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

 PROJECT DESIGN DOCUMENT FORM (CDM PDD) - Version 03

CDM – Executive Board

page 2

SECTION A. General description of project activity

A.1. Title of the project activity:

Gaziantep Landfill Gas to Energy Project, Turkey (Hereafter referred to as the “Project”)
Version: 5
Date: 22.05.2013

A.2. Description of the project activity:

The Project is a Landfill Gas (“LFG”) to Energy Project, developed by “CEV Enerji Üretim San.ve Tic.
Ltd. Sti.” (hereafter referred to as the “Project owner”), which is the regional office of the Korea-based
company CEV Clean Energy & Vehicle. The proposed activity involves the collection and utilization of
the LFG with an electricity component with a maximum installed capacity reaching 5.655 MWe. The
location of the proposed activity is the Gaziantep landfill site, Turkey.

The Gaziantep landfill is the main

Annual Disposal at Landfill landfill of the Gaziantep city,
450.000 which is the 6th largest city in
400.000 Turkey with its 1.2 million
350.000 inhabitants. It started operations in
300.000
tonnes/a

250.000
1996 and currently holds in excess
200.000 of 3.2 million tonnes of waste. In
Total SW
150.000 disposed, t 2008, the disposed waste amount
100.000 reached 354,620 tonnes1,
50.000 corresponding to 1000 t/day on
0
average. The landfill is a managed
landfill with no landfill gas

venting. Figure 1. Annual amount of waste disposed at the Gaziantep

Landfill

In 2008, the Gaziantep Metropolitan Municipality opened a tender for managing its solid waste at the
landfill. The Project owner has acquired the right to commercially operate the landfill in 2008.The Project
does not only aim at utilizing the already existing waste but it will also make use of the new waste until
2018. The Project is expected to operate until 20382 and will have two phases; in the initial phase the
capacity will be 1.131 MW. In the second phase, the capacity will be expanded up to 5.655 MW:

1
Source: Gaziantep Environmental and Forestry Department (http://www.gaziantep-
cevreorman.gov.tr/sayfalar/cevysb.php?Gel=Bak&id=76)
2
Source: Feasibility Study, section 4.2.2.
 PROJECT DESIGN DOCUMENT FORM (CDM PDD) - Version 03

CDM – Executive Board

page 3

Table 1. Schedule of the Project

Phase Generation Units Installed Total Installed Expected Date of
Capacity Operation3
Phase 1 1 generation unit of 1.131 MWe 1.131 MWe 18.03.2010
Phase 2 4 generation units of 1.131 MWe each 5.655 MWe 24.08.2011

During the registration process of the Project, the construction of the 1 st and 2nd stages have been
completed and full operation has started. Gaziantep Landfill is a landfill in use today, vehicle weighing
stations are installed near the administration building to record landfill amount and emitted leachate is
being stored in the storage tank and moved to the treatment facility using tank lorries. The proposed
Project consists of covering the landfill site with soil, installation of vertical and horizontal pipes for
collecting and transporting the recovered LFG, combusting the LFG for electricity generation and flaring
the remaining LFG. The Project’s objective is to utilize LFG generation from almost all the waste
disposed in former years as well as the coming years, therefore the Project covers the Gaziantep landfill
as a complete waste management project. At the time of PDD preparation, the waste at the Project site has
been covered with soil and the LFG collection piping system has been completed. The Project owner is
responsible both of utilisation of the LFG, and the landfill site’s management.
The purpose of LFG flaring is to dispose of the flammable constituents (particularly methane) safely and
to control odour nuisance, health risks and other adverse environmental impacts. The electricity
generation will be used to cover the own electricity consumption of the Project and the excess power will
be sold to the national electricity grid. The proposed Project will reduce GHG emissions by:
i. Preventing methane emissions to the atmosphere: Municipal waste decays under normal
conditions at the landfill site and this leads to the production of large amounts of potent
greenhouse gases. Methane is the largest constituent of LFG and its global warming potential
(GWP) is 21 times than CO2. The LFG produced at the landfill site will be captured and
destroyed.
ii. The recovered methane will be combusted for power generation. The produced electricity will be
supplied to the national power grid and substitute the electricity which otherwise would have
been generated by the thermal power plants. Thus, it will reduce the fossil fuel consumption and
associated CO2 emissions indirectly.

Current Landfill Proposed Project

3
Source: Acceptance permits by the Ministry of Energy and Natural Resources.
 PROJECT DESIGN DOCUMENT FORM (CDM PDD) - Version 03

CDM – Executive Board

page 4

Landfill area: 147,228 m2 Landfill area: 195,499 m2

Lenth of landfill boundary: 1,514m Lenth of landfill boundary: 1,760 m
Elevation: 840m – 898m Elevation: 840m - 906m
Figure 2. Visual topographic description of the proposed Project
 PROJECT DESIGN DOCUMENT FORM (CDM PDD) - Version 03

CDM – Executive Board

page 5

The expected social and environmental impacts of the

proposed Project are:
 It will promote integration of environmental infrastructure
(e.g. after-care for landfill sites, etc.)
 The active LFG collection and flaring system will
minimize off-site LFG migration and thus prevent
potential explosions resulting from subsurface gas
migration
 LFG flaring and combusting will dispose of the hazardous
constituents safely. At the same time it will reduce odour
nuisance and health risks
 It will promote sustainable development by reducing
greenhouse gas emissions and their impact on climate
change
 Being a model for LFG management with an incorporated
clean energy component, it will present an demonstrative
example as a multi-purpose solution for effective and
sustainable waste management
Figure 3. Current Landfill Site  It will promote energy security from local sources and
contribute to a more sustainable energy infrastructure.
 It will result in creation of new jobs in the regions and
transfer of innovative technology to the host country.

A.3. Project participants:

Name of Party involved (*) Private and/or public entity(ies) project Kindly indicate if the
((host) indicates a host participants (*) Party involved wishes to
Party) (as applicable) be considered as project
participant (Yes/No)
Turkey (host) CEV Enerji Üretim San. ve Tic. Ltd. Sti. No
(private entity)
Turkey (host) Mavi Consultants No
(private entity)

CEV Enerji Üretim San. ve Tic. Ltd. Sti. (private entity) is the project owner and shall be defined as the
project participant. Mavi Consultants act as carbon consultants for the Project. Contact details are
provided in Annex 1.

A.4. Technical description of the project activity:

A.4.1. Location of the project activity:

 PROJECT DESIGN DOCUMENT FORM (CDM PDD) - Version 03

CDM – Executive Board

page 6

A.4.1.1. Host Party(ies):

The host country is Turkey. Turkey has recently ratified the Kyoto Protocol and is an official member as
of August 26th, 2009. Turkey has no emission reduction targets under the Kyoto Protocol and cannot host
CDM or JI projects either. There is no limitation for Turkey for hosting voluntary emission reduction
projects.

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

South East Anatolia Region / Gaziantep Province. The Project site is located near the boundary between
southeast region of Turkey and Syria.

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

The Project is located in Baglarbasi neighbourhood, Sahinbey district, Gaziantep province. The Gaziantep
Landfill is a typical valley landfill surrounded with U-type ridgeline. The surrounding topography is a
desolate basin surrounded with ridgelines with rare trees and a lot of exposed rocks. It is approximately 9
km south of Gaziantep city centre.

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

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

Approximate GPS Coordinates

of the Project are:
 36°59'28" N
 37°24'5" E

Figure 4. Location of the proposed Project

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

The Project is categorized as:
 Sectoral Category 13, Waste Handling and Disposal; and
 Sectoral Category 1, Energy Industries (Renewable- /nonrenewable sources)
 PROJECT DESIGN DOCUMENT FORM (CDM PDD) - Version 03

CDM – Executive Board

page 7

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

The Project mainly consists of the following components: Landfill cover, LFG collection system, flare,
electricity generation unit and other controlling / measurement equipment.

Landfill Cover:
The waste will be covered with soil to block
methane emissions to the atmosphere to provide
sufficient containment and prevent air or rainwater
to get into the waste.
This cover will include clay, sand and soil layers
for erosion control and plant growth.

Figure 5. Concept Diagram of the Project

LFG Collection:
The Project aims at efficiently collecting LFG generated at the
landfill site by using vertical wells, which are easy to maintain.
The technical properties of this system are as follows;
 Considering the inclination and landfill depth, there will
be 38 units of vertical gas wells covering the landfill.
These wells are able to effectively collect LFG from a
radius of 30 m.
 The gas will go through: Vertical collection well →
Horizontal collection pipe → Manifold Station
→Connecting pipe → Header pipe → Pre-treatment
facility
 A modular piping network will connect groups of gas
wells to 3 manifolds. The manifolds are connected to the
main pipe which delivers the gas to the extraction plant
and the flare, and have the following properties:
 The manifold station will control collection pressure, flow
rate and properties of each vertical well, prevent
condensation in pipes and keeps balance of pressure
Figure 6. Arrangement of vertical wells between individual pipes with automatic gas pressure
control valves.
 The condensate in the horizontal LFG collection lines (10-
15 lines) will be returned to the landfill by collecting
condensates at dewatering traps at lower points of the
LFG collection system.
 The LFG will be drawn from the landfill with the help of
 PROJECT DESIGN DOCUMENT FORM (CDM PDD) - Version 03

CDM – Executive Board

page 8

one or more blower(s) and delivered to the flare or

electricity generation unit. The system will be operated at
a pressure slightly lower than the atmospheric pressure.

Electricity Generation:
The Project will generate electricity from LFG to cover its own electricity consumption and to feed the
rest to the national power grid. The Project employs 1 gas engine generator with 1.131 MWe capacity, and
by adding new generators with 1.131 MW each the Project’s capacity will be increased up to 5.655 MW,
depending on actual gas extraction. The generator is driven by a turbocharged gas engine with 16
cylinders. The installed gas engine is JGC 416 GS-L.L with a rated power of 1.131 MWe and electrical
efficiency of 41.6%.
The Project uses two buildings at the landfill site, one for operational activities and the other one for the
personnel. Electricity will be generated in container type engine generation system and transmitted to
national grid after being consumed within the site. Each engine/alternator unit will contain a transformer,
switch gear, synchronization system and system protection device. The mechanical energy will be
converted into electrical power.
An electrical sub-station contains all suitable switching gear and metering equipment to facilitate a proper
connection to the national grid network. Parallel to the gas production rate, each unit will be operated
depending on the need. All engine units will be fitted with an internet-based remote monitoring and
controlling feature which allows engines to be monitored, started and stopped remotely to be used for
emergency cases or maintenance purposes4. Regardless of this system, the Project will employ full time
staff for operation, routine servicing and repairs.

Flare
In addition to the power generation equipment, the Project owner plans installing a flare. This will ensure
that the LFG, which could not be combusted in the power generation units, is destroyed. Enclosed stacks
will provide conditions for high temperature combustion to effectively destruct methane with other
combustible LFG components and end up with low GHG emissions.

Project Instrumentation
The Project will include sophisticated instrumentation that will allow for the accurate measurement of
captured and destroyed LFG, including the following components:
 Flow meters will be installed to measure and monitor accurately the flow of the LFG through the
system. The measurement points will be: the main delivery pipe, the pipe going to the flare and
the pipes going to each of the generation units. These flow meters will also be able to accurately
measure various parameters such as pressure, temperature and the gas contents (e.g. methane,
carbon dioxide and oxygen). The measurement sampling intervals of the flow meters will be in
agreement with the UNFCCC requirements.
 The measurement system will be able to store the measured data electronically. The control and
monitoring system will allow these readings to be obtained remotely.
 The flare will include flame and temperature control. Ultraviolet cameras will monitor the
presence of the flame and thermocouples will monitor both the temperature of the flame and
temperature of the exhaust gas in the stack. This way, the temperature of the stack gas will be
regulated with an automated air louver.

4
Provided that the site gets connected with a phone line.
 PROJECT DESIGN DOCUMENT FORM (CDM PDD) - Version 03

CDM – Executive Board

page 9

A.4.4. Estimated amount of emission reductions over the chosen crediting period:
The Project is expected to achieve the following emission reductions:
Table 2. Expected Emission Reductions of the Project
Year Ex-ante estimation of emission reduction in tCO2e
2010 (partial) 30,384
2011 114,654
2012 163,729
2013 167,037
2014 169,217
2015 170,445
2016 171,245
2017 (partial) 157,417
Total estimated reductions, tCO2e 1,144,128
Total number of crediting years 7
Annual average over the crediting period of
163,447
estimated reductions (tonnes of CO2 e)

A.4.5. Public funding of the project activity:

The Project will not receive any ODA finance.
 PROJECT DESIGN DOCUMENT FORM (CDM PDD) - Version 03

CDM – Executive Board

page 10

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:
For the emission reductions stemming from LFG capture, the ACM0001 v.11, “Consolidated baseline and
monitoring methodology for landfill gas project activities”, hereinafter referred to as the methodology, is
used. The methodology refers to the following tools:
 “Tool for the demonstration and assessment of additionality”; v.5.2 (“Additionality Tool”)
 “Tool to determine methane emissions avoided from disposal of waste at a solid waste disposal
site”; v.4
 “Tool to determine project emissions from flaring gases containing methane”; EB28, Annex 13

For the emission reductions stemming from electricity generation, the ACM0002 v.12.1 “Consolidated
baseline methodology for grid-connected electricity generation from renewable sources is used. This
methodology refers to the following tool:
 “Tool to calculate the emission factor for an electricity system”, v.2

B.2. Justification of the choice of the methodology and why it is applicable to the project
activity:
ACM0001 Applicability:
This methodology is applicable to landfill gas capture project activities, where the baseline scenario is the
partial or total atmospheric release of the gas and the project activities include situations such as:
(a) The captured gas is flared; and/or
(b) The captured gas is used to produce energy (e.g. electricity/thermal energy). Emission reductions
can be claimed for thermal energy generation, only if the LFG displaces use of fossil fuel either
in a boiler or in an air heater. For claiming emission reductions for other thermal energy
equipment (e.g. kiln), project proponents may submit a revision to this methodology;
(c) The captured gas is used to supply consumers through natural gas distribution network. If
emissions reductions are claimed for displacing natural gas, project activities may use approved
methodology AM0053.
Since the Project involves both flaring and electricity generation, options (a) and (b) are satisfied and the
methodology is applicable to the Project.

ACM0002 Applicability:
 PROJECT DESIGN DOCUMENT FORM (CDM PDD) - Version 03

CDM – Executive Board

page 11

The small scale AMS I.D methodology can be applied if the Project has a maximum capacity of 15 MWe.
The Project will have a maximum capacity up to 5.65 MW and is therefore eligible for the use of AMS
I.D. However, for the sake of conservative approach, the large scale methodology is preferred.

B.3. Description of the sources and gases included in the project boundary:
According to ACM0001, the project boundary is the site of the Project activity where the gas is captured
and destroyed/used. The Project boundary shall include the power generator, which is connected to the
grid.
According to ACM0002, the project boundary should encompass the physical, geographical site of the
renewable generation source.

Waste production

Waste collection and

transportaion

LFG production
Fugitive emissions
Own consumption LFG collection

Electricity generation Flaring

Project boundary

Export to National Grid

End Use

The spatial extent of the Project boundary is defined as the Project site and the plants connected to the
grid system to which the Project will be connected to.

Table 3. Sources and gases included in the project boundary

Source Gas Included? Justification / Explanation
 PROJECT DESIGN DOCUMENT FORM (CDM PDD) - Version 03

CDM – Executive Board

page 12

CO2 No It is part of the natural carbon cycle, where the carbon

LFG emissions
was previously sequestered from the atmosphere.
from waste
Baseline

CH4 Yes Main source of emissions.

degradation
N2O No N/A
CO2 Yes Main source of emissions.
Emissions from
CH4 No N/A
the power grid
N2O No N/A
CO2 No It is part of the natural carbon cycle, where the carbon
was previously sequestered from the atmosphere.
LFG capture and
CH4 Yes When flare does not operate, methane emissions are
flaring
subtracted.
N2O No N/A
Project Activity

CO2 No It is part of the natural carbon cycle, where the carbon

was previously sequestered from the atmosphere. Only
LFG combustion the net electricity generation will be accounted for ER
for power calculations.
generation CH4 Yes When generator does not operate, methane emissions
are subtracted.
N2O No N/A
CO2 Yes Project’s own emissions are subtracted.
On-site electricity CH4 No N/A
N2O No N/A

B.4. Description of how the baseline scenario is identified and description of the identified
baseline scenario:
As the ACM0001 suggests, the baseline scenarios are identified and assessed according to the “Tool for
the demonstration and assessment of additionality”. The ACM0001 further requires certain scenarios to
be included among alternatives. These default scenarios are included in the assessment.
The Project includes the LFG and electricity generation components; therefore different alternatives to
these two components will be described;

Alternatives to Landfill Gas Component Alternatives to Power Generation Component

LFG1: The Project activity (capture of landfill P1: Power generated from landfill gas undertaken
gas and its flaring) undertaken without being without being registered as VER project activity.
registered as a VER project activity.
LFG2: Atmospheric release of the landfill gas. P2: Existing and/or new grid-connected power
plants.
LFG3: The Project activity is realized using the P3: The Project activity is realized using the VER
VER revenues. revenues.

There is no incentive to utilise the LFG to produce thermal energy, since there is no demand for thermal
energy in the surroundings of the Project site. The Project is a green field investment, which does not
 PROJECT DESIGN DOCUMENT FORM (CDM PDD) - Version 03

CDM – Executive Board

page 13

modify or retrofit any existing facility. There is no national regulation which would require the recovery
or flaring of the LFG emitted from landfill sites. Based on the barrier and investment analyses, it is clear
that the P1 and LFG1 scenarios are not feasible for the Project owner and are therefore not applicable.
The Project being a voluntary initiative, the only plausible baseline scenario would be:
 P2: Generation of grid-connected power, which would have otherwise been generated by the
operation of already existing grid-connected power plants and by the addition of new generation
sources; and,
 LFG2: Maintaining the status quo, where LFG is emitted into the atmosphere without conducting
any management, collection or utilization on the landfill site.
The Project owner does not have other fossil fuel fired power plants or control over the emissions
stemming from the baseline scenario. The Project will partially reduce LFG emissions from the landfill
and substitute the electricity generation from grid-connected fossil fuel fired thermal power plants,
thereby reducing the overall greenhouse gas emissions.

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):
This section utilizes the “Tool for the demonstration and assessment of additionality”, as required by the
methodology. In agreement with the ACM0001, when defining alternative scenarios, relevant policies
and regulations related to the management of landfill sites are taken into account.

Step 1: Identification of alternatives to the project activity consistent with current laws and
regulations
Realistic and credible alternatives to the project activity(s) are defined through the following Sub-steps;

Sub-step 1a: Define alternatives to the project activity:

The following realistic and credible alternatives are identified that are available to the project participants
or similar project developers that provide outputs or services comparable with the proposed Project
activity;

Alternatives to the Landfill Gas Component:

 LFG1: The Project activity (capture of landfill gas and its flaring) undertaken without being
registered as a VER project activity. This scenario assumes that the Project owner will realize the
Project activity even in the lack of revenues stemming from Project’s emission reductions. In this
scenario, the Project would operate a LFG facility which would capture and reduce methane
emissions from the landfill site, without any VER sales. The inclusion of this scenario is required
under ACM0001.
 LFG2: Atmospheric release of the landfill gas. This scenario corresponds to the current practice
on the landfill site by maintaining the status quo, where methane is directly emitted to the
atmosphere, without any type of collection, recovery, processing or destruction. The inclusion of
this scenario is required under ACM0001.
 PROJECT DESIGN DOCUMENT FORM (CDM PDD) - Version 03

CDM – Executive Board

page 14

 LFG3: The Project activity is realized using the VER revenues. This scenario corresponds to the
Project activity, where the Project only becomes feasible with the use of VERs. Under this
alternative, the Project will partially capture the LFG emissions from the landfill site and use it
for power generation. The rest will be flared in order to minimize GHG emissions and safety
risks, which were present in the scenario LFG2.

Alternatives to the Power Generation Component:

 P1: Power generated from landfill gas undertaken without being registered as VER project
activity. This scenario assumes that the Project owner would realize the Project activity even in
the lack of VER revenues and generate power from the collected LFG in order to feed it to the
national grid. The inclusion of this scenario is required under ACM0001.
 P2: Existing and/or new grid-connected power plants. This scenario corresponds to the current
practice for electricity generation by maintaining the status quo. Under this scenario, the Project
will not be undertaken, the existing and new power plants will generate all the power and the
national electricity will remain unaffected. The inclusion of this scenario is required under
ACM0001.
 P3: The Project activity is realized using the VER revenues. This scenario corresponds to the
Project activity, where the Project only becomes feasible with the use of VERs. Under this
alternative, the Project will generate power and feed it to the national grid, thereby replacing
electricity partially generated by thermal power plants.

The alternative scenario is defined as the combination of both Landfill Gas and Power Generation
components, since the Project has both components. Realistic and credible alternative scenarios to the
Project activity are identified.

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

For the electricity generation component, the following laws and regulations apply;
Table 4. Laws and Regulations Applicable in the Electricity Market5
Legal Framework Concerning Electricity Generation
Electricity Market Balancing and Settlement Regulation
 The repealed Electricity Market Balancing And Settlement Regulation published in the Official
Gazette No. 25632 dated 03/11/2004
Regulation Concerning Electricity Demand Forecast
Communiqué Regarding Connection to and Use of Transmission and Distribution Systems in the
Electricity Market
Communiqué Regarding Preparation of Retail Contract in The Electricity Market
Communiqué Concerning Principles and Procedures for Selection in the Existence of More Than One
Application for Generation of Electricity from the Same Source and on the Same Region
Communiqué Regarding Regulation of Market Management Revenue
Regulation on Principles and Procedures for Granting Guarantee of Origin
Electricity Transmission System Supply Reliablity and Quality Regulation

5
Source: Energy Market Regulatory Authority (http://www.epdk.gov.tr/english/regulations/electricity.htm)
 PROJECT DESIGN DOCUMENT FORM (CDM PDD) - Version 03

CDM – Executive Board

page 15

Electricity Market Grid Regulation

Communiqué Regarding The Principles and Procedures of Financial Settlement In The Electricity Market
Electricity Market Import and Export Regulation
Communiqué Regarding Regulatory Accounting Guidelines
Electricity Market Distribution Regulation
Communiqué Regarding the Meters to be used in the Electricity Market
Communiqué Regarding Wind and Solar Measurements
Electricity Market Customer Services Regulation
Electricity Market Eligible Consumer Regulation
Electricity Market License Fees
Electricity Market Tariffs Regulation
Electricity Market Licensing Regulation
Electricity Market Law

Other relevant laws:

Law on Utilization of Renewable Energy Resources for the Purpose of Generating Electricity Energy (Nr.
5346)
Energy Efficiency Law (Nr. 5627)
Forest Law (Nr. 6831)

For the landfill gas component, the following laws and regulations may apply;
Table 5. Laws and Regulations governing the landfill gas component
Legal Framework Concerning the Environment
The Environment Law Packaging Waste Control Regulation
Air Quality Control Regulation Soil Protection Law
Noise Control Regulation Air Pollution from Heating Regulation
Water Pollution Control Regulation Hazardous Chemicals Regulation
Control of Solid Waste Regulation Waste Batteries Regulation
Environmental Impact Assessment Soil Pollution Control Regulation
Regulation
Medical Waste Regulation Air Pollution from Vehicles Regulation
Toxic Chemical Substance and Prod Medical Waste Control Regulation
Regulation
Hazardous Waste Regulation Water Resources Protection from Hazardous Materials
Regulation
Waste Oils Control Regulation Urban Waste Water Treatment Regulation
Industrial Air Pollution Control Regulation Drinking Water Quality Regulation

The Environment Law6 does not require a tipping fee for accepting municipal solid waste at the sanitary
solid waste disposal sites. There is an “environment tax” and another “waste water surcharge” collected
by municipalities from households for waste management activities. The collected taxes are mostly used
for maintenance of city parks and gardens and managing waste. Municipalities generally subsidize waste

6
The Environmental Law (Nr. 2872), dated to 11.08.1983 is a comprehensive law describing relevant public bodies
and their responsibilities, principles of environmental protection, limitations and prohibitions, penalties etc. It is also
supported by various specific communiquees and regulations.
 PROJECT DESIGN DOCUMENT FORM (CDM PDD) - Version 03

CDM – Executive Board

page 16

collection and dumping activities from the municipal budgets. Under these circumstances, municipalities
or households are not familiar with additional costs of proper waste management. Therefore, waste
management is one of the everlasting problems of municipalities and is an unattractive field for private
companies.
The “Metropolitan Municipalities Law7” sets out the legal framework of solid waste management in
metropoles. Accordingly, the Gaziantep Metropolitan Municipality is responsible for the collection,
management and proper disposal of municipal waste and shall build and operate the necessary facilities or
let 3rd parties do so. In agreement with this law, a tender shall be organized for certain types of goods and
services the municipalities purchase. Therefore, the Municipality has organized a tender and the Project
owner has won it by offering landfill site management with no cost to the Municipality.
The Project is a voluntary investment managed by a special contract between the Gaziantep Metropolitan
Municipality and the Project owner. Therefore the Project has to be in compliance with all relevant
legislation. The Project is licensed and permitted by public authorities. All scenarios are valid according
to national laws, regulations and communiqués.
For scenario LFG2, the most relevant regulation governing landfill sites is the “Control of Solid Waste
Regulation”. According to its Article 27, landfill sites are not enforced to capture and/or to destroy LFG
emissions. This regulation does not set any obligations or penalties but only suggests the reduction of
GHG emissions. Therefore, this alternative reflects current practice and is in agreement with current laws
and regulations.
For scenario P2, maintaining the status quo, without the realization of the Project activity, is by definition
in agreement with the relevant legislation.
As a result, it is shown that these realistic and credible alternative scenarios to the Project activity are in
compliance with mandatory legislation and regulations.

Step 2: Investment analysis

According to the Additionality Tool, this step involves the determination whether the proposed Project
activity is not:
(a) The most economically or financially attractive; or
(b) Economically or financially feasible, without the revenue from the sale of emission reductions.

Sub-step 2a: Determine appropriate analysis method

According to the Additionality Tool, one of three options must be selected:
i. Simple cost analysis (where no benefits other than CDM income exist for the project)
ii. Investment comparison analysis (where comparable alternatives to the project exist)
iii. Benchmark analysis
Because the Project will receive additional revenues other than VERs from electricity sales, and since
there are no comparable investment alternatives to the proposed project, option (iii) benchmark analysis is
selected. In this case, the most likely alternative to the Project would be simply not to install flaring and
electricity generation equipment on the landfill site.

7
Law Nr: 5216, Article 7
(http://www.mevzuat.gov.tr/Metin.Aspx?MevzuatKod=1.5.5216&MevzuatIliski=0&sourceXmlSearch=)
 PROJECT DESIGN DOCUMENT FORM (CDM PDD) - Version 03

CDM – Executive Board

page 17

Sub-step 2b: Option III. Apply benchmark analysis

The likelihood of the development of this Project will be determined by analyzing its Project IRR based
on the scenarios with and without the sales of carbon credits.
IRR is a measure of investment profitability. According to the Additionality Tool, the assessment of the
financial performance of the Project with and without carbon revenues shall be carried out according to
benchmarks. The chosen benchmark for the Project is the discount rate. This means that the Project would
be attractive only if the IRR exceeds the discount rate. The “Guidelines on the Assessment of Investment
Analysis” v.3, EB51 (“Guidelines”) suggest that the IRR shall be calculated without considering financial
expenses such as principal and interest payments. This means that the “Project IRR” shall be calculated.

Explanations to the calculation methodology:

Guidance8 Guidance Calculation procedure implemented Conclusion
Nr.
3 "The period of assessment The actual project activity is not limited in Satisfied
should not be limited to the time to the crediting period being requested.
proposed crediting period of The Project has a crediting period of 7 years.
the CDM project activity. ... Therefore, in agreement with the UNFCCC
In general a minimum period guidance, a longer investment analysis period
of 10 years and a maximum shall be selected, which is chosen to be 20
of 20 years will be years.
appropriate."
5 "Depreciation, and other The calculations do not consider non-cash Satisfied
non-cash items related to the items (e.g. depreciation, interest expenses
project activity, which have etc.). They are included in the financial
been deducted in estimating model of the project only for informational
gross profits on which tax is purposes and do not affect the financial
calculated, should be added indicators. The IRR calculations and their
back to net profits for the assessment are made with a pre-tax approach.
purpose of calculating the
financial indicator”
9 “The cost of financing Interest and principal repayments are Satisfied
expenditures (i.e. loan included in the financial model only for
repayments and interest) informational purposes. They do not affect
should not be included in the the financial indicators. The IRR is
calculation of project IRR." calculated without taking interest expenses
into account.
11 “Due to the impact of loan The calculations are carried out to obtain the Satisfied

8
Only relevant guidance items are included from “Guidelines on the Assessment of Investment Analysis” v.3, EB51
 PROJECT DESIGN DOCUMENT FORM (CDM PDD) - Version 03

CDM – Executive Board

page 18

interest on income tax Project IRR. Therefore, the (nominal) pre-tax

calculations it is WACC9 is selected as the benchmark. For
recommended that when a calculating the pre-tax WACC, first the post-
project IRR is calculated to tax WACC is calculated and then converted
demonstrate additionality a to pre-tax WACC.
pre-tax benchmark be
applied.”
12 "Local commercial lending WACC is selected as the appropriate Satisfied
rates or weighted average benchmark.
costs of capital (WACC) are
appropriate benchmarks for
a project IRR."
17 “Only variables, including The sensitivity analysis only takes the Satisfied
the initial investment cost, variables into account that have an impact on
that constitute more than revenues or costs more than 20%.
20% of either total project
costs or total project
revenues should be subjected
to reasonable variation"
18 “...variations in the The sensitivity analysis covers a range of - Satisfied
sensitivity analysis should at 15% and +15%.
least cover a range of +10%
and -10%.”

Outcome of Sub-step 2b: The benchmark analysis is applied and the approach is explained.

Sub-step 2c: Calculation and comparison of financial indicators

The following parameters are used for calculations;
Table 6. Parameters used for Investment Analysis
Parameter Unit Figure Source Justification
The Guidelines suggest a
Investment Horizon years 20 Assumption minimum of 10 years and a
maximum of 20 years.
This is the official corporate tax
Corporate Tax % 20% www.invest.gov.tr
rate in the host country.
10
Discount Rate WACC Pre-tax WACC is suggested by
% 11.8%
(Benchmark) calculations the Guidelines.
This figure is used in the
Electricity Price EUR¢/kWh 6.1 Feasibility Study
investment decision.

9
Weighted average cost of capital (WACC) is the rate that a company is expected to pay on average to all its
security holders to finance its assets. The WACC is the minimum return that a company must earn on existing asset
base to satisfy its creditors, owners, and other providers of capital, or they will invest elsewhere.
10
Weighted average cost of capital (WACC) is the rate that a company is expected to pay on average to all its
security holders to finance its assets. The WACC is the minimum return that a company must earn on existing asset
base to satisfy its creditors, owners, and other providers of capital, or they will invest elsewhere.
 PROJECT DESIGN DOCUMENT FORM (CDM PDD) - Version 03

CDM – Executive Board

page 19

This figure is used in the

Carbon Credit Price EUR/tCO2-eq 4 Feasibility Study
investment decision.
This figure is used in the
Initial Investment tEUR 6,321 Feasibility Study
investment decision.
Operation & This figure is used in the
tEUR 1,411 Feasibility Study
Maintenance Costs investment decision.

According to the agreement between the Municipality and the Project owner, the Project owner does not
receive any revenues from the Municipality.

Scenario LFG1 & P1: Project without Carbon Credits

Since the Project involves no disposal fee paid by the Municipality, its revenue sources is limited to
electricity sales (when VERs are not considered). Based on these data, the Project’s IRR is calculated for
the case where the Project would have been realized without carbon revenues. This corresponds to the
scenario combination LFG1 & P1. The results are the following;

Table 7. Financial Performance of the Project without carbon revenues considered

Indicator Unit Source IRR Benchmark Result
Results: % Calculations 6.8% 11.8% Unfeasible

In this scenario, the Project IRR calculations are carried out without considering carbon credit sales. The
calculations conservatively assume that the revenues from electricity sales are obtained without delay
(which may not reflect the actual case), that there are no major unforeseen malfunctions or other
unforeseen expenses, and that the LFG generation occurs as expected.
The results indicate that without carbon credits, the Project is not feasible. Under these circumstances, the
Project would not be attractive for a private investor.

Proposed Project Activity: Project with Carbon Credits

The proposed Project is realized with the additional inflow of revenues from carbon credit sales, the
Project’s profitability improves considerably;
Table 8. Financial Performance of the Project, with VER revenues considered
Indicator Unit Source IRR Benchmark Result
Results: % Calculations 16.3% 11.8% Feasible

In this case, it is observed that the IRR improves considerably with the inclusion of the carbon credit
component and thus exceed the benchmarks. The Project IRR reaches investment levels because it
exceeds the benchmarks.
Outcome of Sub-step 2c: Financial indicators are calculated and compared.

Sub-step 2d: Sensitivity analysis

 PROJECT DESIGN DOCUMENT FORM (CDM PDD) - Version 03

CDM – Executive Board

page 20

The purpose of the sensitivity analysis is to check how much the Project’s financial performance depends
on main variables of the investment analysis. The Additionality Tool requires including those financial
parameters in the analysis, that have 20% or more impact on the results. The following parameters are
identified which satisfy this condition;
a) Electricity Prices (impact on revenues)
b) Capital expenditures (impact on costs)
c) LFG Collection ratio (impact on revenues)
d) Operation and Maintenance Costs (impact on costs)
Both parameters are changed in the negative and positive directions to check how far they affect the
Project profitability. The Additionality Tool suggests to at least cover an interval from -10% to +10%
when varying the chosen input parameters. In order to assess the behaviour of the Project feasibility to a
wider range of variations, an interval from -15% to +15% is chosen, with steps of 5% change. The results
are as the following;
 PROJECT DESIGN DOCUMENT FORM (CDM PDD) - Version 03

CDM – Executive Board

page 21

Sensitivitiy of IRR

30.0%

25.0% Power IRR, with VER

Power IRR, w/o VER
20.0%
CapEx IRR, with VER

15.0% CapEx IRR, w/o VER

IRR, % O&M IRR, with VER
10.0% O&M IRR, w/o VER
Collection % IRR, with VER
5.0%
Collection % IRR, w/o VER
0.0% BENCHMARK
-15% -10% -5% 0% 5% 10% 15%
-5.0%
Variation %

Sensitivitiy of IRR

30.0%

25.0% Power IRR, with VER

Power IRR, w/o VER
20.0%
CapEx IRR, with VER

15.0% CapEx IRR, w/o VER

IRR, % O&M IRR, with VER
10.0% O&M IRR, w/o VER
Collection % IRR, with VER
5.0%
Collection % IRR, w/o VER
0.0% BENCHMARK
-20% -13% -7% 0% 7% 13% 20%
-5.0%
Variation %

Figure 7. The sensitivity of Project feasibility on varying input parameters

The figure above depicts the reaction of the financial viability of the Project to the most important
changing input parameters. Accordingly, the following conclusions can be made:
 PROJECT DESIGN DOCUMENT FORM (CDM PDD) - Version 03

CDM – Executive Board

page 22

a) Impact of electricity prices on Project IRR (“Power IRR”): There are two Power IRR lines in
the Figure 7 above, the lower one representing the baseline scenario (LFG1&P1) without carbon
revenues, and the upper line representing the proposed Project activity, including carbon
revenues. The figure shows that the Project is quite sensitive to electricity prices. The Project
would become feasible only if the electricity price would increase by 15% or higher, which is
unlikely considering current market conditions, legal incentives for renewable energy and trends.
b) Impact of capital expenditures on Project IRR (“CapEx IRR”): The figure shows that as
CapEx increases the IRR decreases (and vica versa) and that it is unlikely the Project becoming
feasible even if CapEx would drop at significant amounts. Even if capital expenditures would
increase by 20%, the IRR would be below the benchmark.
c) Impact of Operation and Maintenance Costs (“O&M IRR”): The figure shows that as O&M
costs increases the IRR decreases (and vica versa) and that it is unlikely the Project becoming
feasible even if O&M costs would drop by 15%.
During the registration process of the Project, the construction of the 1st and 2nd stages have been
completed and full operation has started. In the meantime, actual realized financial figures (CAPEX, loan
interest rate, E/D ratio) have also been finalized. The real figures and a comparative IRR analysis with
these real values show that the Project is not feasible and real IRR is considerably below the benchmark.
Conclusion: It is seen that in case the parameters change in positive direction, the Project does not
exceed the benchmark threshold.
Outcome of Sub-step 2d: The sensitivity of financial indicators to input parameters is assessed.
Outcome of Step 2: The sensitivity analysis clearly demonstrates that the proposed Project activity is
unlikely to be most financially/economically attractive and LFG1 & P1 is not a plausible alternative.
According to the Additionality Tool, this satisfies the requirement of Step 2.

Step 3: Barrier analysis

This step is skipped.

Step 4: Common practice analysis

Currently, about 39% of the total population of Turkey is served with municipal disposal services. The
rest of the population is either not served at all, or the municipal waste practice is limited to simple
dumping on open areas. Under these circumstances, a waste-to-energy concept is quite innovative for
stakeholders.
Table 9. Solid Waste Indicators in Turkey11, 2006
Main Waste Indicators of Municipalities, 2008
Total Number of municipalities 3 225

Number of municipalities receiving municipal waste services 3 129

Rate of population receiving waste services in total population (%) 82
Rate of population receiving waste services in total municipal population (%) 99

Amount of municipal waste collected (thousand tonnes/year) 24 361

11
Source: Turkish Statistical Institute (http://www.turkstat.gov.tr/PreIstatistikTablo.do?istab_id=496)
 PROJECT DESIGN DOCUMENT FORM (CDM PDD) - Version 03

CDM – Executive Board

page 23

Amount of municipal waste per capita (kg/capita-day) 1.15

Main Indicators of Waste Disposal and Recovery Facilities, 2008

Rate of population served by waste disposal and recovery facilities in total municipal population (%) 47
Rate of population served by waste disposal and recovery facilities in total population (%) 39

Controlled landfill sites

Number 37
Capacity (thousand tonnes) 390 478

Incineration plants
Number 2
Capacity (thousand tonnes/year) 44

Composting plants
Number 4
Capacity (thousand tonnes/year) 551

The Project is not common practice and it has not diffused in energy generation industry in the host
country. This is demonstrated below;

Sub-step 4a: Analyze other activities similar to the proposed project activity:
As the geographical scope the host country is selected, because there is no sufficient evidence that
suggests landfills in a specific region have considerably different characteristics than other regions or the
host country.
The proposed Project activity is an IPP12 investment by a private company for the purpose of generating
electricity from LFG. In Turkey, the permission process starts with obtaining a generation license. In this
context, license holders can be defined as companies who have a certain extent of intention for an
investment. IPP license holders are particularly similar to the Project activity, as they have the same
purpose of generating and selling power to the national grid with similar legal framework. BOT and
Autoproducer models cannot be regarded as similar, as they are based on different legal, financial and
organizational conditions.

Sub-step 4b: Discuss any similar Options that are occurring:

The following landfill projects have an electricity generation license from EMRA;
Table 10. Similar Project Activities in the Region13
Project License Type Location Capacity VER Description
Owner [MW] Considered?
14
ISTAC Autoproducer Istanbul 4.0 No Power generation from LFG
(Municipality owned)
Ortadogu IPP Istanbul 13.9 Yes Power generation from LFG

12
Independent Power Producer, generating and selling energy to the grid on commercial basis
13
Source: http://www.epdk.gov.tr/lisans/elektrik/lisansdatabase/verilentesistipi.asp
14
Autoproducer: Companies who generate energy mainly for their own consumption.
 PROJECT DESIGN DOCUMENT FORM (CDM PDD) - Version 03

CDM – Executive Board

page 24

Enerji
Ortadogu IPP Istanbul 7.6 Yes Power generation from LFG
Enerji
ITC-KA IPP Ankara 11.3 Yes Power generation from LFG
ITC IPP Ankara 25 Yes Power generation from LFG
ITC IPP Adana Yes Power generation from LFG
Ekolojik IPP Istanbul 1.0 Unknown Gasification facility for
Enerji hazardous waste
Aksa BOT15 model Bursa 1.4 Unknown Power generation from LFG
Enerji
CEV IPP Bolu 3.3 Yes Power generation from LFG
Marmara
Avdan IPP Samsun 1.2 Yes Power generation from LFG
Enerji

The first private power generation facilities which are in operation have been realized under BOT or
Autoproducer models. Autoproducers generate electricity primarily for their own electricity consumption,
and they are allowed to feed only a fraction of their generation to the grid. The BOT model is not
applicable in Turkey anymore, as the existent BOT projects have special contracts with the government
and will be handed over to the government after a certain period of time. As BOT and autoproducer
power plants are not completely liberal electricity market players and are limited in terms of number and
installed capacity, they cannot be considered as common practice or similar projects.
After the “liberalization” of the electricity market, which is still in a transformation period, investors have
been allowed to build and operate their own power plants for electricity production and sales to the
national grid as IPPs. Since the Project activity is an IPP, it cannot be compared to BOT or Autoproducer
projects. Therefore, ISTAC and AKSA projects cannot be regarded as similar activities. The Ekolojik
Enerji project deals with hazardous waste and is out of the scope. The remaining Ortadogu and ITC-KA
projects are similar activities, as they are IPPs that generate power from LFG. All these 3 projects have
considered VERs. There are no other similar project activities which have been realized without the
consideration of carbon credits.

Demonstration of additionality
Due to some time constraints, macroeconomic conditions and ongoing talks with the Gaziantep
Metropolitan Municipality, there have been some delays in the development of carbon project. Since
banks refused to fund the Project, the Project owner had to devote its scarce resources to meeting its
deadlines. However, the Project has been designed and planned from the beginning by considering carbon
credits. The feasibility study of the Project activity clearly suggests that emission reductions and carbon
revenues have been an integral part of the Project from the start. The project owner has considered carbon
revenues earlier than project implementation, demonstrating early consideration of VER revenues.
The chronological history of the Project is as the following;

15
Build-Operate-Transfer: This model enables parties to have specific, undisclosed contracts with particular
exemptions, incentives and other mechanisms. This business model was applicable before the electricity market
liberalization and cannot be regarded as a similar activity.
 PROJECT DESIGN DOCUMENT FORM (CDM PDD) - Version 03

CDM – Executive Board

page 25

Table 11. Steps of the Project

Date Action
21/10/2008 Gaziantep Metropolitan Municipality organizes a tender for managing the waste on its
landfill.
28/10/2008 The Project owner wins the tender and concludes a contract with the Municipality.
22/12/2008 Technical experts from Korea make a site visit to carry out various gas tests and
measurements.
12/2008 Feasibility study contract
25/02/2009 Two construction companies are subcontracted for the preparation of the site (soil cover,
piping etc.)
26/02/2009 The turbine contract is signed with the equipment supplier.
13/03/2009 Start day of site preparations (mobilisation)
17/03/2009 License application to EMRA
17/06/2009 Completion of site preparations
29/06/2009 Start of talks with carbon consultants
21/08/2009 Contracting carbon consultants
01/02/2010 Actual start date of electricity generation

The identified barriers and results of the investment analysis are sufficient grounds for demonstration of
additionality since they prevent potential project proponents from carrying out the proposed project
activity undertaken without being registered as a VER project activity. The waste-to-energy concept
constitutes a very limited portion of the Turkish electricity market and the Project Activity goes beyond
of “business as usual” scenario and cannot be considered as a common practice.
The regulations in the host country regarding landfill gas capture or destruction are not mandatory and
there is a distinct lack of policies promoting efficient use of LFG (e.g. production of renewable energy,
processing of organic waste etc.). Landfill site operators are not required to capture or destroy LFG,
therefore the Project would have reduced GHG emissions compared to the case where it would not be
realized at all. As a result, the Project is considered to be additional.
Outcome of Sub-step 4b: Other similar options are discussed and the additionality of the Project is
demonstrated.

B.6. Emission reductions:

B.6.1. Explanation of methodological choices:

The methodology ACM0001 requires that ‘Project proponents should provide an ex-ante estimate of
emission reductions, by projecting the future GHG emissions of the landfill”. For the Project, a model
based on the first order decay model was used in Project’s feasibility study to determine estimated
emission reductions ex-ante. Based on this model, the ex-ante emissions will be estimated. After the
operation, the real emission reductions will be monitored ex-post.

Emission Reductions
 PROJECT DESIGN DOCUMENT FORM (CDM PDD) - Version 03

CDM – Executive Board

page 26

According to the ACM0001, leakage does not need to be accounted. The emission reduction is the
difference between the baseline emissions and project emissions;

ERy = BEy – PEy (1)

The definitions of all the parameters used in the formulae below are provided in Annex 3 of this PDD.

Baseline emissions
The baseline emissions prior to the Project implementation consist of:
 The methane emitted to the atmosphere from the landfill; and
 The grid emissions due to electricity generation;

BEy = (MDproject,y – MDBL,y) * GWPCH4 + ELLFG,y * CEFelec,BL,y (2)

The regulatory methane destruction is calculated as;

MDBL,y = MDproject,y * AF (3)

As the Project does not involve thermal power generation or gas supply to any pipeline, according to
ACM0001 the methane destruction by the Project is calculated as;
MDproject,y = MDflared,y + MDelectricity,y ( 4)

Methane destroyed by flaring is found as;

MDflared,y = (LFGflare,y * wCH4,y * DCH4) – (PEflare,y / GWPCH4) (5)

The project emissions due to flaring will be calculated by using the “Tool to determine project emissions
from flaring gases containing methane”;
8760
PEflare,y = ∑ TMRG,h*(1-ηflare,h)*GWP CH4/1000 ( 6)
h=1

The LFG generation is calculated using the first order decay method using the “Tool to determine
methane emissions avoided from disposal of waste at a solid waste disposal site”. Accordingly, the
methane emissions avoided is found as;

BECH4,SWDS,y = φ*(1-f)*GWPCH4*(1-OX)*16/12*F*DOCf*MCF*∑∑Wj,x*DOCj *e-kj(y-x)*(1-e-kj ) (7)

Baseline emissions due to electricity generation are calculated using the ACM0002 methodology. The
Project mainly involves electricity capacity addition, which reduces CO2 through the substitution of grid
 PROJECT DESIGN DOCUMENT FORM (CDM PDD) - Version 03

CDM – Executive Board

page 27

electricity generation with fossil fuel fired power plants by renewable electricity. ACM0002 offers two
options for preparing the baseline calculation:
(a) A combined margin, consisting of the combination of operating margin (OM) and build margin
(BM) according to the procedures prescribed in the ‘Tool to calculate the emission factor for an
electricity system’, or;
(b) The weighted average emissions (in kg CO2e/kWh) of the current generation mix. The data of the
year in which project generation occurs must be used.
Option (a) above will be applied for the Project. The combined emission factor CEFelec,BL,y for the Project
activity is calculated as a weighted average of Operating Margin and Build Margin emission factors. The
operation margin refers to a cohort of power plants that reflect the existing power plants whose electricity
generation would be affected by the proposed project activity. The build margin refers to a cohort of
power plants that reflect the type of power units whose construction would be affected by the proposed
project activity;

CEFelec,BL,y = wOM* EFgrid,OM,y + wBM* EFgrid,BM,y (8)

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

Data / Parameter: GENi,y

Data unit: GWh
Description: The gross electricity generation by fuel type i in year y (2002-2007)
Source of data used: Turkish Electricity Transmission Company (TEİAŞ) website
http://www.teias.gov.tr/ist2007/31(40-07).xls
Value applied: Table 16. Gross and Net Electricity Generation [GWh] in Turkey
Justification of the TEİAŞ annually publishes official data regarding electricity generation on a fuel
choice of data or type basis.
description of
measurement methods
and procedures actually
applied :
Any comment:

Data / Parameter: Net Electricity Generationy

Data unit: GWh
Description: The difference between the total quantity of electricity generated by power
plants/units and the auxiliary electricity consumption of power plants/units.
Source of data used: Turkish Electricity Transmission Company (TEİAŞ) website
http://www.teias.gov.tr/ist2007/30(84-07).xls (2002-2007)
Value applied: Table 16. Gross and Net Electricity Generation [GWh] in Turkey
Justification of the TEİAŞ annually publishes official data regarding total net electricity
choice of data or generation, but its breakdown by fuel type is unavailable.
description of
measurement methods
and procedures actually
applied :
 PROJECT DESIGN DOCUMENT FORM (CDM PDD) - Version 03

CDM – Executive Board

page 28

Any comment:

Data / Parameter: Net Delivery Ratioy

Data unit: %
Description: The ratio of the total Net Electricity Generation to the total Gross Electricity
Generation in year y.
Source of data used: Net Electricity Generation and Gross Electricity Generation data from
http://www.teias.gov.tr/ist2007/30(84-07).xls
http://www.teias.gov.tr/ist2007/31(40-07).xls
Value applied: Table 16. Gross and Net Electricity Generation [GWh] in Turkey
Justification of the Electricity delivered to the grid by each power plant/unit is unavailable. The Net
choice of data or Delivery Ratioy is used for approximating the net electricity amount delivered to
description of the grid by power plants/units except lc-mr sources (GENy).
measurement methods
and procedures actually
applied :
Any comment: This is a conservative assumption, since in general thermal power plants
consume more energy for auxilaries than e.g. wind or hydro power plants. This
assumption leads to higher net electricity amounts and lower emission
reductions.

Data / Parameter: GENy

Data unit: GWh
Description: The net electricity delivered to the grid in year y, excluding the low cost – must
run sources
Source of data used: Calculation steps (for each year y):
1. Gross electricity generation excluding lc-mr sources = Total gross electricity
generation from all sources - total gross electricity generation from lc-mr
sources
2. Net electricity generation excluding lc-mr sources = Gross electricity
generation except lc-mr sources * Net Delivery Ratio
3. Net electricity delivered to the grid except lc-mr sources = Net electricity
generation except lc-mr sources + Imports
Value applied: Table 16. Gross and Net Electricity Generation [GWh] in Turkey
Justification of the
choice of data or
description of
measurement methods
and procedures actually
applied :
Any comment:

Data / Parameter: EFCO2,i,y

Data unit: tCO2/TJ
Description: CO2 emission factor of fossil fuel type i in year y
Source of data used: The lower limits of the 95% confidence interval stated in the “2006 IPCC
 PROJECT DESIGN DOCUMENT FORM (CDM PDD) - Version 03

CDM – Executive Board

page 29

Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas Inventories”, Volume 2, Chapter 1

(energy) Table 1.4.
Value applied: Table 25. NCVs and Emission Factors of Fuels
Justification of the Local Emission factor information is available for certain fuel types, which are
choice of data or submitted to the UNFCCC in the 2005 Turkey National GHG Inventory Report
description of (NIR). For the fuel types which are not described in this NIR, industry
measurement methods guidelines are used instead.
and procedures actually
applied :
Any comment:

Data / Parameter: EIy

Data unit: GWh
Description: Net electricity imports delivered to the grid in year y
Source of data used: Turkish Electricity Transmission Company (TEİAŞ) website
http://www.teias.gov.tr/ist2007/30(84-07).xls
Value applied: Table 16. Gross and Net Electricity Generation [GWh] in Turkey
Justification of the This is the total electricity imported and delivered to the national grid from
choice of data or connected electricity systems (neighbour countries).
description of
measurement methods
and procedures actually
applied :
Any comment:

Data / Parameter: Electricity Capacity Additions

Data unit: -
Description: Power plants which are most recently taken into operation
Source of data used: Turkish Electricity Transmission Company (TEİAŞ) Capacity Projections
(2007-2016, 2008-2017, 2009-2018)
http://www.teias.gov.tr/projeksiyon/KAPASITEPROJEKSIYONU2009.pdf,
http://www.teias.gov.tr/projeksiyon/KAPASITEPROJEKSIYONU2008.pdf,
http://www.teias.gov.tr/projeksiyon/KAPASITE%20PROJEKSIYONU%2020
07.pdf,
http://www.teias.gov.tr/istatistik2005/7.xls,
http://www.teias.gov.tr/istat2004/7.xls,
http://www.teias.gov.tr/istatistik/7.xls.
Value applied: Table 24. Capacity Additions
Justification of the Average (not firm) generation values are used. This is conservative.
choice of data or Since capacity additions between 2004 - 2007 are not sufficiently large, a
description of representative selection of power plants from 2003 has been included as well.
measurement methods
and procedures actually
applied :
Any comment: As the methodology suggests, isolated and retrofitted power plants/units and
performance revisions are not considered in the sample power plant list.
 PROJECT DESIGN DOCUMENT FORM (CDM PDD) - Version 03

CDM – Executive Board

page 30

Data / Parameter: ηm,y

Data unit: %
Description: Average net energy conversion efficiency of power unit m in year y
Source of data used: UNFCCC methodological tool “Tool to calculate the emission factor for an
electricity system” Annex I
Value applied: Table 27. Electricity Generation of Selected Recent Capacity Additions by Fuel
Type
Justification of the There is no official efficiency values available based on each power plant or
choice of data or each fuel type. Therefore the default IPCC values are used, as listed in the
description of “Tool to calculate the emission factor for an electricity system”.
measurement methods
and procedures actually
applied :
Any comment:

Data / Parameter: AF
Data unit: N/A
Description: National legislation and mandatory regulations
Source of data used: The national legislation: “Control of Solid Waste Regulation” Article 27
Value applied: Equation (3)
Justification of the The relevant national regulations regarding solid waste disposal do not require
choice of data or any LFG destruction or reduction. Therefore AF is taken as 0.
description of
measurement methods
and procedures actually
applied :
Any comment:

Data / Parameter: φ
Data unit: N/A
Description: Model correction factor to account for model uncertainties
Source of data used: “Tool to determine methane emissions avoided from disposal of waste at a solid
waste disposal site”
Value applied: 0.9
Justification of the Given the uncertainties associated with the model and in order to estimate
choice of data or emission reductions in a conservative manner, a discount of 10% is applied to
description of the model results.
measurement methods
and procedures actually
applied :
 PROJECT DESIGN DOCUMENT FORM (CDM PDD) - Version 03

CDM – Executive Board

page 31

Any comment:

Data / Parameter: OX
Data unit: N/A
Description: Oxidation factor (reflecting the amount of methane from SWDS that is oxidized
in the soil or other material covering the waste)
Source of data used: IPCC 2006 Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas Inventories
Value applied: 0.1
Justification of the The Project site will be covered with soil, therefore OX=0.1 according to the
choice of data or “Tool to determine methane emissions avoided from disposal of waste at a solid
description of waste disposal site”.
measurement methods
and procedures actually
applied :
Any comment:

Data / Parameter: F
Data unit: N/A
Description: Fraction of methane in the SWDS gas (volume fraction)
Source of data used: IPCC 2006 Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas Inventories
Value applied: 0.5
Justification of the A preliminary sampling carried out on the Project site indicates a methane
choice of data or fraction around 0.6. A default value of 0.5 is recommended by IPCC, therefore
description of 0.5 is used in a conservative manner.
measurement methods
and procedures actually
applied :
Any comment:

Data / Parameter: DOCf

Data unit: N/A
Description: Fraction of degradable organic carbon (DOC) that can decompose
Source of data used: IPCC 2006 Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas Inventories
Value applied: 0.5
Justification of the The default value suggested by the “Tool to determine methane emissions
choice of data or avoided from disposal of waste at a solid waste disposal site” is used.
description of
 PROJECT DESIGN DOCUMENT FORM (CDM PDD) - Version 03

CDM – Executive Board

page 32

measurement methods
and procedures actually
applied :
Any comment:

Data / Parameter: MCF

Data unit: N/A
Description: Methane correction factor
Source of data used: IPCC 2006 Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas Inventories
Value applied: 1
Justification of the The Project site is a anaerobic managed solid waste disposal site with controlled
choice of data or placement of waste and the site will be covered with soil. According to the
description of “Tool to determine methane emissions avoided from disposal of waste at a solid
measurement methods waste disposal site”, a value of 1 shall be used for such sites.
and procedures actually
applied :
Any comment:

Data / Parameter: DOCj

Data unit: N/A
Description: Fraction of degradable organic carbon (by weight) in the waste type j
Source of data used: IPCC 2006 Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas Inventories
Value applied: For different waste types, the fraction of DOC varies;
W j,x DOCj,wet
Wood, wood products and straw 43%
Pulp, paper and cardboard (other than sludge) 40%
Food, food waste, sewage sludge, beverages and tobacco 15%
Textiles 24%
Other (non-food) organic putrescible garden and park waste 20%
Glass, plastic, metal, other inert waste 0%
Justification of the The default DOC values for wet SW are used, in agreement with the “Tool to
choice of data or determine methane emissions avoided from disposal of waste at a solid waste
description of disposal site”.
measurement methods
Unclassified SW types of nappies, rubber and leather are covered in the “Pulp,
and procedures actually
paper and cardboard” classification. Ceramics, soil and sand are covered in the
applied :
“Glass, plastic, metal, other inert waste” classification.
Any comment:
 PROJECT DESIGN DOCUMENT FORM (CDM PDD) - Version 03

CDM – Executive Board

page 33

Data / Parameter: kj
Data unit: N/A
Description: Decay rate for the waste type j
Source of data used: For kj values: IPCC 2006 Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas Inventories
For climate data (1975-2006 Averages): National General Directorate for
Meteorology (http://www.dmi.gov.tr/veridegerlendirme/il-ve-ilceler-
istatistik.aspx?m=GAZIANTEP ;
http://www.dmi.gov.tr/veridegerlendirme/yillik-toplam-yagis-
verileri.aspx?m=GAZIANTEP )
Value applied: For different waste types, the decay rate varies;
W j,x kj
Wood, wood products and straw 0.02
Pulp, paper and cardboard (other than sludge) 0.04
Food, food waste, sewage sludge, beverages and tobacco 0.06
Textiles 0.04
Other (non-food) organic putrescible garden and park waste 0.05
Glass, plastic, metal, other inert waste 0.00
Justification of the The “Tool to determine methane emissions avoided from disposal of waste at a
choice of data or solid waste disposal site” lists decay rates for different waste types.
description of
Average temperate in Gaziantep over the year is 15.0 °C and annual
measurement methods
precipitation is 553.3 mm. Based on these data, the selection of appropriate kj
and procedures actually
values are made according to a “boreal and temperate” and “dry” climate.
applied :
Unclassified SW types of nappies, rubber and leather are covered in the “Pulp,
paper and cardboard” classification. Ceramics, soil and sand are covered in the
“Glass, plastic, metal, other inert waste” classification.
Any comment:

Data / Parameter: ρCH4

Data unit: t/m3
Description: Density of methane at normal conditions
Source of data used: “Tool to determine methane emissions avoided from disposal of waste at a solid
waste disposal site”
Value applied: 0.0007168
Justification of the The methane density under normal conditions (0° C and 1,013 bar ) is constant.
choice of data or
description of
measurement methods
and procedures actually
applied :
 PROJECT DESIGN DOCUMENT FORM (CDM PDD) - Version 03

CDM – Executive Board

page 34

Any comment:

Data / Parameter: GWPCH4

Data unit: tCH4/tCO2eq
Description: Global Warming Potential of methane valid for the commitment period
Source of data used: “Tool to determine project emissions from flaring gases containing methane”
Value applied: 21
Justification of the The default GWP value of 21 is used as suggested by the UNFCCC tool.
choice of data or
description of
measurement methods
and procedures actually
applied :
Any comment:

Data / Parameter: COL

Data unit: %
Description: Collection Ratio of the generated LFG
Source of data used: Feasibility Study
Value applied: 70%
Justification of the The collection system which will be installed on the Project site will be able to
choice of data or collect a certain fraction of the total LFG generation. This collection ratio is
description of affected principally by the Project’s technical design, therefore the value
measurement methods suggested in the feasibility study is used.
and procedures actually
applied :
Any comment:

Data / Parameter: ηflare

Data unit: N/A
Description: Flaring efficiency of the flare
Source of data used: “Tool to determine project emissions from flaring gases containing methane”
Value applied: 90%
Justification of the The default efficiency for enclosed flares will be used as long as manufacturer’s
choice of data or specifications for efficient operation are complied with. The determination of
description of the flare efficiency will be based on “enclosed flares and use of the default
 PROJECT DESIGN DOCUMENT FORM (CDM PDD) - Version 03

CDM – Executive Board

page 35

measurement methods value”. The flare will be monitored with probes with an adequate frequency;
and procedures actually
 0%, if the temperature in the exhaust gas of the flare (Tflare) is below
applied :
500 °C for more than 20 minutes during the hour h .
 50%, if Tflare is above 500 °C for more than 40 minutes during the hour
h, but the manufacturer’s specifications on proper operation of the flare
are not met at any point in time during the hour h.
 90%, if Tflare is above 500 °C for more than 40 minutes during the hour
h and the manufacturer’s specifications on proper operation of the flare
are met continuously during the hour h.
For estimating the amount of flared methane ex-ante, 90% is used.
Continuous monitoring of compliance with manufacturer’s specification of flare
will be performed. If in a specific hour any of the parameters are out of the limit
of manufacturer’s specifications, a 50% default value for the flare efficiency
will be used for the calculations for this specific hour.
Any comment:

Data / Parameter: BECH4,SWDS,y

Data unit: tCO2-eq
Description: Methane generation from the landfill in the absence of the project activity at
year y
Source of data used: Calculated as per the “Tool to determine methane emissions avoided from
disposal of waste at a solid waste disposal site”
Value applied: Equation (7)
Justification of the The Feasibility Study of the Project employs a First Order Decay model, which
choice of data or is not compatible with the UNFCCC “Tool to determine methane emissions
description of avoided from disposal of waste at a solid waste disposal site”. Therefore, this
measurement methods parameter has been calculated in the PDD separately.
and procedures actually
applied :
Any comment:

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

The Project’s emission reductions stem from the prevention of methane emissions to the atmosphere from
the SWDS as well as substitution of electricity by generation of electrical power from the LFG. There are
basically two components of the baseline emissions;
i. Landfill gas, and;
 PROJECT DESIGN DOCUMENT FORM (CDM PDD) - Version 03

CDM – Executive Board

page 36

ii. Electricity generation.

i. Landfill Gas Component

The Project will make use of flow meters to measure the LFG amounts and characteristics of the total
collected LFG (LFGtotal,y), LFG went to flaring (LFGflared,y), and LFG went to the generator (LFGelectricity,y).
In order to calculate the LFG generation of the selected site, the “Tool to determine methane emissions
avoided from disposal of waste at a solid waste disposal site” suggests the use of the Equation (7). Using
the LFG figures, the methane destroyed by the Project is found by using Equation (4), (5) and (6).
For the purpose of calculation of the LFG generation, the First Order Decay model is used, as required.
The amount of SW dumped on the Project site is calculated using sophisticated models by the Project
owner. The flow of waste amount is found out to be as:

Table 12. Composition and Amount of Disposed Waste on Project Site

Wood, Pulp, paper Food, food waste, Other (non-food)
Total
wood and cardboard sewage sludge, organic putrescible
Wj,x Disposal on Textiles
products (other than beverages and garden and park
Project Site
and straw sludge) tobacco waste
Fraction, % 100% 2% 16% 49% 2% 2%
1996 146,000 2,774 23,798 70,810 2,774 2,190
1997 63,487 1,206 10,348 30,791 1,206 952
1998 162,194 3,082 26,438 78,664 3,082 2,433
1999 179,504 3,411 29,259 87,059 3,411 2,693
2000 196,524 3,734 32,033 95,314 3,734 2,948
2001 209,642 3,983 34,172 101,676 3,983 3,145
2002 201,354 3,826 32,821 97,657 3,826 3,020
2003 224,420 4,264 36,580 108,844 4,264 3,366
2004 240,911 4,577 39,268 116,842 4,577 3,614
2005 275,124 5,227 44,845 133,435 5,227 4,127
2006 316,218 6,008 51,544 153,366 6,008 4,743
2007 365,156 6,938 59,520 177,101 6,938 5,477
2008 381,874 7,256 62,245 185,209 7,256 5,728
2009 380,000 7,220 61,940 184,300 7,220 5,700
2010 380,000 7,220 61,940 184,300 7,220 5,700
2011 380,000 7,220 61,940 184,300 7,220 5,700
2012 0 0 0 0 0 0
2013 0 0 0 0 0 0
2014 0 0 0 0 0 0
2015 0 0 0 0 0 0
2016 0 0 0 0 0 0
2017 0 0 0 0 0 0

Using appropriate decay rates kj and fractions of degradable organic carbon DOCj and taking the
capacities of the generator and the flare, the Equation (7) results in the following LFG generation figures:
 PROJECT DESIGN DOCUMENT FORM (CDM PDD) - Version 03

CDM – Executive Board

page 37

Table 13. Amounts of generated and collected LFG

Total LFG Methane Methane Ratio of met. for
generation Maximum destroyed by destroyed by power gen. / total
on site, as collectable flaring (eligible) electricity met. destruction
Year m3 LFG LFG [m3] [tCO2] generator [tCO2] [%]
2010 25,520,156 16,395,826 0 26,526 100%
2011 26,420,253 18,494,177 1,995 98,545 98%
2012 27,130,507 18,991,355 0 142,937 100%
2013 27,678,768 19,375,138 0 145,825 100%
2014 28,088,613 19,662,029 765 147,134 99%
2015 28,380,008 19,866,005 2,147 147,134 99%
2016 28,569,893 19,998,925 3,047 147,134 98%
2017 28,672,654 20,070,857 3,387 147,134 98%
2018 28,700,578 20,090,404 3,387 147,134 98%

The project emissions from flaring shall be subtracted from the methane destroyed by flaring, using the
Equation (6), as explained in the “Tool to determine project emissions from flaring gases containing
methane. It is assumed that an enclosed flare will be operated in agreement with its manufacturer’s
specifications and will be monitored. Accordingly, the PEflare,y is found as;

Table 14. Project Emissions from Flaring [tCO2]

Year TMRG,y (LFGflared,y [tCO2]) ηflare [%] PEflared,y [tCO2]
2010 (partial) 0 90% 0
2011 106 90% 222
2012 0 90% 0
2013 0 90% 0
2014 40 90% 85
2015 114 90% 239
2016 161 90% 339
2017 (partial) 15 90% 31

Using these results, the net methane amount destroyed by flaring is found with the Equation (5);
Table 15. Calculation of destroyed methane by flaring

MDflared,y MDelectricity,y MDproject,y MDelectricity,y MDBL,y

Year AF
[tCH4] [tCH4] [tCH4] / MDproject,y [tCH4]

2010 (partial) 0 24,346 24,346 100% 0% 0

2011 1,995 98,545 100,540 98% 0% 0
2012 0 142,937 142,937 100% 0% 0
2013 0 145,825 145,825 100% 0% 0
2014 765 147,134 147,899 99% 0% 0
2015 2,147 147,134 149,281 99% 0% 0
2016 3,047 147,134 150,181 98% 0% 0
 PROJECT DESIGN DOCUMENT FORM (CDM PDD) - Version 03

CDM – Executive Board

page 38

2017 (partial) 278 12,093 12,372 98% 0% 0

These figures for the first and last year of the crediting period are not given for the entire year but only
partially depending on the crediting start date of the proposed Project activity.

ii. Electricity Generation Component

As the Project’s electricity generation does not exceed the UNFCCC threshold of 15 MW, the Project is
eligible for using the small scale methodologies for electricity generation. According to the “Tool to
calculate the emission factor for an electricity system”, the missing parameters are the emission factors
EFGRID,OM,y and EFGRID,BM,y, which shall be calculated in 6 subsequent steps.

STEP 1. Identify the relevant electric power system

Turkey imports electrical power from and exports to neighbour countries16, which are defined as
connected electricity systems for the Project. According to the baseline methodology, imports are
regarded as a power source delivering electricity to the grid with an OM emission factor of 0 tCO 2, since
electricity being imported is purchased from connected electricity systems located in other countries.

STEP 2. Select an operating margin (OM) method

As explained above, the ex-ante combined margin method will be used.
There exists no nuclear power plant in Turkey, and there is no indication that coal or lignite is obviously
used as must-run. Hydro, geothermal, wind power plants and other renewables are included as low-
cost/must-run resources, hereafter referred as lc-mr, which turns out to be 25.0% of the total electricity
generation on average between years 2003 and 2007.
Since the share of lc-mr resources is less than 50% on average of the five most recent years and as
available data are limited, the simple OM method will be implemented.

Table 16. Gross and Net Electricity Generation [GWh] in Turkey

GENERATION DATA BY Avg.
SOURCE, GWh 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 Share
Coal 11,998 13,246 14,217 15,136 15,858 8.0%
Lignite 22,450 29,946 32,433 38,295 41,858 18.6%
Fuel Oil 6,690 5,121 4,232 6,470 7,209 3.4%
Diesel oil 7 3 58 13 266 0.0%
LPG 33 34 0 0 0 0.0%
Naphtha & Aphaltite 940 326 50 44 44 0.2%
Natural Gas 62,242 73,445 80,691 95,025 98,685 46.4%
Renewables and wastes 104 122 154 214 220 0.1%

16
Since 2001: Exports to Georgia, Azerbaijan, Iraq, Syria. Imports from Bulgaria, Iran, Turkmenistan, Georgia.
Sources: http://www.teias.gov.tr/ist2006/49.xls, http://www.teias.gov.tr/ist2006/47.xls
 PROJECT DESIGN DOCUMENT FORM (CDM PDD) - Version 03

CDM – Executive Board

page 39

Hydro 46,084 39,561 44,244 35,851 33,270 23.1%

Geothermal & Wind 151 153 221 511 1,009 0.2%
Gross Total 150,698 161,956 176,300 191,558 198,418 100.0%
Gross Total excluding lc-mr 104,360 122,120 131,681 154,983 163,919

Net Generation 145,066 155,469 169,543 183,340 189,762

Net Delivery Ratio 96.3% 96.0% 96.2% 95.7% 95.6%
Imports 463.5 635.9 573.2 864.3 789.4
Net Delivered to Grid, exc. lc-mr 100,923 117,864 127,208 149,198 157,558

The UNFCCC methodology suggests using local, publicly available data whenever possible. In the lack
of local data, industry guidelines shall be used in a conservative manner. 2005-2007 national emissions
figure stemming from electricity generation is publicly available and used for OM calculations.

STEP 3. Calculate the operating margin emission factor according to the selected method
According to the “Tool to calculate the emission factor for an electricity system”, the OM emission
factor, EFGRID,OM,y, is found as;
EFGRID,OM,y = EMgrid,y / EGy, (9)

Using official CO2 emissions data instead of calculated figures, the Operating Margin Emission Factor,
EFGRID,OM, is found to be as the following;
Table 17. Calculation of the OM emission factor
Operating Margin EF 2006 2007 2008 Note
CO2 Emissions, ktCO2 (Official Data) 85,312 100,662 101,473 used
CO2 Emissions, ktCO2 (Calculation) 82,844 98,099 103,714 not used
Net Electricity Supplied to grid, GWh 127,208 149,198 157,558
OM Emission Factor in year y, tCO2/MWh 0.671 0.675 0.644
Operating Margin EF 2006-2008,
tCO2/MWh 0.663

STEP 4. Identify the cohort of power units to be included in the build margin
In this step, a generation-weighted average emission factor is calculated based on a sample of power
plants, which have been taken into operation recently. The sample group of power plants/units m used to
calculate the build margin consists of either:
(a) The set of five power units that have been built most recently
(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 DESIGN DOCUMENT FORM (CDM PDD) - Version 03

CDM – Executive Board

page 40

For conducting the calculations, option (b) is selected, because this option results in a larger electricity
generation. The data of the most recent commissioned power plants are being published by the Turkish
Electricity Transmission Company (TEİAŞ) on an annual basis. For build margin calculations, the power
plants/units taken into operation between 2003-2007 are included in the cohort of power units.
Performance revisions, modifications, retrofits and dismantlings of power plants or are stand-alone have
been excluded from the samples list for the build margin calculations.
Based on these requirements and conditions, the final list of selected power plants is summarized in
Annex 3.

STEP 5. Calculate the build margin emission factor

The build margin emission factor is the generation-weighted average emission factor (tCO2/MWh) of all
power units m during the most recent year y for which power generation data is available, calculated as
follows;

 EG * EF m, y EL , m , y
EFGRID , BM , y  m
(10).
 EG m
m, y

The EFEL,m,y is found as;

EFCO2,m,i , y * 3,6
EFEL ,m, y  (11)
 m, y

Using the sample list of recently built power plants, the Build Margin Emission Factor, EFGRID,BM, is
found as;

Table 18. CO2 Emissions of Recent Capacity Additions by Fuel Type

Build Margin EF
Emission
Generation of New Average Factor, CO2 Emissions,
Fuel Type Capacity Additions Efficiency, η tCO2/TJ ktCO2
Coal 1,125.0 40.0% 90.8 919
Lignite 11,451.1 40.0% 90.9 9,368
Fuel Oil 1,474.9 46.0% 75.5 871
Diesel oil 0.0 46.0% 72.6 0
LPG 0.0 60.0% 61.6 0
Naphtha & Asphaltite 323.5 46.0% 69.3 175
Natural Gas 25,083.9 60.0% 54.3 8,172
Renewables and wastes 119.0 N/A 0.0 0
Hydro 3,243.3 N/A 0.0 0
Geothermal & Wind 108.4 N/A 0.0 0
Total 42,929.0 19,507
Build Margin EF 2006- 0.454
 PROJECT DESIGN DOCUMENT FORM (CDM PDD) - Version 03

CDM – Executive Board

page 41

2008, tCO2/MWh

Power plant-specific data are unavailable in Turkey; therefore CO2 emissions are calculated based on fuel
type consumed in sample power plants/units. Data regarding electricity generation efficiency rates in
Turkey are not available for each power plant in the sample list. Efficiency rates of already operating
large power plants do exist17, however they are not included in the sample list. Conservatively, the
average efficiency for each fuel type from the existing efficiency rates are assumed as efficiency for
calculation purposes.
The “Tool to calculate the emission factor for an electricity system” requires the sample list of recent
capacity additions to constitute at least 20% of the system generation. This requirement is met;
Table 19. Generation of Recent Capacity Additions
Generation Sample List Generation [GWh]
2008 Generation, GWh 191,558
UNFCCC Threshold, % of Generation 20%
UNFCCC Threshold, GWh 38,311.6
Capacity Additions, 2004-2008 GWh 42,929.0

STEP 6. Calculate the combined margin emissions factor

The combined margin emissions factor is calculated by using Equation (8). The weights are taken as 50%
for both factors, as the “Tool to calculate the emission factor for an electricity system” suggests.
CEFelec,y = 0.663 tCO2/MWh * 0.50 + 0.454 tCO2/MWh * 0.50 = 0.559 tCO2/MWh
Project emissions and leakage are not considered. The main emissions potentially giving rise to leakage in
the context of electric sector projects are emissions arising due to activities such as power plant
construction and upstream emissions from fossil fuel use (e.g. extraction, processing, transport). These
emissions sources are neglected in agreement with the baseline methodology.

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

The results of the baseline calculations are as follows;

Table 20. Summary of Emission Factors for Electricity Generation
Parameter Definition Value
EFGRID,OM Operating Margin Emission Factor 0.663
EFGRID,BM Build Margin Emission Factor 0.454
wOM Weight of the Operating Margin 50%
wBM Weight of the Build Margin 50%
CEFelec Combined Margin Emission Factor 0.559

17
Environmental Map of Turkey, 2004 (Published by General Directorate of Environmental Works of Turkey)
 PROJECT DESIGN DOCUMENT FORM (CDM PDD) - Version 03

CDM – Executive Board

page 42

Table 21. Results of the Emission Reduction Calculations

Estimation of Estimation of
Estimation of Estimation of
project activity overall emission
Year baseline emissions leakage (tonnes
emissions (tonnes of reductions (tonnes
(tonnes of CO2 e) of CO2 e)
CO2 e) of CO2 e)

2010 (partial) 0 30,384 0 30,384

2011 222 114,875 0 114,654
2012 0 163,729 0 163,729
2013 0 167,037 0 167,037
2014 85 169,302 0 169,217
2015 239 170,684 0 170,445
2016 339 171,584 0 171,245
2017 (partial) 376 157,793 0 157,417
Total (tonnes
1,260 1,149,389 0 1,144,128
of CO2e)

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

B.7.1 Data and parameters monitored:

Data / Parameter: PEFC,j,y

Data unit: tCO2e
Description: Project emissions from fossil fuel combustion in process j during the year y
Source of data to be Calculated as per the “Tool to calculate project or leakage CO2 emissions from
used: fossil fuel combustion”.
Measurement This data will be calculated based on the actual fossil fuel consumption by the
procedures (if any): Project activity as auxiliary fuel.
Monitoring frequency: Annually.
QA/QC procedures: The consumption of fossil fuel will be monitored based on the fuel invoices and
is therefore of high quality.
Any comment:
 PROJECT DESIGN DOCUMENT FORM (CDM PDD) - Version 03

CDM – Executive Board

page 43

Data / Parameter: LFGcollected,y

Data unit: Nm3
Description: Total amount of landfill gas (under normal pressure and temperature) captured
in year y
Source of data to be The flow meter readings installed at the LFG pipe
used:
Measurement
procedures (if any):
Monitoring frequency: Data will be measured continuously with a flow meter by the Project owner.
The flow meter will be maintained and calibrated regularly in line with the
manufacturer’s recommendations. This will ensure that the accuracy of the
measurement instrument is maintained.
QA/QC procedures: Data will be aggregated monthly and yearly. Flow meters will be subject to a
regular maintenance and testing regime to ensure accuracy. The measurement
interval will be equal to or more than one sampling each hour.
Any comment:

Data / Parameter: T
Data unit: °C
Description: Temperature of the landfill gas
Source of data to be Reading from the flow meter
used:
Measurement N/A
procedures (if any):
Monitoring frequency: Continously
QA/QC procedures: The flow meter is subject to a regular maintenance and testing, to ensure
accuracy.
Any comment: Measured continuously to determine the density of methane.
 PROJECT DESIGN DOCUMENT FORM (CDM PDD) - Version 03

CDM – Executive Board

page 44

Data / Parameter: P
Data unit: Bar
Description: Pressure of the landfill gas fed into gas engine
Source of data to be Reading from the flow meter
used:
Measurement
procedures (if any):
Monitoring frequency:
QA/QC procedures: The flow meter is subject to a regular maintenance and testing, to ensure
accuracy.
Any comment: Measured continuously to determine the density of methane.

Data / Parameter: LFGflare,y

Data unit: Nm3
Description: Total amount of landfill gas (under normal pressure and temperature) flared in
year y
Source of data to be The flow meter installed at the pipe feeding the flare
used:
Measurement This parameter will be measured by a dedicated measurement device in
procedures (if any): accordance with UNFCCC and device manufacturer’s requirements.
Monitoring frequency: There will a separate flow meter for each of the flare units, as required by the
Methodology.
Data will be measured continuously with a flow meter by the Project owner.
The flow meter will be maintained and calibrated regularly in line with the
manufacturer’s recommendations. This will ensure that the accuracy of the
measurement instrument is maintained.
QA/QC procedures: Data will be aggregated monthly and yearly for each flare unit. Flow meters
will be subject to a regular maintenance and testing regime to ensure accuracy.
The measurement interval will be equal to or more than one sampling each
hour.
Any comment:

Data / Parameter: LFGelectricity,y

Data unit: Nm3
Description: Total amount of landfill gas (under normal pressure and temperature)
combusted in the generator unit in year y
Source of data to be The flow meter readings installed at the pipe feeding the generator unit(s)
 PROJECT DESIGN DOCUMENT FORM (CDM PDD) - Version 03

CDM – Executive Board

page 45

used:
Measurement This parameter will be measured by a dedicated measurement device in
procedures (if any): accordance with UNFCCC and device manufacturer’s requirements.
Monitoring frequency: There will a separate flow meter for each of the generator units, as required by
the Methodology.
Data will be measured continuously with a flow meter by the Project owner.
The flow meter will be maintained and calibrated regularly in line with the
manufacturer’s recommendations. This will ensure that the accuracy of the
measurement instrument is maintained.
QA/QC procedures: Data will be aggregated monthly and yearly for each generator unit. Flow
meters will be subject to a regular maintenance and testing regime to ensure
accuracy. The measurement interval will be equal to or more than one sampling
each hour.
Any comment:

Data / Parameter: wCH4

Data unit: %
Description: Methane fraction in the landfill gas
Source of data to be Flow meter , by the Project owner
used:
Measurement 50%
procedures (if any):
Monitoring frequency: Methane content will be measured directly and continuously with a gas analyser
by the project onwer. The gas analyser will be maintained and calibrated
regularly according to the manufacturer’s requirements in order to ensure that
required level of accuracy is maintained.
QA/QC procedures: The gas analyser will be subject to a regular maintenance and testing regime to
ensure accuracy, therefore the analyser will be calibrated according to the
manufacturer’s recommendations. A zero check and a typical value check will
be performed by comparison with a standard certified gas. The measurement
interval will be equal to or more than one sampling each hour.
Any comment:

Data / Parameter: PEflare,y

Data unit: tCO2-eq
Description: Project Emissions from flaring in year y
Source of data to be Calculated by project owner
used:
Measurement This parameter will be calculated.
 PROJECT DESIGN DOCUMENT FORM (CDM PDD) - Version 03

CDM – Executive Board

page 46

procedures (if any):

Data will be calculated based on the default values for the flare efficiency
Monitoring frequency: (ηflare,h) and the flow meter readings (FVRG,h) from the Project Developer
according to the “Tool to determine project emissions from flaring gases
containing methane”.
QA/QC procedures: Data will be aggregated yearly. Flow meters will be subject to a regular
maintenance to ensure accuracy.
Any comment:

Data / Parameter: Tflare

Data unit: °C
Description: Temperature in the exhaust gas of the flare
Source of data to be The thermocouple installed at the pipe feeding the flare
used:
Measurement This parameter will be measured by a dedicated measurement device in
procedures (if any): accordance with UNFCCC and device manufacturer’s requirements.
Monitoring frequency: Measurement of the temperature of the stack gas with an N-type thermocouple.
Temperatures above 500 °C indicate that the flare is operating.
QA/QC procedures: The thermocouple should be subject to a regular calibration or replacement
every year to ensure accuracy.
Any comment:

Data / Parameter: Operation of the power plant

Data unit: h
Description: Operation of the power plant
Source of data to be Project owner
used:
Measurement N/A
procedures (if any):
Monitoring frequency: Data will be recorded annually by the project developer to ensure methane
destruction is claimed for methane used in electricity plant when it is
operational.
QA/QC procedures: Equipment will be maintained according to the manufacturer’s
recommendations to assure a good operation.
Any comment:

Data / Parameter: AF
 PROJECT DESIGN DOCUMENT FORM (CDM PDD) - Version 03

CDM – Executive Board

page 47

Data unit: %
Description: Regulatory requirements relating landfill gas projects
Source of data to be National laws and regulations.
used:
Measurement 0. (No enforced regulations relating to landfill gas recovery or power generation
procedures (if any): projects)
Monitoring frequency: This information will be checked yearly.
QA/QC procedures: In case of a change of the Article 27 of the relevant regulation “Control of Solid
Waste Regulation”, this change will be included in the monitoring report.
Any comment:

Data / Parameter: ELLFG,y

Data unit: MWh
Description: Quantity of net electricity generation supplied by the project plant/unit to the
grid in year y
Source of data to be PMUM reports.
used:
PMUM is the financial settlement centre of TEIAS, which has an online user
interface for reporting purposes. PMUM web site can list a detailed overview of
electricity generation and consumption figures of power plants, based
completely on the measurement device readings carried out by TEIAS
personnel.
Measurement For calculating expected emission reductions, the “estimated” amount of annual
procedures (if any): net electricity generation is used.
Monitoring frequency: Data will be obtained on-line from the PMUM web site by the project owner
using its own unique ID and password. The PMUM reports will be then
submitted to the DOE for monitoring purposes. The PMUM data are based on
measurement device readings carried out on site by TEIAS personnel.
Two TEIAS-calibrated and approved measurement devices will be installed,
which measure the net electricity supply to the national grid by the Project. The
switchgear station on the Project site constitutes the border between the Project
and the national electricity grid. Both measurement devices, which continuously
monitor and measure the net electricity delivered by the Project to the grid.
TEIAS-approved measurement protocols each month will be uploaded to the
PMUM web site.
The metering device does not measure the net electricity generation but the
gross generation and self consumption separately. Their difference gives the net
electricity generation, which is going to be listed on a monthly basis for
monitoring purposes.
QA/QC procedures: The measurement devices will be selected in agreement with the relevant
regulations, ensuring a certain data storage and measurement quality in terms of
 PROJECT DESIGN DOCUMENT FORM (CDM PDD) - Version 03

CDM – Executive Board

page 48

accuracy etc.
PMUM is owned and operated by the public transmission line operator TEIAS,
which purchases the electricity from the project owner. Therefore, PMUM
reports offer a conservative, dependable and correct way for monitoring net
electricity supplied to the grid.
There is no sampling involved in monitoring. All data used will be measured,
increasing the accountability of the calculated emission reductions.
In order to maintain uninterrupted measurement and to prevent technical errors,
a back-up measurement device will also be installed, which will continuously
measure and store generation and consumption data real-time, parallel to the
main measurement device.
Before installation, both measurement devices will be calibrated by TEIAS. If a
malfunctioning is observed during operation, the measurement device will again
be inspected and calibrated by TEIAS.
Both measurement devices will be sealed and only accessible by TEIAS
personnel. Project staff or any other personnel will have no control over or
access to the measurement devices.
Measured data will be both kept by the project owner and the PMUM web site
for at least 2 years.
The net electricity supplied to the grid will be calculated by subtracting
Project’s own consumption from gross generation figure. This calculation will
be done with a spreadsheet in order to allow easy understanding, transparency
and correct computation purposes with minimum human intervention.
Any comment: The annual emissions reductions will be updated by multiplying the ex-ante
calculated baseline emission factor by the PMUM-reported amount of net
electricity supplied to the grid. The emission factor will not be updated.

B.7.2. Description of the monitoring plan:

The monitoring plan overview can be visualized as below:

 PROJECT DESIGN DOCUMENT FORM (CDM PDD) - Version 03

CDM – Executive Board

page 49

Figure 8. Monitoring System Flowchart

The monitoring instruments to be installed include LFG flow meters, methane meters, pressure and
temperature gauges and electricity measurement devices. All the monitoring instruments will meet the
relevant accuracy requirements.

Table 22. Summary of the monitoring plan

Parameter Explanation Measurement Device
Number
wCH4,y Methane fraction in the landfill gas 1
T Temperature 2
P Pressure 3
LFGtotal,y Total amount of landfill gas captured at normal temperature 4
and pressure
ELLFG,y Net amount of electricity supplied to the grid by the Project 5
LFGflare,y Amount of landfill gas flared at normal temperature and 6
pressure
PEflare,y Project emissions from flaring 6
LFGelectricity,y Amount of landfill gas combusted in the power plant at 7, 8, ...
normal temperature and pressure
Operation of the Annual operational hours 7,8, ...
power plant
 PROJECT DESIGN DOCUMENT FORM (CDM PDD) - Version 03

CDM – Executive Board

page 50

All data used for the monitoring plan will be archived electronically and backed up regularly. These data
will be kept for the full crediting period and a further two years after the end of the crediting period or the
last issuance of VERs, whichever occurs later. The monitoring plan mainly involves proper preparation of
a spreadsheet and reporting of it. Monitoring will be carried out with the help of a spreadsheet.
Please refer to section B.7.1 for details.

Responsibilities and Management Structure for Monitoring

The responsible person for the monitoring of the Project is the general
manager of the Project owner. The Project owner will appoint a project
manager who will collect the data. The data will be processed and
reported in agreement with the monitoring plan by the general
manager. The general manager can assign a carbon consultant for
these tasks.
The general manager of the Project owner is responsible for
overseeing the implementation of the monitoring procedure.
Competency requirements for these tasks will be applied to ensure that
the general manager is able to implement and/or supervise this
procedure. The general manager will be responsible of the emission
reduction calculations and the preparation of necessary documents for
verification.
The general manager will appoint the power plant manager for data collection, checking instrumentation,
record keeping, data handling and data processing, filing, reporting, organising repair and maintenance of
monitoring equipment and ensuring the monitoring plan is adhered to as indicated in the approved PDD.
The general manager will ensure that the personnel of the Project owner acquire the skills to carry out
these tasks properly through capacity building practices and trainings.
The maintenance staff will receive technical trainings, as well as health and safety trainings to minimise
exposure to workplace hazards. At every shift, at least one trained technical personnel will be present. All
relevant information such as data files, maintenance and defect records and other monitoring related
records will be kept at a designated location in a transparent and organised manner.
The SCADA monitoring system of the Project in general follows the requirements of methodology
ACM0001 version 11. The Figure 8 shows the overview of the monitoring system and the measurement
devices.

Data Collection and Management

Remote Monitoring: All important parameters that are needed to determine the avoided emissions will be
able to be monitored from the control room of the Project as well as remotely from the company office.
The SCADA system will record meter readings at pre-determined intervals, as specified in the CDM
monitoring manual. These data will be used to calculate the total emission reductions.
 PROJECT DESIGN DOCUMENT FORM (CDM PDD) - Version 03

CDM – Executive Board

page 51

Manual Recording of Data: The general manager will implement a manual data recording system to act as
a back-up for the on-line monitoring system. This basic back-up system will consist of regular updating of
a spreadsheet manually that includes the main key parameters.
Data Archiving: The electronic monitoring system will periodically archive the readings data. Written
documents (e.g. equipment replacement protocols, accident logs, maintenance records, back-ups etc.) will
be kept safely. These data will be stored until 2 years after the end of the crediting period. The general
manager will implement a document control system that ensures that the correct versions of
documents that might be necessary for verification purposes are available whenever needed.
Data corruption: If data in the SCADA system are corrupted or missing during the operational hours
(which can be proven by the records of the electricity meters), the missing data can be estimated by the
following procedure: the value of that parameter one hour before the error, one hour after the system
restart, and the average from the previous 24 hours will be determined and the lowest figure of those will
be used. For other cases, any deficiencies in methane flow monitoring data will be rectified by calculation
from power generation in a conservative manner.

Maintenance and calibration of meters

All measurement devices will be purchased and maintained as specified in the CDM monitoring manual
according to manufacturer specifications. All measurement devices that are used in monitoring will be
subject to a quality control procedure that will include regular maintenance and calibration in agreement
with legal and/or manufacturer requirements. According to the relevant regulation18, periodical
inspections of “gauges for electric, water, coal gas, natural gas and, current and voltage measuring
transformers will be made once in 10 years”.
For every calibration, a separate calibration record will be kept that shows the identification number of
each measurement device, calibration date, due date for next calibration, calibration service provider etc.
Calibration certificates will be kept for every measurement device until two years after the end of the
crediting period.

A. Electricity Generation Component

As the project boundary is defined as the national grid of Turkey, the baseline emissions from electricity
generation activities in Turkey are calculated and monitored based on national official data. The leakage
during crediting period will be negligibly small and will not be monitored, as fossil fuel consumption
during construction and operation of the project activity is minimal. Hence, the monitoring plan involves
the net electricity generation by the project activity;
 The two measurement instruments are not accessible by the project participant or any other party
except TEİAŞ. This prevents any intervention and assures the accuracy and quality of the
measurements.
 The measurement instruments in broad terms give two types of data; the total gross electricity
generated and the total electricity consumed by the Project activity. The difference of these two
data is the net electricity generated. Furthermore, TEİAŞ cuts a certain percentage of the
generation to account for transmission losses. The net electricity generation, which is to be

18
“Measurement and Measuring Tools Inspection Regulation”, Date: 24/07/1994, Official Gazette Number: 22000
 PROJECT DESIGN DOCUMENT FORM (CDM PDD) - Version 03

CDM – Executive Board

page 52

monitored and to be used for baseline emissions, is the net electricity generation, without the cut,
which is the difference of gross electricity generation and self electricity consumption.
 At the end of each monitoring period, the data from the monthly meter readings will be added up
to obtain the total monitoring period net electricity generation. This figure will be multiplied with
the combined margin emission factor, which has been calculated ex-ante.
 The procedure will be repeated for each month. The sum of emission reductions of each month
will give the total offsets achieved by the Project.

Self consumption of the project activity:

Each project activity has a certain amount of self electricity consumption. Similar to energy generation,
energy consumption is also recorded and accounted for the invoicing.
Self electricity consumption of the project activity is also measured and recorded by a primary and a
secondary metering devices. The TEIAS personnel comes on the first days of each succeeding month and
takes the readings of the previous month in terms of gross electricity generation and self electricity
consumption (beside others), for invoicing.
Following this reading, the results are transmitted on site to the TEIAS network by the TEIAS personnel
electronically without any intervention. Based on this reading, a protocol form is printed out, which lists
in detail the energy generation and consumption values in a similar way the PMUM web site lists them,
and is then signed by the site manager and the TEIAS personnel. Therefore, self consumption values are
recorded, read and treated similar to the generation values. Project participants have no access to the
metering devices and the self electricity consumption data is of high quality.

Data Source:
At the first day of each month, a TEIAS personnel comes to the sites and makes a reading regarding the
last period from the beginning to the end of the previous month. After making the reading from the
metering device, a standard protocol showing the generation and consumption data is signed by the site
manager and the TEIAS personnel. Under normal conditions, these figures are used for invoicing
purposes.
Based on these monthly protocols, a detailed breakdown of generation and consumption figures is also
supplied by the TEIAS Market Financial Clearing Center (PMUM) website. The project participant can
access its own consumption and generation data through the web site of PMUM
(http://pmum.teias.gov.tr) by using a secured ID and password. After accessing this web site, the project
participant is able to call actual and historical data. These data are used by TEIAS for invoicing, and the
same data source will be used for the determination of emission reductions.
TEIAS invoices according to the net electricity supply, which takes transmission line losses into account.
This means that the invoiced amount of electricity is the difference of gross generation, self consumption
and transmission line losses, which is determined by TEIAS every month as a certain percentage.
For emission reductions calculations, however, transmission line losses shall not be subtracted; therefore
the invoiced amount of energy cannot be used. Instead, EGfacility,y (Annual net electricity amount fed to
the grid by the project activity) will be used, which is the monitoring parameter, is the difference between
the Gross Electricity Generation (GEGy) and project activity’s Self Electricity Consumption (SECy):
 PROJECT DESIGN DOCUMENT FORM (CDM PDD) - Version 03

CDM – Executive Board

page 53

EGfacility,y = GEGy - SECy

PMUM website publishes monthly GEGy and SECy data in detail (with a breakdown into three daily time
periods), however it does not show EGfacility,y separately. Therefore, for each month GEGy and SECy data
need to be recorded and their difference has to be calculated on a monthly basis. The annual total net
electricity generation is then found by summing up monthly EGfacility,y values.
These monthly figures will be used to fill in the Net Electricity Generation Monitoring Plan spreadsheet-
table. This table is provided below and is also submitted to the DOE as a separate spreadsheet-file. The
monthly and annual emission reductions are calculated with this table. The scans of monthly report print-
outs will be also be supplied as proof to the DOE.
The monthly invoices will also be cross-checked with the PMUM records and monthly protocols to
ensure high data quality.

B. LFG Consumption for Electricity Generation

The amount of LFG combusted in the gas engines will be monitored by effectively and conservatively
monitoring the methane amount supplied into each of the engine units. The actual emission reductions
from the destruction of methane in the combustion units will be calculated such that the risk of
overestimation is minimised, and according to the ACM0001 v.11, “Consolidated baseline and
monitoring methodology for landfill gas project activities”. The readings will be taken and recorded
internally by compatible and proper measurement devices automatically with high data quality.

C. LFG Consumption by Flaring

An enclosed flare unit will be installed with a flame detection unit. The project emissions from flaring
and emission reductions from the destruction of LFG will be monitored at this point. The readings will be
taken and recorded internally by compatible and proper measurement devices automatically with high
data quality.
The actual project emissions from flaring will be calculated in a conservative manner using the “Tool to
determine project emissions from flaring gases containing methane”; EB28, Annex 13. Please refer to
section B.7.1 and B.7.2 for details.

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):

This monitoring methodology and baseline study application was completed on September 2nd, 200919 by
Yagmur Karabulut.
Consultant: Mavi Sürdürülebilir Kalkinma Proje ve Danismanlik Hiz. Ltd. Sti.
Address: Baba Efendi S. 5/2 34357 Akaretler, Istanbul - TURKEY
Telephone: +90 212 3270922
Fax: +90 212 3270925

19
The baseline study application date is later than the construction start date. However, the CDM revenues have
been considered from the start in the tender document and the feasibility study.
 PROJECT DESIGN DOCUMENT FORM (CDM PDD) - Version 03

CDM – Executive Board

page 54

E-Mail: [email protected]
Web: www.maviconsultants.com
 PROJECT DESIGN DOCUMENT FORM (CDM PDD) - Version 03

CDM – Executive Board

page 55

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:

The starting date of a project activity is the earliest date at which either the implementation or
construction or real action of a project activity begins20. The construction start date of the Project is
13/03/2009. The loan agreement is signed on 02/06/2010. The main equipment order (generator set) is
signed on 25/11/2010. The electricity generation has started on 01/02/2010. Therefore, the starting date of
the project activity shall be considered as 13/03/2009.

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

The Project is designed for an operation lifetime of 15 years.

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

C.2.1. Renewable crediting period:

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

01/02/2010

C.2.1.2. Length of the first crediting period:

7 years

C.2.2. Fixed crediting period:

C.2.2.1. Starting date:

N/A

C.2.2.2. Length:
N/A

20
CDM Glossary of Terms, Version 03
 PROJECT DESIGN DOCUMENT FORM (CDM PDD) - Version 03

CDM – Executive Board

page 56

SECTION D. Environmental impacts

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

impacts:
The Project activity has been exempted by the Ministry of Forest and Environment from the requirement
to carry out an Environmental Impact Assessment. The Project is fully in line with national laws and
regulations, including those involving environment, health and safety. The official document
demonstrating that the Project does not need an EIA is attached in the Annex 5.
Current practice on the site is a managed landfill with no methane recovery. The Project has several
environmental benefits:
 It will cover the landfill area with soil, reducing the adverse visual impacts.
 The cover and an effective landfill gas collection system will reduce odour from the landfill
 The LFG recovery will reduce GHG emissions and help in tackling with global warming
 It will set a good example for proper waste management with improved health and safety impacts
 It will minimize explosion and fire risks by decreasing gas accumulation
 It will feed clean energy to the grid, thereby reducing emissions from power generation
As one of the sustainable renewable energy generation technologies, the Project poses reduces the
environmental impacts of the current practice on the landfill site considerably.

D.2. If environmental impacts are considered significant by the project participants or the host
Party, please provide conclusions and all references to support documentation of an environmental
impact assessment undertaken in accordance with the procedures as required by the host Party:
N/A
 PROJECT DESIGN DOCUMENT FORM (CDM PDD) - Version 03

CDM – Executive Board

page 57

SECTION E. Stakeholders’ comments

The Project was acquired by the Project owner with a tender, which was organized by the Gaziantep
Greater Municipality. The Project and its conditions are clearly set with a mutual agreement and the
Municipality is satisfied with the Project.
Following the tender, there have been several newspaper announcements about the Project that positively
commented on the Project.
A meeting organized by the Project owner on 26.12.2008 has hosted several stakeholders and the
opinions declared during that meeting were very positive and encouraging. There have been no negative
comments from any stakeholder about the Project.

E.1. Brief description how comments by local stakeholders have been invited and compiled:
The Project is not required to follow an official stakeholder consultation procedure. Since an EIA report
was not required by the Ministry of Environment and Forest, no official EIA meeting was organized.
Instead, various unofficial meetings have been carried out between the project owner and local
communities.

E.2. Summary of the comments received:

Stakeholders are supportive towards the Project.

E.3. Report on how due account was taken of any comments received:
Stakeholder did not raise any critical issues which would require the Project design to be revisited.
 PROJECT DESIGN DOCUMENT FORM (CDM PDD) - Version 03

CDM – Executive Board

page 58

Annex 1

CONTACT INFORMATION ON PARTICIPANTS IN THE PROJECT ACTIVITY

Organization: CEV Enerji Üretim Sanayi ve Ticaret Limited Şirketi

Street/P.O.Box: Kuşbakışı Caddesi Aşuroğlu Sitesi 29/D Daire:5 Altunizade Üsküdar

Building:
City: Istanbul
State/Region:
Postcode/ZIP: 34662
Country: Turkey
Telephone: +90 216 651 92 85
FAX: +90 216 651 92 87
E-Mail: [email protected]
URL: www.cev-tr.com
Represented by:
Title: General Manager
Salutation: Mr.
Last name: Lee
Middle name:
First name: Yong Woo
Department:
Mobile:
Direct FAX:
Direct tel:
Personal e-mail: [email protected]
 PROJECT DESIGN DOCUMENT FORM (CDM PDD) - Version 03

CDM – Executive Board

page 59

Organization: Mavi Consultants

Street/P.O.Box: Baba Efendi S. 5/2 Akaretler 34357
Building:
City: Istanbul
State/Region:
Postfix/ZIP:
Country: Turkey
Telephone: +90 212 3270922
FAX: +90 212 3270925
E-Mail: [email protected]
URL: www.maviconsultants.com
Represented by:
Title: Managing Partner
Salutation: Ms.
Last Name: Çapalov
Middle Name:
First Name: Lale
Department:
Mobile:
Direct FAX:
Direct tel:
Personal E-Mail: [email protected]
 PROJECT DESIGN DOCUMENT FORM (CDM PDD) - Version 03

CDM – Executive Board

page 60

Annex 2

INFORMATION REGARDING PUBLIC FUNDING

There is no public or ODA finance used for the Project.
 PROJECT DESIGN DOCUMENT FORM (CDM PDD) - Version 03

CDM – Executive Board

page 61

Annex 3

BASELINE INFORMATION

Table 23. Definition of Parameters Used

Parameter Definition
EFGRID,OM,y Operating Margin Emission Factor of the grid in year y
EMgrid,y Emissions resulting from electricity generation in year y
EGy Net electricity delivered to the grid in year y, excluding low cost-must run generation units
EGm,y Net quantity of electricity generated and delivered to the grid by power unit m in year y
EFEL,m,y CO2 emission factor of power unit m in year y (tCO2/MWh)
EFCO2,m,i,y Average CO2 emission factor of fuel type i used in power unit m in year y (tCO2/GJ)
ηm,y Average net energy conversion efficiency of power unit m in year y (%)
m All power units serving the grid in year y except low-cost / must-run power units
ERy Emission reductions in year y (tCO2e/yr)
PEy Project emissions in year y (tCO2/yr)
BEy Baseline emissions in year y (tCO2e)
MDproject,y The amount of methane that would have been destroyed/combusted during the year, in
tonnes of methane (tCH4) in project scenario
MDBL,y The amount of methane that would have been destroyed/combusted during the year in the
absence of the project due to regulatory and/or contractual requirement, in tonnes of
methane (tCH4)
MDflared,y Quantity of methane destroyed by flaring (tCH4)
MDelectricity,y Quantity of methane destroyed by generation of electricity (tCH4)
LFGflare,y Quantity of landfill gas fed to the flare(s) during the year measured (m3)
wCH4,y Average methane fraction of the landfill gas as measured during the year and expressed as
a fraction (in m3 CH4/ m3 LFG)
PEflare,y Project emissions from flaring of the residual gas stream y
TMRG,h Mass flow rate of methane in the residual gas in the hour h
wOM Weight of operating margin emission factor
wBM Weight of build margin emission factor
EFgrid,OM,y Operating margin CO2 emission factor in year y
EFgrid,BM,y Build margin emission factor of the grid in year y
 PROJECT DESIGN DOCUMENT FORM (CDM PDD) - Version 03

CDM – Executive Board

page 62

x Year during the crediting period: x runs from the first year of the first crediting period (x =
1) to the year y for which avoided emissions are calculated (x = y)
y Year for which methane emissions are calculated

Table 24. Capacity Additions

Capacity Avg. Generation
Year Plant [MW] Fuel Type [GWh]
2004 ANKARA D.G.(BAYMİNA) GR-I-II-III 798.0 N.GAS 6500.0
2004 ENTEK GR-IV 31.1 N.GAS+NAPHTA 255.7
2004 ATATEKS 2 GM 5.6 N.GAS 45.0
2004 TANRIVERDİ 4 GM 4.7 N.GAS 38.7
2004 TEKBOY TEKSTİL 1 GM 2.2 N.GAS 16.0
2004 GÜL ENERJİ GR-II 12.5 FUEL-OIL 96.5
2004 KOMBASSAN KAĞIT GIDA VE TEKS 5.5 N.GAS 38.1
2004 AYEN OSTİM ENERJİ ÜRETİM 31.1 N.GAS 264.1
2004 BİS ENERJİ 2 GT 73.0 N.GAS 602.7
2004 ENERJİ-SA ADANA 1 BT 49.8 NAPHTA 322.9
2004 ŞAHİNLER ENERJİ 1 GM 3.2 N.GAS 22.2
2004 BESLER GR-2, BT (5,2+7,5) 12.7 N.GAS 97.7
2004 ÇELİK ENERJİ ÜR.ŞTİ. 2 GM 2.4 N.GAS 18.6
2004 KOMBASSAN KAĞ. MATBAA GIDA 5.5 N.GAS 35.7
2004 AYEN OSTİM ENERJİ ÜRETİM(BT) 9.9 N.GAS 84.0
2004 HABAŞ ALİAĞA GRUP I-II 89.2 N.GAS 713.9
2004 STANDART PROFİL 3 GM 6.7 N.GAS 49.2
2004 KARKEY-II 3+3 DGM 54.3 FUEL-OIL 369.7
2004 ALTINMARKA GIDA GR I-II-III 3.6 N.GAS 28.8
2004 ERE(BİR KAPILI HES) GRUP-I 48.5 RUN OF RIVER 170.6
2004 ELTA ELK(DODURGA) GR-I-II-III-IV 4.1 RUN OF RIVER 12.3
2004 İSKUR TEKSTİL(SÜLEYMANLI) GR I-II 4.6 RUN OF RIVER 17.9
2004 BEREKET EN.(Feslek Hes) Gr-1-2 9.5 RUN OF RIVER 41.0
2005 ÇAN GR I 160.0 LIGNITE 1040.0
2005 ÇAN GR II 160.0 LIGNITE 1040.0
2005 ELBİSTAN-B GR I 360.0 LIGNITE 2340.0
2005 AKÇA ENERJİ GR-III 8.7 N.GAS+NAPHTHA 65.4
2005 AYKA TEKSTİL GR-I 5.5 N.GAS 40.0
2005 BAYDEMİRLER GR IV-V-VI 6.2 N.GAS 51.4
2005 BOSEN GR-III 50.0 N.GAS 350.0
2005 ÇUMRA ŞEKER 16.0 N.GAS+LIGNITE 40.0
2005 ETİ MAD.(BAN.ASİT)GR-I 11.5 RENEW.+WASTES 85.0
2005 EVYAP GR I-II 5.1 N.GAS 30.0
2005 GRANİSER GRANİT GR-I 5.5 N.GAS 42.0
2005 HABAŞ ALİAĞA GR III 47.7 N.GAS 381.6
2005 HABAŞ ALİAĞA GR IV 47.7 N.GAS 381.6
2005 HABAŞ ALİAĞA GR-V 24.6 N.GAS 196.8
 PROJECT DESIGN DOCUMENT FORM (CDM PDD) - Version 03

CDM – Executive Board

page 63

2005 HAYAT KAĞIT GR-I 7.5 N.GAS 56.0

2005 İÇDAŞ ÇELİK GR-I 135.0 IMPORTED COAL 1080.0
2005 KAHRAMANMARAŞ KAĞIT GR-I 6.0 IMPORTED COAL 45.0
2005 KORUMA KLOR GR I-II-III 9.6 N.GAS 77.0
2005 KÜÇÜKÇALIK TEKSTİL GR I-II-III-IV 8.0 N.GAS 64.0
2005 MERCEDES BENZ TURK GR I-II-III-IV 8.3 N.GAS 68.0
2005 MODERN ENERJİ GR-III 8.4 N.GAS 62.9
2005 MODERN ENERJİ GR-II 6.7 N.GAS+LPG 50.4
2005 MOSB GR I-II-III-IV-V-VI-VII 84.8 N.GAS 434.0
2005 ORS RULMAN 12.4 N.GAS 99.4
2005 PAK GIDA(Kemalpaşa) GR-I 5.7 N.GAS 45.0
2005 TEZCAN GALVANİZ GR I-II 3.7 N.GAS 29.0
2005 YONGAPAN(KAST.ENTG) GR-II 5.2 N.GAS 32.7
2005 ZEYNEP GİYİM SAN. GR-I 1.2 N.GAS 9.0
2005 AK ENERJİ(K.paşa) GR- III 40.0 N.GAS 256.9
2005 AK ENERJİ(K.paşa) GR I-II 87.2 N.GAS 560.1
2005 ALTEK ALARKO GR I-II 60.1 N.GAS 420.0
2005 BİS ENERJİ GR VII 43.7 N.GAS 360.8
2005 CAN ENERJİ GR-I 3.9 N.GAS 28.0
2005 ÇEBİ ENERJİ BT 21.0 N.GAS 164.9
2005 ÇEBİ ENERJİ GT 43.4 N.GAS 340.1
2005 ENTEK ELK.A.Ş.KOÇ ÜNİ.GR I-II 2.3 N.GAS 19.0
2005 KAREGE GR IV-V 18.1 N.GAS 141.9
2005 KARKEY(SİLOPİ-4) GR-IV 6.2 F.OIL 47.2
2005 KARKEY(SİLOPİ-4) GR-V 6.8 F.OIL 51.9
2005 METEM ENERJİ(Hacışıramat) GR I-II 7.8 N.GAS 58.0
2005 METEM ENERJİ(Peliklik) GR I-II-III 11.7 N.GAS 89.0
2005 NOREN ENERJİ GR-I 8.7 N.GAS 70.0
2005 NUH ENERJİ-2 GR I 47.0 N.GAS 319.7
2005 ZORLU ENERJİ KAYSERİ GR-I-II-III 149.9 N.GAS 1144.1
2005 ZORLU ENERJİ KAYSERİ GR-IV 38.6 N.GAS 294.9
2005 ZORLU ENERJİ YALOVA GR I-II 15.9 N.GAS 122.0
2005 İÇTAŞ ENERJİ(Yukarı Mercan) GR I-II 14.2 RUN OF RIVER 44.0
2005 MURATLI GR I-II 115.0 DAM 444.0
2005 BEREKET EN.(DALAMAN) GR XIII-XIV-XV 7.5 RUN OF RIVER 35.8
2005 YAMULA GRUP I-II 100.0 DAM 422.0
2005 SUNJÜT(RES) GR I-II 1.2 WIND 2.4
2006 EKOTEN TEKSTİL GR-I 1.9 N.GAS 14.0
2006 ERAK GİYİM GR-I 1.4 N.GAS 10.0
2006 ALARKO ALTEK GR-III 21.9 N.GAS 158.3
2006 AYDIN ÖRME GR-I 7.5 N.GAS 60.0
2006 NUH ENERJİ-2 GR II 26.1 N.GAS 180.1
2006 MARMARA ELEKTRİK (Çorlu) GR I 8.7 N.GAS 63.0
2006 MARMARA PAMUK (Çorlu) GR I 8.7 N.GAS 63.0
2006 ENTEK (Köseköy) GR IV 47.6 N.GAS 378.2
2006 ELSE TEKSTİL (Çorlu) GR I - II 3.2 N.GAS 25.0
 PROJECT DESIGN DOCUMENT FORM (CDM PDD) - Version 03

CDM – Executive Board

page 64

2006 SÖNMEZ ELEKTRİK (Çorlu) GR I - II 17.5 N.GAS 126.0

2006 MENDERES ELEKTRİK GR I 8.0 GEOTHERMAL 56.0
2006 KASTAMONU ENTEGRE (Balıkesir) GR I 7.5 N.GAS 54.0
2006 BOZ ENERJİ GR I 8.7 N.GAS 70.0
2006 ADANA ATIK SU ARITMA TESİSİ 0.8 BIOGAS 6.0
2006 AMYLUM NİŞASTA (ADANA) 14.3 N.GAS 34.0
2006 ŞIK MAKAS (Çorlu) GR I 1.6 N.GAS 13.0
2006 ELBİSTAN B GR III 360.0 LIGNITE 2340.0
2006 ANTALYA ENERJİ GR I - II - III - IV 34.9 N.GAS 245.0
2006 HAYAT TEM. VE SAĞLIK GR I - II 15.0 N.GAS 108.0
2006 EKOLOJİK EN. (Kemerburgaz) GR I 1.0 LANDFILL GAS 6.0
2006 EROĞLU GİYİM (Çorlu) GR I 1.2 N.GAS 9.0
2006 CAM İŞ ELEKTRİK (Mersin) GR I 126.1 N.GAS 1008.0
2006 ELBİSTAN B GR II 360.0 LIGNITE 2340.0
2006 YILDIZ ENT. AĞAÇ (Kocaeli) GR I 6.2 N.GAS 40.0
2006 ÇERKEZKÖY ENERJİ GR I 49.2 N.GAS 390.0
2006 ENTEK (Köseköy) GR V 37.0 N.GAS 293.9
2006 ELBİSTAN B GR IV 360.0 LIGNITE 2340.0
2006 ÇIRAĞAN SARAYI GR I 1.3 N.GAS 11.0
2006 AKMAYA (Lüleburgaz) GR I 6.9 N.GAS 50.0
2006 BURGAZ (Lüleburgaz) GR I 6.9 N.GAS 54.0
2006 SEYHAN I-II 0.3 HYDRO 1.7
2006 ŞANLIURFA GR I-II 51.8 HYDRO 124.0
2006 BEREKET ENERJİ GÖKYAR HES 3 Grup 11.6 HYDRO 43.3
2006 MOLU EN. Zamantı Bahçelik GR I - II 4.2 HYDRO 16.7
2006 SU ENERJİ (Balıkesir) GR I - II 4.6 HYDRO 20.7
2006 BEREKET EN.(Mentaş Reg) GR I - II 26.6 HYDRO 108.7
2006 EKİN (Başaran Hes) (Nazilli) 0.6 HYDRO 4.5
2006 ERE(Sugözü rg. Kızıldüz hes) GR I - II 15.4 HYDRO 31.6
2006 ERE(AKSU REG.ve ŞAHMALLAR HES) GR I-II 14.0 HYDRO 26.7
2006 BEREKET EN.(Mentaş Reg) GR III 13.3 HYDRO 54.4
2007 HABAŞ (Aliağa-ilave) 9.1 N.GAS 72.8
2007 MODERN ENERJİ 5.2 N.GAS 38.7
2007 ARENKO 0.7 N.GAS 5.6
2007 ALTINMARKA GIDA 0.1 N.GAS 0.8
2007 TEKBOY ENERJİ 0.1 N.GAS 0.7
2007 VELSAN AKRİLİK 0.1 N.GAS 0.7
Acıbadem Sağlık Hiz.ve Tic.A.Ş(Kadıköy
2007
Hast.)(İstanbul/Kadıköy) 0.5 N.GAS 4.0
Acıbadem Sağlık Hiz.ve Tic.A.Ş(Kozyatağı
2007
Hast.)(İstanbul/Kadıköy) 0.6 N.GAS 5.0
2007 Acıbadem Sağlık Hiz.ve Tic.A.Ş(Nilüfer/BURSA) 1.3 N.GAS 11.0
2007 AKATEKS Tekstil Sanayi ve Ticaret A.Ş. 1.8 N.GAS 14.0
FLOKSER TEKSTİL SAN.AŞ.(Çatalça/istanbul)(Poliser
2007
Tesisi) 2.1 N.GAS 17.0
FLOKSER TEKSTİL SAN.AŞ.(Çatalça/istanbul)(Süetser
2007
Tesisi) 2.1 N.GAS 17.0
 PROJECT DESIGN DOCUMENT FORM (CDM PDD) - Version 03

CDM – Executive Board

page 65

2007 FRİTOLAY GIDA SAN.VE TİC. AŞ. 0.5 N.GAS 4.0

2007 KIVANÇ TEKSTİL SAN.ve TİC.A.Ş. 3.9 N.GAS 33.0
2007 KİL-SAN KİL SAN.VE TİC. A.Ş 3.2 N.GAS 25.0
SÜPERBOY BOYA SAN.ve
2007
Tic.Ltd.Şti.(Büyükçekmece/İstanbul) 1 N.GAS 8.0
2007 SWİSS OTEL(Anadolu Japan Turizm A.Ş (İstanbul) 1.6 N.GAS 11.0
2007 TAV Esenboğa Yatırım Yapım ve İşetme AŞ./ANKARA 3.9 N.GAS 33.0
2007 NUH ENERJİ-2(Nuh Çim.) 73 N.GAS 514.0
2007 AKTEKS 0.8 FUEL-OIL 5.6
2007 UŞAK ŞEKER (NURİ ŞEKER) 1.7 LIGNITE 11.1
2007 BOĞAZLIYAN ŞEKER 16.4 D.OIL & N.GAS 131.2
2007 KARTONSAN 5.0 D.OIL & N.GAS 40.0
2007 ESKİŞEHİR END.ENERJİ 3.5 D.OIL & N.GAS 26.8
2007 ESKİŞEHİR ŞEKER (KAZIM TAŞKENT) 2.9 D.OIL & N.GAS 23.2
2007 İGSAŞ 2.2 D.OIL & N.GAS 15.2
2007 DESA 0.7 D.OIL & N.GAS 4.6
2007 DENTAŞ 0.3 D.OIL & N.GAS 2.3
2007 SÜPER FİLMCİLİK 0.1 D.OIL & N.GAS 0.8
2007 ATAER ENERJİ 0.1 D.OIL & N.GAS 0.6
2007 BİL ENERJİ 0.1 D.OIL & N.GAS 0.7
2007 BİS Enerji Üretim AŞ.(Bursa)(İlave) 43 N.GAS 354.8
2007 Aliağa Çakmaktepe Enerji A.Ş.(Aliağa/İZMİR) 34.8 N.GAS 278.0
2007 BİS Enerji Üretim AŞ.(Bursa)(İlave) 48 N.GAS 396.1
2007 BOSEN ENERJİ ELEKTRİK AŞ. 142.8 N.GAS 1071.0
2007 SAYENERJİ ELEKTRİK ÜRETİM AŞ. (Kayseri/OSB) 5.9 N.GAS 47.0
2007 T ENERJİ ÜRETİM AŞ.(İSTANBUL) 1.6 N.GAS 13.0
2007 ZORLU EN.Kayseri (İlave 1 GT) 7.2 N.GAS 55.0
2007 SİİRT 25.6 FUEL-OIL 190.0
2007 Mardin Kızıltepe 34.1 FUEL-OIL 250.0
2007 KAREN 24.3 FUEL-OIL 180.0
2007 İDİL 2 (PS3 A- 2) 24.4 FUEL-OIL 180.0
2007 YPM Ener.Yat.AŞ.(Altıntepe Hidro.)(Sivas/Suşehir) 4 HYDRO 18.0
2007 YPM Ener.Yat.AŞ.(Beypınar Hidro.)(Sivas/Suşehir) 3.6 HYDRO 18.0
2007 YPM Ener.Yat.AŞ.(Konak Hidro.)(Sivas/Suşehir) 4 HYDRO 19.0
KURTEKS Tekstil A.Ş./Kahramanmaraş(KARASU
2007
HES-Andırın) 2.4 HYDRO 19.0
2007 İSKUR TEKSTİL (SÜLEYMANLI HES) 4.6 HYDRO 18.0
2007 ÖZGÜR ELK.AŞ.(K.MARAŞ)(Tahta) 6.3 HYDRO 27.2
2007 ÖZGÜR ELK.AŞ.(K.MARAŞ)(Tahta)(İlave) 6.3 HYDRO 27.2
2008 MB ŞEKER NİŞASTA SAN. A.Ş. (Sultanhanı) 8.8 N. GAS 60.0
2008 AKSA ENERJİ (Antalya) 183.8 N. GAS 1290.0
2008 AKSA ENERJİ (Manisa) 52.38 N. GAS 370.0
2008 ANTALYA ENERJİ (İlave) 17.46 N. GAS 122.3
2008 ATAÇ İNŞAAT SAN. A.S.B. (ANTALYA) 5.4 N.GAS 37.0
2008 BAHÇIVAN GIDA(LÜLEBURGAZ) 1.165 N.GAS 8.0
 PROJECT DESIGN DOCUMENT FORM (CDM PDD) - Version 03

CDM – Executive Board

page 66

2008 CAN ENERJİ (Çorlu-TEKİRDAĞ)(İlave) 52.38 N.GAS 304.2

2008 FOUR SEASONS OTEL (ATİK PASHA TUR.A.Ş.) 1.165 N.GAS 7.0
2008 FRİTOLAY GIDA SAN. VE TİC. A.Ş. (İlave) 0.06 N.GAS 4.0
2008 KARKEY (SİLOPİ-5)(154kV)(İlave) 14.78 FUEL-OIL 103.2
2008 MELİKE TEKSTİL (GAZİANTEP) 1.584 N.GAS 11.0
2008 MİSİS APRE TEKSTİL BOYA EN. SAN. 2 N.GAS 14.0
2008 MODERN ENERJİ (LÜLEBURGAZ) 13.4 N.GAS 94.1
2008 ORTADOĞU ENERJİ (ODA YERİ)(Eyüp-İst) 2.83 LANDFILL GAS 22.0
2008 POLAT TURZ. (POLAT RENAISSANCE İST.OT.) 1.6 N.GAS 11.0
2008 SARAYKÖY JEOTERMAL(DENİZLİ) 6.85 GEOTHERMAL 50.0
2008 YILDIZ SUNTA (Uzunçiftlik-Köseköy)(Düzeltme) 22.63 N.GAS 146.5
2008 SÖNMEZ Elektrik (İlave) 8.73 N.GAS 67.3
2008 AKKÖY ENERJİ (AKKÖY I HES) 101.94 HYDRO 408.0
2008 ALP ELEKTRİK (TINAZTEPE) ANTALYA 7.689 HYDRO 29.0
2008 CANSU ELEKTRİK (Murgul/ARTVİN) 9.18 HYDRO 47.0
DAREN HES ELKT. (SEYRANTEPE BARAJI VE
2008
HES) 49.7 HYDRO 182.0
2008 DEĞİRMENÜSTÜ EN. (KAHRAMANMARAŞ) 25.7 HYDRO 69.0
2008 GÖZEDE HES (TEMSA ELEKTRİK) BURSA 2.4 HYDRO 10.0
2008 H.G.M. ENERJİ (KEKLİCEK HES) (Yeşilyurt) 8.674 HYDRO 18.0
2008 HİDRO KNT.(YUKARI MANAHOZ REG.VE HES) 22.44 HYDRO 79.0
2008 İÇ-EN ELK.(ÇALKIŞLA REGÜLATÖRÜ VE HES) 7.66 HYDRO 18.0
2008 KALEN ENERJİ (KALEN II REGÜLAT. VE HES) 15.65 HYDRO 50.0
2008 MARAŞ ENERJİ (FIRNIS REGÜLATÖRÜ VE HES) 7.22 HYDRO 36.0
2008 SARMAŞIK I HES (FETAŞ FETHİYE ENERJİ) 21.04 HYDRO 96.0
2008 SARMAŞIK II HES (FETAŞ FETHİYE ENERJİ) 21.58 HYDRO 108.0
2008 TORUL 105.6 HYDRO 322.0
2008 YEŞİL ENERJİ ELEKTRİK (TAYFUN HES) 0.8 HYDRO 5.0
Total 6,394.3 42,929.0

Table 25. NCVs and Emission Factors of Fuels

Emission Factor,
NCV Calculations [TJ/kt or TJ/mil m3] 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 [tCO2/TJ]
Hard Coal 15.1 13.6 18.1 18.2 17.9 90.8
Imported Coal 25.5 24.7 24.5 25.0 24.9 90.8
Lignite 7.6 5.9 6.9 6.9 6.8 90.9
Fuel Oil 39.9 40.2 40.2 39.8 39.7 75.5
Diesel Oil 42.4 42.8 42.7 43.1 42.3 72.6
Lpg 45.9 46.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 61.6
Naphta 44.0 44.3 43.9 43.2 44.6 69.3
Natural Gas 36.9 37.3 37.0 36.7 36.6 54.3
 PROJECT DESIGN DOCUMENT FORM (CDM PDD) - Version 03

CDM – Executive Board

page 67

Table 26. CO2 Emissions Breakdown by Fuel Type

CO2 Emissions, ktCO2 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008
Hard Coal 1,860 2,155 3,758 4,091 3,908
Imported Coal 7,388 7,858 7,424 8,080 8,747
Lignite 23,207 26,057 31,921 38,154 41,161
Fuel Oil 7,242 6,085 5,297 6,771 6,510
Diesel Oil 90 88 190 157 403
Lpg 36 37 0 0 0
Naphta 637 260 41 34 33
Natural Gas 26,687 31,886 34,212 40,811 42,952
Total Calculated 67,145 74,426 82,844 98,099 103,714
Official data supplied to UNFCCC 70,499 83,680 85,312 100,662 101,473

Table 27. Electricity Generation of Selected Recent Capacity Additions by Fuel Type
Indicative
Capacity Additions 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 Total Efficiency
Coal 0.0 1125.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1125.0 40.0%
Lignite 0.0 4420.0 7020.0 11.1 0.0 11451.1 40.0%
Fuel Oil 466.2 99.1 0.0 806.4 103.2 1474.9 46.0%
Diesel oil 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 46.0%
LPG 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 60.0%
Naphtha & Asphaltite 322.9 0.0 0.0 0.6 0.0 323.5 46.0%
Natural Gas 8810.4 6995.4 3457.4 3274.2 2546.5 25083.9 60.0%
Renewables and wastes 0.0 85.0 12.0 0.0 22.0 119.0 N/A
Hydro 241.8 945.8 432.3 146.4 1477.0 3243.3 N/A
Geothermal & Wind 0.0 2.4 56.0 0.0 50.0 108.4 N/A
Total 9,841.4 13,672.7 10,977.7 4,238.6 4,198.7 42,929.0
 PROJECT DESIGN DOCUMENT FORM (CDM PDD) - Version 03

CDM – Executive Board

page 68

Annex 4

MONITORING INFORMATION

A. Electricity Generation Component

The switchgear station, where the measurement instruments are read periodically by TEİAŞ, is only
accessible to trained TEİAŞ staff. On the first days of each successive month, the TEİAŞ staff performs
the reading, upon which the invoicing will be based.
There will be two measurement instruments monitoring the generated electricity continuously.
Furthermore, a SCADA system on the Project activity site will monitor and store various data including
the electricity generation of each wind turbine separately. The project participant is able to monitor the
electricity generation data read by the SCADA system as well as the two measurement instruments from a
distance; however it has no control over or access to the measurement devices and cannot perform any
type of maintenance or calibration.
Energy generation and consumption of the Project is measured and recorded with a single primary
metering device and another secondary metering device for high data quality. A TEIAŞ personnel comes
each month to the Project site and connects to the primary and secondary metering devices using his own
equipment, without any interference from the project participant. This TEIAS personnel takes readings
from both devices and compares them. If the difference of both devices is higher than 0.002, then
technical precautions described in Section B.7.2. are taken by TEIAS to ensure data quality. Under
normal conditions, the digital readings are uploaded by the TEIAS personnel to TEIAS on site and a
print-out of the preceding month’s generation and consumption summary is signed by both the site
engineer and the TEIAS personnel.
The net electricity generated and delivered to the grid can be monitored from TEİAŞ invoices, from the
PMUM -Market Financial Settlement Centre- (MFSC) website21 or the SCADA system. To ensure high
quality data, PMUM web site data will be used to calculate the net electricity generation.
A spreadsheet will be prepared and filled in with PMUM data to calculate the emission reductions.

Responsibility:
The methodology requires monitoring of net electricity supply of the Project. Archiving the daily power
generation reports, performance report and monthly meter reading is handled by project proponent on
regular basis. The data collection on daily basis is done by project O&M staff, who are responsible for
preventive maintenance, handling emergency situations and improvement measures under the overall
responsibility of project manager on site.

Data Quality:
The generation and consumption data will be used for invoicing purposes. The data is of high quality,
because the monthly reports are signed both by the project proponent and by TEİAŞ, the public
transmission line operator. Measuring devices will have accuracy better than UNFCCC requirements,
thus fulfilling quality conditions.

21
http://www.teias.gov.tr/mali/maliuz.htm
 PROJECT DESIGN DOCUMENT FORM (CDM PDD) - Version 03

CDM – Executive Board

page 69

Monitored Data:
Net Electricity Generation of the Project = Gross Generation of the Project – Consumption of the Project
Gross Generation of the Project and Consumption of the Project will be monitored and recorded to
calculate Net Electricity Generation of the Project.

Storage of Data:
Data involving consumption and generation will be kept by PMUM, the market financial settlement
centre and users (project proponents included) can access its website with its unique ID and password to
be able to see these data. Storage will be done by PMUM for an unlimited period of time, which ensures
UNFCCC criteria.

Calibration of Measuring Devices:

There are two measuring devices, one main and one back-up device to prevent any potential errors which
may result from device failures. If two devices show a significant bias, the failing device will be
dismantled by TEİAŞ personnel and calibrated by TEİAŞ to ensure high quality. Project proponents have
no access to measuring devices in any way and both devices are sealed.
 PROJECT DESIGN DOCUMENT FORM (CDM PDD) - Version 03

CDM – Executive Board

page 70

Annex 4

ATTACHMENTS

-----