Bonn March 12-13, 2011 Dr. Manfred Brinkmann TÜV Rheinland Japan Ltd. Improvement of Methodologies...

Bonn March 12-13, 2011

Dr. Manfred BrinkmannTÜV Rheinland Japan Ltd.

Improvement of Methodologies - DOE’s perspective -

7th CDM Joint Workshop, 2010

Contents

Identified shortcomings

Improvements

Procedures


Identified Shortcomings

Structure;

“Chapters” are indicated, but requirements not always explicitly

listed in the relevant chapter

Example ACM0006:

- “Hidden” applicability criteria, e.g. availability of scenarios;

- project boundary requirements impeding credits for heat export

without plant-specific data of facilities eventually to be replaced.



Generally “Prosaic” language:

should be limited to explanation of rationales,

but less for describing the actual options, conditions, etc.

Lack of rationale explanation, e.g. AM0058:

“levelized cost of provided heat” to be based i.a. on the “Lifetime

of the project, equal to the remaining lifetime of the existing

facility;”

=> levelized cost depends on total lifetime of a technology

“Leftovers” of project-specific descriptions within methodology(?)Dr. Manfred BrinkmannTÜV Rheinland Japan Ltd.


Parameters to be determined ex-ante or to be monitored:

frequently not all parameters are required for a given project

(e.g., due to different equations for each scenario);

Lists of parameters lacking structure and/or indication for which

cases / equations etc. parameters are needed:

=> source of errors in PDD development

=> tedious and error-prone validation process

Inconsistency of parameter names among various meths and tools(e.g., methane concentration in ACM0001 vs. tool on PE from flaring



Allocation of methodologies to Sectoral Scopes

- process and criteria not transparent

- Example: Waste heat recovery projects based on ACM0012 are

related to scopes 1 and 4; if used only for electricity generation, the

heat source may be irrelevant for assessment and not be covered

by any of the Technical Areas proposed in the Accreditation

Standard V02


Improvement potentials

Harmonization of Structure

Decision trees for the application of different options / equations

Clear indication for which equations / options etc. monitored / non-

monitored parameters are required

Standardizing parameter names

Incorporate responses to clarifications,

indicate which clarificiations remains to be considered separately


Procedural improvements

Formal procedure: Request for revision

- market hesitation for fear of delays to actual projects

- (perceived) little interaction/communication while the request is

being processed

General review for consistency of structure, approaches,

parameters;

Other possible means:

- Timely Calls for input on specific work done by Meth panel / SSC

- Periodic “Methodology Roundtable”


Thank you for your attention!

[email protected]

TÜV Rheinland Japan Ltd.Shin Yokohama Daini Center Bldg.3-19-5, Shin Yokohama Kohoku-kuYokohama 222-0033, JapanPhone: +81 45-470-1850Fax: +81 45-470-2361E-mail: [email protected]


Bonn March 12-13, 2011 Dr. Manfred Brinkmann TÜV Rheinland Japan Ltd. Improvement of Methodologies...

Documents

Transcript of Bonn March 12-13, 2011 Dr. Manfred Brinkmann TÜV Rheinland Japan Ltd. Improvement of Methodologies...