Switch From Single Cycle to Combined Cycle (CC) CDM Project at Shirvan Power Plant

PROJECT DESIGN DOCUMENT FORM (CDM PDD) - Version 03

CDM – Executive Board

page 1

CLEAN DEVELOPMENT MECHANISM

PROJECT DESIGN DOCUMENT FORM (CDM-PDD)

Version 03 - in effect as of: 28 July 2006

CONTENTS

A. General description of project activity

B. Application of a baseline and monitoring methodology

C. Duration of the project activity / crediting period

D. Environmental impacts

E. Stakeholders’ comments

Annexes

Annex 1: Contact information on participants in the project activity

Annex 2: Information regarding public funding

Annex 3: Baseline information

Annex 4: Monitoring plan



page 2

SECTION A. General description of project activity

A.1. Title of the project activity:

Switch from Single Cycle to Combined Cycle (CC) CDM Project at Shirvan Power Plant

PDD v.1.1

12/04/2011

A.2. Description of the project activity:

The proposed project activity consists in the conversion of an existing open cycle gas power plant to a

combined cycle gas power plant. The project activity is located close to the city of Shirvan, in North

Khorasan, Islamic Republic of Iran. The Shirvan power plant consists of 6 gas turbines, which are

divided in three different blocks. However, since only two blocks are being converted from open to

combined cycle, the project boundary will be limited to blocks one and two which are being converted

from open to combined cycle.

Purpose of the proposed project activity:

- Scenario existing prior to the start of the implementation of the project activity:

Blocks 1 and 2 of Shirvan power plant are currently operating with 4 gas turbines of 159 MW

gross capacity each under ISO conditions. The overall gross capacity of the two blocks is

therefore 636 MW under ISO conditions. Taking into account the site characteristics, the gross

capacity of the two blocks is 560 MW. The power plant is connected to the grid.

- Project scenario

The project activity consists in converting of block one and block two of the existing open cycle

power plant in Shirvan to a combined cycle power plant. For the conversion 4 heat recovery

steam generators (HRSG) and two steam turbines, each rated at 159 MW gross capacity under

ISO conditions, will be added. Overall, the proposed project activity will lead to an increase in

the gross capacity of block one and block two of the power plant from 636 MW to 954 MW

under ISO conditions. At site conditions, the combined cycle power plant will have a gross

capacity of 840 MW.

- Baseline scenario

The baseline scenario is equivalent to the continuation of the current practice, ie. the electricity

to meet the demand in the grid system will be generated:

1) By the operation of the existing power plant in open cycle mode;

2) By the operation of existing grid-connected power plants; and

3) By the addition of new generation sources to the grid.

Reduction of greenhouse gases:



page 3

The conversion from open to combined cycle leads to significant efficiency gains, since the waste heat

from the existing gas turbines will be used to produce steam which will power the steam turbines. This

increase in efficiency will lead to an increase in the production of electricity, while keeping fossil fuel

consumption constant. The additional electricity produced will be supplied to the national grid, and will

displace other fossil fuel generated electricity, thereby reducing overall CO2 emissions. The project

activity is expected to reduce overall emissions of CO2 by 6,453,239t over 10 years (see section A.4.4 for

detailed values).

Contribution to sustainable development:

The proposed project activity contributes to sustainable development in Iran through a number of ways:

- More efficient use of Iran’s gas reserves: the efficiency gains achieved by the conversion from

open to combined cycle will help preserve finite fossil fuel resources

- Ensuring stable supplies of electricity: The proposed project activity will contribute to providing

stable power supplies to the population and industries of Iran, without increasing the

consumption of fossil fuels.

- Technology and know-how transfer: the proposed project activity will lead to training of the

local staff, and help the spread of modern power plant technology in Iran.

A.3. Project participants:

Name of Party involved ((host)

indicates a host Party)

Private and/or public entity(ies)

project participants (as

applicable)

Kindly indicate if the Party

involved wishes to be considered

as project participant (Yes/No)

Islamic Republic of Iran (host) Iran Power Development Company

(IPDC) (Project owner - Public

entity)

No

Switzerland Swiss Carbon Assets Ltd. (Carbon

consultant - Private entity)

No

Switzerland Energy Changes Projektentwicklung

GmbH (Carbon consultant - Private

entity)

No

A.4. Technical description of the project activity:

A.4.1. Location of the project activity:

A.4.1.1. Host Party(ies):

Islamic Republic of Iran

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

North Khorasan Province

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



page 4

Shirvan

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

unique identification of this project activity (maximum one page):

Shirvan is located in the province of North Khorasan, in north-eastern Iran, as shown on the map below:

The power plant is located on Shirvan-Mashad Road 12 kilometres from Shirvan, in North Khorasan

Province.

Geographical coordinates:

- Site latitude:37 degrees, 0 minutes and 22 seconds North

- Site longitude: 58 degrees, 2 minute and 34 seconds East

- Site altitude: 1160 meters

Location of power plant

Shirvan

Shirvan



page 5

A.4.2. Category(ies) of project activity:

Energy industries (non-renewable sources), sectoral scope 1.

A.4.3. Technology to be employed by the project activity:

Scenario existing prior to the start of the implementation of the project activity:

The existing Shirvan power plant consists of 6 units of Ansaldo – v94.2 gas turbines, arranged in three

blocks. The turbines have a gross installed capacity of 159 MW per unit at ISO conditions, with a net

capacity per unit of 158.667 MW at ISO conditions. Two gas turbines together form one block. The

Ansaldo – v94.2 gas turbines achieve 31% – 34% efficiency, and are designed for a life time of 25 years.

The 4 gas units from block one and two were synchronized on the following dates:

- Unit 1: March 16 2006

- Unit 2: May 10 2006

- Unit 3: July 5 2006

- Unit 4: September 6 2006

The proposed project activity includes the addition of:

- Four heat recovery steam generators (HRSGs), one per gas turbine in the first two blocks of the

power plant

- Two steam turbine-generator in blocks one and two

The particulars of the steam turbines:

SIEMENS-E30-16-1*6.3-7 Model

2 Number Of Units

159(With SF) Nominal Capacity Per Unit (MW)

153.8 Rated Net Capacity Per Unit (MW)

25 Design Life Time (yr)

The particulars of the steam turbine generators:

2 Number Of Units

200,000 Output Power Per Unit (KVA)

SALIENT Kind Of Rotor

3000 Rated Speed (RPM)

0.8 Power Factor

7331 Current (A)

15750 Voltage (V)

50 Frequency (Hz)



page 6

With the proposed project activity, the gross installed capacity of block one and two of Shirvan power

plant will increase to 954 MW at ISO conditions – an increase of 50%. The nameplate efficiency of the

power plant will increase to 49% - 51%.

The fuel consumption will be measured by turbine gas flow meters (for natural gas) or turbine oil flow

meters (for diesel) respectively. Electricity meters measuring the amount of electricity produced by the

generators and the auxiliary consumption of the power plant will be installed. All meters will be subject

to regular maintenance in line with manufacturer or industry standards.

The baseline scenario is the same as the scenario existing prior to the start of the implementation of the

project activity (i.e. continuation of current practice).

Involved greenhouse gases: CO2.

For calculation of expected emission reductions the following yearly energy and mass flows are assumed.

The consumption of diesel and natural gas are not expected to increase compared to the current situation.

Year EGCC,y FCDiesel, y (lit) FCNG, y (Nm3)

1 2,618,429 55,795,231 424,413,371

2 2,607,955 55,572,050 422,715,718

3 2,597,523 55,349,762 421,024,855

4 2,587,133 55,128,363 419,340,755

5 2,576,785 54,907,850 417,663,392

6 2,566,478 54,688,218 415,992,739

7 2,556,212 54,469,465 414,328,768

8 2,545,987 54,251,587 412,671,453

9 2,535,803 54,034,581 411,020,767

10 2,525,660 53,818,443 409,376,684

A.4.4. Estimated amount of emission reductions over the chosen crediting period:

Years Annual estimation of emission reductions

in tonnes of CO2 e

1 655,793

2 653,443

3 651,102

4 648,771

5 646,449

6 644,136

7 641,833

8 639,539

9 637,254

10 634,919



page 7

Total estimated reductions (tonnes of CO2e) 6,453,239

Total number of crediting years 10

Annual average over the crediting period of

estimated reductions (tonnes of CO2 e)

645,324

A.4.5. Public funding of the project activity:

There is no public funding for the project activity.



page 8

SECTION B. Application of a baseline and monitoring methodology

B.1. Title and reference of the approved baseline and monitoring methodology applied to the

project activity:

ACM0007 Version 04, “Consolidated methodology for conversion from single cycle to combined cycle

power generation”

“Tool to calculate the emission factor for an electricity system”, Version 2

“Tool to determine the remaining lifetime of equipment”, Version 1

“Combined tool to identify the baseline scenario and demonstrate additionality”, Version 2.2

“Tool to calculate project or leakage CO2 emissions from fossil fuel combustion”, Version 2

B.2. Justification of the choice of the methodology and why it is applicable to the project

activity:

Applicability criteria of the methodology ACM0007, Version 04

This methodology applies to project activities that utilize previously-unused waste heat from a power

plant, with a single-cycle capacity, be it a gas turbine or an internal combustion engine and utilize the

heat to produce steam for a turbine thus making the system combined-cycle.

The proposed project activity involves the conversion of block one and block two at the grid connected

power plant in Shirvan from single-cycle to combined-cycle mode. It will use previously unused waste

heat from the power plant to power the steam turbines.

Waste heat generated on site is not utilizable for any other purpose on-site

Waste heat cannot be used for other purposes on site, since no other source of demand if located nearby.

The project activity does not increase the lifetime of the existing gas turbine or engine during the

crediting period, determined using the “Tool to determine the remaining lifetime of equipment”;

The project does not involve any upgrade or modification to the existing gas turbines themselves.

Therefore, the conversion does not affect the lifetime of the installed equipment. The gas turbines have a

lifetime of 25 years, as indicated in official documentation by the manufacturer. This is in line with the

“Tool to determine the remaining lifetime of equipment”, Version 1.

The table below shows the commissioning dates of the different gas turbines and the expected end-date

of the lifetime of the gas turbines:

Number of power unit Number of gas turbine Synchronization date End-date of lifetime



page 9

of gas turbine

Block 1 Gas turbine 1 16.03.2006 16.03.2031

Gas turbine 2 10.05.2006 10.05.2031


Gas turbine 4 06.09.2006 06.09.2031

The project has a crediting period of 10 years. Therefore, the installed equipment will not reach the end

of its lifetime during the crediting period.

Project developers have access to appropriate data to estimate the combined margin emission factor, as

described in the “Tool to calculate the emission factor for an electricity system”, of the electricity grid to

which the proposed project is connected

The project developers have access to the appropriate data. The combined margin emission factor was

calculated as described in the “Tool to calculate the emission factor for an electricity system”, Version

02. See section B.6.3 below.

B.3. Description of the sources and gases included in the project boundary:

The spatial extent of the project boundary includes the power plant at the project site and all power

plants considered for the calculation of the baseline CO2 emission factor. A flow diagram of the project

boundary, physically delineating the project activity is presented below:



page 10

The following table illustrates which emissions sources are included and which are excluded from the

project boundary for determination of both baseline and project emissions.

Source Gas Included? Justification / Explanation

Baseline

Scenario Baseline: Grid

electricity generation

CO2 Yes Main emission source

CH4 No Excluded for simplification. This is conservative

N2O No Excluded for simplification. This is conservative

On-site fossil fuel

consumption to operate

project power plant in

CO2 Yes An important emission source

CH4 No Excluded for simplification. This emission source is

assumed to be very small



page 11

open cycle mode. N2O No Excluded for simplification. This emission source is


Project Activity

On-site fossil fuel

consumption to operate

the gas turbine or

engine of project power

plant.

CO2 Yes An important emission source



N2O No Excluded for simplification. This emission source is


On-site fossil fuel

consumption to

supplement waste heat

in operating Steam

turbine.

CO2 Yes May be an important emission source



N2O No Excluded for simplification. This emission source is


B.4. Description of how the baseline scenario is identified and description of the identified

baseline scenario:

In line with the requirements of ACM0007 Version 04, the “Combined tool to identify the baseline

scenario and demonstrate additionality” Version 2.2 is used to determine the baseline.

Step 1: Identification of alternative scenarios

This step serves to identify all alternative scenarios to the proposed CDM project activity that can be

then baseline scenario through the following Sub-steps:

Step 1a: Define alternative scenarios to the proposed CDM project activity

Identify all alternative scenarios that are available to the project participants and that provide outputs

or services with comparable quality, properties and application areas as the proposed CDM project

activity. These alternative scenarios shall include:

- The proposed project activity undertaken without being registered as a CDM project activity

Description of Alternative Plausibility Check

The project activity (i.e switch from

open to combined cycle at block one

and block two of the power plant) not

implemented as a CDM project

Delivers comparable output as project activity.

Is available to IPDC (a project participant).

� Plausible but not financially attractive (see step 3)

- All other plausible and credible alternative scenarios to the project activity scenario, including

the common practices in the relevant sector, that deliver outputs or services (e.g. electricity, heat

or cement) with comparable quality, properties and application areas, taking into account,

where relevant, examples of scenarios identified in the underlying methodology;

The tool gives further guidance that credible alternative scenarios shall:



page 12

- be situated in the Islamic Republic of Iran

- be available to the project participants

New power plants using technologies other than the one used in the project activity, which attain a

similar scale than the proposed project activity:


Open cycle Medium-Large Gas Turbine

Technical lifetime up to 20 years

Efficiency up to 34.5%

Source: Information provided by

Ministry of Energy of Iran

Can deliver comparable output as project activity, subject to

fuel availability.


� Plausible, but faces fuel availability barrier (see step

2).

Steam Plant (using residual fuel oil and

natural gas)

Technical lifetime: 30 years

Source: World Bank Iran Power Sector

Note

Efficiency: up to 37-39%

Source: UNFCCC-Tool: Tool to

calculate the emission factor for an

electricity system


fuel availability.

Is not available to IPDC (a project participant), since not being

developed anymore due to high capital costs and lead times in

construction.

Not plausible => excluded.

Coal Power Plant


Source: OECD study - Projected costs

of generating electricity 2005 update

Efficiency: 37-50%



electricity


fuel availability.

Is not available to IPDC (a project participant), since no coal

fired power plants have been developed in Iran.


Diesel Oil Power Plant


Source: OECD study - Projected costs

of generating electricity 2005 update

Efficiency: 30-46%



electricity system

Cannot deliver comparable output as project activity, since

diesel oil power plants are built at much lower capacity1.



Nuclear Power



1 The largest diesel oil power plant ever built in Iran has a capacity of 125 MW, less than 50% than the proposed

project activity. No more diesel power plants have been built since 1992 in Iran.



page 13

Efficiency: 36%

Source: IEA Energy Technology

Essentials – Nuclear power

http://www.iea.org/techno/essentials4.p

df

Is not available to IPDC (a project participant), since nuclear

power plant at Bushehr is developed by the Atomic Energy

Organization of Iran (AEOI).


Large hydropower plant

Technical lifetime (up to 100 years)

Efficiency 34% - 56%

Source: IEA Energy Technology

Network http://www.etsap.org/E-

techDS/PDF/E07-hydropower-GS-

gct.pdf

Can deliver comparable output as project activity, if big

enough reservoir to supply base-load electricity.

Is not available to IPDC (a project participant), since hydro

power plants in Iran are developed by either Iran Water and

Power Resources Development Co. (IWPCO) or the

Khuzestan Water & Power Authority (KWPA)


Wind


Source: OECD study Emission

baselines estimating the unknown

/2000

Efficiency: up to 40%

Source:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wind_powe

r#Capacity_factor

Does not deliver comparable output as project activity, since

wind farms are an intermittent source of power. Therefore

wind farms cannot be used to displace base load capacity.

Is available to IPDC.


- If applicable, continuation of the current situation and, where relevant, the “proposed project

activity undertaken without being registered as a CDM project activity” undertaken at a later

point in time (e.g. due to existing regulations, end-of-life of existing equipment, financing

aspects).


Continuation of the current practice, ie.

that to meet the demand in the grid

system the electricity will be generated:

1) By the operation of the existing

power plant in open cycle

mode;

2) By the operation of existing

grid-connected power plants;

and

3) By the addition of new

generation sources to the grid



� Plausible

Outcome of Step 1a: List of plausible alternative scenarios to the project activity

Scenario Title of Alternative



page 14

1 The project activity (i.e switch from open to combined cycle at block one and

block two of the power plant) not implemented as a CDM project

2 Open cycle Medium-Large Gas Turbine

3 Continuation of the current practice

Sub-step 1b: Consistency with mandatory applicable laws and regulations

The alternative(s) shall be in compliance with all mandatory applicable legal and regulatory

requirements.

In addition, the methodology ACM0007 v.04 specifies explicitly that the following regulations should be

taken into account:

• Regulations for utilization of waste heat on the premises where it is generated;

No regulations for the utilization of waste heat on the premises exist.

• Regulation on energy efficiency norms for power projects; and

No regulation on energy efficiency norms for power plants exists. Open cycle and combined

cycle power plants continue to operate in Iran, showing that they satisfy all existing energy

efficiency norms for power plants.

Emission norms for power projects.

Open cycle and combined cycle power plants continue to operate in Iran, showing that they

satisfy all existing emission norms for power plants.

No other mandatory applicable laws and regulations exist which could exclude any of the plausible

alternative scenarios.

Outcome of Step 1b: List of alternative scenarios to the project activity that are in compliance with

mandatory legislation and regulations […].




2 Open cycle Medium-Large Gas Turbine


Step 2: Barrier analysis

This Step serves to identify barriers and to assess which alternatives are prevented by these barriers.

Apply the following Sub-steps:

Sub-step 2a: Identify barriers that would prevent the implementation of alternative scenarios

Establish a complete list of realistic and credible barriers that may prevent alternative scenarios to

occur.



page 15

Description of Barrier Plausibility Check

Technological barriers:

Access to fuel

Access to fuel is determined by locally available infrastructure and the

supply contracts entered into with the fuel supplier. Shirvan power plant is

connected to the gas network, but the gas supply contract stipulates a

maximum delivery of 300,000 Nm3 of natural gas per hour. This means that

the maximum available supply of natural gas for Shirvan power plant is

effectively capped. This limits possible capacity extensions for natural gas

fired power plants such as open cycle power plants.

Despite having the second largest gas reserves in the world, gas is becoming

seasonally scarce in Iran because of i) very low domestic gas price which

encourages overconsumption, ii) lack of investment in pipeline

infrastructure and storage that leads to local supply bottlenecks and iii)

underinvestment in gas exploration and extraction2. This has lead to power

plants using diesel in times of high demand of residential gas consumption

(ie. during the winter). This shows that there are severe limitations on how

much additional natural gas can be made available.

Outcome of Step 2a: List of barriers that may prevent one or more alternative scenarios to occur

- Access to fuel barrier

Sub-step 2b: Eliminate alternative scenarios which are prevented by the identified barriers

The following table shows through which factors the identified barriers affect power plant projects:

Barrier Indicators for barriers Explanation

Access to fuel

barrier

Electricity production per

unit of natural gas

(MWh/Nm3)

Due to the relative scarcity of natural gas and the limits

imposed by the gas supply contract for Shirvan Power

Plant, power plants which cannot deliver the equivalent

output as the combined cycle under the existing gas

supply contract will be excluded.

This will allow us to analyze which barrier is affecting which alternative.

Applicability of the different barriers to the scenarios:

Barrier &

indicator

Scenario 1:

project

activity

without CDM

Scenario 2:

open cycle

Scenario 3:

current

practice

Access to fuel

barrier

No additional

fuel needed

Yes,

insufficient gas

available

No additional

fuel needed

2 See World Bank Power Sector Note, p. 20 - 21



page 16

Access to fuel barrier:

Scenario 2: Open cycle power plant requires significant additional natural gas resources to be available.

As explained, gas in general is becoming scarcer in Iran and the local supply of natural gas in Shirvan is

limited by the existing gas supply contract. This contract stipulates that up to 300,000 Nm3 of natural gas

are available in Shirvan. This amount of natural gas is insufficient to increase the capacity at the site by

the same amount as in the proposed project activity.

The efficiency of the existing gas turbines are as follows:

Year Energy input (GJ) Electricity output GJ Efficiency

21/3/2007-20/3/2008 12,735,650 3,766,514 29.57%

21/3/2008-20/3/2009 25,018,172 7,630,996 30.50%

21/3/2009-20/3/2010 22,063,760 6,802,877 30.83%

Average 19,939,194 6,066,796 30.30%

An efficiency of 30.30% implies that when the open cycle power plant is running at full load (840 MW

site conditions), it consumes 258,864 Nm3 of natural gas. Therefore, compared to the amount stipulated

in the contract, only a surplus of 41,136 Nm3 natural gas per hour is available, which limits the

additional capacity that can be installed on site.

Maximum additional capacity that can be installed with 41,136 Nm3 natural gas per hour:

Scenario 2: Open cycle

Additional amount of natural gas

available (Nm3)

41,136

Efficiency % 30.30%

Maximum additional capacity (MW) 133

% of additional capacity installed under

proposed project activity (266 MW)

48%

This clearly shows that Scenario 2 would not deliver equivalent outputs to the proposed project activity

due to the limited amount of fuel available. Hence open cycle gas turbines are prevented by an access to

fuel barrier.

Outcome of Step 2: List of alternative scenarios to the project activity which are not prevented by any

barrier





If there are still several alternative scenarios remaining, including the proposed project activity

undertaken without being registered as a CDM project activity, proceed to Step 3 (investment analysis).



page 17

Step 3: Investment analysis

This Step serves to determine which of the alternative scenarios in the short list remaining after Step 2 is

the most economically or financially attractive. For this purpose, an investment comparison analysis is

conducted for the remaining alternative scenarios after Step 2. If the investment analysis is conclusive,

the economically or financially most attractive alternative scenario is considered as the baseline

scenario.

Since the continuation of current practice does not involve an investment on behalf of the project

proponent, a benchmark analysis is conducted. The IRR is chosen as a suitable financial indicator, since

it allows assessing whether a single project activity is financially attractive or not.

The national benchmark for investments in power plants as confirmed by the Ministry of Energy in Iran

is used. It is equal to 20%. The financial analysis is done over the period of conversion and operation of

the power plant. Only costs and revenues which are due to the conversions from open to combined cycle

power plant are taken into account.

The relevant data for calculation of the IRR are tabulated below:

Parameter (unit) Value combined

cycle

Source

Generated Electricity & fuel consumption

Nominal capacity ISO (MW) 318 IPDC – MAPNA

contract

Capacity at site condition (MW) 280 Ministry of

Energy

Degradation (%) 0.40% World Bank Iran

Power Sector

Note

Operating hours (%) 3168 Operating hours

open cycle

plant3

Auxiliary consumption (%) 1.60% World Bank Iran

Power Sector

Note

Costs

Investment costs per unit (EUR) 108,889,182 IPDC – MAPNA

contract

Investment costs per unit (USD) 9,689,964 IPDC – MAPNA

contract

Investment costs per unit (IRR) 1,099,490,909,09

2

IPDC – MAPNA

contract

Operation and maintenance costs

(USD/MWh)

0.69 World Bank Iran

Power Sector

Note

3 Based on historical data



page 18

Electricity price (IRR/KWh) August

2007 144

Iran Grid

Management

Company

Timeline

Construction time (years) 3 Ministry of

Energy

Technical lifetime (years) 20 Ministry of

Energy

Economic indicators

Exchange rate IRR/EUR 12.8.2007 12453.3 www.oanda.co

m

Exchange rate USD/EUR 12.8.2007 1.3689 www.oanda.co

m

Inflation rate 7%

Annual

electricity price

inflation 2006 &

first half 2007

Benchmark 20%

Ministry of

Energy

The result of the financial analysis is provided below.

IRR Benchmark

Base case 5.75% 20%

As can be seen, the proposed project activity is clearly not financially attractive, thereby reinforcing the

conclusion reached in Step 2 above.

A sensitivity analysis is conducted to see if this result is robust to reasonable variations in the underlying

assumptions. In line with the Guidance on the Assessment of Investment Analysis (version 2), all

parameters which constitute either more than 20% of either total project cost or total project revenues are

subjected to reasonable variation of either +10% or -10%.

The following parameters constitute more than 20% of either total project cost or total project revenues:

% of total costs/revenues

Investment Costs 91%

Electricity tariff 100%

In addition, operating hours and inflation rate were also subjected to the same sensitivity analysis, since

they have an indirect impact on either total project costs or revenues which exceeds 20%.

The results of the sensitivity analysis are shown below:

Scenario 1 - Investment IRR Benchmark

10% 4.91% 20%

-10% 6.70% 20%

Scenario 2 - Operating hours



page 19

10% 6.61% 20%

-10% 4.83% 20%

Scenario 3 - Electricity tariff

10% 6.65% 20%

-10% 4.78% 20%

Scenario 4 - Inflation

10% 6.40% 20%

-10% 5.09% 20%

The sensitivity analysis confirms the outcome of the benchmark analysis. This clearly shows that

Scenario 1: Project activity without CDM is not a plausible baseline scenario. Hence, Scenario 3: Current

practice is the only remaining alternative.

The result that combined cycle power plants are not an attractive investment in Iran without CDM is

confirmed by the results of the World Bank Iran Power Sector Note. This document shows that combined

cycle power plants without CDM are not cost competitive in Iran, mainly because of the very low price

of natural gas. This confirms the outcome of our benchmark analysis.

In addition to the requirements of the Combined tool to identify the baseline scenario and demonstrate

additionality Version 2.2, the methodology ACM007 Version 4 mentions the following points:

When the current practice condition (to continue the operation in open cycle) is assessed, the future

estimated load factor should reflect the changes due to new conditions in the grid, analyzing the last

plants that have been incorporated in the grid.

A change in the future estimated load factor for the current practice condition would have no impact on

either the barrier analysis (Step 2) or the benchmark analysis (Step 3) conducted above.

Project proponents, if undertaking investment analysis, shall include the revenue generated from the

possible increase in electricity produced from the open cycle component in the project situation.

The operating hours of the existing open cycle power plant are equal to 3168 hours of full load. This

shows that the power plant is operated to supply base load electricity to the grid4. Therefore no further

increase in operating hours is anticipated.

If the sensitivity analysis confirms the result of the investment comparison analysis, then the most

economically or financially attractive alternative scenario is considered as baseline scenario.

Therefore the Scenario 3: continuation of current practice constitutes the baseline scenario.

Finally, the methodology ACM0007 Version 4 specifies one more applicability condition:

This methodology is only applicable where it can be demonstrated that the baseline scenario is the

continuation of the current practice, i.e. that in the absence of the proposed project activity the

electricity, to meet the demand in the grid system, will be generated:

4 ACM0013 defines base load as more than 3,000 hours per year.



page 20

(1) By the operation of the existing power plant in open cycle mode;

(2) By the operation of existing grid-connected power plants; and

(3) By the addition of new generation sources to the grid.

As is demonstrated in this section, the baseline scenario is the continuation of the current practice

(Scenario 3). Therefore the methodology ACM0007 Version 4 is applicable.

Step 4: Common practice analysis

This test is a credibility check to demonstrate additionality which complements the barrier analysis (Step

2) and, where applicable, the investment analysis (Step 3).

Establish list of similar activities

Provide an analysis to which extent similar activities to the proposed CDM project activity have been

implemented previously or are currently underway. Similar activities are defined as activities (i.e.

technologies or practices) that are of similar scale, take place in a comparable environment, inter alia,

with respect to the regulatory framework, and are undertaken in the relevant geographical area

The following table gives an overview of the criteria a power plant needs to fulfil in order to be

considered similar to the proposed project activity, as defined in the Combined tool to identify the

baseline scenario and demonstrate additionality Version 2.2:

Criteria Similar Not similar

Technology Conversions from open to

combined cycle power plants

Greenfield combined cycle power plants

Integrated solar combined cycle power plants

Open cycle gas power plants

Steam power plants

Coal power plants

Diesel power plants

Nuclear power plants

Hydro power plants

Wind power plants

Scale 954 MW power plants, +/- 30%

capacity

Power plants smaller than 668 MW and larger than

1240 MW installed capacity

Comparable

environment

- Project start under the

Ministerial Order

Establishing the Electricity

Market, issued on August 25

2005

- Owned by Tavanir, the

electricity holding company

- Project start before August 25 2005, ie. in a

different regulatory framework

- Project developed as Build Own Operate (BOO)

or BOT (Build Own Transfer) and owned by

private investors

Relevant

geographical

area

Islamic Republic of Iran Other country



page 21

Background on regulatory framework of Iranian power market5

a) Establishment of a competitive power market

The Ministerial Order Establishing the Electricity Market issued on 16 August 2005 is the key

legislative piece used by the authorities to establish a new market based power sector in Iran. The

Ministerial Order contains, inter alia, the following provisions:

o market rules that create a two-tier structure for electricity sale and purchase transaction,

including a centrally scheduled and dispatched operational regime for Tavanir owned

power plants and a semi-centrally scheduled and dispatched regime for independent

power producers.

o creation of the regulatory agency, the Electricity Market Regulatory Board (EMRB),

which oversees the operation of the market rules

o identification of mechanisms by which the Iran Grid Management Company (IGMC)

controls the market transactions.

As a result, power plants now need to bid in a competitive market to supply their electricity to

the grid. Before the Ministerial Order no power market existed and there was not even an

electricity price paid to the power plants for electricity supplied to the grid. Construction of

power plants, supply and distribution of electricity were centrally decided based on non-market

mechanisms.

b) Encouraging private participation in the power market

Based on the fourth Five Year Development Plan (FYDP) adopted in 2004, private investments

in power generation facilities are encouraged. Previously private participation in the electricity

sector was excluded.

Several options exist to private developers, but to-date all IPPs have signed so called Energy

Conversion Agreements (ECAs) with Tavanir. These ECAs supply the power plants with free

natural gas, against a fixed off-take electricity price. Two different schemes exist, so called Build

Own Operate (BOO) and Build Own Transfer (BOT), with BOOs typically targeted at domestic

investors and BOTs targeted at foreign investors.

Since natural gas is supplied for free during the lifetime of the project (typically 20 years), the

electricity price paid under ECAs is different from the electricity price which is settled in the

power pool. Hence the institutional setup for and risks faced by privately owned power plants are

very different from power plants owned by the Ministry of Energy.

Combining the elements outlined in the table above, a combined cycle power plant needs to fulfil the

following criteria in order to be considered similar with the proposed project activity:

- Conversion from open to combined cycle power plant6

- installed capacity between 668 MW and 1240 MW

- owned by Tavanir

- project start date after August 25 2005

5 The following is heavily based on Chapter 5 and Chapter 7 of the Iran Power Sector Note

6 The same definition as in ACM0007 Version 4 will be applied to distinguish greenfield combined cycle power

plants from conversions, namely an operational history of at least 3 years.



page 22

The below list of all combined cycle power plants already built or under construction in Iran will check

to what extent the combined cycle power plants fulfil these criteria. Since commissioning dates are easier

to obtain than project start dates, in a first step power plants with a commissioning date prior to August

25 2005, with an incorrect size or which are not owned by the MoE will be excluded.

List of all combined cycle projects already constructed or undergoing construction in Iran:

Name of combined

Cycle Power Plant

Greenfield

or

conversion?

Installed

capacity

(MW)

Similar capacity?

(668MW -

1240MW)

Owned

by MoE?

Commissiong

date Similar?

Gilan conversion 1305.6 No MoE 17/06/1997 No

Qom conversion 714 Yes MoE 20/02/1998 No

Montazer-Ghaem (Karaj) conversion 997.5 Yes MoE 21/11/2000 No

Shahid Rajaee conversion 1042.8 Yes MoE 22/01/2002 No

Khoy conversion 349.3 No MoE 25/05/2002 No

Fars conversion 1035.3 Yes MoE 08/02/2003 No

Shariati conversion 346.8 No MoE 02/04/2003 No

Neishabour conversion 1040.4 Yes MoE 24/07/2003 No

Neka (Shahid Salimi) conversion 435 No MoE 17/07/2006 No

Yazd conversion 724.8 Yes MoE 01/01/2007 Maybe

Kazeroon conversion 1372 No MoE 19/12/2007 No

Kerman conversion 1912 No MoE 15/03/2009 No

Damavand conversion 2388 No MoE 2011 expected No

Sanandaj conversion 954 Yes MoE 2011 expected Maybe

Genaveh greenfield 484 No BOO 2011 expected No

South Esfahan conversion 968 Yes BOT 2011 expected No

Abadan conversion 954 Yes MoE 2011 expected Maybe

Jahrom conversion 1431 No MoE 2012 expected No

Pareh-sar greenfield 968 Yes BOO 2012 expected No

The above analysis shows that only three power plants might be considered similar:

- Yazd Combined Cycle Power Plant

- Abadan Combined Cycle Power Plant

- Sanandaj Combined Cycle Power Plant

To establish whether they can be considered similar we need to determine if their starting date predates

the issuance of the Ministerial Order of August 16 2005. The actual starting dates are as follows:

- Yazd Combined Cycle Power Plant: September 10 2002

- Abadan Combined Cycle Power Plant: May 4 2008

- Sanandaj Combined Cycle Power Plant: October 1 2007

Based on this only Abadan Combined Cycle Power Plant and Sanandaj Combined Cycle Power Plant can

be considered similar activities.

Essential distinctions between Abadan Combined Cycle Power Plant and the proposed project activity:



page 23

The Abadan power plant received foreign funding from the Islamic Development Bank (IDB)7. Shirvan

does not benefit from any foreign funding.

CDM development:

All three similar power plants are being developed as CDM projects.

Therefore, sub-step 4 is satisfied; similar activities are observed but essential distinctions between the

proposed project activity and similar activities were reasonably explained. Hence the proposed project

activity is additional.

B.5. Description of how the anthropogenic emissions of GHG by sources are reduced below

those that would have occurred in the absence of the registered CDM project activity (assessment

and demonstration of additionality):

Additionality has been demonstrated in B.4, using the latest approved version of the “Combined tool to

identify the baseline scenario and demonstrate additionality”, Version 2.2.

Since the starting date of the project activity is before the date of validation, evidence is provided that the

incentive from the CDM was seriously considered in the decision to proceed with the project activity:

Date Development of conversion

from open to combined cycle

project

Activities taken to achieve

CDM registration

Evidence

September 5

2006

Minutes of meetings of internal

discussions about starting the

proposed project activity. IPDC

faces financial difficulties.

IPDC –

MAPNA

Agreement

including

Annexes,

Minutes of

meetings.

November

2006

Implementation of the Iranian

Designated National Authority

March 3 2007 Letter from IPDC to Ministry of

Energy to inquire about

possibility for additional funds

for the proposed project activity

to alleviate financing

difficulties.

Letter

April 10 2007 Letter from Ministry of Energy

to IPDC confirming the

possibility to receive additional

funding through CDM.

Introduction of IPDC to Dr.

Letter

7 http://www.uzdaily.com/articles-id-2825.htm



page 24

Parviz Nikkhah, a CDM expert.

August 12

2007

Letter from IPDC to MAPNA

announcing the start of the

proposed project activity and

IPDC’s intention to register the

conversions as a CDM project =

Investment start date

Letter

October 1

2007

First payment for the proposed

project activity = Project start

date

Proof of

payment

November 13

2007

First meeting between IPDC,

Energy Changes (a CDM

consultant) and Dr. Parviz

Nikkhah. A draft CDM

agreement is submitted from

Energy Changes to IPDC.

Letter, draft

CDM

agreement

December 11

2007

Meeting legal department IPDC

with Energy Changes & Dr.

Parviz Nikkhah to discuss draft

CDM agreement

Minutes

September 20

2008

Letter from Chairman of IPDC

to deputy Energy Minister

asking for authorization for

signing CDM contract

Letter

September 28

2008

Confirmation by MAPNA to

IPDC that the proposed project

activity started.

June 6 2009 Hand-over of land from Tavanir

to MAPNA to develop the

proposed project activity

Minutes of

meeting

August 1 2009 Letter of Ministry of Energy to

Economic council concerning

IPDC’s responsibility for the

CDM and combined cycle

projects

Letter

April 25 2010 Confirmation of IPDC’s

responsibility for CDM

development by Economic

Council

Letter

August 4 2010 CDM contract signing IPDC -

Carbon Tejarat Iranian

CDM contract

January 7 2011 Agreement Carbon Tejarat

Iranian, Energy Changes &

Swiss Carbon Assets to jointly

develop the CDM project

activity

Agreement



page 25

April 11 2011 Signing of DOE contract for

project activity

DOE contract

August 2012 Expected commissioning of

steam unit 1

November

2012

Expected commissioning of

steam unit 2

B.6. Emission reductions:

B.6.1. Explanation of methodological choices:

In accordance with ACM007 version 4, the project activity mainly reduces CO2 emissions through

substitution of power generation supplied by the existing generation sources connected to the grid and

likely future additions to the grid. The relevant methodological steps are described below:

Emission reductions

The emission reductions (ERy) can be expressed as follows:

yyyy LEPEBEER −−= (1)

Where:

ERy = Emissions reductions in year y (tCO2)

BEy = Baseline emissions in year y (tCO2)

PEy = Project emissions in year y (tCO2)

LEy = Leakage emissions in year y (tCO2)

Project emissions

Project emissions (PEy) should be calculated based on “Tool to calculate project or leakage CO2

emissions from fossil fuel combustion” and is referred to in the Tool as PEFC,j,y, making the element

processes j correspond to the combustion of fossil fuels in year y to operate the gas turbine or engine

and to operate the steam turbine.

The “Tool to calculate project or leakage CO2 emissions from fossil fuel combustion” specifies that:

CO2 emissions from fossil fuel combustion in process j are calculated based on the quantity of fuels

combusted and the CO2 emission coefficient of those fuels, as follows:

yiCOEFyjFCiPE yjFC ,,,,, ∑ ∗=

where

yjFCPE ,, Are the CO2 emissions from fossil fuel combustion in process j during the year y

(tCO2/yr)



page 26

yjFCi ,, Is the quantity of fuel type I combusted in process j during year y (mass or volume

unit/yr)

yCOEFi, Is the CO2 emission coefficient of fuel type I in yaer y (tCO2/mass or volume unit)

i Are the fuel types combusted in process j during year y

The CO2 emission coefficient COEFi,y can be calculated using one of the two options, depending on the

availability of data on the fossil fuel type i

For the proposed project activity data for option A is not available. Therefore option B is selected:

yiCOyiyi EFNCVCOEF ,,2,, *=

where

yCOEFi, Is the CO2 emission coefficient of fuel type i in year y (tCO2/mass or volume unit)

yiNCV , Is the weighted average net calorific value of the fuel type i in year y (GJ/mass or

volume unit)

yiCOEF ,,2 Is the weighted average CO2 emission factor for fuel type i in year y (tCO2/GJ)

i Are the fuel types combusted in process j during year y

Default values will be used for NCVNG,y and NCVDiesel,y.

Justification

Ex ante default values are available.

IPCCC default values for EFCO2,NG,y and EFCO2,Diesel,y are used for the ex-ante calculation of emission

reductions.

Justification:

No values provided by fuel supplier and no direct measurements by project proponent available.

Baseline emissions

The baseline scenario is the following: electricity would be generated by the operation of the power

plant in open cycle mode, and by grid-connected power plants. The baseline emissions for year y (with

assumption made regarding the baseline situation) are calculated as follows:

) - ( ,,,,,,, yXOCyCCygridyXOCOCyX EGEGEFEGEFBE ×+×= (2)

Where:

EFOC = Emission factor for plant operational in Open Cycle Mode (tCO2/MWh)

EGOC,X,y = Electricity generated by the open cycle in the baseline (MWh); as shown below,

this is calculated in two ways based on historical data (EGOC,H,y), or based on the

load factor in the project plant (EGOC,P,y) and Index X is either “H” or “P”



page 27

EGCC,y = Actual electricity generated by project in year y (MWh)

EFgrid,y = CO2 emission factor for the electricity displaced due to the project activity during

the year y (tCO2/MWh)

If more than one fuel is used in the gas turbine or engine, the baseline calculation (equation 2) must

assume the emission factor of the least carbon intensive fuel that has been used before or after project

implementation.

Step 1: Estimating EGOC,X,y

Project participants shall estimate, by the two ways provided below, the amount of generation by the

power plant running in open cycle mode in the baseline (MWh). The calculation is done based on:

(i) The historic load situation (EGOC,H,y) and for (ii) The load situation in the project (EGOC,P,y), as

follows:

(i) Amount of baseline power generation assuming on historical data (MWh):

E ,, OCyHOC GEG = (3)

Where:

EGOC = Average net annual generation from the operation of power plant in open cycle mode

based on five years of generation records at the time of validation (MWh). If five

years data is not available, then data for the highest number of complete years

available should be used, with a minimum of three full years

For EGOC the data for the highest number of complete years is used.

Justification:

More than three but less than five years of generation records are available

(ii) And amount of baseline power generation calculated assuming load situation of project power plant

(MWh):

,,, yCC

CC

OCyPOC EG

Cap

CapEG ×= (4)

Where:



page 28

CapOC = Net power generation capacity8 of the open cycle gas turbine or engine before the

project activity (MW)

EGCC,y = Actual electricity generated by project in year y (MWh)

CapCC = Net installed power generation capacity (MW) of the project including both the open

cycle (gas turbine or engine) and the steam turbine capacity

Step 2: Estimating EFOC, the emissions factor for electricity generated in open cycle mode in the

baseline

The emissions factor for the open cycle mode generation in the baseline (EFOC in tCO2/MWh) is given by

historical performance of the plant when it operated in open cycle using data for five years at the time of

validation. The emission factor is calculated as follows:

2 CO

OC

HISTOC EFNCV

EG

FCEF ××

= (5)

Where:

FCHIST = Annual average fuel consummation of the open cycle gas turbine or engine (mass or

volume unit) estimated using data for five years at the time of validation. If five years

data is not available, then data for the highest number of complete years available

should be used, with a minimum of three full years

EGOC = Average net annual generation from the operation of power plant in open cycle mode

(MWh)

NCV = Net calorific value of the fuel(GJ/mass or volume unit )

EFCO2 = CO2 emission factor of the fuel (tCO2/GJ)

For FCHIST the data for the highest number of complete years is used.

Justification:

More than three but less than five years of generation records are available

Step 3: Determine the emissions factor for the operating margin

The baseline emission factor (EFgrid,y) should be calculated as a combined margin (CM), following the

guidance in the “Tool to calculate the emission factor for an electricity system”.

Dispatch analysis method is not used to calculate the combined margin.

Version 2 of the “Tool to calculate the emission factor for an electricity system” is used for calculating

the combined margin.

Step 1: Identify the relevant electricity systems

The relevant electricity system is the electricity grid of the Islamic Republic of Iran.

Justification:

8 Net capacity is defined as gross capacity less auxiliary consumption of the plant.



page 29

There are only very limited power import and exports from Iran to neighbouring countries.

Step 2: Choose whether to include off-grid power plants in the project electricity system (optional)

Option I is chosen

Justification:

Grid power plants account for the vast majority of installed capacity in Iran.

Step 3: Select a method to determine the operating margin (OM)

The calculation of the operating margin emission factor (EFgrid,OM,y) is based on one of the following

methods:

(a) Simple OM; or

(b) Simple adjusted OM; or

(c) Dispatch data analysis OM; or

(d) Average OM.

The simple OM method (option a) can only be used if low-cost/must-run 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.

Simple OM was chosen.

Justification:

Low-cost/must-run resources constitute less than 50% of the total grid generation

Two options are available:

- Ex-ante option: the emission factor is determined once at the validation stage

- Ex post option: the emission factor is updated annually during monitoring

The ex ante option is chosen.

Justification:

3-year generation-weighted averages based on the most recent data was used.

Step 4: Calculate the operating margin emission factor according to the selected method

The project participant choose (a) Simple OM and Option B Calculation based on total fuel consumption

and electricity generation of the system.

Justification

(a) The necessary data for Option A is not available; and



page 30

(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 (i.e., if Option I has been chosen in Step 2).

Under this option, the simple OM emission factor is calculated based on the net electricity supplied to

the grid by all power plants serving the system, not including low-cost/must-run power plants/units, and

based on the fuel type(s) and total fuel consumption of the project electricity system, as follows:

Where:

EFgrid,OMsimple,y = Simple operating margin CO2 emission factor in year y (tCO2/MWh)

FCi,y = Amount of fossil fuel type i consumed in the project electricity system in year y (mass or volume

unit)

NCVi,y = Net calorific value (energy content) of fossil fuel type i in year y (GJ/mass or volume unit)

EFCO2,i,y = CO2 emission factor of fossil fuel type i in year y (tCO2/GJ)

EGy = Net electricity generated and delivered to the grid by all power sources serving the system, not

including low-cost/must-run power plants/units, in year y (MWh)

i = All fossil fuel types combusted in power sources in the project electricity system in year y

y = The relevant year as per the data vintage chosen in Step 3

Step 5: Identify the group of power units to be included in the build margin

The sample group of power units m used to calculate the build margin consists of either:

(a) The set of five power units that have been built most recently ;or

(b) The set of power capacity additions in the electricity system that comprise 20% of the system

generation (in MWh) and that have been built most recently.

Project participants should use the set of power units that comprises the larger annual generation.

The project participants used approach (b).

Justification:

Approach (b) comprises the larger annual generation in 2009.

The sample group of power units m used to calculate the build margin is based on data provided by the

Ministery of Electricity and Renewable Energy. The Power plants registered as CDM project activities

were excluded from the sample group m.

Two options for data vintages are available:



page 31

- Option 1: calculation ex ante based on the most recent information available

- Option 2: annual updating based on the latest available information

Option 1: ex ante calculation was chosen

Step 6: Calculate the build margin emission factor

The build margin emissions factor is the generation-weighted average emission factor (tCO2/MWh) of

all power units m during the most recent year y for which power generation data is available, calculated

as follows:

Where:

EFgrid,BM,y = Build margin CO2 emission factor in year y (tCO2/MWh)

EGm,y = Net quantity of electricity generated and delivered to the grid by power unit m in year y (MWh)

EFEL,m,y = CO2 emission factor of power unit m in year y (tCO2/MWh)

m = Power units included in the build margin

y = Most recent historical year for which power generation data is available

Step 7: Calculate the combined margin emissions factor

The combined margin emissions factor is calculated as follows

EFgrid,CM,y=EFgrid,OM,y x wom+EFgrid,BM,y x wBM

Where:

EFgrid,BM,y = Build margin CO2 emission factor in year y (tCO2/MWh)

EFgrid,OM,y = Operating margin CO2 emission factor in year y (tCO2/MWh)

wOM = Weighting of operating margin emissions factor (%)

wBM = Weighting of build margin emissions factor (%)

Since the proposed project activity is no wind or solar power generation project, the default values wOM =

0.5 and wBM = 0.5 are used for the first crediting period.

Step 4: Conservatively determine baseline emissions

The baseline emission BEy for year y is the lower value between the baseline emissions calculated on the

basis of historical power generation, BEH,y, and the baseline emissions calculated based on the load

factor of the project situation, BEP,y:

),( ,, yPyHy BEBEMINBE = (6)

∑

∑ ×

=

m

ym

ymEL

m

ym

yBMgridEG

EFEG

EF,

,,,

,,



page 32

Where BEH,y, and BEP,y are determined with equations (2) to (5).

Leakage

The main emissions potentially giving rise to leakage in the context of the proposed projects are:

(i) CH4 leakage in production, transportation and consumption of increased quantity of

natural gas consumed by the project activity; and

(ii) Emissions arising due to power plant construction.

The CH4 emissions can be ignored while applying this methodology, if project proponents demonstrate

through estimation that these are a negligible fraction of baseline.

Overall the project activity will decrease the volume of gas consumed per unit of electricity produced in

Iran. It should therefore have positive leakage affects on fugitive emissions of gas, especially since the

baseline scenario to meet increasing electricity demand is to build further open cycle gas fired power

plants. However such positive leakage is not considered by the methodology ACM007 v4. But this

clearly demonstrates that emissions due to leakage through upstream fugitive emissions are a negligible

fraction of baseline emissions, and will be ignored.

Project participants do not need to consider construction related emission sources as leakage in

applying this methodology. Project activities using this baseline methodology shall not claim any credit

for the project on account of reducing these emissions below the level of the baseline scenario.

No credits for the reduction of construction related emissions are claimed.

B.6.2. Data and parameters that are available at validation:

Data / Parameter: EGOC

Data unit: MWh

Description: Historical net quantity of electricity generated by the Open Cycle operation of

power plant

Source of data

used:

Generation records. Historical data of electricity supplied by the project to the

grid, preferably for five year should be used and not less than three years

Value applied: 1,685,221

Justification of the

choice of data

Official published data by Tavanir.

Year Output (MWh)

21/3/2007-20/3/2008 1,046,254

21/3/2008-20/3/2009 2,119,721

21/3/2009-20/3/2010 1,889,688

Average 1,685,221

Any comment: Official data published by Tavanir based on direct measurements by plant

operator.



page 33

Data / Parameter: CapOC

Data unit: MW

Description: Net power generation capacity9 of the open cycle gas turbine or engine (before the

project activity)

Source of data

used:

Manufacturer’s specification

Value applied: 634.668


choice of data


Any comment:

Data / Parameter: CapCC

Data unit: MW

Description: Net generation capacity of the project power plant

Source of data

used:




choice of data


Any comment:

Data / Parameter: FCHIST Nat Gas

Data unit: Nm3

Description: Historic natural gas consumption of the project in Open cycle generation

Source of data

used:

Historical data of annual fuel consumption by the project operating in open cycle

mode



choice of data

Official data published by Tavanir.

Year Natural gas (Nm3)

21/3/2007-20/3/2008 234,419,000

21/3/2008-20/3/2009 608,230,000

21/3/2009-20/3/2010 530,902,000

Average 457,850,333


operator.

Data / Parameter: FCHIST, Diesel

Data unit: lit

Description: Historic diesel consumption of the project in Open cycle generation

Source of data

used:

Historical data of annual fuel consumption by the project operating in open cycle

mode


Justification of the Official data published by Tavanir

9 Net capacity is defined as gross capacity less auxiliary consumption of the plant.



page 34

choice of data Year Diesel (lit)

21/3/2007-20/3/2008 97,260,000

21/3/2008-20/3/2009 41,307,000

21/3/2009-20/3/2010 42,006,000

Average 60,191,000


operator.

Data / Parameter: NCVNG

Data unit: GJ / Nm3

Description: Net calorific value of natural gas used previous to the start of project

Source of data

used:

Default values



choice of data

Fuel supplier does not provide fuel values on invoice

Any comment:

Data / Parameter: NCVDiesel

Data unit: GJ/lit

Description: Net calorific value of diesel used previous to the start of project

Source of data

used:

Default values



choice of data

Fuel supplier does not provide fuel values on invoice

Any comment:

Data / Parameter: EFCO2

Data unit: tCO2/GJ

Description: CO2 emission factor for fossil fuel used previous to the start of project

Source of data

used:

IPCC default values at the upper limit of the uncertainty at a 95% confidence

interval as provided in table 1.4 of Chapter1 of Vol. 2 (Energy) of the 2006 IPCC

Guidelines on National GHG Inventories



choice of data

The following alternatives are not available:

- Values provided by the fuel supplier

- Measurements by the project participant

- Regional or national default values

The value for diesel oil is 0.0748. In line with the requirements of the

methodology the emission factor of the least carbon intensive fuel that has been

used before or after project implementation is used (ie. the value for natural gas)



page 35

Any comment:

B.6.3. Ex-ante calculation of emission reductions:

Baseline emissions

Baseline emissions are calculated by multiplying the electricity generated in the open cycle mode with

the grid emission factor of the power plant in the open cycle mode plus multiplying the additional

electricity produced by the power plant in combined cycle mode with the grid emission factor.

) - ( ,,,,,,, yXOCyCCygridyXOCOCyX EGEGEFEGEFBE ×+×= (7)

Step 1: Estimating EGOC,X,y

Two ways exist to estimate the amount of power generated in the baseline:

(i) Amount of baseline power generation assuming on historical data (MWh):

E ,, OCyHOC GEG =

Data for the last three years of electricity production is available:

Year Output (MWh)

21/3/2007-20/3/2008 1,046,254

21/3/2008-20/3/2009 2,119,721

21/3/2009-20/3/2010 1,889,688

Average 1,685,221

Therefore EGOC = 1,685,221 MWh (8)

(ii) And amount of baseline power generation calculated assuming load situation of project power plant

(MWh):

,,, yCC

CC

OCyPOC EG

Cap

CapEG ×= (9)

The yearly electricity generated by the project activity is estimated according to the following formula:

EGCC,y=CapCC*OperatingHoursCC*AuxConsCC*(DegCC^y)



page 36

Where :

- OperatingHoursCC are the expected operating hours of the project activity

- AuxConsCC is the expected auxiliary consumption of the project activity

- DegCC is the expected degradation of the project activity

The calculation is based on the following assumptions

Variable Value Unit

CapOC 560 MW (site condition)

Degradation (DegCC) 0.4% %

OperatingHoursCC 3,168 h

Auxiliary consumption

(AuxConsCC) 1.2% %

CapCC 840 MW (site condition)

This yields the following results:

Year EGCC,y EGOC,P,y

1 2,618,429 1,745,619

2 2,607,955 1,738,637

3 2,597,523 1,731,682

4 2,587,133 1,724,756

5 2,576,785 1,717,857

6 2,566,478 1,710,985

7 2,556,212 1,704,141

8 2,545,987 1,697,325

9 2,535,803 1,690,535

10 2,525,660 1,683,773

Step 2: Estimating EFOC, the emissions factor for electricity generated in open cycle mode in the

baseline

2 CO

OC

HISTOC EFNCV

EG

FCEF ××

= (10)

The annual fuel consumption over the last three years was the following:

Year

Fuel consumption

Diesel (l) Natural gas (Nm3)

21/3/2007-20/3/2008 97,260,000 234,419,000

21/3/2008-20/3/2009 41,307,000 608,230,000

21/3/2009-20/3/2010 42,006,000 530,902,000



page 37

Average (FCHIST) 60,191,000 457,850,333

EGOC = 1,685,221 MWh

The net calorific values for diesel and natural gas:

NCVNG,y = 0.03855 GJ/Nm3

NCVDiesel,y = 0.03803 GJ/lit

The calculation yields an emission factor EFOC = 0.690

Step 3: Determine the emissions factor for the operating margin

a) Calculate the operating margin

EFgrid,OM-simple,2007 EFgrid,OM-simple,2008 EFgrid,OM-simple,2009

[ton CO2/MWh] [ton CO2/MWh] [ton CO2/MWh]

A B C

0.66730 0.66619 0.66772

Total EGm,2007

(excluding low-

cost must run

and Imports)

Weight 2007 Total EGm,2008

(excluding low-cost

must run and

Imports)

Weight 2008 Total EGm,2009

(excluding low-cost

must run and Imports)

Weight 2009

[MWh] [MWh] [MWh]

D E=D/J F G=F/J H I=H//J

178,060,000 0.3046 201,037,000 0.3439 205,475,000 0.3515

Total EGm2007-2009

(excluding low-cost

must run and Imports)

EFgrid,OM-simple, 2007-2009

3 year generation weighted

average

[MWh] [ton CO2/MWh]

J=D+F+H K=A*E+B*G+C*I

584,572,000 0.6671

b) Calculate the build margin emission factor

∑

∑ ×

=

m

ym

ymEL

m

ym

yBMgridEG

EFEG

EF,

,,,

,,



page 38

Where = 28,338,129.27 tCO2e

= 44,875,346 MWh

= 0.6315 tCO2e/MWh

c) Calculate the combined margin emissions factor

EFgrid,CM,y=EFgrid,OM,y x wom+EFgrid,BM,y x wBM

Step 4: Conservatively determine baseline emissions

),( ,, yPyHy BEBEMINBE = (11)

Calculating BEH,y

Year EFOC EGOC,H,y EFGrid EGCC,y BEH,y,

1 0.690 1,685,221 0.649 2,618,429 1,768,365

2 0.690 1,685,221 0.649 2,607,955 1,761,564

3 0.690 1,685,221 0.649 2,597,523 1,754,791

4 0.690 1,685,221 0.649 2,587,133 1,748,045

5 0.690 1,685,221 0.649 2,576,785 1,741,326

6 0.690 1,685,221 0.649 2,566,478 1,734,634

7 0.690 1,685,221 0.649 2,556,212 1,727,969

8 0.690 1,685,221 0.649 2,545,987 1,721,330

9 0.690 1,685,221 0.649 2,535,803 1,714,718

10 0.690 1,685,221 0.649 2,525,660 1,708,132

Calculating BEPy

EFgrid,OM-simple 2007-2009 wOM EFgrid,BM,2009 wBM EFgrid,CM,2007-2009

[ton CO2/MWh] - [tCO2/MWh] - [tCO2/MWh]

0.67 0.50 0.63 0.50 0.65

) - ( ,,,,,,, yHOCyCCygridyHOCOCyH EGEGEFEGEFBE ×+×=

ymEL

m

ym EFEG ,,, ×∑

∑m

ymEG ,

yBMgridEF ,,



page 39

Year EFOC EGOC,P,y EFGrid EGCC,y BEP,y,

1 0.690 1,745,619 0.649 2,618,429 1,770,812

2 0.690 1,738,637 0.649 2,607,955 1,763,729

3 0.690 1,731,682 0.649 2,597,523 1,756,674

4 0.690 1,724,756 0.649 2,587,133 1,749,647

5 0.690 1,717,857 0.649 2,576,785 1,742,648

6 0.690 1,710,985 0.649 2,566,478 1,735,678

7 0.690 1,704,141 0.649 2,556,212 1,728,735

8 0.690 1,697,325 0.649 2,545,987 1,721,820

9 0.690 1,690,535 0.649 2,535,803 1,714,933

10 0.690 1,683,773 0.649 2,525,660 1,708,073

Based on the above calculations BEH,y is lower and hence BEy = BEH,y

Project emissions

Project emissions are calculated based on the “Tool to calculate project or leakage CO2 emissions from

fossil fuel combustion”, Version 02

Where we choose option B to calculate COEFi,y :

The relative energy input of diesel and natural gas is calculated based on their historic consumption:

Diesel Natural gas

Average consumption 60,191,000 457,850,333

NCV 0.03803 0.03855

Energy input 2,289,064 17,650,130

Energy input in % 0.115 0.885

The energy input is estimated using the nameplate efficiency of the project activity (51%), and calculated

separately for diesel and natural gas:

Year EGCC,y EfficiencyCC Energy Input (MWh) Energy Input (GJ)

Energy input

Diesel (GJ)

Energy input

Natural Gas (GJ)

1 2,618,429 51% 5,134,174 18,483,028 2,121,893 16,361,135

2 2,607,955 51% 5,113,638 18,409,096 2,113,405 16,295,691

3 2,597,523 51% 5,093,183 18,335,460 2,104,951 16,230,508

4 2,587,133 51% 5,072,810 18,262,118 2,096,532 16,165,586

yiCOEFyjFCiPE yjFC ,,,,, ∑ ∗=

yiCOyiyi EFNCVCOEF ,,2,, *=



page 40

5 2,576,785 51% 5,052,519 18,189,069 2,088,146 16,100,924

6 2,566,478 51% 5,032,309 18,116,313 2,079,793 16,036,520

7 2,556,212 51% 5,012,180 18,043,848 2,071,474 15,972,374

8 2,545,987 51% 4,992,131 17,971,672 2,063,188 15,908,485

9 2,535,803 51% 4,972,163 17,899,786 2,054,935 15,844,851

10 2,525,660 51% 4,952,274 17,828,187 2,046,715 15,781,471

Based on this, the project emissions are calculated:

Year

Energy input

Diesel (GJ) EFCO2, Diesel

Energy input Natural

Gas (GJ) EFCO2, Nat Gas PEy

1 2,121,893 0.0748 16,361,135 0.0583 1,112,572

2 2,113,405 0.0748 16,295,691 0.0583 1,108,121

3 2,104,951 0.0748 16,230,508 0.0583 1,103,689

4 2,096,532 0.0748 16,165,586 0.0583 1,099,274

5 2,088,146 0.0748 16,100,924 0.0583 1,094,877

6 2,079,793 0.0748 16,036,520 0.0583 1,090,498

7 2,071,474 0.0748 15,972,374 0.0583 1,086,136

8 2,063,188 0.0748 15,908,485 0.0583 1,081,791

9 2,054,935 0.0748 15,844,851 0.0583 1,077,464

10 2,046,715 0.0748 15,781,471 0.0583 1,073,154

No leakage is assumed, hence LEy=0

Overall, this leads to the following emission reduction calculations:

Years BEy Pey LEy ERy

1 1,768,365 1,112,572 0 655,793

2 1,761,564 1,108,121 0 653,443

3 1,754,791 1,103,689 0 651,102

4 1,748,045 1,099,274 0 648,771

5 1,741,326 1,094,877 0 646,449

6 1,734,634 1,090,498 0 644,136

7 1,727,969 1,086,136 0 641,833

8 1,721,330 1,081,791 0 639,539

9 1,714,718 1,077,464 0 637,254

10 1,708,073 1,073,154 0 634,919

B.6.4 Summary of the ex-ante estimation of emission reductions:



page 41

Year Estimation of project

activity Emissions

(tonnes of CO2 e)

Estimation of baseline

emissions (tonnes of

CO2 e)

Estimation of

leakage

(tonnes of CO2

e)

Estimation of

overall emission

reductions (tonnes

of CO2 e)

1 1,112,572 1,768,365 0 655,793

2 1,108,121 1,761,564 0 653,443

3 1,103,689 1,754,791 0 651,102

4 1,099,274 1,748,045 0 648,771

5 1,094,877 1,741,326 0 646,449

6 1,090,498 1,734,634 0 644,136

7 1,086,136 1,727,969 0 641,833

8 1,081,791 1,721,330 0 639,539

9 1,077,464 1,714,718 0 637,254

10 1,073,154 1,708,073 0 634,919

Total tonnes

of CO2e 17,380,815 10,927,576 0 6,453,239

B.7. Application of the monitoring methodology and description of the monitoring plan:

B.7.1 Data and parameters monitored:



page 42

Data / Parameter: EGCC,y

Data unit: MWh

Description: Net quantity of electricity generated by the project power plant in year y

Source of data to be

used:

Measurements by the project participant

Value of data applied

for the purpose of

calculating expected

emission reductions in

section B.6

Year EGCC,y

1 2,618,429

2 2,607,955

3 2,597,523

4 2,587,133

5 2,576,785

6 2,566,478

7 2,556,212

8 2,545,987

9 2,535,803

10 2,525,660

Description of

measurement methods

and procedures to be

applied:

The net generated electricity is calculated through direct measurements of the

electricity generated by the power plant (gross quantity) and the electricity

consumed by the power plant (auxiliary consumption) by Landis and Gyr 3

phase 4 wire electricity meter.

The readings of the electricity meters will be read every month by the Data

Recorder.

Monitoring frequency: Continuously

QA/QC procedures to

be applied:

The consistency of metered net electricity generation will be cross-checked with

receipts from sales (if available). Meters will be subject to regular maintenance

and testing regime to ensure efficiency in order with manufacturer

specifications, which is equal to a calibration every 10 years. The accuracy of

the meter is equal to 0.2%.

Any comment: The data shall be archived for 2 years following the end of the crediting period.

Data / Parameter: FCNG,y (Natural Gas)

Data unit: m3/yr

Description: Quantity of fuel type Natural Gas combusted during the year y


used:

Onsite measurements by the project participant



page 43


for the purpose of



section B.6

Year

Natural gas (Nm3)

21/3/2007-20/3/2008 234,419,000

21/3/2008-20/3/2009 608,230,000

21/3/2009-20/3/2010 530,902,000

Average 457,850,333

Description of

measurement methods


applied:

The consumption of natural gas is measured by a turbine gas flow meter. The

flow meter will be read monthly by the Data Recorder..

Monitoring frequency Continuously

QA/QC procedures to

be applied:

The period of calibration is in line with manufacturer’s specifications, but will

be at least every 10 years.

The consistency of metered fuel consumption quantities will be crosschecked by

an annual energy balance that is based on purchased quantities and stock

changes.

The metered gas consumption quantities will also be crosschecked with available

purchase invoices from financial records.


Data / Parameter: FCDiesel,y (Diesel Oil)

Data unit: lit/yr

Description: Quantity of fuel type Diesel Oil combusted during the year y


used:

Onsite measurements by the project participant


for the purpose of



section B.6

Year Diesel (lit)

21/3/2007-20/3/2008 97,260,000

21/3/2008-20/3/2009 41,307,000

21/3/2009-20/3/2010 42,006,000

Average 60,191,000

Description of

measurement methods


applied:

The consumption of diesel is measured by a turbine oil flow meter. The flow

meter will be read monthly by the Data Recorder.

Monitoring frequency Continuously

QA/QC procedures to

be applied:

The period of calibration is in line with manufacturer’s specifications, but will

be at least 10 years.

The consistency of metered fuel consumption quantities will be crosschecked by

an annual energy balance that is based on purchased quantities and stock

changes.

The metered fuel consumption quantities will also be crosschecked with

available purchase invoices from financial records.



page 44


Data / Parameter: NCVNG,y (Natural Gas)

Data unit: GJ/m3

Description: Net calorific of fuel type Natural Gas in year y


used:

One of the following data sources will be used, depending on their availability:

Data source Conditions for using the data source

(a) Values provided by the fuel

supplier in invoices

This is the preferred source

(b) Measurements by the project

participants

If (a) is not available

(c) IPCC default values at the upper

limit of the uncertainty at a 95%

confidence interval as provided

in table 1.4 of Chapter1 of Vol. 2

(Energy) of the 2006 IPCC

Guidelines on National GHG

Inventories



for the purpose of


emission reductions

in section B.6

0.03855

Description of

measurement methods


applied:

Measurements will be undertaken in line with national or international fuel

standards

Monitoring frequency For a) and b): The NCV will be obtained for each fuel delivery, from which

weighted average annual values will be calculated

For c): Any future revision of the IPCC Guidelines should be taken into account

QA/QC procedures to

be applied:

Values will be verified if they are within the uncertainty range of the IPCC default

values as provided in Table 1.2, Vol. 2 of the 2006 IPCC Guidelines. If the values

fall below this range additional information from the testing laboratory shall be

collected to justify the outcome or additional measurements shall be conducted.

The testing laboratory should have ISO17025 accreditation or justify that they can

comply with similar quality standards


Data / Parameter: NCVDiesel,y (Diesel Oil)

Data unit: GJ/lit

Description: Net calorific of fuel type Diesel Oil in year y


used:








page 45


participants


(c) Regional or national default

values


These sources will be based on well-

documented, reliable sources (such as

national energy balances)

(d) IPCC default values at the upper






Inventories



for the purpose of


emission reductions

in section B.6

0.03803

Description of

measurement methods


applied:


standards

Monitoring frequency For a) and b): The NCV will be obtained for each fuel delivery, from which

weighted average annual values will be calculated

For c), the appropriateness of the values will be reviewed annually

For d): Any future revision of the IPCC Guidelines should be taken into account

QA/QC procedures to

be applied:

Values will be verified if they are within the uncertainty range of the IPCC default

values as provided in Table 1.2, Vol. 2 of the 2006 IPCC Guidelines. If the values

fall below this range additional information from the testing laboratory shall be

collected to justify the outcome or additional measurements shall be conducted.

The testing laboratory should have ISO17025 accreditation or justify that they can

comply with similar quality standards


Data / Parameter: EFCO2NG,y

Data unit: tCO2/GJ

Description: Emission factor of fuel type Natural Gas in year y


used:







participants


(c) IPCC default values at the upper If (a) is not available



page 46






Inventories


for the purpose of


emission reductions

in section B.6

0.0583

Description of

measurement methods


applied:


standards.

Monitoring frequency For a) and b): The CO2 emission factor will be obtained for each fuel delivery,

from which weighted average annual values will be calculated

For c): Any future revision of the IPCC Guidelines will be taken into account

QA/QC procedures to

be applied:

Any future revision of the IPCC Guidelines should be taken into account


B.7.2. Description of the monitoring plan:

Responsibilities for monitoring

At the plant a CDM Manager will be trained to supervise the collection, aggregation and storage of the

required data from the regular monitoring activities, as well as the calibration and maintenance of the

measurement equipments. The Data Recorders and Meter Supervisors will take charge of the regular

monitoring tasks, and will provide the relevant data to the CDM Manager.

All staff involved in any of the procedures related with the CDM project activity will be trained in order

to perform the tasks specified in the monitoring plan by the CDM consultant.

Operational Management

The detailed calibration, testing and maintenance procedure for the measurement equipments used to

monitor data of the project activity shall be prepared by the CDM Manager based on the agreements with

equipment manufacturer’s recommendations and the industry and national standards as applicable.

Meters will be installed, maintained and calibrated according to equipment manufacturer instructions and

be in line with national standards, or, if these are not available, international standards (e.g. IEC, ISO).

The data collected as part of monitoring will, whenever possible, be archived electronically and be kept

at least for 2 years after the end of the last crediting period. Records used for monitoring which are not

available in electronic format will be stored physically. The records for calibration, testing and

maintenance of meters will be also readily accessible for the DOE during verification



page 47

All electronic data will be remotely monitored and recorded from the power plant control centre. Staff

working at the control centre will prepare a report on the operations of the CDM project activity and this

report will record data readings and equipment defects, outages, repairs and maintenance activities. All

relevant information, notes of meetings, data files, maintenance records, defect reports, hard copy and

computerized records of monitoring will be kept at the control centre or other designated location, and

arranged in an orderly and transparent manner to facilitate audit as and when required.

Operation and Management structure:

Group members and their responsibilities

Person Responsibility

Power plant manager Supervises the implementation of monitoring plan

CDM Manager Managing the whole CDM data processing for Shirvan power plant,

guiding and supervising data recorder after training by CDM consultant.

CDM consultant Providing CDM Manager training and technical support about CDM

monitoring plan.

Data recorder Collecting and recording data every month.

Meter supervisor Checking power meter periodically according to relevant regulation.

Emergency preparedness

Disposal of Emergency will be implemented according to the stipulations in the regulations of the

Shirvan Power Plant.

Annex 4 contains further background information.

B.8. Date of completion of the application of the baseline study and monitoring methodology

Power plant manager

CDM Manager

Meter supervisor Data recorder

CDM consultant



page 48

and the name of the responsible person(s)/entity(ies):

10/04/2011

Roman Schibli

Swiss Carbon Assets Ltd. (Project Participant)

[email protected]

www.southpolecarbon.com

SECTION C. Duration of the project activity / crediting period

C.1. Duration of the project activity:

C.1.1. Starting date of the project activity:

01/10/2007, first payment by IPDC to MAPNA for the proposed project activity.

C.1.2. Expected operational lifetime of the project activity:

20 years, 0 months

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

Fixed crediting period.

C.2.1. Renewable crediting period:

C.2.1.1. Starting date of the first crediting period:

Not applicable

C.2.1.2. Length of the first crediting period:

Not applicable

C.2.2. Fixed crediting period:

C.2.2.1. Starting date:

01/05/2011 or date of registration, whichever is later

C.2.2.2. Length:

10 years, 0 months



page 49

SECTION D. Environmental impacts

D.1. Documentation on the analysis of the environmental impacts, including transboundary

impacts:

Ghods Niroo carried out an Environmental Impact Assessment of the Shirvan Power Plant.

Section D.2 summarizes the main potential environmental impacts, recommended actions and monitoring

responsibilities.

D.2. If environmental impacts are considered significant by the project participants or the host

Party, please provide conclusions and all references to support documentation of an environmental

impact assessment undertaken in accordance with the procedures as required by the host Party:

Remarks Monitoring Agent Frequency of

monitoring

Monitoring

requirement

Recommended

action

Potential

Environmental

Impacts/issues

Main pollutant

parameters as are:

SOx ,NOx , HC ,

COx ,TSPM, H2S

Reliable Private Lab

Consulting

Companies

Approved by DOE

According to

EMS Plan( Stack

Sampling &

Monitoring

program)

Stack Emission

Standards

provided by

DOE10 of Iran

Should be

followed

Concentration of

air pollutant

parameters be

monitored

Emission of

Power plant main

stacks

HSE11 after

commencement

of operation :the

once every

months

Emission of any

ducts��

Main pollutant

parameters as are:

SO2 ,NO2 , HC ,

CO , PM10 , H2S


Consulting

Companies

Approved by DOE

According to

EMS Plan (air

quality Sampling

or Monitoring

program)

Clean air

Standards

provided by DOE

of Iran should be

followed

Ambient air

quality be

monitored Ambient Air

Different pollutant

parameters such as:

PM10, Mist , Fumes

& etc.


Consulting

Companies

Approved by MOH

Initially 3months

after

commencement

of operation,

then once every

6months

Indoor air

Standards

provided by

MOH12 of Iran

Should be

followed

Indoor air quality

be monitored

Indoor Air

COx NOx HC Reliable Private Lab

Consulting

Companies

Approved by DOE

Quarterly Testing Passenger

&Trucks

Vehicles

emission

Standards

provided by

DOE of Iran

Should be

followed

Motor Vehicles

Exhaust Gas be

tested

Mobile Sources

LEQ at Daily & Reliable Private Lab According to Sound Level LEQ of Noise Out door Sound

10 Provincial Department of Environment = DOE

11 Department of power plant Health Safety Environment = HSE

12 Ministry of Health = MoH



page 50

Night Hours Consulting

Companies

Approved by DOE

EMS Plan (Noise

pollution Testing

or Monitoring

program

Standards

provided by

DOE of Iran

Should be

followed

pollution be

monitored

Level

SPL & LEQ Reliable Private Lab

Consulting

Approved by MOH

after

commencement

of operation :the

once every

months

Sound Level

Standards

provided by

MOH of Iran

Should be

followed

SPL & LEQ of

Noise pollution be

monitored In door Sound

Level

pH,BOD 5 ,COD,

TSS, TDS,ABS,

Total & Fecal

Coliforms, Oil &

Grease


Consulting

Approved by DOE

once every

months

Waste Water

discharge

Standards

provided by DOE

of Iran Should be

followed

Water Quality

parameters &

Level of oil &

grease in water be

monitored

Water Discharge

Reliable Private

Execution

Companies

Approved by

MOM°

every day Appropriate

positioning of

waste bins

Disposal off at the

waste disposal site

by Malayer

district Solid Waste

Reliable Private

Execution

Companies

Approved by DOE

or MOM°

Continuously Appropriate

positioning of

Hazardous waste

bins & Chambers

Disposal at the

hazardous waste

disposal site

Approved by DOE Industrial Waste

SECTION E. Stakeholders’ comments

E.1. Brief description how comments by local stakeholders have been invited and compiled:

To collect feedback from local stakeholders on the proposed project activity, the project participants

organized a public meeting on April 10 2011 (21.01.1390 in the Persian calendar). The meeting was

announced on April 6 2011 (17.01.1390) in a local newspaper. Direct invitations to key stakeholders were also sent. 35 stakeholders including workers at the power plant, members of neighboring

communities and authorities took part in the meeting. The meeting lasted for 1.5 hours. It was started

with a presentation on the proposed project activity and its benefits. Then background information on the

CDM and climate change were given. Finally there stakeholders were invited to comment directly on the

project. Stakeholder feedback was received verbally, and are compiled in the minutes of the meeting.

E.2. Summary of the comments received:

During the discussions, the following points were raised:

- Mr. Mousavi who works for the local administration asked, whether the CDM could also be used

to finance the conversion of the third block of the power plant to combined cycle, which is



page 51

currently not included in the project activity. The presenter explained that this option was being

evaluated.

- Ms Naghdi asked whether the fact that the project was going to benefit from the CDM was going

to increase local employment. No such concrete plans exist, but the presenter found this an

interesting suggestion. Other participants strongly supported this suggestion.

- Mr Jamshidi, a local resident expressed his wish that Shirvan was going to be the first CDM

project in Iran, to demonstrate the local commitment to preserving the environment.

- Multiple questions concerning the CDM were answered, and several new project ideas (landfill,

energy efficiency) were brought up.

In a final poll on the project, all present stakeholders expressed their strong support for the proposed

project activity.

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

The stakeholders attending the local stakeholder consultation meeting were all very supportive to the

proposed project. There were no objections received. The project participant will put proper measures

into effect as described in the EIA during construction and operation to minimize the negative impacts on

the environment.



page 52

Annex 1

CONTACT INFORMATION ON PARTICIPANTS IN THE PROJECT ACTIVITY

Organization: Iran Power Development Company

Street/P.O.Box: Shahid Sahamati St, Vali-e-asr Ave

Building: 3

City: Tehran

State/Region: Tehran

Postcode/ZIP:

Country: Iran

Telephone: +98 021 - 88 80 45 04

FAX:

E-Mail:

URL: http://www.ipdc.ir/

Represented by:

Title:

Salutation: Mrs

Last name: Buzari

Middle name:

First name: Mitra

Department:

Mobile:

Direct FAX:

Direct tel: +98 021 - 88 80 45 04

Personal e-mail:

Organization: Energy Changes Projektentwicklung GmbH

Street/P.O.Box: Obere Donaustrasse

Building: 12/28

City: Vienna

State/Region:

Postcode/ZIP: 1020

Country: Austria

Telephone: +43 1 9684529

FAX: +43 1 9684529

E-Mail: [email protected]

URL: www.energy-changes.com

Represented by: Clemens Plöchl

Title: Managing Partner

Salutation: Mr.

Last name: Plöchl

Middle name:

First name: Clemens

Department:



page 53

Mobile:

Direct FAX: +43 1 9684529

Direct tel: +43 1 9684529

Personal e-mail: [email protected]

Organization: Swiss Carbon Assets Ltd.

Street/P.O.Box: Technoparkstrasse

Building: 1

City: Zurich

State/Region: Zurich

Postcode/ZIP: 8005

Country: Switzerland

Telephone: +41 43 501 35 50

FAX: +41 43 501 35 99

E-Mail: [email protected]

URL: www.southpolecarbon.com

Represented by: Renat Heuberger

Title: Managing Partner, CEO

Salutation: Mr.

Last name: Heuberger

Middle name:

First name: Renat

Department:

Mobile:

Direct FAX: +41 43 501 35 99

Direct tel: +41 43 501 35 50

Personal e-mail: [email protected]



page 54

Annex 2

INFORMATION REGARDING PUBLIC FUNDING

There is no public funding for the project activity.



page 55

Annex 3

BASELINE INFORMATION

Synchronization dates of gas turbines:

Number of power unit Number of gas turbine Synchronization date End-date of lifetime

of gas turbine


Gas turbine 2 10.05.2006 10.05.2031


Gas turbine 4 06.09.2006 06.09.2031

Source: Iran Power Development Company

Historic electricity production and fuel consumption data, Shirvan Power Plant:

gasoil

(liter)

gas

(cubic

meter)

crude oil

21/3/2005-20/3/2006

21/3/2006-20/3/2007 126895 5033 121862 42989 - 1669

21/3/2007-20/3/2008 228012 4774 223238 19628 52709 - 2272

21/3/2008-20/3/2009 483788 11018 472770 10415 136969 - 4849

21/3/2009-20/3/2010 539077 17577 521500 15270 146080 - 5363

21/3/2005-20/3/2006

21/3/2006-20/3/2007 104210 2507 101703 35366 - 1782

21/3/2007-20/3/2008 259086 3115 255971 26494 54496 - 2442

21/3/2008-20/3/2009 683902 10357 673545 14431 191253 - 6747

21/3/2009-20/3/2010 566736 1892 564844 8711 159180 - 5618

21/3/2005-20/3/2006

21/3/2006-20/3/2007 48607 1348 47259 16983 - 1540

21/3/2007-20/3/2008 273431 3962 269469 19921 65246 - 2535

21/3/2008-20/3/2009 485284 3022 482262 8650 138463 - 4901

21/3/2009-20/3/2010 346662 2747 343915 8818 96699 - 3511

21/3/2005-20/3/2006

21/3/2006-20/3/2007 51201 1162 50039 16394 - 524

21/3/2007-20/3/2008 302865 5289 297576 31217 61968 - 2711

21/3/2008-20/3/2009 494527 3383 491144 7811 141545 - 4949

21/3/2009-20/3/2010 462328 2899 459429 9207 128943 - 4664

21/3/2005-20/3/2006 0 0 0 0 0 - 0

21/3/2006-20/3/2007 330913 10050 320863 111732 0 - 524

21/3/2007-20/3/2008 1063394 17140 1046254 97260 234419 - 2272

21/3/2008-20/3/2009 2147501 27780 2119721 41307 608230 - 4849

21/3/2009-20/3/2010 1914803 25115 1889688 42006 530902 - 3511

unit year

gross

output

power

(MWh)

05.07.2006

06.09.2006

1

2

3

4

Total

annual

operatio

n hours

16.03.2006

10.05.2006

internal

consump

tion

(MWh)

consuming fuel (thousands)Commissi

oning date

unit

output

(MWh)



page 56

Source: official data by Tavanir

http://www.tavanir.org.ir/info/stat88/tafsili/tolid/chapter2/vahed%20be%20vahed/main.htm



page 57

Annex 4

MONITORING INFORMATION

A. Operation and Management structure:

Group members and their responsibilities

Person Responsibility

Power plant manager Supervises the implementation of monitoring plan

CDM Manager Managing the whole CDM data processing for Shirvan power plant,

guiding and supervising data recorder after training by CDM consultant.

CDM consultant Providing CDM Manager training and technical support about CDM

monitoring plan.

Data recorder Collecting and recording data every month.

Meter supervisor Checking power meter periodically according to relevant regulation.

B. Monitoring procedure

The steps of monitoring the electricity supplied to the grid and the fuel supplied to the power plant are as

follows:

(1) The electricity supplied by the project to the grid will be automatically monitored. The data is

measured continuously.

(2) Persons in charge of data record and meter supervisor from power plants shall read and collect data

from power and fuel meters at the end of every month.

(3) Copies of invoices for electricity and fuel (diesel and natural gas) supplies are stored by CDM

Manager for double checking.

Power plant manager

CDM Manager

Meter supervisor Data recorder

CDM consultant



page 58

C. Data recording and archiving procedures

• The CDM Manager shall keep monitored data in electronic archives at the end of every month.

Paper documents should also be compiled and saved monthly.

• Power plant shall keep copies of electricity sales and fuel purchase invoices

• In order to help verifiers obtain documents and information related to the emission reduction of the

proposed project, CDM Manager shall prepare an index of the data documents compiled

• All the data shall be kept for 2 years after the crediting period.

D. Training

The CDM consultant will in close collaboration with the power plant manager train the CDM Manager to

ensure effective monitoring of all parameters in line with the monitoring plan.

Switch From Single Cycle to Combined Cycle (CC) CDM Project at Shirvan Power Plant

Documents