Asynchronous motors with integrated brakes
Speed
C. 0.4 °/s
Control system
Type
PLC, Remote Field Controller (RFC)
Grid connection
Via IGBT converter
Scope of monitoring
Remote monitoring of over 300 different parameters, e.g. temperature, hydraulic
pressure, pitch parameters, wind speed and direction
Recording
Production data, event lists with filter function, long and short-term trends
Visualisation
Panel PC in control cabinet and Web-based access possible from any PC, adapter for
laptop at the bottom of tower or in nacelle
UNFCCC/CCNUCC
Page 8
As primary monitoring equipment, one main and one backup bidirectional electricity meter with
0.5s accuracy class5 are installed at the substation to which Kar-demir Bozyaka RES 12 MW is
connected. As backup monitoring equipment, another proprietary set of main and backup
meters is installed on site for control purposes. Location of meters is represented in 7 in
Section B.7.3. below.
Facilities, systems and equipment under the existing scenario prior to the implementation of the
project activity which corresponds to the baseline scenario can best be summarised by
1. the current distribution of primary energy resources used for electricity generation in
Turkey and
2. the projected future distribution of those primary energy resources.
For the current distribution, data is available from Turkish electricity generation-transmission
statistics 20116 published by the Turkish grid operator Türkiye Elektrik İletim A.Ş (TEİAŞ) as
summarised in
Table 4:
Turkey’s gross electricity generation by primary energy resources 7
Gross electricity generation (GWh)
Primary Energy Resources
2009
2010
2011
Hard Coal+Imported Coal
16,595.60
19,104.30
27,347.50
Lignite
39,089.46
35,942.10
38,870.40
Fuel Oil
4,439.77
2,143.80
900.50
345.81
4.30
3.10
0.40
0.00
0.00
17.56
31.90
0.00
96,094.71
98,143.70
104,047.60
Diesel oil
LPG
Naphtha
Natural Gas
Renewables and wastes
Hydro+Geothermal+Wind Total
TURKEY'S TOTAL
340.15
457.50
469.20
37,889.47
55,380.10
57,756.80
194,812.92
211,207.70
229,395.10
The current generation mix is clearly dominated by fossil fuel fired power sources, causing GHG
emissions of 98,047 kt CO2 in 2009, 98,582 kt CO2 in 2010, and 110,027 kt CO2 in 2011, as
calculated in this document, see 14 Section B.6.3 Step 4. below.
The coal fired power plants serving the Turkish system are characterised by pulverized coal
combustion technology with relatively low pressure and temperature. The average efficiency is
around 32-33%, with a maximum of 38%. The average age is approx. 28 years.8 See also
5
6
7
8
See detailed specification in Section B.7.1 below.
See http://www.teias.gov.tr/T%C3%BCrkiyeElektrik%C4%B0statistikleri/istatistik2011/istatistik%202011.htm
[TEİAŞ Statistics].
Source: TEİAŞ Statistics (http://www.teias.gov.tr/T%C3%BCrkiyeElektrik%C4%B0statistikleri/istatistik2011/uretim
%20tuketim(22-45)/40(06-11).xls). For a detailed compilation of all power plants serving the Turkish system, see
TEİAŞ (2011): Türkiye elektrik enerjisi 10 yıllık üretim kapasite projeksiyonu (2012–2021) pp. 1-101 (Turkish 10year electricity generation capacity projection).
http://www.teias.gov.tr/projeksiyon/KAPASITEPROJEKSIYONU2012.pdf [TEİAŞ Projection]
See Presentation “Clean Coal Technologies“ held by Assoc. Prof. Dr. Fehmi Akgün during the “Turkish-American
Clean Energy Conference” in Istanbul in January 2008. Download at: http://www.americanturkishcouncil.org/
events/cleanenergy/pdf/TuesdayMorningBallroom2&3/AkgunFehmi_2008CleanEnergy.pdf.
UNFCCC/CCNUCC
Table 5:
Page 9
Thermal power plants in Turkey9
Power plant name
Fuel type
Province
Afşin-Elbistan A
Lignite
K.Maraş
Aliağa GT+KÇ
Diesel oil
Ambarlı
Total capacity
(MW)
Projected
generation
(GWh)
Average thermal
efficiency (%)
1,360.00
8,840.00
30.06
İzmir
180.00
540.00
33.78
Fuel oil
İstanbul
630.00
4,100.00
37.25
Ambarlı KÇ
Natural Gas
İstanbul
1,350.90
8,780.00
48.57
Bursa
Natural Gas
Bursa
1,432.00
10,024.00
54.40
Çatalağzı B
Hard Coal
Zonguldak
300.00
1,950.00
33.57
Çayırhan 1,2
Linyit
Ankara
320.00
2,080.00
34.54
Denizli Tabii
Buhar
Denizli
17.50
105.00
11.57
Esenyurt I,II,III,IV
Natural Gas
İstanbul
188.50
1,413.80
45.00
Enron(Trakya Elek.)
Natural Gas
Tekirdağ
498.70
3,740.30
47.00
Engil GT
Diesel oil
Van
15.00
90.00
21.27
Hakkari
Fuel oil
Hakkari
11.10
83.30
35.03
Hamitabat KÇ
Natural Gas
Kırklareli
1,200.00
7,800.00
45.81
Hopa
Fuel oil
Artvin
50.00
200.00
26.27
Kangal 1,2,3
Lignite
Sivas
457.00
2,970.50
29.76
Kemerköy 1,2,3
Lignite
Muğla
630.00
4,095.00
33.21
Orhaneli
Lignite
Bursa
210.00
1,365.00
36.18
Ova elektrik
Natural Gas
Kocaeli
258.40
1,938.00
44.00
Park Termik
Lignite
Ankara
300.00
1,072.90
34.71
PS3-Silopi
Fuel oil
Ş. Urfa
44.10
330.80
37.36
PS3A-idil
Fuel oil
Mardin
11.40
85.50
35.19
Seyitömer
Lignite
Kütahya
600.00
3,900.00
32.97
Soma A
Lignite
Manisa
44.00
290.00
30.31
Soma B
Lignite
Manisa
990.00
6,435.00
32.45
Tunçbilek A+B
Lignite
Kütahya
429.00
2,790.00
31.45
Unimar
Natural Gas
Tekirdağ
504.00
3,780.00
37.00
Van
Fuel oil
Van
24.00
180.00
39.33
Yatağan
Lignite
Muğla
630.00
4,100.00
32.67
Yeniköy
Lignite
Muğla
420.00
2,730.00
34.82
As for the future of the generation mix in Turkey, it can be stated that the typical capacity
additions in recent years are clearly dominated by natural gas plants with presumably higher
efficiencies than displayed in 5 above (see also the assumptions explained in Step 5. below in
Section B.6.1, as well as the plants listed in D below in Appendix 4). The expectations about the
development of the Turkish power production sources in the coming 10 year period as
published in TEİAŞ Projection are illustrated in
9
Source: Environmental Atlas of Turkey (Türkiye Çevre Atlası) 2004, p. 197. Download at:
http://www.cedgm.gov.tr/CED/Files/cevreatlas%C4%B1/atlas_metni.pdf.
UNFCCC/CCNUCC
Figure 4:
Shares of energy resources in projected Turkish electricity generation
2012-2021 (scenario 1).10
Figure 5:
Shares of energy resources in projected Turkish electricity generation
2012-2021 (scenario 2).11
Page 10
As can be seen in both scenarios, electricity generation in Turkey is clearly based on fossil fuels
and is expected to remain so in the nearer future. The share of natural gas will slightly decline
from over 45% to roughly 40%. Emission intensive but domestic lignite will keep a share of
around 15%, hard coal of approx. 10% while petroleum based sources are expected to stay
below 5%. Hydro electricity plants are expected to increase their share to well above 25%.
Other renewable energy is expected to remain at very low levels of around 2.7%, and are
expected to be outpaced by newly added nuclear power plants.
10
11
For underlying values see A below in Appendix 4.
For underlying values see B below in Appendix 4.
UNFCCC/CCNUCC
Page 11
The baseline scenario is almost identical with the situation prior to the implementation of the
proposed GS VER project activity as described above in this section. I.e., the assumption is that
the electricity presumably generated by the proposed GS VER project activity would be
otherwise provided by the existing and forecast generation mix. Section B.4 below will contain
general explanations on the way of identifying the baseline scenario as well as a general
definition according to the methodology used to calculate GHG emission reductions caused by
the proposed GS VER project activity. Section B.5 below will exactly apply a stepwise approach
of identifying the baseline scenario in compliance with the used methodology. Step 3 and Step 4
in Section B.6.1 will contain an exact specification of the characteristics of the power plants to
be included in the baseline scenario, particularly w.r.t. the current generation mix. Step 5 in
Section B.6.1, as well as D below in Appendix 4 will also provide for exact definitions as to how
the forecast generation mix will be represented in the baseline scenario.
A.4.
Parties and project participants
Name of Party involved
Turkey (host)
Private and/or public entity project
participants
Kar-demir Haddecilik San. Tic. Ltd. Sti.
Party involved wishes to be
considered as project participant
No
A.5.
Public funding of project activity
No public funding is involved in the financing of the proposed GS VER project activity.12
A.6.
Debundling for project activity
According to UNFCCC "Guidelines on assessment of debundling for SSC project activities" 13, a
"[...] proposed small-scale project activity shall be deemed to be a debundled component of a
large project activity if there is a registered small-scale CDM project activity or an application to
register another small-scale CDM project activity:
(a) With the same project participants;
(b) In the same project category and technology/measure; and
(c) Registered within the previous 2 years; and
(d) Whose project boundary is within 1 km of the project boundary of the proposed small-scale
activity at the closest point. [...]"
None of this is applicable to Kar-demir Bozyaka RES 12 MW.
12
13
A respective written undertaking by the financier of the project is submitted to the DOE for validation.
http://cdm.unfccc.int/Reference/Guidclarif/ssc/methSSC_guid17.pdf
UNFCCC/CCNUCC
Page 12
SECTION B. Application of selected approved baseline and monitoring methodology
B.1.
Reference of methodology
For the proposed GS VER project activity the
1. Indicative simplified baseline and monitoring methodology small-scale CDM project
activity category "I. D. Grid connected renewable electricity generation", Version 17.0,
valid as of 17/06/2011 (referred to as AMS-I.D. from here on) is used in combination with
2. the “Tool for the demonstration and assessment of additionality” Version 07.0.0 valid as
of 23/11/2012 (referred to as Additionality Tool from here on) as well as with the
3. “Tool to calculate the emission factor for an electricity system” Version 03.0.0 valid as of
23/11/2012 (referred to as EF Tool from here on).
B.2.
Project activity eligibility
Kar-demir Bozyaka RES 12 MW represents a capacity addition of wind energy resources to the
Turkish national electricity grid. It does not involve switching from fossil fuels to renewable
energy at the project site. Identification of geographic and system boundaries is feasible in a
clear way and information of grid characteristics is available. Concluding, all applicability criteria
listed in AMS-I.D. are met by the proposed GS VER project activity. As it is a grid connected
power plant, the applicability criteria of the EF Tool are also met.
B.3.
Project boundary
Only CO2 emissions will be included in the project boundary. The proposed project activity itself
will cause no emissions:
Table 6:
Emission sources included in the project boundary:
Project
Baseline
Source
Gas
Included?
Justification/
Explanation
CO2
Yes
Major emission source
CH4
No
Minor emission source
N2 O
No
Minor emission source
CO2
Yes
Major baseline emission source
CH4
No
Minor baseline emission source
N2 O
No
Minor baseline emission source
According to AMS-I.D., the spatial extent of the project boundary includes the project site and all
power plants connected physically to the electricity system that the project power plant is
connected to. So, as relevant sources, basically all power plants connected physically to the
Turkish national electricity grid and feeding in electricity to it will be included in the project
boundary. This includes power plants outside Turkey supplying electricity imports into the
Turkish grid. The figure below provides for an overview:
UNFCCC/CCNUCC
Figure 6:
Page 13
Flow diagram of Turkish electricity system
Turkish interconnected system
CO2
Power
producers*
Kar-demir
Connected
electricity
systems
Bozyaka
wind farm
Grid connected power plants
TEIAŞ
Transmission
system
Regional
Distributors
Electricity
imports
Transmission lines
Distribution lines
Electricity
exports
Distribution
system
Power consumers
Isolated autoproducer power plants
Isolated
Autoproducers
*i.e. EÜAŞ (and associated companies), IPP, (grid connected) Autoproducers, BOO/BO/BOT companies.
B.4.
Establishment and description baseline scenario
The baseline scenario will be identified by applying the stepwise approach provided by the
Additionality Tool. Section B.5 below will demonstrate that the proposed project activity is not
business as usual and that the most plausible alternative corresponding to the proposed project
activity is the baseline scenario as prescribed by AMS-I.D.: “[...] electricity delivered to the grid
by the project would have otherwise been generated by the operation of grid-connected power
plants and by the addition of new generation sources into the grid.”.
This corresponds to the situation prior to the implementation of the proposed project activity as
described in Section A.3 above. The CM calculations reflecting the baseline, the characteristics
of the technology that would be employed, and the activities that would take place in the
absence of the proposed project activity are described in detail in Section B.5 below. The
relevant electricity system is identified in Step 1 below in Section B.6.1 A general
UNFCCC/CCNUCC
Page 14
characterisation of the power plants included in the baseline scenario's presence component is
contained in Step 3 in Section B.6.1 below. The characterisation of the power plants
representing the future component of the baseline is given in Step 5 in Section B.6.1 below, and
D below in Appendix 4 lists the actual power plants representing the forecast component. The
explanations under Step 4 in Section B.6.3 below contain the actual values of the relevant
characteristics (i.e. generation and emissions, see 14 and 15, respectively) of the power plants
representing the presence component.
B.5.
Demonstration of additionality
Early consideration of carbon credits
Contracting of carbon market consultant enveco GmbH took place on 19/09/2008 14,
demonstrating clearly that carbon revenue was included in the project feasibility assessment.
This was clearly before the project starting date, as well as before the public announcement of
the project activity (i.e. invitation to GS Local Stakeholder Consultation on 10/03/2010), see
Table 7:
Project time line
Date
Project development step
01/05/2008
Autoproducer licence for 12 MW project is granted by EPDK
14/07/2008
Wind yield assessment is submitted by DLC
01/04/2008
Board decision about the necessity to use carbon finance
November 2008
08/2008
Pre-Negotiations with several turbine suppliers in Germany
Project presentation file (Turkish: Proje Tanıtım Dosyası, PTD) is submitted to TÇOB for
environmental assessment of the project
11/09/2008
TÇOB decides that the project is relieved from duty to perform EIA
19/09/2008
Carbon market consulting contract with enveco GmbH
21/12/2009
First non-binding offer from turbine supplier Nordex
10/03/2010
GS Local Stakeholder Consultation Meeting
04/2010
14/05/2010
Wind yield assessment by EMD
Bank loan contract with YapiKredi Bank
10/06/2010
Supplier contract with Nordex signed
Time of investment decision, first real action, and project start date.
First invoice from turbine supplier Nordex
15/01/2011
Date of site delivery protocol and start of anchorage construction
19/01/2011
Change of production licence from Autoproducer to IPP
10/03/2012
Commissioning date
21/01/2013
Application for GS version 2.2 pre-feasibility assessment due to retroactive registration
11/06/2013
Contract with DOE for validation
19/06/2010
For the detailed demonstration and assessment of additionality of the proposed GS VER project
activity, the stepwise approach provided by the Additionality Tool will be used below.
Step 0 Demonstration whether the proposed project activity is the first-of-its-kind
This step is not applied, as the project activity clearly is not first-of-its-kind.
14
The contract is submitted to the DOE for validation.
UNFCCC/CCNUCC
Page 15
Step 1 Identification of alternatives to the project activity consistent with current laws
and regulations
Sub-step 1.a Define alternatives to the project activity
Kar-demir has only the choice whether or not to implement the proposed GS VER project
activity. If not, the respective power will be provided by the (then) existing Turkish generation
facilities as represented by 4 and 5 in Section A.3. above. Concluding, only the following
alternatives to the proposed GS VER project activity will be considered:
Alternative (1)
The proposed wind power project without origination and sale of GS VERs.
Alternative (2)
The production of the projected electricity amount by the operation of gridconnected power plants as well as by those power plants subject to the
upgrading of Turkish electricity generation according to the latest projection of
the development of the Turkish power supply published by TEİAŞ.
Sub-step 1.b Consistency with mandatory laws and regulations
Both alternatives are in full compliance with all applicable laws and regulations. All required
official approvals for the proposed GS VER project activity are at hand. The electricity system
expansion scenario has been published by an official Turkish authority making any conflict with
applicable law very unlikely. All the alternatives to the project outlined in Sub-step 1.a are in
compliance with applicable laws and regulations, including:
1. Electricity Market Law (number 4628, ratified 20/02/2001, enacted 03/03/2001)
2. Law on Utilization of Renewable Energy Resources for the Purpose of Generating
Electricity Energy (number 5346, ratified 10/05/2005, enacted 18/05/2005)
3. Environment Law (number 2827, ratified 09/08/1983, enacted 11/08/1983)
Step 2 Investment analysis
The purpose of this step is to demonstrate that the proposed GS VER project activity is not
economically or financially feasible without the revenue from the sale of VERs. According to the
Additionality Tool, “[...] the latest version of the 'Guidelines on the assessment of investment
analysis' [in short Investment Analysis Guidelines] […] shall be taken into account when
applying this step. The latest version as of submission of the PDD to the DOE for validation is
version 5, valid as of 15/07/2011.15
Sub-step 2.a Determine appropriate analysis method
The Additionality Tool provides for three options regarding investment analysis, i.e. (I) simple
cost analysis, (II) investment comparison analysis, and (III) benchmark analysis.
Option (I) is considered appropriate only if the proposed project activity as well as the
alternatives presented in Sub-step 1.a above generate no financial or economic benefits other
than income from carbon trade. As all alternatives and the proposed project activity generate
income from electricity sales, Option (I) is not applicable.
Option (II) investment comparison is also not applicable. Clause 19 of the Investment Analysis
Guidelines: "[...] If the alternative to the project activity is the supply of electricity from a grid this
is not to be considered an investment and a benchmark approach is considered appropriate.
[...]" Kar-demir has only the choice between implementing the proposed project activity or not
investing at all. In the latter case, Alternative (2) as described in Sub-step 1.a above would
become effective, which is equal to the one described in the citation above.
Concluding, Option (III), i.e. benchmark analysis, is chosen.
15
http://cdm.unfccc.int/Reference/Guidclarif/reg/reg_guid03.pdf
UNFCCC/CCNUCC
Page 16
Sub-step 2.b Option III. Apply benchmark analysis
First, an appropriate financial indicator must be chosen to measure economic
attractiveness/feasibility of the proposed GS VER project activity. We choose IRR as typical
indicator for long-term investments. As the investment discussed in this section is made by a
private entity contributing equity to financing of the project, the appropriate indicator is assumed
to be equity IRR. The appropriate benchmark for equity IRR is required return on equity,
according to the Additionality Tool.
Sub-step 2.c Calculation and comparison of financial indicators
The Additionality Tool states that "[...] the financial/economic analysis shall be based on
parameters that are standard in the market[...]” except for certain particular circumstances.
More precisely, the Investment Analysis Guidelines state in their clause 13: “In cases of projects
which could be developed by an entity other than the project participant the benchmark should
be based on parameters that are standard in the market.” As the development of Wind Farm
projects in Turkey is not reserved to one company only, the application of parameters that are
standard in the market is obligatory. According to Clause 38 of the Additionality Tool,
benchmarks shall be derived from estimates of the cost of financing and required return on
capital, based on bankers' views. According to the World Bank, the typical expected equity IRR
for Wind Farms in Turkey is 15%.16 Thus, this benchmark is accordingly determined. Taking into
account the guidance of Clause 5 of the Investment Analysis Guidelines, this figure is
conservatively interpreted as a post-tax value.
Table 8:
Financial data and equity IRR as of 19/06/2010
Turbine costs
Investment side costs (erection of turbines,
buildings, roads, etc.)
Total investment
Debt to Equity ratio
Bank loan duration
Bank loan interest
Equity
Bank loan
Annual operation costs (average)
11,500,000 € Source: Supply and Installation
Agreement17
2,800,000 € Source: Loan Contract18
14,300,000 € (turbine cost + investment side cost)
80% : 20% Source: Loan Contract
10 years
5.65%
2,860,000 € (figures calculated from debt to
equity ratio displayed in loan contract
11,440,000 €
371,515 € Source: Kar-demir calculation19
Feed-in tariff (per MWh)
55,00 € Source: Law no. 5346
Annual electricity generation (net) (MWh/yr)
34,690 Source: EMD WYA20
Equity IRR (20 years, post tax, nominal)
Carbon credit price (expectation at the time of
investment decision)
Equity IRR with carbon credits
16
17
18
19
20
21
10.81%
7.00 € Source: State of the Voluntary
Carbon Market 2010, page vii.21
13.39%
Project Appraisal Document on a proposed International Bank for Reconstruction and Development Loan, World
Bank, 2009; page 80. See http://www-wds.worldbank.org/external/default/WDSContentServer/WDSP/IB/2009/05/
11/000333037_20090511030724/Rendered/PDF/468080PAD0P112101Official0Use0Only1.pdf
The SIA is provided to the DOE for validation.
The loan contract is provided to the DOE for validation.
The financial tables showing the OPEX estimate applied by Kar-demir are provided to the DOE for validation.
The wind yield assessment prepared by EMD for the project is povided to the DOE for validation.
See http://forest-trends.org/publication_details.php?publicationID=2434.
UNFCCC/CCNUCC
Page 17
As can be seen, the equity IRR does not reach the benchmark without including carbon credit
income into the financial model while it improves significantly once carbon income is added.
As a preliminary conclusion, the proposed GS VER project activity without origination and sale
of GS VERs is not economically or financially feasible.
Sub-step 2.d Sensitivity analysis
To demonstrate that the preliminary conclusion deduced above is robust to reasonable
variations in the critical assumptions, a sensitivity analysis is conducted. The Additionality Tool
suggests to subject only those variables to variation that constitute more than 20% of total
project costs, and that a general point of departure should at least cover a range of +/-10%. The
variables included in the sensitivity analysis are:
1. The annual income, depending on feed-in tariff and net annual electricity production
2. The investment cost
A compilation of input value variations and the corresponding impact on equity IRR is given in
Table 9: Sensitivity analysis
Variation acc. to Additionality Tool
Variable
Feed-in tariff per MWh
Investment cost
Annual Electricity
Generation
Variation
Value
IRR
+10.00%
60.50 €
14.85%
-10.00%
49.50 €
7.07%
-10.00%
12,870,000 €
13.39%
+10.00%
15,730,000 €
8.64%
+10.00%
38,159 MWh/yr
13.41%
-10.00%
31,221 MWh/yr
7.07%
Variation to reach benchmark
Variation
Value
+10.35%
60.69 €
-15.52%
0€
+16.17%
40,030 MWh/yr
The sensitivity analysis shows that the benchmark cannot be reached with variations of
variables within the range of +10% and -10%. What is more, the deviations from assumed
figures are highly unlikely.
At the time of investment decision, i.e. 19/06/2010 (see 7 above), the guaranteed feed-in tariff
was limited to a maximum of 0.055 €/kWh according to law no. 5346 as amended by law no.
5627.22 On 29/12/2010, law no. 609423 came into effect, amending law no. 5346 again,
introducing a feed-in tariff nominated in USD instead of EUR, amounting to 73 USD/MWh.
22
23
Energy Efficiency Law
(http://www.eie.gov.tr/english/announcements/EV_kanunu/EnVer_kanunu_tercume_revize2707.doc).
http://www.enerji.gov.tr/mevzuat/5346/Yenilenebilir_Enerji_Kaynaklarinin_Elektrik_Enerjisi_Uretimi_Amacli_Kullan
imina_Iliskin_Kanunda_Degisiklik_Yapilmasina_Dair_Kanun.pdf.
UNFCCC/CCNUCC
Page 18
Given USD-EUR exchange rates of the previous year, this tariff actually represents a reduction
as against the former feed-in tariff, see
Table 10:
USD-EUR exchange-rates since coming into effect of law no. 6094 and resulting
EUR denominated feed-in tariffs24
1 EUR =
Date
feed-in tariff
(EUR/MWh)
Low
1.2089 USD
24/07/12
60.39
Peak
1.4882 USD
04/05/11
49.05
Average
1.3327 USD
29/10/10 – 01/10/2013
54.78
As can be seen, the new guaranteed feed-in tariff since its introduction has never reached the
10.35% upward variation determined in the sensitivity analysis to be required for reaching the
benchmark.
Also, the new legal framework added a significant exchange-rate risk to the proposed GS VER
project activity, as both technology procurement and financing are nominated in Euros.
As for options to sell power on the Turkish Electricity Market Financial Settlement Center,
Piyasa Mali Uzlastirma Merkezi (PMUM), the price development there has been generally
unfavourable since the peak in 2008. An overview is given in
Table 11:
Average Power Prices in Turkey 2006 - 201325
Year(s)
Annual
average
(EUR/MWh)
2006
62.27
2007
71.86
2008
84.42
2009
67.64
2010
61.52
2011
54.48
2012
61.26
2013
(Jan-Aug)
54.62
Average
2006- Aug
2013
65.53
So, even without taking into account the manifold shortfalls of the option to sell power to PMUM
(exchange-rate risk, high volatility of power prices, timing of electricity production, etc.), the
general price level has not been attractive since the project start date. However, the discussed
downward variation of -10% is evenly unlikely.
As a consequence of this lack of financial attractiveness, the risk assessment by the financing
bank led to significant requirements for the security package, although Kar-demir is a long term
client. The bank has explicitly emphasized that the carbon credits generated by the project
represent an important part of this security package.26
As for the annual electricity generation, wind farm performance to date has shown that the 33%
plant load factor assumption from the wind yield assessment is slightly too optimistic. So, a
significant and systematic long term exceedance of this is highly unlikely. Also, the potential for
a positive impact on return and subsequently on IRR is severely impaired by the SIA terms
related to operation and maintenance. A supplementary fee of 0.02 €/kWh for each kWh over
and above 7,000,000 kWh per turbine is included therein. The likelihood for a systematic and
significant overestimation of AEG as reflected in the -10% variation included in 9 above is also
very low.
24
25
26
See http://www.ecb.eu/stats/exchange/eurofxref/html/eurofxref-graph-usd.en.html.
For TL nominated prices, see http://dgpys.teias.gov.tr/dgpys/.
For exchange rates, see http://evds.tcmb.gov.tr/yeni/cbt-uk.html.
The respective letter by the bank is provided to the DOE for validation.
UNFCCC/CCNUCC
Page 19
Last, the investment has actually increased to over € 17 million, whereas the loan could only be
used up to the amount of € 12 million, instead of the actually sought amount of € 12.8million.
This severely increased the equity share in total CAPEX, much to the disadvantage of the
project owner. With the actual CAPEX and an AEG of 34,690 MWh/yr, the power price would
need to rise to 68.15 €/MWh in order to reach the benchmark. AEG would need to rise to
47,910 MWh/yr with the estimated power price of 55.00 €/MWh. As for CAPEX, the +10%
variation included in 9 above has turned out to be even too optimistic, let alone the -10%
variation.
Thus, the conclusion reached in Sub-step 2.c above is robust. Concluding, the proposed project
activity is additional.
Step 3 Barrier analysis
This step is not chosen.
Step 4 Common practice analysis
According to the CDM validation and verification standard version 8.0 valid as of 28/11/2014,
Clause 137, a common practice analysis is only necessary for large-scale project activities.
B.6.
B.6.1.
Emission reductions
Explanation of methodological choices
Emission reductions
The generic equation for the calculation of emission reductions is
ER y =BE y −PE y − LE y
equation (1a)
where
ERy
BEy
PEy
LEy
=
=
=
=
Emission reductions in year y (t CO2/yr)
Baseline emissions in year y (t CO2/yr)
Project emission in year y (t CO2/yr)
Leakage emissions in year y (t CO2/yr)
AMS-I.D. gives instructions and methods to calculate/estimate each of the above stated
parameters separately and sometimes provides for generic assumptions which are allowed to to
be made.
Project emissions
According to AMS-I.D., “project emissions have to be considered following the procedure
described in the most recent version of ACM002”. According to the Large-scale Cosolidated
Methodology Grid-connected electricity generation from renewable sources Version 16.0 dated
28/11/2014 (ACM002), Clause 37 states: “For all renewable energy power generation project
activities, emissions due to the use of fossil fuels for the backup generator can be neglected.”
Thus:
equation (2)
PE y =0
UNFCCC/CCNUCC
Page 20
Leakage emissions
According to AMS-I.D., leakage is to be considered if the energy generating equipment is
transferred from another activity. This is not the case for Kar-demir Bozyaka RES 12 MW, so
LE y =0
equation (3)
where
LEy
=
Leakage emissions in year y (t CO2/yr)
Conclusion for emission reductions
Concluding, by inserting equation (2) and equation (3) into equation (1a) leads to:
ER y = BE y
equation (1)
Baseline emissions
According to AMS-I.D., “baseline emissions include […] CO2 emissions from electricity
generation in fossil fuel fired power plants that are displaced due to the project activity.” The
equation provided there to calculate baseline emissions is:
BE y =EG BL , y⋅EF CO , grid , y
equation (4a)
2
where
BEy
EGBL,y
=
=
EFCO2,grid,y
=
Baseline emissions in year y (tCO2/yr)
Quantity of net electricity supplied to the grid as a result of the
implementation of the [...] project activity in year y (MWh/yr)
CO2 emission factor of the grid in year y (tCO2/MWh)
In this PDD, the EF Tool is applied for calculating the emission factor, thus
EF CO
equation (5)
where
EFgrid,CM,y
=
2
, grid , y
=EF grid ,CM , y
Combined margin CO2 emission factor for the project electricity system
in year y (tCO2/MWh)
Concluding, the final way to calculate baseline emissions is:
equation (4)
BE y =EG BL , y⋅EF grid ,CM , y
EGBL,y has been estimated in advance by expert studies, the result of which is applied in this
PDD, see 8 above (Section B.5) and will be subjected to validation. The parameter will be
subjected to monitoring as described in Section B.7 below and will be verified periodically for
the purpose of final determination of actual emission reductions. For calculating EFgrid,CM,y,
AMS-I.D. allows to use the EF Tool. The latter provides for several methodological choices
which are explained along with the presentation of the stepwise approach of the EF Tool:
The combined margin (CM) emission factor shall represent the electricity generation
displacement effect of the proposed project activity on the electricity system. It is calculated as
the weighted average of the operating margin and the build margin. The operating margin (OM)
refers to a cohort of existing power plants whose electricity generation amount is likely to be
affected by the proposed project activity. It represents the presence component of the baseline
scenario. The build margin (BM) refers to a cohort of power units reflecting the type of power
UNFCCC/CCNUCC
Page 21
units whose construction/commissioning would be affected by the proposed project activity. It
represents the future/forecast component of the baseline scenario. For calculation of EFgrid,CM,y
the EF Tool provides for the following steps:
Step 1 Identification of the relevant power systems
Step 2 Choose whether to include off-grid power plants in the project electricity system (optional)
Step 3 Selection of an OM method
Step 4 OM emission factor calculation
Step 5 BM emission factor calculation
Step 6 CM emission factor calculation
In the course of performing these steps, the EF Tool on several occasions provides for certain
methodological options to choose from. The choices taken in this PDD will be presented and
justified in the following section in the order of their appearance in the course of the stepwise
procedure. Step 1, Step 2, and Step 3 will actually also already be performed in this section, as
they address methodological choices in them selves rather than being sub steps of the emission
reduction calculation.
UNFCCC/CCNUCC
Page 22
Step 1
Identification of the relevant power systems
According to the guidance provided in the EF Tool, the relevant electricity system, i.e. the
project electricity system “is defined by the spatial extent of the power plants that are physically
connected through transmission and distribution lines to the project activity (e.g. the renewable
power plant location or the consumers where electricity is being saved) and that can be
dispatched without significant transmission constraints.” It shall preferably be identified using an
official delineation provided by the host country. As this is not available for Turkey, the provisions
of the EF Tool will be followed: “project participants should define the project electricity system
and any connected electricity system and justify and document their assumptions […]”.
Power can be dispatched without significant transmission constraint in the Turkish national
electricity transmission and distribution grid. This is demonstrated i.a. by the fact that Turkey’s
interconnected peak load in 2010 and 2011 amounts only to some 34% of the total capacity of
transformers in the national interconnected system:
Table 12:
Relation of peak load and transformer capacity in interconnected Turkish national
grid in years 2010 and 201127
2010
2011
Turkey’s interconnected peak load (instantaneous) [MW]
33,391.9
36,122.4
Total transformer capacity [MVA]
99,852.0
104,658.0
Share
33,44%
34,51%
Concluding, the Turkish national electricity system as outlined in 6 in Section B.3. above is the
project system. The connected electricity system “is defined as an electricity system that is
connected by transmission lines to the project electricity system.” This is also included in 6 in
Section B.3. above. In 2010 and 2011, Turkey has imported electricity from Georgia, Iran, and
the Azerbaijani Nakhchivan Autonomous Republic, Greece, and Bulgaria. Electricity was
exported to the same countries, and also to Iraq and Syria. The amount of exports and imports
is negligible as compared to total generation 28, and no indications as to a significant increase in
imports enabled by additions in transmission capacity can be found. Concluding, for determining
the BM emission factor, the spatial extent is limited to the project electricity system.
As the project electricity system is the Turkish national grid, and, concluding, all connected
electricity systems are located in another country, the emission factor for the electricity
imports, which are to be included in the OM calculations, is EFgrid,import,y = 0 tCO2/MWh
according to the provisions of the EF Tool.
Step 2
Choose whether to include off-grid power plants in the project electricity
system (optional)
No off-grid power plants will be included in the project electricity system.
27
28
Sources: http://www.teias.gov.tr/T%C3%BCrkiyeElektrik%C4%B0statistikleri/istatistik2011/kgucunkullan
%C4%B1m(13-21)/20(2006-2011).xls (peak load); http://www.teias.gov.tr/T%C3%BCrkiyeElektrik
%C4%B0statistikleri/istatistik2011/hat%20trafo(55-59)/58.xls (transformer capacity).
Source: http://www.teias.gov.tr/T%C3%BCrkiyeElektrik%C4%B0statistikleri/istatistik2011/maliyet(67-73)/69.xls.
UNFCCC/CCNUCC
Page 23
Step 3
Selection of an OM method
For the OM calculation, the EF Tool presents four different options. For the proposed project
activity, option (a) Simple OM is chosen. The simple OM emission factor is calculated as the
generation-weighted average CO2 emissions per unit net electricity generation (tCO 2/MWh) of
all generating power plants serving the system, not including low-cost/must-run power
plants/units. This choice is permitted by the EF Tool only under the condition that low-cost/mustrun resources constitute less than 50% of total grid generation in: 1) average of the five most
recent years, or 2) based on long-term averages for hydroelectricity production.
Coal is not considered as a must-run resource in Turkey. The respective shares for the last five
years for which data is available are shown in
Table 13:
Share of low-cost/must-run resources in Turkish electricity production,
2007-201129
[%]
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
TOTAL THERMAL
81.0
82.7
80.6
73.8
74.8
TOTAL HYDRO
18.7
16.8
18.5
24.5
22.8
GEOTHERMAL+WIND
0.3
0.5
1.0
1.7
2.4
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
TOTAL TURKEY
The EF Tool also allows for the choice between an ex ante and an ex post option for data
vintage. For the proposed project activity, the OM will be calculated according to the ex ante
option, being a 3-year generation-weighted average, based on the most recent data available
at the time of submission of the project documentation to the DOE for validation, without
requirement to monitor and recalculate the emissions factor during the crediting period. For the
proposed project activity, data from the years 2009-2011 is applied, as these are the most
recent years covered by TEİAŞ Statistics.
Step 4
OM emission factor calculation (Methodological choices)
For the application of the simple OM as chosen in Step 3 above, the EF Tool again allows two
sub-options:
Option A
based on the net electricity generation and a CO2 emission factor of each power unit
Option B
based on the total net electricity generation of all power plants serving the system
and the fuel types and total fuel consumption of the project electricity system.
For the proposed project activity, Option B is applied.
According to the EF Tool, Option B can only be used if
(a) the necessary data for Option A is not available; and
(b) only nuclear and renewable power generation are considered as low-cost/must-run
power sources and the quantity of electricity supplied to the grid by these sources is
known; and
(c) off-grid power plants are not included in the calculation.
29
Source: http://www.teias.gov.tr/T%C3%BCrkiyeElektrik%C4%B0statistikleri/istatistik2011/uretim%20tuketim(2245)/36.xls
UNFCCC/CCNUCC
Page 24
These premises are analysed below:
ad (a)
Option A requires data on power plant/unit specific fuel consumption or, alternatively,
power plant/unit specific average electric efficiency data.
ad (b)
As stated above, coal cannot be considered a must-run resource in Turkey, so only
renewable power generation is considered as low-cost/must-run power source
(nuclear power plants are not in operation in Turkey). Also, data on renewable power
generation in Turkey is available.
ad (c)
As indicated in Step 2 above, off-grid power plants are not included.
So, all prerequisites for choosing Option B are met. The equation used when applying simple
OM calculations according to Option B is:
equation (6a)
EF grid ,OMsimple , y =
where
EFgrid,OMsimple,y =
FCi,y
=
NCVi,y
=
EFCO2,i,y
EGy
=
=
i
=
y
=
∑ ( FC i , y⋅NCV i , y⋅EF CO ,i , y )
2
i
EG y
Simple operating margin CO2 emission factor in year y (tCO2/MWh)
Amount of fuel type i consumed in the project electricity system in
year y (mass or volume unit)
Net calorific value (energy content) of fuel type i in year y (GJ/mass or
volume unit)
CO2 emission factor of 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 validator
So actually the emission factor is calculated by relating the total emissions to the total
generation for the power plants included in the OM.
As fuel consumption data is provided by TEİAŞ Statistics not only on a mass/volume unit base
but also on a heating value base, NCVs are not necessary for calculating the OM emissions. It
is easier to directly convert the heating values provided by TEİAŞ Statistics from Tcal to TJ:
equation (7)
where
FCHV,i,y
FC i , y⋅NCV i , y =FC HV ,i , y [TJ]=FC HV ,i , y [Tcal] ⋅ 4.1868
=
Amount of energy contained in the amount of fossil fuel type i
consumed in the project electricity system in year y (TJ)
The conversion of the raw data is presented in C below in Appendix 4.
UNFCCC/CCNUCC
Page 25
Inserting equation (7) into equation (6a) leads to:
equation (6)
∑ ( FC HV ,i , y⋅EF CO ,i , y )
2
i
EG y
Data on emission factors (EFCO2,i,y) is not available on a country or plant specific base. Thus,
IPCC default values at the lower limit of the uncertainty at a 95% confidence interval are applied
as in compliance with the EF Tool. The respective values are applied in 14 below (Step 4
Section B.6.3) and 17 below (Step 5 Section B.6.3)
As EGy represents only the electricity produced by sources which are not considered as mustrun or low-cost, the generation amount of the latter must be subtracted from the whole Turkish
electricity generation. However, electricity imports need to be included, so the determination of
EGy takes the following shape:
equation (8)
where:
EGy,GROSS
EG y ,GROSS = EG TOTAL , y ,GROSS EI y −EG LC −MR , y , GROSS
=
EGTOTAL,y,GROSS =
EIy
=
EGLC-MR,y,GROSS =
Gross electricity generated and delivered to the grid by all power
sources serving the system (including electricity imports), not including
low-cost/must-run power plants/units, in year y (MWh)
Gross electricity generated and delivered to the grid by all power
sources serving the Turkish system (not including electricity imports) in
year y (MWh)
Electricity imports to Turkish system in year y (MWh)
Gross electricity generated and delivered to the grid by low-cost/mustrun sources (i. e. hydro power plants, wind power plants, biogas
plants, geothermal plants) in year y (MWh)
The EF Tool explicitly refers to net generation with respect to EGy. However, TEİAŞ Statistics
only provide for gross generation data, so net generation of the relevant sources has to be
estimated by an approximation. The approach used here is to apply the overall Turkish net to
gross generation relation of a certain year y to the total net generation of the plants included in
OM calculations. The equation is:
EG y = EG y ,GROSS ⋅
equation (9)
where:
EGTOTAL,y,NET
=
EG TOTAL , y , NET
EG TOTAL , y , GROSS
Net electricity generated and delivered to the grid by all power sources
serving the Turkish system (not including electricity imports) in
year y (MWh)
UNFCCC/CCNUCC
Page 26
Step 5
Calculation of the Build Margin Emission Factor (Methodological Choices)
As for data vintage, there are two options for calculating the BM emission factor. Here, option 1
ex-ante calculation is chosen (instead of annually updating of the BM emission factor) for
reasons of simplicity and data availability.
To calculate the BM emission factor, the following equation will be used:
∑ EG m , y⋅EF EL, m , y
EF grid , BM , y = m
∑ EG m, y
equation (10)
m
where
EFgrid,BM,y
EGm,y
=
=
EFEL,m,y
m
y
=
=
=
Build margin CO2 emission factor in year y (tCO2/MWh)
Net quantity of electricity generated and delivered to the grid by power
unit m in year y (MWh)
CO2 emission factor of 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.
Electricity generation EGm
The sample group of power units m used to calculate the BM is determined in Section B.6.3
Step 5 below in accordance with the procedure specified in the EF Tool. It contains EÜAŞ
power plants as well as IPP and Autoproducer plants, see also D below in Appendix 4.
For EÜAŞ plants included in the BM plant cohort, complete data on power generation EGm in
2011 is available on a plant specific level in TEİAŞ Statistics.
For capacity additions m from other types of power producers (i.e. Autoproducers and IPP),
projected generation in 2011 as displayed in TEİAŞ Projection is used to estimate actual
current generation, because this is the most current data source. 30 This document also displays
firm generation for each single power plant operated under BOT, BOO, IPP, or Autoproducer
business model. As negative deviations of firm from projected generation mostly occur with
emission neutral hydro power and wind power plants, the choice for projected generation leads
to the tendency of an overestimation of the generation share of carbon neutral energy sources,
and thus represents the application of a conservative approach.
In cases where capacity additions of any kind comprise only parts of complete power plants
and, as a result, only values for these complete power plants can be found in the most current
data source, the part generation is determined using a rule of three calculation, i.e. as the
product of total plant generation and the capacity of the part, divided by the total plant capacity.
As the EF Tool explicitly refers to net generation while this data is not available on a plant
specific level, the parameter must again be estimated. Similar to the approach presented in
equation (9), the overall net to gross relation is applied to each single plant:
EG m , y =EG m , y , GROSS ⋅
equation (11)
where
EGm,y,GROSS
30
=
EG TOTAL , y , NET
EG TOTAL , y ,GROSS
Gross quantity of electricity generated and delivered to the grid by
power unit m in year y (MWh)
See TEİAŞ Projection, pp. 92-101.
UNFCCC/CCNUCC
Page 27
CO2 emission factor EFEL,m,y
The EF Tool states that EFEL,m,y must be "determined as per the guidance in Step 4 (a) for the
simple OM, using options A1, A2 or A3, using for y the most recent historical year for which
power generation data is available, and using for m the power units included in the build
margin."
Option A1 is applicable, if for a power unit m data on fuel consumption and electricity generation
is available.
Option A2 is applicable, if for a power unit m data on electricity generation and fuel types used is
available.
Option A3 is applicable, if for a power unit m only data on electricity generation is available.
As for the power units m in the Turkish system data on electricity generation and the fuel types
used is available, the emission factor will be determined according to Option A2 which provides
for the following equation:
EF EL ,m , y =
equation (12)
where:
EFEL,m,y
EFCO2,m,i,y
=
=
ηm,y
=
EF CO
2
,m ,i , y
⋅ 3.6
ηm , y
CO2 emission factor of 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 (%)
To assure a conservative approach and in compliance with the EF Tool, plants for which several
fuels are disclosed in the data source were assigned to the least emission intensive fuel. Plants
for which no fuel type data is disclosed are deemed emission neutral.
As no plant specific efficiency data (ηm,y) is available, the default values for grid power plants
provided in Annex 1 of the EF Tool are used, based on the following assumptions/information:
600 MW import coal fired plant İÇDAŞ ÇELİK is operated as supercritical plant.31
This is also the case for the second and third unit (600 MW respectively) of EREN
ENERJİ ELEKTRİK ÜRETİM A.Ş. plant. The first component (160MW) of EREN ENERJİ
ELEKTRİK ÜRETİM A.Ş. is operated as CFBS plant.32
• For Lignite, Natural Gas and Fuel Oil plants, the most conservative values are applied
for ηm,y, i.e. Lignite 50%, Natural Gas 60%, Fuel Oil 46%.
The respective calculations are represented in 17 below (Step 5 Section B.6.3)
•
•
31
32
http://www.icdas.com.tr/icdas/enerji_tr.htm
http://www.cmec.com/html/news_project_details.php?id=144731; http://www.erenholding.com.tr/eren-enerji_2_15
UNFCCC/CCNUCC
Page 28
Step 6
CM emission factor calculation (Methodological choices)
The basic equation for calculating EFgrid,CM,y as represented in the EF Tool is:
equation (13)
Where:
EFgrid,BM,y
EFgrid,OM,y
wOM
wBM
EF grid ,CM , y =EF grid ,OM , y⋅w OM EF grid , BM , y⋅w BM
=
=
=
=
Build margin CO2 emission factor in year y (tCO2/MWh)
Operating margin CO2 emission factor in year y (tCO2/MWh)
Weighting of operating margin emissions factor (%)
Weighting of build margin emissions factor (%)
According to the EF Tool, for wind power project activities the following default values for wOM
and wBM should be used:
wOM = 0.75 and wBM = 0.25.
B.6.2.
Data and parameters fixed ex ante
Date / Parameter
FCHV,i,y
Unit
Tcal
Description
Amount of fuel combusted for electricity production in Turkey in the years
2009-2011.
Source of data
TEİAŞ Statistics; http://www.teias.gov.tr/T%C3%BCrkiyeElektrik
%C4%B0statistikleri/istatistik2011/yak%C4%B1t46-49/49.xls
Value(s) applied
See C on p. 46 below (Appendix 4).
Choice of data or Measurement
methods and procedures
Data source is an official document published by TEİAŞ.
Purpose of data
Calculation of baseline emissions
Additional comment
N/A
Date / Parameter
EFCO2,i,y / EFCO2,i,m,y
Unit
tCO2/TJ
Description
Carbon emission factors of fuels used for combustion for electricity production
by fuel type (IPCC default values at the lower limit of the uncertainty at a 95%
confidence interval)
Source of data
2006 IPCC Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas Inventories, table 1.4,
pp. 1.23 and 1.24.
Value(s) applied
See 14 on p. 31 below (Step 4 Section B.6.3) for OM.
See 17 on p. 34 below (Step 5 Section B.6.3) for BM.
Data source is applicable according to the EF Tool.
Purpose of data
Additional comment
N/A
UNFCCC/CCNUCC
Page 29
Date / Parameter
EGTOTAL,y,GROSS
Unit
GWh
Description
Gross electricity production in Turkey in 2009-2011.
Source of data
%C4%B0statistikleri/istatistik2011/uretim%20tuketim(22-45)/23.xls
Value(s) applied
See 15 on p. 32 below (Step 4 Section B.6.3)
Purpose of data
Additional comment
Date / Parameter
EGTOTAL,y,NET
Unit
GWh
Description
Net electricity production in Turkey in 2009-2011.
Source of data
%C4%B0statistikleri/istatistik2011/uretim%20tuketim(22-45)/33(84-11).xls
Value(s) applied
Purpose of data
Additional comment
Date / Parameter
EGLC-MR,y,GROSS
Unit
GWh
Description
Gross electricity production from low-cost/must-run sources in Turkey 20092011.
Source of data
Value(s) applied
Purpose of data
Additional comment
Date / Parameter
EIy
Unit
GWh
Description
Gross electricity imports to the Turkish national grid 2009-2011.
Source of data
Value(s) applied
Purpose of data
Additional comment
UNFCCC/CCNUCC
Page 30
Date / Parameter
Capacity additions
Unit
N/A
Description
Power plants most recently added to the Turkish electricity system and
representing at least 20% of total current (i.e. 2011) generation (without
generation of plants using the carbon market)
Source of data
For 2010: TEİAŞ: Türkiye elektrik enerjisi 10 yıllık üretim kapasite
projeksiyonu (2011–2020); pp. 102-106.
http://www.teias.gov.tr/KAPASITEPROJEKSIYONU2011.pdf
For 2011: TEİAŞ Projection; pp. 124-125. Commissioning dates (before
29/10/11) were obtained directly from TEİAŞ. Plants commissioned between
29/10/11 and 31/12/11 are deemed to have been commissioned on 01/11/11.
Value(s) applied
See D below (Appendix 4).
Data sources are official documents published by TEİAŞ.
Purpose of data
Additional comment
N/A
Date / Parameter
EGm,y,GROSS
Unit
GWh
Description
Annual gross generation of the power plants most recently added to the
system and representing 20% of total current (i.e. 2011) gross generation in
Turkey.
Source of data
For EÜAŞ plants: TEİAŞ Statistics
http://www.teias.gov.tr/T%C3%BCrkiyeElektrik
%C4%B0statistikleri/istatistik2011/kguc(1-12)/10-11.xls
http://www.teias.gov.tr/T%C3%BCrkiyeElektrik
%C4%B0statistikleri/istatistik2011/kguc(1-12)/12.xls
For all other plants: TEİAŞ Projection, pp. 113-123.
Value(s) applied
Data sources are official documents published by TEİAŞ.
Purpose of data
Additional comment
N/A
B.6.3. Ex-ante calculation of emission reductions
Emission reduction calculation comprises first the calculation of the combined margin emission
factor EFgrid,CM,y following Step 4, Step 5, and Step 6 of the EF Tool. Second, the reductions will
be calculated by multiplying EFgrid,CM,y with the projected power production of the proposed GS
VER project activity according to equation (4) in Subsection "Emission reductions" in Section
B.6.1 above.
Calculation of EFgrid,CM,y
Step 1
Identification of the relevant power system
See Step 1 above (Section B.6.1).
Step 2
Choose whether to include off-grid power plants in the project electricity
system (optional)
UNFCCC/CCNUCC
Page 31
Step 3
Selection of an OM method
Step 4
Calculation of the OM emission factor
As deduced in Step 4 above (Section B.6.1), simple OM emission factor is calculated according
to:
equation (6)
∑ ( FC HV ,i , y⋅EF CO ,i , y )
2
i
EG y
The numerator represents the total emissions from the power sources to be included in the OM.
Their calculation is presented in
Table 14:
CO2 Emissions from power production in Turkey 2009-2011
Fuel type/year
FCHV
[TJ]
EFCO2,i,y
[tCO2/yr]
Emissions
[ktCO2]
(FCHV · EFCO2 / 1000)
147,081
89.5
13,164
Lignite
408,848
90.9
37,164
Fuel Oil
63,471
75.5
4,792
7,663
72.6
556
5
61.6
0
353
69.3
24
779,858
54.3
42,346
Diesel Oil
LPG
Naphta
Natural Gas
Subtotal 2009
98,047
165,573
89.5
14,819
Lignite
404,240
90.9
36,745
Fuel Oil
35,877
75.5
2,709
Diesel Oil
877
72.6
64
Naphta
440
69.3
30
814,279
54.3
44,215
Natural Gas
Subtotal 2010
98,582
241,023
89.5
21,572
Lignite
448,865
90.9
40,802
Fuel Oil
22,106
75.5
1,669
649
72.6
47
846,002
54.3
45,938
Diesel Oil
Natural Gas
Subtotal 2011
110,027
Total 2009 – 2011
306,657
For the conversion of FCHV from Tcal to TJ see C below (Appendix 4).
UNFCCC/CCNUCC
Page 32
As for the denominator in equation (6), EGy is calculated in several consecutive steps according
to
EG y ,GROSS = EG TOTAL , y ,GROSS EI y −EG LC −MR , y , GROSS
equation (8)
and
EG y = EG y , GROSS ⋅
equation (9)
EG TOTAL , y , NET
EG TOTAL , y ,GROSS
The respective calculations are presented in
Table 15:
Calculation of Net Electricity Generation in Turkey (GWh) not including lowcost/must-run sources and including electricity imports for the years 2009-2011
unit: GWh
2009
2010
2011
I
EGTOTAL,y,GROSS
194,813
211,208
229,395
II
EGTOTAL,y,NET
186,619
203,046
217,558
III=II/I
net-to-gross relation
95.79%
96.14%
94.84%
IV
Geothermal and Wind
1,931
3,585
5,418
V
Hydro
35,958
51,796
52,339
EGLC-MR,y,GROSS
37,889
55,380
57,757
812
1,144
4,556
EGy,GROSS
157,736
156,971
176,194
EGy
151,101
150,906
167,102
VI=IV+V
VII
EIy
XIII = I – VI+VII
IX=XIII*III
TOTAL 2009-2011
469,109
As the OM emission factor is to be determined based on a 3-year generation-weighted average,
it must be calculated as follows:
306,657 ktCO2
tCO2
= 0.654
469,109 GWh
MWh
UNFCCC/CCNUCC
Page 33
Step 5
Calculation of the Build Margin emission factor
The sample group of power units m used to calculate the BM is determined according to the
procedure as outlined in the EF Tool:
(a) Identify the set of five power units, excluding power units using the carbon market, that
started to supply electricity to the grid most recently (SET5-units) and determine their annual
electricity generation (AEGSET-5-units, in MWh):
SET5-units cannot be clearly identified, because neither TEİAŞ Statistics nor TEİAŞ
Projection display commissioning dates for capacity additions in 2011, and information
obtained from the authority directly only covers plants commissioned until October 2011.
However, no combination of any five power plants added to the Turkish System after
October 2011 would reach 20% of AEGtotal. The maximum value for AEGSET-5-units would be
reached by the following power plants:
1. BEKİRLİ TES (İÇDAŞ ELEKTRİK EN.)
2. AKSA ENERJİ (Antalya)
3. ALİAĞA ÇAKMAKTEPE ENERJİ (İlave)
4. YEDİGÖZE HES (YEDİGÖZE ELEK.) (İlave)
5. TİRENDA TİRE ENERJİ ÜRETİM A.Ş.
with a total annual electricity generation of AEGSET-5-units = 9,856,6901 MWh/yr.
See also D below in Appendix 4.
(b) Determine the annual electricity generation of the project electricity system, excluding
power units using the carbon market (AEGtotal, in MWh). Identify the set of power units,
excluding power units using the carbon market, that started to supply electricity to the grid
most recently and that comprise 20% of AEGtotal, (if 20% falls on part of the generation of a
unit, the generation of that unit is fully included in the calculation) (SET≥20 per cent) and
determine their annual electricity generation (AEGSET-≥20 per cent, in MWh):
AEGtotal = EGTOTAL;2011,gross - AEGcarbon
= 229,395,100 MWh – 13,427,300 MWh = 215,967,800 MWh
For determination of AEGcarbon see also E below in Appendix 4.
SET≥20% is presented in detail in D below in Appendix 4, comprising plants commissioned
in the years 2010-2011 in Turkey, starting with ETİ SODA 24 MW lignite fired
Autoproducer plant commissioned on 22/01/2010. This set leads to:
AEGSET-≥ 20 per cent = 43,266,480 MWh
This is 20.03% of AEGtotal. 20% fall on part of the capacity of ETİ SODA 24 MW lignite
power plant. Excluding it would lead to AEGSET-≥20 per cent = 43,122,480 MWh/yr, i.e. 19.97%
of AEGtotal.
(c)
From SET5-units and SET≥20 per cent select the set of power units that comprises the larger
annual electricity generation (SETsample);
Identify the date when the power units in 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 SETsample to calculate the build margin.
SET≥20 per cent clearly comprises the larger annual electricity generation, so SET≥20 per cent =
SETsample. None of the power units contained in it started to supply electricity more than 10
years ago, see D below in Appendix 4.
Concluding, SETsample is used to calculate the build margin.
UNFCCC/CCNUCC
Page 34
As explained in Section B.6.1 Step 5 above, calculation of the BM emission factor is done by
applying
∑ EG m , y⋅EF EL, m , y
EF grid , BM , y = m
∑ EG m, y
equation (10)
m
As the EF Tool refers to net generation, the approximation approach already used in the OM
calculations is applied again:
equation (11)
EG m , y =EG m , y , GROSS ⋅
EG TOTAL , y , NET
EG TOTAL , y ,GROSS
The calculation of net generation of BM plants according to equation (11) is represented in:
Table 16:
Annual net generation of BM plants
EGm,y,GROSS [GWh]
43,266.48
net-to-gross relation
94.84%
EGm,2009 [GWh]
41,033.93
As explained in Step 5 above (Section B.6.1), EFEL,m,y is determined in compliance with
equation (12)
EF EL ,m , y=
EF CO , m ,i , y ⋅ 3.6
η m, y
2
The respective calculations are represented in
Table 17:
Calculation of EFEL,m,y
Fuel type
ηm,y
EFCO2,m,i,y
[t CO2/TJ]
EFEL,m,y
[t CO2/MWh]
Fuel Oil
46.00%
75.50
688.10
Lignite
50.00%
90.90
839.08
Natural Gas
60.00%
54.30
325.80
Supercritical Coal
45.00%
89.50
716.00
CFBS Coal
40.00%
89.50
805.50
UNFCCC/CCNUCC
Page 35
The resulting calculations of the numerator of equation (10) above are represented in
Table 18:
Calculation of BM emissions
Fuel type
EGm,y,GROSS
[GWh]
net/gross
relation
EGm,y
[GWh]
EFEL,m,y
[tCO2/MWh]
Emissions
[kt CO2]
Fuel Oil
296.76
94.84%
281.44
590.87
166.29
Lignite
144.00
94.84%
136.57
654.48
89.38
Natural Gas
24,992.94
94.84%
23,703.30
325.80
7,722.54
Supercritical Coal
12,331.76
94.84%
11,695.45
716.00
8,373.95
1,068.24
94.84%
1,013.12
805.50
816.06
CFBS Coal
Total BM emissions
17,168.21
The final calculation of the BM emission factor is:
EF grid , BM , y =
17,168.21 ktCO 2
tCO 2
= 0.418
41,033.93 GWh
MWh
Step 6
Calculation of the combined margin emission factor
As stated above in Step 6 above (Section B.6.1), the equation for calculating the CM emission
factor is:
equation (13)
EF grid ,CM , y =EF grid ,OM , y⋅w OM EF grid , BM , y⋅w BM
Applying the weights derived in Step 6 above, as well as the results from calculating the OM
emission factor displayed above in Step 4 and from calculating the BM emission factor, leads to:
EF grid ,CM , y = 0.654
tCO 2
tCO 2
tCO2
⋅ 0.75 + 0.418
⋅ 0.25 = 0.595
MWh
MWh
MWh
Calculation of emission reductions:
As stated in Subsection "Conclusion for emission reductions" above (Section B.6.1), emission
reductions are equal to the baseline emissions:
equation (1)
ER y = BE y
Calculation of baseline emissions is done according to
equation (4):
BE y =EG BL , y⋅EF grid ,CM , y
Concluding, emission reductions are calculated as follows:
ER y = BE y = EG BL , y ⋅ EF grid , CM , y = 34,690
tCO 2
tCO 2
MWh
⋅ 0.595
= 20,641
yr
MWh
yr
UNFCCC/CCNUCC
B.6.4.
Page 36
Summary of the ex-ante estimation of emission reductions
Year
Estimation of
project activity
emissions
(tonnes of CO2e)
Estimation of
baseline
emissions
(tonnes of CO2e)
Estimation of
leakage
(tonnes of CO2e)
Estimation of
overall emission
reductions
(tonnes of CO2e)
10/03/2012
-
31/12/2012
0
16,795
0
16,795
01/01/2013
-
31/12/2013
0
20,641
0
20,641
01/01/2014
-
31/12/2014
0
20,641
0
20,641
31/12/2015
0
20,641
0
20,641
01/01/2015
01/01/2016
-
31/12/2016
0
20,641
0
20,641
01/01/2017
-
31/12/2017
0
20,641
0
20,641
01/01/2018
-
31/12/2018
0
20,641
0
20,641
01/01/2019
-
09/03/2019
0
3,845
0
3,845
0
144,486
0
144,486
Total 2012 - 2019
UNFCCC/CCNUCC
B.7.
Page 37
Monitoring plan
B.7.1. Data and parameters to be monitored
As the ex-ante approach has been chosen for determining the baseline emission factors, all
baseline connected data is at hand. Thus, monitoring efforts can be limited to measuring the
electricity amount fed into the grid by the proposed GS VER project activity. Kar-demir will be
responsible for monitoring.
Data/Parameter
EGBL,y
Unit
MWh/yr
Description
Net electricity supply equal to electricity delivered to the grid minus electricity
consumed by Kar-demir Bozyaka RES 12 MW.
Source of data
Metering devices
Value(s) applied
34,690 MWh/yr
Measurement methods and
procedures
Continually measured by one main digital, bidirectional electricity meter of the
type ELSTER A 1500, with a 0.5s accuracy class, serial number 00436809.
A backup electricity meter with equal specifications is also installed, serial number
00436808.
Data is read out daily via remote access and electronically archived by a software
system.
Monitoring frequency
Continuous
QA/QC procedures
Electricity meters have been calibrated by ELSTER33 and will be recalibrated after
10 years under the responsibility of TEİAŞ, as in accordance with Turkish
regulations.34
To mitigate risk of failure, a back-up meter with equal characteristics is installed at
the substation.
To allow for cross-checks, the SCADA system installed on each turbine will be
used and evaluated by responsible Kar-demir staff.
Purpose of data
Additional comment
N/A
B.7.2.
N/A
Sampling plan
B.7.3. Other elements of monitoring plan
Monitoring is conducted according to AMS-I.D. in connection with the EF Tool, see also
Section B.1 above.
TEİAŞ has installed one main electricity meter and one back-up electricity meter at the
substation to which Kar-demir Bozyaka RES 12 MW wind power plant is connected. Both
electricity meters have 0.5s accuracy level and comply with TS EN 62053-22 standard. They
have been calibrated by ELSTER on 03/03/201135. These meters represent the primary data
source for monitoring.
On a daily basis, TEİAŞ performs remote read-out on these electricity meters and publishes the
results online on the PMUM website in Kar-demir's account. The PMUM website provides for
each power producer access to data concerning their own power plants, including gross
electricity generation and consumption.36 Also on a daily basis, Kar-demir performs a direct
read-out of the electricity meters, checks the account entries online and then cross-checks with
33
34
35
36
Calibration certificates are provided to the DOE for Validation.
See http://www.mevzuat.gov.tr/Metin.Aspx?MevzuatKod=7.5.6381&MevzuatIliski=0&sourceXmlSearch=.
The calibration reports are provided to the DOE for Validation.
See http://dgpys.teias.gov.tr/dgpys/.
UNFCCC/CCNUCC
Page 38
data from the SCADA system as described further below. In case of significant deviations, a
complaint will be issued to TEİAŞ within one working day after online publication. TEİAŞ then
conducts a review and revises the data, as the case may be.
The data source for cross-checks in terms of quality assurance and quality control is the SCADA
system installed on each of the turbines. Kar-demir staff has been trained by turbine supplier
Nordex in using the SCADA system for monitoring wind farm performance along with other
relevant data. The SCADA system thus serves as secondary data source for monitoring and as
reference for comparison of primary monitoring data.
As evidence and documentation of the monitoring results, the following procedures are
followed.
1. Screen-shots of the PMUM account are prepared and printed monthly and stored
electronically and as hard copy by Kar-demir staff at the company headquarters for at
least 2 years after the end of the last crediting period as required by AMS-I.D.
2. Screen-shots of the SCADA system are prepared and printed monthly and stored
electronically and as hard copy by Kar-demir staff at the company headquarters for at
least 2 years after the end of the last crediting period as required by AMS-I.D.
3. Invoices to TEİAŞ are stored as hard copy at Kar-demir premises for at least 2 years
after the end of the last crediting period.
4. Results of data read outs are compiled monthly by Kar-demir in a data read out protocol
which is stored as hard copy and scanned and stored as electronic file at the company
headquarters, both for at least 2 years after the end of the last crediting period.
5. Final data for gross electricity production and own electricity consumption is inserted into
an electronic spreadsheet file, which will be archived electronically and kept at least for 2
years after the end of the last crediting period.
UNFCCC/CCNUCC
Figure 7:
Page 39
Flow diagram of monitoring structure
Kar-demir
TEİAŞ
Substation
kWh
Power
Plant
kWh
Back
up
Main
No
Read out
(remote)
SCADA
System
Main Meter
working
Yes
No
Yes
Read out
(on site)
Document & Store
Publish
Online
Database
Scan
Protocol
Screen
Shot
Hard
Copy
Scan
Invoice
Obtain
TEİAŞ Data
Document & Store
TEİAŞ and SCADA Data
Compare
Data
Difference
significant
Yes
Perform
Review
No
Require
Review
Issue
Invoice
Pay
Invoice
Compile
Data
Consultant
Prepare
Report
Auditor
Monitoring
Report
Verify
Verification
Report
UNFCCC/CCNUCC
Page 40
The main responsible person for monitoring will be the chief coordinating manager for Kar-demir
Bozyaka RES 12 MW, i.e. Mr. Cihan İlker. He will also supervise the on-site technical manager,
who will also have access to the SCADA system.
Figure 8:
Organisational Chart
Nevzat Karalp
(President)
T. Önder Karalp
(Vice President)
Özge Yastı
Cihan İlker
(Finance & GS)
Fatih Ünnü
(Finance)
(Project Manager)
Yiğit Mungan
M. Kemal
(Environment)
(Site Manager)
Özgür Tezel
(Technician)
Nurtekin Çolak
(Security)
Sedat Tarhan
(Technician)
Bilal Özkalsın
(Security)
Murat Kılıç
(Technician)
Ahmet Öner
(Technician)
B.8.
Date of completion of the application of the baseline study and monitoring
methodology and the name of the responsible person(s)/entity(ies)
Date of completion: 23/03/2015.
Responsible for determining the baseline:
enveco GmbH, Münster, Germany
Tel: +49 (251) 315810
Fax: +49 (251) 3833516
E-mail: [email protected]
Enveco GmbH is not a project participant.
UNFCCC/CCNUCC
Page 41
SECTION C. Duration and crediting period
C.1.
Duration of project activity
C.1.1. Start date of project activity
19/06/2010
The starte date of the project activity is the time of first real action on implementing the project,
i.e. the signature date of the turbine supply contract. It also represents the date of investment
decision.
The wind farm is fully operational since 10/03/2012.
C.1.2. Expected operational lifetime of project activity
20 years and 0 months.
C.2.
Crediting period of project activity
C.2.1. Type of crediting period
Renewable crediting period.
First crediting period.
C.2.2. Start date of crediting period
10/03/2012
C.2.3. Length of the first crediting period:
7 years and 0 months.
SECTION D. Environmental Impact:
D.1.
Analysis of environmental impacts
Kar-demir contracted the Ankara based expert office EN-ÇEV Enerji Çevre Yatırımları ve
Danışmanlığı Ltd. Şti. for preparing the PTD. The PTD was finalised in August 2008 and
submitted to the İzmir province office of TÇOB.
UNFCCC/CCNUCC
Page 42
Figure 9: Relief from duty to perform full EIA
The examination of the project's environmental impact has revealed that
a) no sensitive or protected areas according to Annex 5 of the Turkish EIA regulation are
affected by the project
b) no sites with a high value w.r.t. to cultural history are affected by the project (particularly
the four most important sites located in Aliağa district)
c) an adequate management system will be applied during construction to comply with
Turkish regulations and provisions w.r.t. solid and liquid waste, dust and noise
emissions, and excavation. The PTD contains in its sections 1c and 1e comprehensive
lists with precautionary measures.
d) a detailed field study on local flora and fauna at the project site taking into consideration
the the Red Data Book of Turkish Plants, the Turkish environmental law, the convention
on the conservation of European Wildlife, and the Central Hunting Commission of
TÇOB, has revealed that no endemic or endangered flora species and no threatened
animal species exist within the project area
e) potential negative effects on Avifauna are unlikely, as the project site is at a far distance
from bird migration routes. However, potential negative effects on birds may be caused
by the high and medium voltage transmission lines. Adequate protection measures will
be taken by Kar-demir.
As demonstrated in 9 above, the Ministry of Environment and Forestry has - upon assessing the
PTD - released the project from the duty to perform a complete EIA according to Turkish
environmental law.
UNFCCC/CCNUCC
D.2.
Page 43
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. Local stakeholders consultation
E.1.
Solicitation of comments from local stakeholders
Stakeholder consultation for the proposed VER GS project activity was conducted in
accordance with the rules and guidelines of Gold Standard version 2.1. 37 In a first step, a local
stakeholder consultation (LSC) was conducted by inviting selected relevant stakeholders as well
as the interested public to attend a meeting held on 10/03/2010 at Aliağa Public Meeting Hall.
The invitation also provided for contact data to allow for giving comments in case attendance
was impossible. The meeting was held with 25 attendants and showed important results and
helpful suggestions as to improve the project design. The project was presented and then
attendants were asked to assess it with respect to its environmental, social, and technoeconomic impacts on the region and on the country. A report on the meeting (LSC report) has
been prepared (in English and Turkish language).
An additional stakeholder feedback round was conducted according to Gold Standard version
2.2.38 Revised documentation was uploaded to a website and provided as hard copy at the
Muhtar's office in Horozgediği village 20/09/2013 until 19/11/2013. For specific issues like
monitoring of sustainability perfomance of the project and implementation of a continuous input
and grievance mechanism, key stakeholders were identified and proactively approached for
feedback. All details are given in the Gold Standard Passport (GSPP).
E.2.
Summary of comments received
At the meeting, the participants have generally scored the project positively or neutrally with
respect to certain environmental, social, technological and economic indicators. Details are
given in the LSC report.
The generally positive reaction was confirmed during the stakeholder feedback round. Details
are given in the GSPP.
E.3.
Report on consideration of comments received
The project owner has been grateful for all comments and has taken them into account. The
ongoing process in the course of the CIGM will assure that all stakeholders will continually have
the opportunity to raise comments, and that the project owner can accurately take them into
account.
SECTION F. Approval and authorization
N/A
37
38
See http://www.cdmgoldstandard.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/10/GSv2.1_Requirements-11.pdf;
http://www.cdmgoldstandard.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/10/GSv2.1_Toolkit_Clean-11.pdf and
http://www.cdmgoldstandard.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/10/Annex_J.pdf.
http://www.goldstandard.org/energy/rules-requirements.
UNFCCC/CCNUCC
Appendix 1
Page 44
Contact Information of project participants
Organization:
Kar-demir Haddecilik San. ve Tic. Ltd. Şti.
Street/P.O.Box:
Yeni Foça yolu 5. Km.
Building:
City:
Aliağa
State/Region:
İzmir
Postcode/ZIP:
Country:
Turkey
Telephone:
FAX:
E-Mail:
URL:
Represented by:
Title:
Salutation:
Mr.
Last name:
İlker
Middle name:
First name:
Cihan
Department:
Mobile:
+90 530 408 16 18
Direct FAX:
+90 232 625 19 42
Direct tel:
+90 232 625 22 22 / 179
Personal e-mail:
[email protected]
Appendix 2
Affirmation regarding public funding
No public funding is involved in the financing of the proposed project activity.
Appendix 3
N/A
Applicability of selected methodology
UNFCCC/CCNUCC
Appendix 4
Page 45
Further background Information on ex ante calculation of emission reductions
Baseline description
The following tables represent the two 10 year capacity projection scenarios 39 which are the
data base for 5 and 6, respectively, in Section A.3 above.
Table A:
Projected Turkish electricity generation, 2012-2021 (scenario 1). Unit: Gwh
Year
2012
2013
2014
2015
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
2021
52,683
52,861
53,185
57,261
61,236
61,333
61,333
61,333
61,333
61,333
Hard Coal+Asf.
3,967
3,967
3,967
4,939
5,911
5,911
5,911
5,911
5,911
5,911
Imported Coal
26,821
26,780
26,281
30,790
37,901
39,626
39,673
39,673
39,673
39,673
Fuel Type
Lignite
Natural Gas
150,688 152,777 158,748 169,522 175,072 175,154 176,011 175,785 176,011 176,011
Geothermal
802
912
1,212
1,402
1,402
1,402
1,402
1,402
1,402
1,402
9,224
9,224
9,224
9,224
9,224
9,224
9,224
9,224
9,224
9,224
148
148
148
148
148
148
148
148
148
148
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
4,200
12,600
21,000
1,408
1,408
1,408
1,408
1,408
1,408
1,408
1,408
1,408
1,408
945
1,111
1,166
1,196
1,196
1,196
1,196
1,196
1,196
1,196
Hydro
65,463
72,934
79,651
Wind
6,315
7,001
8,343
Fuel Oil
Diesel Oil
Nuclear
other
Biogas+Waste
TOTAL
90,522 104,443 112,708 115,779 116,558 116,558 116,558
9,208
9,208
9,208
9,208
9,208
9,208
9,208
318,464 329,123 343,333 375,620 407,149 417,318 421,293 426,046 434,672 443,072
Table B:
Projected Turkish electricity generation, 2012-2021 (scenario 2). Unit: Gwh
Year
2012
2013
2014
2015
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
2021
52,675
52,853
53,185
54,299
56,549
57,883
57,883
57,883
57,883
57,883
Hard Coal+Asf.
3,967
3,967
3,967
4,939
5,911
5,911
5,911
5,911
5,911
5,911
Imported Coal
26,821
26,780
26,281
26,530
29,381
31,106
35,413
39,673
39,673
39,673
Fuel type
Lignite
Natural Gas
Geothermal
149,403 150,545 156,703 167,848 174,498 175,154 176,011 175,785 176,011 176,011
802
912
1,057
1,247
1,402
1,402
1,402
1,402
1,402
1,402
9,224
9,224
9,224
9,224
9,224
9,224
9,224
9,224
9,224
9,224
148
148
148
148
148
148
148
148
148
148
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
4,200
12,600
21,000
1,408
1,408
1,408
1,408
1,408
1,408
1,408
1,408
1,408
1,408
872
1,038
1,166
1,196
1,196
1,196
1,196
1,196
1,196
1,196
Hydro
64,158
70,698
76,555
84,380
Wind
6,231
6,812
7,820
8,790
Fuel Oil
Diesel Oil
Nuclear
other
Biogas+Waste
TOTAL
39
96,511 106,626 113,652 116,558 116,558 116,558
9,208
9,208
9,208
9,208
9,208
9,208
315,709 324,385 337,514 360,009 385,436 399,266 411,456 422,596 431,222 439,622
See TEİAŞ Projection, p. 57 and p. 64, respectively.
UNFCCC/CCNUCC
Page 46
Operate Margin
For calculation of operate margin emissions, NCVs were not used due to the availability of direct
data on fuel use in the electricity sector in Turkey. The data had merely been converted from
Tcal to TJ to allow for direct application of the CO 2 emission factors expressed in t CO2/TJ. The
conversion follows
equation (7)
FC i , y⋅NCV i , y =FC HV , i , y [TJ]=FC HV , i , y [Tcal] ⋅ 4.1868
as presented in Step 4 above in Section B.6.1 The results of the conversion are presented in
Table C:
Conversion of fuel use data in Turkish electricity sector 2009-2011 from Tcal to TJ
2009
[Tcal]
2010
[TJ]
[Tcal]
2011
[TJ]
[Tcal]
[TJ]
Hard Coal+Imported
Coal+Asphaltite
35,130
147,081
39,546
165,573
57,567
241,023
Lignite
97,652
408,848
96,551
404,240
107,210
448,865
Fuel Oil
15,160
63,471
8,569
35,877
5,280
22,106
1,830
7,663
209
877
155
649
1
5
0
0
0
0
84
353
105
440
0
0
186,266
779,858
194,487
814,279
202,064
846,002
Diesel Oil
LPG
Naphta
Natural Gas
Build Margin
The compilation below lists all plants included in the build margin. They represent a total annual
average gross generation of 43,266,480 MWh which amounts to 20.03% of annual electricty
generation of the project electricity system, excluding power units using the carbon market, i.e.
AEGtotal = 215,967,800 MWh.
Table D:
Power Plants included in the Build Margin Calculation40
Power Unit
Cap.
(MW)
Bus.
model
Fuel type
AEG
(GWh)
CoD
ETİ SODA
24.00 Autopr.
Lignite
144.00
22/01/10
CAN TEKSTİL
13.00 Autopr.
N.Gas
100.00
28/01/10
ALTINMARKA
4.60 Autopr.
N.Gas
35.90
28/01/10
BAYBURT HES (BAYBURT ENERJİ ÜRET.)
14.60 IPP
Hydro
51.00
28/01/10
UZUNÇAYIR HES (Tunceli) (İlave)
27.35 IPP
Hydro
107.40
28/01/10
ALAKIR HES (YURT ENERJİ ÜRETİM)
2.10 IPP
Hydro
6.00
29/01/10
GAZİANTEP ÇÖP BİOGAZI
1.13 IPP
REN
7.34
01/02/10
AKBAŞLAR
1.54 Autopr.
N.Gas
12.08
18/02/10
PETA MÜHENDİSLİK EN. (MURSAL II HES)
4.50 IPP
Hydro
19.00
19/02/10
ASA ENERJİ (KALE REG.ve HES)
9.60 IPP
Hydro
32.00
19/02/10
HETAŞ HACISALİHOĞLU (YILDIZLI HES)
1.20 IPP
Hydro
5.00
23/02/10
ODA YERİ
4.20 IPP
REN
32.81
24/02/10
40
Except where other reasons are noted, all crossed out plants are using VERs.
UNFCCC/CCNUCC
Power Unit
ASMAKİNSAN (BANDIRMA 3 RES)
Page 47
Cap.
(MW)
Bus.
model
Fuel type
AEG
(GWh)
CoD
20.00 IPP
Wind
70.83
26/02/10
GLOBAL ENERJİ (PELİTLİK)
3.50 IPP
N.Gas
26.17
26/02/10
KONYA ŞEKER SAN. VE TİC. A.Ş.
6.00 Autopr.
Lignite
0.00
26/02/10
26.20 IPP
N.Gas
166.69
03/03/10
SOMA ENERJİ ÜRETİM (SOMA RES)
4.50 IPP
Wind
15.39
10/03/10
ROTOR ELEKTRİK (OSMANİYE RES)
17.50 IPP
Wind
66.11
10/03/10
3.10 IPP
Hydro
10.00
11/03/10
DENİZ ELEKTRİK (SEBENOBA RES)
10.00 IPP
Wind
36.67
12/03/10
AKDENİZ ELEKTRİK (MERSİN RES)
33.00 IPP
Wind
100.00
19/03/10
AKSA ENERJİ (ANTALYA)
25.00 IPP
N.Gas
150.00
20/03/10
RASA ENERJİ (VAN)
DOĞUBAY ELEKTRİK (SARIMEHMET HES)
MENDERES GEOTERMAL DORA-2
9.50 IPP
REN
73.00
26/03/10
NURYOL ENERJİ (DEFNE REG. VE HES)
7.23 IPP
Hydro
22.09
26/03/10
ASMAKİNSAN (BANDIRMA 3 RES)
4.00 IPP
Wind
14.17
26/03/10
ÖZGÜR ELEKTRİK (AZMAK I REG.VE HES)
5.90 IPP
Hydro
21.50
01/04/10
BİRİM HİDR. ÜRETİM AŞ. (ERFELEK HES)
3.25 IPP
Hydro
8.95
03/04/10
BEYTEK El. ÜR. A.S. (ÇATALOLUK HES)
9.50 IPP
Hydro
31.00
07/04/10
NİSAN E.MEKANİK EN. (BAŞAK REG. HES)
6.90 IPP
Hydro
22.00
09/04/10
BOREAS ENERJİ (OREAS I ENEZ RES)
15.00 IPP
Wind
49.00
09/04/10
BERGAMA RES EN. ÜR. A.Ş. ALİAĞA RES
52.50 IPP
Wind
207.08
09/04/10
ROTOR ELEKTRİK (OSMANİYE RES)
17.50 IPP
Wind
66.11
09/04/10
UZUNÇAYIR HES (Tunceli) (İlave)
27.35 IPP
Hydro
107.40
11/04/10
FIRTINA ELEKTRİK ÜR. A.Ş. (SÜMER HES)
21.60 IPP
Hydro
70.00
16/04/10
FRİTOLAY
0.06 Autopr.
REN
0.45
21/04/10
FRİTOLAY
0.33 Autopr.
REN
2.48
21/04/10
BAKRAS EN. ELKT.ÜR. A.Ş. ŞENBÜK RES
15.00 IPP
Wind
47.00
22/04/10
YILDIZLI ENTEGRE AĞAÇ (Kocaeli)
12.40 Autopr.
N.Gas
92.67
22/04/10
1.80 IPP
Wind
6.35
28/04/10
12.41 IPP
Hydro
56.05
30/04/10
1.40 IPP
REN
10.93
30/04/10
ALİZE ENERJİ (KELTEPE RES)
KAR-EN KARADENİZ EL.A.Ş. ARALIK HES
ITC-KA ENERJİ (SİNCAN)
ATAER ENERJİ ELEKTRİK ÜRETİM A.Ş.
49.00 IPP
N.Gas
277.89
05/05/10
3.25 IPP
Hydro
8.95
14/05/10
101.95 IPP
N.Gas
819.36
22/05/10
KARADENİZ EL.ÜRET. (UZUNDERE-1 HES)
31.10 IPP
Hydro
82.50
27/05/10
AKIM ENERJİ (CEVİZLİK REG. VE HES)
91.40 IPP
Hydro
330.00
28/05/10
ÇAKIT HES (ÇAKIT ENERJİ A.Ş.)
20.20 IPP
Hydro
96.00
01/06/10
CEYHAN HES (OŞKAN HES) (ENOVA EN.)
23.90 IPP
Hydro
98.00
03/06/10
ERENLER REG. ve HES (BME BİR.MÜT.EN.)
45.00 IPP
Hydro
85.00
04/06/10
ROTOR ELEKTRİK (GÖKÇEDAĞ RES)
20.00 IPP
Wind
75.56
05/06/10
7.20 IPP
Wind
24.62
10/06/10
PAŞA REG. VE HES (ÖZGÜR ELEKTRİK)
8.70 IPP
Hydro
34.00
11/06/10
BİRİM HİDR. ÜRETİM AŞ. (ERFELEK HES)
CENGİZ ENERJİ SAN. VE TİC. A.Ş. (Tekkeköy)
UNFCCC/CCNUCC
Power Unit
GÜZELÇAY-I HES (İLK ELEKTRİK ENERJİ)
Page 48
Cap.
(MW)
Bus.
model
Fuel type
AEG
(GWh)
CoD
3.14 IPP
Hydro
16.67
15/06/10
KALE REG. VE HES (KALE ENERJİ ÜR.)
34.10 IPP
Hydro
116.00
16/06/10
BERGAMA RES EN. ÜR. A.Ş. ALİAĞA RES
37.50 IPP
Wind
147.92
16/06/10
MAZI-3 RES ELEKT.ÜR. A.Ş. (MAZI-3 RES)
7.50 IPP
Wind
26.25
18/06/10
UĞUR ENERJİ ELKTRİK ÜRETİM TİC. VE SAN. A.Ş.
48.20 IPP
N.Gas
405.14
21/06/10
ERİKLİ-AKOCAK REG. ve AKOCAK HES
41.25 IPP
Hydro
128.50
30/06/10
5.65 IPP
Hydro
12.63
30/06/10
BORASKO ENERJİ (BANDIRMA RES)
12.00 IPP
Wind
48.00
30/06/10
AKSA ENERJİ (ANTALYA)
25.00 IPP
N.Gas
150.00
01/07/10
4.40 IPP
Hydro
15.00
03/07/10
DAMLAPINAR HES (CENAY ELEKTRİK ÜR.)
16.40 IPP
Hydro
92.00
08/07/10
DİM HES (DİLER ELEKTRİK ÜRETİM)
38.30 IPP
Hydro
123.00
08/07/10
ALTEK ALARKO ELKTRİK SANTRALLARI
60.10 IPP
N.Gas
415.57
10/07/10
ÖZGÜR ELEKTRİK (AZMAK I REG.VE HES)
5.90 IPP
Hydro
21.50
10/07/10
KİRPİLİK REG. VE HES (ÖZGÜR ELEKTRİK)
6.20 IPP
Hydro
22.00
11/07/10
YAVUZ REG. VE HES (MASAT ENERJİ)
22.50 IPP
Hydro
83.00
14/07/10
EREN ENERJİ ELEKTRİK ÜRETİM A.Ş.
160.00 IPP
CFBS
1,068.24
15/07/10
12.50 IPP
Wind
45.65
15/07/10
N.Gas
42.00
17/07/10
Hydro
49.00
21/07/10
ÇAMLIKAYA REG. VE HES
DİNAR HES (ELDA ELEKTRİK ÜRETİM)
ZİYARET RES (ZİYARET RES ELEKTRİK)
FLOKSER TEKSTİL (Çerkezköy/TEKİRDAĞ)
KAYABÜKÜ REG. VE HES (ELİTE ELEKT.)
5.20 Autopr.
14.60 IPP
RB KARESİ İTHALAT İHRACAT TEKSTİL
8.60 Autopr.
N.Gas
65.00
23/07/10
7.20 IPP
Wind
24.62
28/07/10
6.30 IPP
Wind
21.54
28/07/10
41.25 IPP
Hydro
128.50
29/07/10
101.95 IPP
N.Gas
819.36
31/07/10
GÖK REG. ve HES (GÖK ENERJİ EL. SAN.)
10.01 IPP
Hydro
43.04
06/08/10
BULAM REG. VE HES (MEM ENERJİ ELK.)
7.03 IPP
Hydro
33.14
10/08/10
KESKİNOĞLU TAVUKÇULUK VE DAM. İŞL.
3.50 Autopr.
N.Gas
25.00
11/08/10
32.50 IPP
Wind
110.86
13/08/10
2.00 IPP
N.Gas
13.00
17/08/10
29.10 IPP
N.Gas
203.00
19/08/10
N.Gas
12.00
19/08/10
12.60 IPP
Hydro
51.50
20/08/10
2.40 IPP
Hydro
14.00
25/08/10
33.24 IPP
N.Gas
256.28
26/08/10
1.60 IPP
Hydro
8.00
28/08/10
12.60 IPP
Hydro
51.50
28/08/10
ITC ADANA BİOKÜTLE SANT.
9.90 IPP
REN
72.72
02/09/10
BELEN ELEKTRİK BELEN RÜZGAR-HATAY
6.00 IPP
Wind
19.00
02/09/10
40.50 IPP
Hydro
106.00
03/09/10
ERİKLİ-AKOCAK REG. ve AKOCAK HES
CENGİZ ENERJİ SAN. VE TİC. A.Ş. (Tekkeköy)
SOMA RES (BİLGİN RÜZGAR SAN. EN.ÜR.)
BİNATOM ELEKTRİK ÜRETİM A.Ş.
CAN ENERJİ ELEKTRİK ÜR. A.Ş.(Tekirdağ)
KURTOĞLU BAKIR KURŞUN SAN. A.Ş.
CEYHAN HES (BERKMAN HES)(ENOVA EN.)
GÜDÜL I REG. VE HES (YAŞAM ENERJİ)
SÖNMEZ ELEKTRİK(UŞak)
KARŞIYAKA HES (AKUA ENERJİ ÜRET.)
CEYHAN HES (BERKMAN HES)(ENOVA EN.)
TEKTUĞ ELEKTRİK (ANDIRIN HES)
1.60 Autopr.
UNFCCC/CCNUCC
Power Unit
Page 49
Cap.
(MW)
Bus.
model
Fuel type
AEG
(GWh)
CoD
ÜTOPYA ELEKTRİK (DÜZOVA RES)
15.00 IPP
Wind
46.00
03/09/10
SELEN ELEKTRİK (KEPEZKAYA HES)
28.00 IPP
Hydro
124.00
06/09/10
REŞADİYE 2 HES (TURKON MNG ELEKT.)
26.10 IPP
Hydro
110.00
17/09/10
4.00 IPP
Hydro
9.00
21/09/10
27.50 IPP
Wind
93.81
23/09/10
KIRKA BORAKS(Kırka) (Eti Maden İŞl.) (İlave)
10.00 Autopr.
Fuel Oil
KOZAN HES (SER-ER ENERJİ)
65.93
29/09/10
KAHRAMAN REG. VE HES (KATIRCIOĞLU)
1.40 IPP
Hydro
6.00
30/09/10
NARİNKALE REG. VE HES (EBD ENERJİ)
3.10 IPP
Hydro
9.99
30/09/10
9.00 IPP
Wind
30.78
01/10/10
ENERJİ-SA (BANDIRMA)
930.80 IPP
N.Gas
7,540.00
07/10/10
ERENKÖY REG. VE HES (TÜRKERLER)
21.50 IPP
Hydro
87.00
07/10/10
UĞUR ENERJİ ELKTRİK ÜRETİM TİC. VE SAN. A.Ş.
12.00 IPP
N.Gas
100.86
07/10/10
ZİYARET RES
22.50 IPP
Wind
82.17
13/10/10
KAHTA I HES (ERDEMYILDIZ ELEK. ÜRT.)
7.10 IPP
Hydro
35.00
14/10/10
ROTOR ELEKTRİK (GÖKÇEDAĞ RES)
2.50 IPP
Wind
9.44
15/10/10
48.51 IPP
Hydro
180.46
27/10/10
7.40 IPP
Hydro
21.00
28/10/10
4,005.88
01/11/10
ULUABAT KUVVET TÜNELİ VE HES
SABUNSUYU II HES (ANG ENERJİ ELK.)
600.00 IPP
BURÇ BENDİ VE HES (AKKUR ENERJİ)
27.30 IPP
Hydro
113.00
04/11/10
KARADENİZ EL.ÜRET. (UZUNDERE-1 HES)
31.10 IPP
Hydro
82.50
07/11/10
GÜZELÇAY-II HES (İLK ELEKTRİK ENERJİ)
4.96 IPP
Hydro
26.33
11/11/10
KUYUCAK RES (ALİZE ENERJİ ÜRET.)
8.00 IPP
Wind
34.38
11/11/10
MURGUL BAKIR (Ç.Kaya) (İlave)
19.60 IPP
Hydro
40.50
11/11/10
30.00 IPP
Wind
102.33
11/11/10
MARMARA PAMUKLU MENSUCAT (İlave)
26.20 Autopr.
N.Gas
203.53
25/11/10
ULUABAT KUVVET TÜNELİ VE HES
48.51 IPP
Hydro
180.46
25/11/10
REŞADİYE 1 HES (TURKON MNG ELEKT.)
15.70 IPP
Hydro
126.00
26/11/10
EGEMEN 1 HES (ENERSİS ELEKTRİK)
8.82 IPP
Hydro
31.91
26/11/10
ALİAĞA ÇAKMAKTEPE ENERJİ (İlave)
69.90 IPP
N.Gas
526.25
26/11/10
155.33 IPP
Hydro
474.94
02/12/10
2.56 IPP
N.Gas
19.74
07/12/10
KUYUCAK RES (ALİZE ENERJİ ÜRET.)
17.60 IPP
Wind
75.63
09/12/10
UMUT III REG. VE HES (NİSAN ELEKTR.)
12.00 IPP
Hydro
26.00
13/12/10
5.82
15/12/10
YEDİGÖZE HES (YEDİGÖZE ELEKTRİK)
SÖNMEZ ELEKTRİK(UŞak)
Supercrit.
TÜPRAŞ RAFİNERİ (İZMİT)
0.90 Autopr.
Fuel Oil
POLYPLEX EUROPA POLYESTER FİLM
7.81 Autopr.
N.Gas
61.41
16/12/10
ALTEK ALARKO ELKTRİK SANTRALLARI
21.90 IPP
N.Gas
151.43
18/12/10
SARES RES (GARET ENERJİ ÜRETİM)
15.00 IPP
Wind
60.67
22/12/10
FEKE 2 BARAJI VE HES (AKKUR ENERJİ)
69.30 IPP
Hydro
223.00
24/12/10
EGEMEN 1B HES (ENERSİS ELEKTRİK)
11.10 IPP
Hydro
40.16
28/12/10
4,005.88
29/12/10
600.00 IPP
Supercrit.
UNFCCC/CCNUCC
Power Unit
Page 50
Cap.
(MW)
Bus.
model
Fuel type
AEG
(GWh)
CoD
RASA ENERJİ (VAN)
10.10 IPP
N.Gas
64.26
29/12/10
KALKANDERE REG. VE YOKUŞLU HES
14.54 IPP
Hydro
68.29
30/12/10
TURGUTTEPE RES (SABAŞ ELEKTRİK ÜR.)
22.00 IPP
Wind
64.17
30/12/10
İNTERNATİONAL HOSPİTAL İSTANBUL AŞ.
0.80 Autopr.
N.Gas
6.00
31/12/10
AKSU HES
5.20 IPP
Hydro
16.00
12/01/11
ÇEŞMEBAŞI HES
8.20 IPP
Hydro
28.00
12/01/11
CEVHER I-II HES
16.36 IPP
Hydro
65.00
17/01/11
BAYRAMHACILI HES
47.00 IPP
Hydro
175.00
20/01/11
SÖĞÜTLÜKAYA (POSOF HES) YENİGÜN EN.
6.13 IPP
Hydro
31.00
20/01/11
FRAPORT IC İÇTAŞ
8.00 Autopr.
N.Gas
64.00
24/01/11
N.Gas
366.00
27/01/11
N.Gas
32.00
31/01/11
142.28 IPP
Hydro
360.00
03/02/11
ÇANAKKALE RES
29.90 IPP
Wind
92.00
11/02/11
SUSURLUK RES
45.00 IPP
Wind
112.00
13/02/11
ÇAKIRMAN HES
6.98 IPP
Hydro
22.00
19/02/11
KUMKÖY HES
17.49 IPP
Hydro
98.00
23/02/11
DURU 2 HES
4.49 IPP
Hydro
22.00
25/02/11
KULP I HES
22.92 IPP
Hydro
78.00
04/03/11
261.27 IPP
Hydro
828.00
10/03/11
N.Gas
67.00
19/03/11
HG ENERJİ
SABİHA GÖKÇEN HAVAALANI
HACININOĞLU HES
ALKUMRU HES
BOYTEKS
52.38 IPP
4.00 Autopr.
8.60 Autopr.
EŞEN-1 HES
60.00 IPP
Hydro
240.00
23/03/11
AYRANCILAR HES
32.10 IPP
Hydro
128.00
25/03/11
CENGİZ ENERJİ (Tekkeköy/SAMSUN)
35.00 IPP
N.Gas
281.29
30/03/11
ÇAMLICA III HES
27.62 IPP
Hydro
43.00
01/04/11
YAPRAK II HES
10.80 IPP
Hydro
32.00
03/04/11
OTLUCA I HES
37.54 IPP
Hydro
177.00
07/04/11
İNCESU HES
15.00 IPP
Hydro
48.00
08/04/11
KESME HES
4.61 IPP
Hydro
16.00
14/04/11
ÇATALTEPE RES
16.00 IPP
Wind
52.00
19/04/11
SARAÇBENDİ HES
25.48 IPP
Hydro
101.00
06/05/11
7.20 IPP
N.Gas
54.07
14/05/11
93.00 IPP
Wind
400.00
19/05/11
KARASU I HES
3.84 IPP
Hydro
19.00
19/05/11
YAŞIL HES
3.79 IPP
Hydro
15.00
20/05/11
İNCİRLİ HES
25.20 IPP
Hydro
126.00
25/05/11
DARCA HES
8.91 IPP
Hydro
63.00
26/05/11
ÖREN REG. HES
6.64 IPP
Hydro
29.00
26/05/11
KARASU II HES
3.08 IPP
Hydro
13.00
03/06/11
33.00 IPP
Hydro
141.00
10/06/11
ZORLU ENERJİ (B.Karıştıran)
ŞAH RES
TEFEN HES
UNFCCC/CCNUCC
Power Unit
CENGİZ ENERJİ
Page 51
Cap.
(MW)
Bus.
model
131.34 IPP
Fuel type
AEG
(GWh)
CoD
N.Gas
985.00
14/06/11
ALDAŞ ALTYAPI
1.95 Autopr.
N.Gas
15.00
15/06/11
GÖKMEN HES
2.87 IPP
Hydro
13.00
15/06/11
ÜZÜMLÜ HES
11.36 IPP
Hydro
41.00
23/06/11
1.07 IPP
Hydro
5.00
30/06/11
KÖYOBASI HES
AKRES
43.75 IPP
Wind
165.00
01/07/11
TUZTAŞI HES
1.61 IPP
Hydro
10.00
04/07/11
OTLUCA II HES
6.36 IPP
Hydro
27.00
13/07/11
KNAUF İNŞAT
1.56 Autopr.
N.Gas
12.00
15/07/11
HASIRCI TEKSTİL
2.00 Autopr.
N.Gas
15.00
16/07/11
YAMAÇ HES
5.46 IPP
Hydro
17.00
20/07/11
SEYİTALİ RES
30.00 IPP
Wind
110.00
22/07/11
YAPISAN (KARICA REG. ve DARICA I HES)
13.32 IPP
Hydro
45.41
26/07/11
ŞANLIURFA OSB
116.76 IPP
N.Gas
800.00
26/07/11
SAMSUN TEKKEKÖY
131.34 IPP
N.Gas
980.00
28/07/11
LOKMAN HEKİM
0.51 Autopr.
N.Gas
4.00
29/07/11
KARASU 5 HES
4.10 IPP
Hydro
24.00
03/08/11
BALKONDU I HES
9.19 IPP
Hydro
33.00
05/08/11
KARASU 4-3 HES
4.60 IPP
Hydro
22.00
05/08/11
KORUKÖY HES
3.03 IPP
Hydro
22.00
05/08/11
GORDİON AVM
2.01 Autopr.
N.Gas
15.00
05/08/11
BORASKO BANDIRMA RES
3.00 IPP
Wind
12.00
11/08/11
ÇANAKÇI HES
9.27 IPP
Hydro
39.00
25/08/11
BOLU ÇÖP TOP. TES
1.13 IPP
REN
7.50
26/08/11
ASLIM BİYOKÜTLE
5.66 IPP
REN
44.50
09/09/11
BOSEN ENERJİ
235.82 IPP
N.Gas
1,770.00
10/09/11
BOĞUNTU HES
3.80 IPP
Hydro
17.00
16/09/11
POYRAZ HES
2.66 IPP
Hydro
10.00
16/09/11
İNNORES ELEKTRİK YUNTDAĞ Wind
10.00 IPP
Wind
30.67
27/09/11
GOREN-1
48.65 IPP
N.Gas
277.00
30/09/11
KOZDERE HES
3.15 IPP
Hydro
14.00
08/10/11
SEFAKÖY HES
33.11 IPP
Hydro
121.00
12/10/11
KİLLİK RES
20.00 IPP
Wind
43.00
13/10/11
YEDİGÖL HES
21.90 IPP
Hydro
77.00
13/10/11
SARAY HALI
4.29 Autopr.
N.Gas
33.00
15/10/11
AYVACIK RES
5.00 IPP
Wind
17.00
23/10/11
NİL ÖRME
2.68 Autopr.
N.Gas
21.00
25/10/11
MURATLI HES
26.70 IPP
Hydro
94.00
27/10/11
ODAŞ DGKÇS
54.96 IPP
N.Gas
415.00
28/10/11
BAKİ ELEKTRİK ŞAMLI Wind (İlave)
24.00 IPP
Wind
92.63
01/11/11
UNFCCC/CCNUCC
Power Unit
Page 52
Cap.
(MW)
Bus.
model
Fuel type
AEG
(GWh)
CoD
BANDIRMA ENERJİ (BANDIRMA RES)
3.00 IPP
Wind
12.00
01/11/11
KİLLİK RES (PEM ENERJİ A.Ş.) (İlave)
20.00 IPP
Wind
43.00
01/11/11
SARES RES (GARET ENERJİ ÜRETİM)
7.50 IPP
Wind
30.33
01/11/11
36.80 IPP
Wind
125.84
01/11/11
TURGUTTEPE RES (SABAŞ ELEKTRİK)
2.00 IPP
Wind
5.83
01/11/11
ZİYARET RES (ZİYARET RES ELEKTRİK)
22.50 IPP
Wind
82.17
01/11/11
AYDIN/GERMENCİK JEOTERMAL
20.00 IPP
REN
150.00
01/11/11
CEV ENERJİ ÜRETİM(GAZİANTEP ÇÖP BİOGAZ)
4.52 IPP
REN
29.34
01/11/11
ITC ADANA ENERJİ ÜRETİM (İlave)
1.42 IPP
REN
10.43
01/11/11
ITC-KA ENERJİ (SİNCAN) (İlave)
1.50 IPP
REN
11.71
01/11/11
ITC-KA ENERJİ MAMAK KATI ATIK TOP.
2.83 IPP
REN
18.94
01/11/11
KAYSERİ KATI ATIK DEPONİ SAHASI
1.60 IPP
REN
12.00
01/11/11
BEKİRLİ TES (İÇDAŞ ELEKTRİK EN.)
600.00 IPP
4,320.00
01/11/11
SOMA RES (SOMA ENERJİ) (İlave)
MENGE BARAJI VE HES (ENERJİSA ENERJİ)
Supercrit
44.71 IPP
Hydro
102.00
01/11/11
SEYRANTEPE HES (Düzeltme))
7.14 IPP
Hydro
26.02
01/11/11
BATMAN
0.48 EÜAŞ
Hydro
0.92
01/11/11
ÇAMLIKAYA REG.VE HES (ÇAMLIKAYA EN)
2.82 IPP
Hydro
6.30
01/11/11
ÇUKURÇAYI HES (AYDEMİR ELEKTRİK ÜR.)
1.80 IPP
Hydro
8.00
01/11/11
HASANLAR HES (DÜZCE ENERJİ BİRLİĞİ)
4.70 IPP
Hydro
21.00
01/11/11
KALKANDERE REG. VE YOKUŞLU HES
23.36 IPP
Hydro
109.71
01/11/11
KARASU 4-2 HES (İDEAL ENERJİ ÜRETİMİ)
10.40 IPP
Hydro
58.00
01/11/11
9.74 IPP
Hydro
41.00
01/11/11
NARİNKALE REG. VE HES (EBD ENERJİ)
30.40 IPP
Hydro
98.01
01/11/11
SARIKAVAK HES (ESER ENERJİ YAT. AŞ.)
8.06 IPP
Hydro
43.00
01/11/11
SAYAN HES (KAREL ELEKTRİK ÜRETİM)
14.90 IPP
Hydro
47.00
01/11/11
TEKTUĞ (Erkenek)
0.51 IPP
Hydro
1.96
01/11/11
ULUABAT KUV. TÜN. VE HES (Düzeltme)
2.98 IPP
Hydro
11.09
01/11/11
155.33 IPP
Hydro
474.94
01/11/11
KIRAN HES (ARSAN ENERJİ A.Ş.)
YEDİGÖZE HES (YEDİGÖZE ELEK.) (İlave)
MARDİN-KIZILTEPE (AKSA ENERJİ)
32.10 IPP
Fuel Oil
225.00
01/11/11
AKSA AKRİLİK (İTHAL KÖM.+D.G)
25.00 IPP
N.Gas
175.00
01/11/11
AKSA ENERJİ (Antalya)
600.00 IPP
N.Gas
3,600.00
01/11/11
ALİAĞA ÇAKMAKTEPE ENERJİ (İlave)
139.70 IPP
N.Gas
1,051.75
01/11/11
GLOBAL ENERJİ (PELİTLİK)
0.50 IPP
N.Gas
3.74
01/11/11
GÜLLE ENERJİ(Çorlu) (İlave)
3.90 Autopr.
N.Gas
17.97
01/11/11
N.Gas
168.76
01/11/11
N.Gas
33.00
01/11/11
N.Gas
347.86
01/11/11
HAMİTABAT (Lisans Tadili)
ISPARTA MENSUCAT (Isparta)
MOSB Enerji Elektrik Üretim Ltd. Şti.(İlave)
36.00 EÜAŞ
4.30 Autopr.
43.50 IPP
POLYPLEX EUROPA POLYESTER FİLM
3.90 Autopr.
N.Gas
30.67
01/11/11
SAMUR HALI A.Ş.
4.30 Autopr.
N.Gas
33.00
01/11/11
N.Gas
410.00
01/11/11
TİRENDA TİRE ENERJİ ÜRETİM A.Ş.
58.38 IPP
UNFCCC/CCNUCC
Page 53
Power Unit
Cap.
(MW)
TÜPRAŞ O.A. RAFİNERİ (Kırıkkale) (İlave)
Bus.
model
12.00 Autopr.
Fuel type
AEG
(GWh)
CoD
N.Gas
84.78
01/11/11
YENİ UŞAK ENERJİ ELEKTRİK SANTRALI
8.73 IPP
N.Gas
65.00
01/11/11
ETİ BOR (Borik Asit)(Emet) (Düzeltme)
0.60 Autopr.
N.Gas
4.47
01/11/11
The power units in Turkey that use the carbon market and thus are to be excluded when
determining AEGtotal (see Step 5 above in Section B.6.3) are compiled in
Table E:
Power units in Turkey using the carbon market (Status 2011)41
Power Unit
ANEMON ENERJİ (İNTEPE)
DOĞAL ENERJİ (BURGAZ)
ERTÜRK ELEKT. (ÇATALCA)
ALİZE ENERJİ (KELTEPE)
ITC-KA ENERJİ MAMAK
MARE MANASTIR
ROTOR (OSMANİYE RES-GÖKÇEDAĞ RES)
SAYALAR RÜZGAR (DOĞAL ENERJİ)
TUZLA JEO.
ASMAKİNSAN (BANDIRMA-3 RES)
BELEN HATAY
DEĞİRMENÜSTÜ (KAHRAMANMARAŞ)
BORASKO BANDIRMA
ERİKLİ-AKOCAK REG.(AK EN.)
GÜZELÇAY-I HES(İLK EN.)
ITC-KA ENERJİ ADANA (BİYOKÜTLE)
AYEN ENERJİ (AKBÜK)
AKRES (AKHİSAR RÜZGAR)
BERGAMA RES (ALİAĞA RES)
ALİZE ENERJİ (ÇAMSEKİ)
KAR-EN KARADENİZ ELEK.(ARALIK HES)
AK ENERJİ AYYILDIZ (BANDIRMA)
MENDERES JEOTERMAL
AYRANCILAR (MURADİYE ELEK.)
BALKONDU I HES (BTA ELEK.)
BOLU BEL.ÇÖP (CEV MARMARA)
BOREAS EN.(ENEZ RES)
BULAM
BURÇBENDİ (AKKUR EN.)
ANADOLU ÇAKIRLAR
ÇAKIT HES
ÇALDERE ELEKTRİK DALAMAN MUĞLA
ÇAMLICA
ÇANAKKALE RES (ENERJİ-SA)
BEYTEK(ÇATALOLUK HES)
41
AEG
Standard
(GWh)
92.00
GS
48.00
GS
210.00
GS
73.00
GS
170.00
GS
129.00
GS
510.00
GS
108.00
GS
55.00
GS
85.00
GS
114.00
GS
106.00
VCS
240.00
GS
257.00
VCS
43.00
GS
83.00
GS
123.00
GS
165.00
GS
355.00
GS
82.00
GS
56.00
GS
51.00
GS
56.00
VCS
128.00
VCS
33.00
VCS
7.50
GS
49.00
GS
33.00
GS
113.00
VCS
60.00
GS
96.00
VCS
35.00
VCS
43.00
VCS
92.00
GS
31.00
GS
Link
View
View
View
View
View
View
View
View
View
View
View
View
View
View
View
View
View
View
View
View
View
View
View
View
View
View
View
View
View
View
View
View
View
View
View
Projects were identified by cross-checking TEİAŞ Projection pp. 109-123 with http://www.vcsprojectdatabase.org/,
http://mer.markit.com/br-reg/public/index.jsp?q=Turkey&s=cp, and
http://www.netinform.de/KE/Wegweiser/Ebene1_Projekte2.aspx?mode=4.
UNFCCC/CCNUCC
Page 54
Power Unit
ÇATALTEPE (ALİZE EN.)
DAMLAPINAR(CENAY ELEK.)
DARCA HES (BÜKOR EL.)
DATÇA RES
YAPISAN KARICA DARICA
MENDERES JEOTERMAL DORA-2
ÜTOPYA ELEKTRİK
EGEMEN 1 HES (ENERSİS ELEK.)
TEKTUĞ-ERKENEK
FEKE 2 (AKKUR EN.)
CEV EN.(GAZİANTEP ÇÖP)
UZUNÇAYIR
CEYKAR BAĞIŞLI
CEVHER (ÖZCEVHER)
ÖZTAY GÜNAYŞE
HAMZALI HES (TURKON MNG ELEK.)
HASANLAR (DÜZCE)
KALE HES
ASA EN.(KALE REG.)
TEKTUĞ-KALEALTI HES
KARASU I HES (İDEAL EN.)
KARASU 4-2 HES (İDEAL EN.)
KARASU 4-3 HES (İDEAL EN.); KARASU 5 HES (İDEAL EN.)
TEKTUĞ-KARGILIK
KAYSERİ KATI ATIK (HER EN.)
TEKTUĞ-KEBENDERESİ
LODOS RES (TAŞOLUK)KEMERBURGAZ
SELEN EL.(KEPEZKAYA HES)
KİLLİK RES (PEM EN.)
ITC-KA ENERJİ KONYA (ASLIM BİYOKÜTLE)
KORES KOCADAĞ
BEREKET (KOYULHİSAR)
KOZDERE (ADO MAD.)
KUMKÖY HES (KUMKÖY EN.)
KUYUCAK (ALİZE ENER.)
TGT EN. LAMAS III-IV
ORTADOĞU ENERJİ (Oda yeri) ; ORTADOĞU ENERJİ (KÖMÜRCÜODA)
AYDIN GERMENCİK JEO.(MAREN MARAŞ)
MAZI 3
MENGE (ENERJİ-SA)
AKDENİZ ELEK. MERSİN RES
OTLUCA I HES (BEYOBASI) ; OTLUCA II HES (BEYOBASI)
PAŞA HES(ÖZGÜR EL.)
SÖĞÜTLÜKAYA (POSOF HES) YENİGÜN EN.
POYRAZ HES(YEŞİL EN.)
REŞADİYE III HES(TURKON MNG EL.
REŞADİYE II HES(TURKON MNG EL.
ŞAH RES (GALATA WIND)
AEG
Standard
(GWh)
52.00
GS
92.00
VCS
63.00
GS
84.00
GS
376.00
VCS
73.00
GS
92.00
GS
72.00
GS
50.00
VCS
223.00
VCS
37.00
GS
322.00
VCS
99.00
VCS
65.00
GS
29.00
GS
117.00
GS
21.00
GS
116.00
VCS
32.00
GS
52.00
VCS
19.00
GS
58.00
GS
46.00
GS
83.00
VCS
12.00
GS
32.00
VCS
85.00
GS
124.00
VCS
86.00
GS
44.50
GS
56.00
GS
329.00
VCS
14.00
GS
98.00
VCS
110.00
GS
150.00
VCS
177.80
GS
150.00
GS
105.00
GS
102.00
VCS
100.00
GS
204.00
VCS
34.00
GS
31.00
GS
10.00
GS
115.00
GS
110.00
GS
400.00
GS
Link
View
View
View
View
View
View
View
View
View
View
View
View
View
View
View
View
View
View
View
View
View
View
View
View
View
View
View
View
View
View
View
View
View
View
View
View
View
View
View
View
View
View
View
View
View
View
View
View
UNFCCC/CCNUCC
Page 55
Power Unit
SARAÇBENDİ (ÇAMLICA)
SARES (GARET ENER.)
ALİZE ENERJİ (SARIKAYA ŞARKÖY)
SARIKAVAK (ESER)
SAYAN (KAREL)
SEFAKÖY (PURE)
HİDRO KONTROL (SELİMOĞLU HES)
BAKRAS ELEK.ŞENBÜK RES
SEYİTALİ RES (DORUK EN.)
ITC-KA ENERJİ SİNCAN
BEYOBASI (SIRMA)
SOMA RES (BİLGİN ELEK.)
SOMA RES
SUSURLUK (ALANTEK EN.)
AKIM (CEVİZLİK HES)
KALKANDERE-YOKUŞLU HES(AKIM EN.)
TURGUTTEPE RES (SABAŞ ELEK.)
ULUBAT KUVVET TÜN.(AK EN.)
FİLYOS YALNIZCA HES
YAVUZ HES (MASAT EN.)
ELESTAŞ YAYLABEL
ELESTAŞ YAZI
YEŞİLBAŞ
İNNORES ELEK. YUNTDAĞ
ZİYARET RES
BAKİ ELEKTRİK ŞAMLI RÜZGAR
ÖZGÜR ELEKTR.AZMAK I; ÖZGÜR ELEKTR.AZMAK II; KİRPİLİK HES (ÖZGÜR
ELEK.)
NİSAN EN.(BAŞAK HES)
CEYHAN HES (BERKMAN HES-ENOVA); CEYHAN HES (OŞKAN HES-ENOVA)
YPM GÖLOVA; YPM SEVİNDİK
UMUT III HES(NİSAN EL.)
YAPRAK II HES (NİSAN EL. ENERJİ)
EŞEN-I (GÖLTAŞ)
MARAŞ ENERJİ (FIRNIS)
SEBENOBA (DENİZ ELEK.)SAMANDAĞ
DENİZLİ ELEKT. (Karakurt-Akhisar)
BARES (BANDIRMA)
Appendix 5
AEG
Standard
(GWh)
101.00
VCS
91.00
GS
96.00
GS
43.00
GS
47.00
GS
121.00
VCS
35.00
GS
47.00
GS
110.00
GS
44.50
GS
23.00
VCS
307.00
GS
397.00
GS
112.00
GS
330.00
VCS
178.00
VCS
70.00
GS
372.00
VCS
67.00
GS
83.00
GS
20.00
VCS
6.00
VCS
56.00
VCS
213.00
GS
210.00
GS
440.00
GS
VCS
View
22.00
201.00
39.00
26.00
32.00
240.00
36.00
110.00
28.00
105.00
VCS
VCS
VCS
VCS
VCS
VER+
VER+
VER+
VER+
VER+
View
View
View
View
View
View
View
View
View
View
Further background Information on monitoring plan
Appendix 6
View
View
View
View
View
View
View
View
View
View
View
View
View
View
View
View
View
View
View
View
View
View
View
View
View
View
85.00
N/A
N/A
Link
Summary of post registration changes

project design document

Transkript

Benzer belgeler

Farhat Ali - EMR

enerji̇ i̇ka