CDM – Executive Board PROJECT DESIGN DOCUMENT FORM (CDM...

PROJECT DESIGN DOCUMENT FORM (CDM-SSC-PDD) - Version 03 CDM – Executive Board

1

CLEAN DEVELOPMENT MECHANISM PROJECT DESIGN DOCUMENT FORM (CDM-SSC-PDD)

Version 03 - in effect as of: 22 December 2006

CONTENTS A. General description of the small scale 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 proposed small scale project activity Annex 2: Information regarding public funding Annex 3: Baseline information

Annex 4: Monitoring Information


2

Revision history of this document Version Number

Date Description and reason of revision

01 21 January 2003

Initial adoption

02 8 July 2005 •The Board agreed to revise the CDM SSC PDD to reflect guidance and clarifications provided by the Board since version 01 of this document.

•As a consequence, the guidelines for completing CDM SSC PDD have been revised accordingly to version 2. The latest version can be found at <http://cdm.unfccc.int/Reference/Documents>.

03 22 December 2006

•The Board agreed to revise the CDM project design document for small-scale activities (CDM-SSC-PDD), taking into account CDM-PDD and CDM-NM.


3

SECTION A. General description of small-scale project activity A.1 Title of the small-scale project activity: >> Mushishito Small Hydro Power Project Version 01 7th June 2011

A.2. Description of the small-scale project activity: >> The project activity is a small hydro power project (SHP) which seeks to utilize the hydro resource of the rivers Rukarara and Mushishiro to generate 5MW of electricity. This will be the first privately owned and financed hydro power installation of this size in Rwanda. Objectives: The Mushishito SHP, hereinafter referred to as the project, is located in the Nyamagabe district of Southern Province of the Republic of Rwanda. The natural hydro resources tapped for the project are the rivers Rukarara and Mushishiro. Anticipated annual electricity generation is 39,420 MWh1 using a plant load factor of 80%. Water from the two rivers will be channelled into a single powerhouse. Technical designs based on the feasibility study prepared for the project indicate: a flow rate of 2 m3/s with a head of 145m for the River Mushishiro; and a flow rate of 8 m/s3 and net head of 45m for the river Rukarara. The Mushishito project will lead to emissions reductions of 27,768.24 tCO2e annually. The project site is located within close proximity of the national grid and will require a 2km, 33kv transmission line to connect the powerhouse to the grid for export of electricity generated. A 25 year Power Purchase Agreement has been executed between the project owner and the Rwanda Electricity Company (RECO). The project owner is Renewable Energy for Accelerated Development (REFAD), Rwanda Ltd. Overview of the Electricity supply and generation in Rwanda: The total electricity generation mix in Rwanda produced 73.8 MW of electricity in 20092. This electricity mix is dependent thermal power sources, hydro, methane and solar power sources. Power production in the country has stabilized after severe power shortages in 2004 that caused massive load shedding all over the country, and prompted the government to hire emergency power solutions and invest in increasing generation capacity. While the increased supply and decreased load shedding is ultimately positive for the nation's energy security and development agenda, focus has been placed on increasing the number of thermal plants such as the Jabana Heavy Fuel Oil (HFO) power plant, installed in 2009 that added 21MW of electricity to the

1 REFAD FEASIBILITY STUDY REPORT JUNE 2010 2Republic of Rwanda Environmental Management Authority: http://www.rema.gov.rw/dna/index.php?option=com_docman&task=doc_details&gid=24&Itemid=


4

national grid3. A vivid demonstration of the increasing trend to rely on thermal sources of electricity generation is evidenced in the fact that in the period of 2004-2008 a meagre 41.9% of hydro powered electricity supplied the grid as compared to the 58.1% generated from thermal sources. Contribution to Sustainable development

1. Social The project activity will facilitate to job creation in a rural area of Rwanda. These jobs will be created primarily through manual labour roles during the construction, civil works, operations and management phase of the projects. Primary employment functions will include construction and site preparation. Secondary roles include routine maintenance, specialized administrative and technical roles for staff employed and trained to operate the plant once commissioned. Employment creation in a marginalized area of Rwanda will undoubtedly be a major boost in the fight against poverty in a marginalized region of the country.

2. Economic The project activity will necessitate infrastructural improvements to the region including road improvement for access to the site. Such an improvement will facilitate ease of transport within the local community and hence facilitate improved access to markets for farm produce. This will create supplementary economic growth in addition to direct growth catalyst realized through increased power generation supplied and distributed through the national grid. Nationally, the contribution of the 10 million dollar investment will have significant impact on the economy mainly through tax remittances.

3. Environmental By avoiding GHG emissions through the use of renewable energy electricity generation sources, the project activity will positively contribute to the fight against climate change. As previously increased reliance on thermal power sources to reduce the demand supply gap may potentially lead to increased GHG emissions. These emissions are largely avoidable due to the enormous renewable energy potential within the country. This project will contribute 6.8% of Rwanda’s electricity generation mix4 and hence make a significant contribution to emissions reduction attributable to the country’s current power generation sources.

4. Technological The management staff at REFAD has over 35 years combined of experience in project development and management. In addition, REFAD Rwanda has researched and selected Mecamidi, a French company and European market leader in hydro power installations as its Engineering, Procurement and Construction (EPC) Partner. Mecamidi has a proven track record of successful implementation dating back 50 years with over 500 projects implemented in 60 countries.

3 World Bank Report: Rwanda Urgent Electricity Rehabilitation Project http://web.worldbank.org/WBSITE/EXTERNAL/COUNTRIES/AFRICAEXT/0,,contentMDK:22707397~pagePK:146736~piPK:226340~theSitePK:258644,00.html?cid=3001_2 4 Figures calculated using Rwanda 2009 generation mix.


5

A.3. Project participants: >>

Name of the Party involved ((host) indicates a host Party)

Private and/or public entity(ies) project participants (as applicable)

Kindly indicate if the Party involved wishes to be considered as project participant (Yes/No)

Republic of Rwanda (host) Renewable energy for Accelerated Development (REFAD) Ltd. Viability Africa, LLC

No

Host Country: The host country is Rwanda and the Designated National Authority is the Rwanda Environment Management Authority (REMA). The Rwandan Parliament ratified the Kyoto Protocol on 22nd July 2004 A.4. Technical description of the small-scale project activity : A.4.1. Location of the small-scale project activity: >> A.4.1.1. Host Party(ies): >> Republic of Rwanda A.4.1.2. Region/State/Province etc.: >> Southern Province, Nyamagabe District A.4.1.3. City/Town/Community etc: >> Kibirizi sector A.4.1.4. Details of physical location, including information allowing the unique identification of this small-scale project activity: >> The two water abstraction points & the proposed location of the powerhouse are all located in the Kibirizi sector in the Nyamagabe District of the South Sudan Province of Rwanda. The rivers used for this project are the Rukarara and Mushishiro. Project site coordinates including the catchment area are: Latitude: 2º22” to 2 35” Longitude: 29º16” to 29º32”


6

Illustration 3: Specific Project site within the Kibirizi Sector

A.4.2. Type and category(ies) and technology/measure of the small-scale project activity: >> In accordance with Appendix B of the simplified modalities and procedures for small-scale CDM project activities: Indicative simplified baseline and monitoring methodologies for selected small-scale CDM project activity categories the proposed project category is defined. The type and category of the project activity is given as follows: Sectoral Scope I: Energy Industries (renewable/non-renewable sources) Type 1: Renewable Energy Projects Category I.D: Grid connection renewable generation. (Version 17) http://cdm.unfccc.int/methodologies/DB/RSCTZ8SKT4F7N1CFDXCSA7BDQ7FU1X/view.html The proposed project is a small hydro power scheme with an installed capacity of 5 MW. The electricity generated will be exported directly to the national grid. This is a green-field project.


7

The project design involves one common powerhouse for water conveyed from the two aforementioned rivers. The project load factor is 80%. Specific technical data is provided in the tables below: Turbines Mushishiro Rukarara Type Francis type Francis Type Quantity 2 2 Head 145m 42 m Flow Rate 2 m/s3 8 m/s3 Turbine output 1250kW 2000kW Rotation Speed 1,500 trs/min 1500 trs/min Efficiency 91.7% 91.7% Table 1: Turbine Specifications Mushishiro Rukarara Type Horizontal Asynchronous Horizontal Asynchronous Quantity 2 2 Power 1500kVA 2000kVA Voltage 0.66 KV 0.66 KV Frequency 50 Hz 50 Hz Power Factor 0.8 0.8 Nominal Speed 1500 trs/min 1500 trs/min Table 2: Generator Specifications

CIVIL WORKS

Mushishiro Rukarara

Head Race Canal Length 615m 1800m

Forebay Tank Height 3m 6m

Length 16m 22m

Width 6m 8m

Penstock (Ground Surface) Length 370m 80m

Weir (Clear Overflow) Height Maximum Minimum Maximum Minimum

6.25 2.2 5m 3.2m

Length 22m 17m

Table 3: Civil Works Design


8

A.4.3 Estimated amount of emission reductions over the chosen crediting period: >> A ten year, non-renewable crediting period is selected for the project activity. The total estimated emission reductions as well as annual estimates are given in the table below. Year Annual Estimation of emission reductions in

tonnes of CO2e 2012 13,884.12 2013 27,768.24

2014 27,768.24

2015 27,768.24 2016 27,768.24

2017 27,768.24 2018 27,768.24

2019 27,768.24

2020 27,768.24 2021 27,768.24

2022 13,884.12 Total 277,682.4

Total Number of Crediting Years 10 years

Annual average of estimated emission reductions over the crediting period (tonnes of CO2 e)

27,768.24

A.4.4. Public funding of the small-scale project activity: >> There is no public funding required for the proposed project. A.4.5. Confirmation that the small-scale project activity is not a debundled component of a large scale project activity: A proposed small-scale project activity shall be deemed to be a debundled component of a large project activity if there is a registered small-scale CDM project activity or an application to register another small-scale CDM project activity5:

• With the same project participants; • In the same project category and technology/measure; and • Registered within the previous 2 years; and • Whose project boundary is within 1 km of the project boundary of the proposed small-scale

activity at the closest point.

5 Appendix C of the Simplified Modalities and Procedures for Small-Scale CDM project activities


9

The project activity does not meet any of the following criteria and is as such not a debundled component of a large scale project activity. SECTION B. Application of a baseline and monitoring methodology B.1. Title and reference of the approved baseline and monitoring methodology applied to the small-scale project activity: >> The approved baseline and monitoring methodology of the project activity are described as: AMS Type I Category I.D – Approved Methodology for Small-scale CDM project activities, Type 1 Grid Connected Renewable Electricity Generation (Version 17) B.2 Justification of the choice of the project category: >> The choice of methodology AMS I.D., Version 17, is justified as the proposed project activity meets its applicability criteria:

1. The proposed project is a run-of-river small hydro project, which will export electricity to the national grid. The project activity will augment the hydro power sources in Rwanda’s current electricity generation mix.

2. The total electricity generated is 5 MW and does not exceed the 15MW established as the eligibility criteria of all AMS small scale CDM project activities.

3. The proposed project will be constructed and implemented as a new hydro power plant. Therefore the project activity will not involve the addition of renewable energy generation units at an existing renewable power generation facility, nor does it seek to retrofit or modify an existing facility for renewable energy generation.

The proposed project activity therefore meets all the stated criteria established for the application of small-scale methodology under the Indicative simplified baseline and monitoring methodologies, AMS I.D. B.3. Description of the project boundary: >> The Indicative simplified baseline and monitoring methodologies for selected small-scale CDM project activities Category I.D defines the project boundary as the physical, geographical site of the renewable energy generation source. The project boundary is therefore the small hydro power installation for the Mushishito Small Hydro Project. This is demonstrated in the project boundary illustration in figure 1 below. Rwanda imports electricity through cross-border interconnections of about 15.5 MW from the DRC and about 3MW from Uganda. In accordance with the Tool to calculate the emission factor for an electricity system, for imports from connected electricity systems located in another host country (ies), the emission factor is 0 tons CO2 per MWh. Both the DRC and Uganda are Host countries.


10

Figure 1: Components of Mushishito Hydro Power Project

Figure 2: Mushishito SHP Project Boundary

Mushishiro Canal, Forebay & Penstock

Rukarara Canal, Forebay & Penstock

Powerhouse

Medium Voltage Sub-station

Rwanda National Grid.


11

The sources of greenhouse gas emissions in the project boundary are described and quantified in the table below. Source Gas Included Justification/

Explanation

Bas

elin

e

GHG emissions from electricity generated and subsequently distributed through the Rwanda National Grid

CO2 Yes Main Source of emissions.

CH4 No Conservative. Excluded for simplification.

N2O No Conservative. Excluded for simplification.

Pro

ject

Act

ivity

Emission from water reservoirs of hydro power plants

CO2 No The project activity is run-o-river hydro project and therefore does not create any reservoirs.

CH4 No The project activity is run-o-river hydro project and therefore does not create any reservoirs.

N2O No The project activity is run-o-river hydro project and therefore does not create any reservoirs.

GHG emissions generated from use of diesel generator

CO2 No Conservative. Exclude for simplification.

CH4 No Conservative. Exclude for simplification.

N2O No Conservative. Exclude for simplification.

Table 4: Sources of GHG emissions


12

B.4. Description of baseline and its development: >> The proposed project is a green field small 5 MW hydro power project which will export electricity to the national grid The baseline scenario therefore is the continued generation of electricity from the Rwandan National Grid which, for purposes of this PDD, is calculated by multiplying the energy produced by the renewable energy unit (MWh) multiplied by an emission coefficient (tCO2e/MWh). An elaborate description of the national Grid of Rwanda is provided below and adequately Description of the Rwanda National Grid: In the wake of the 2004 drought, the production of electricity decreased by 22.7%. . The use of thermal power generators increased the production of electricity over the following two years, with a rise of 27.5% and 45.4% respectively in 2005 and 20066. To meet the increased power demand supply gap, the government of Rwanda resulted in installation and commissioning of thermal power stations. These newly installed power plants have resulted in increased production costs despite the reduced demand supply gap. Higher demand and production cost as well as a reduction in revenues in real terms have led to large operating losses for the electricity operator RECO. In order to deal with this crisis, a doubling of electricity tariffs was approved as the cost burden was transferred to the consumers7. The following table shows thermal power stations commissioned in Rwanda since 2004.

Power Station Year of Commissioning

Fuel type

Total kWh generation

Total litres of fuel Consumed

Jabana 2004 HFO 16,325,766 3,635,143

Aggreko I Gikondo 2005 Diesel 42,820,811 11,077,134 Aggreko II Mukungwa

2006

Diesel

12,732,117

3,230,130

Jabana II 2009 HFO 73,866,951 18,981,462 Total Power Generated from Thermal Power Sources 42.8 MW

Thermal power generated as a percentage of total generation mix 57.9%

Table 5: Grid connected thermal power generation plants

6National Institute of Statistics of Rwanda: http://statistics.gov.rw/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=149&Itemid=312 7Rwanda: Electricity tariff reform: Angel-Urdinola, Diego


13

The following table shows the 2009 electricity generation mix. Plant Name Capacity (MW) Commissioning Power Source Generation

(MWh) Gihira 1.8 1984 Hydro 5666 Gisenya 1.2 1959 Hydro 1220 Ntaruka 11.25 1959 Hydro 29413 Mukungwa 12 1982 Hydro 62600 Solar Energy 0.25 2007 Solar 363 Methane Gas 4.5 2008 Methane 3312 Jabana 7.8 2004 HFO 16326 Jabana II 20 2009 HFO 73867 Aggreko 1 Gikondo 10 2005 Diesel 42821 Aggreko 2 Mukungwa

5 2006 Diesel 12732

Total Generation Mix

73.8 248318

Total Renewable Energy Contribution

31 102573

Total Thermal Energy Contribution

42.8 145746

Table 6: Rwanda electricity generation mix 2009 Based on this data, the business-as-usual situation in Rwanda would be electricity generation for export to the grid with a comparatively higher percentage of fossil fuel based thermal plants. The adverse effects attributable to this would be the increased release of greenhouse gases. The data used to establish the baseline emissions was sourced from the Rwandan DNA, REMA in their Grid Emission Factor Report from 2007 to 20098. This data represents the most recent, accurate and conservative information that is publicly available in Rwanda. The emission factor is calculated annually in a transparent and conservative manner using a combined margin (CM) which is calculated in accordance with the methodological tool to calculate the emission factor for an electricity system9 with data obtained from the Rwanda Electricity Corporation, (RECO).

8 Republic of Rwanda Environmental Management Authority: http://www.rema.gov.rw/dna/index.php?option=com_docman&task=doc_details&gid=24&Itemid= 9 EB 60 Version 02.1.0


14

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 small-scale CDM project activity: According to the CDM, EB54 report: Guidelines for demonstrating additionality of renewable energy Projects less than or equal to 5 MW and energy efficiency projects with energy savings <=20 GWh per year, (Version 01), Annex 15, page 1, Project activities up to 5 megawatts that employ renewable energy as their primary technology are additional if any one of the below conditions are satisfied:

a) The geographic location of the project activity is in LDCs/ SIDs or in a special underdeveloped zone of the host country identified by the Government before 28 May 2010;

b) The project activity is an off grid activity supplying energy to households/communities (less than 12 hrs. grid availability per 24 hrs. day is also considered as “off grid” for this assessment);

c) The project activity is for distributed energy generation with both conditions (i) and (ii) satisfied (see below);

i. Each of the independent subsystem/measure in the project activity is smaller than or equal to 750 kW electrical installed capacities;

ii. End users of the subsystem or measure are households/communities SMEs. d) The project activity employs specific renewable energy technologies/measures recommended by

the host country DNA and approved by the Board to be additional in the host country (conditions apply: The total installed capacity of technology/measure contributes less than or equal to 5% to national annual electricity generation).

The republic of Rwanda has been classified as a Least Developed Country by the United Nations list of LDCs10. The Mushishito project is a 5MW hydro power project .The project activity has satisfied condition (a) listed above from Executive Board 54, Version 01, Annex 15. The proposed project activity therefore, is additional. B.6. Emission reductions:

B.6.1. Explanation of methodological choices: >> The approved baseline and monitoring methodology AMS-I.D. version 17 has been selected and is applicable to the proposed project activity. Therefore the following steps and sub-steps have been employed to calculate the baseline, project and leakage emissions reductions.

10 www.un.org/special-rep/ohrlls/ohrlls/allcountries-regions.pdf - Similar


15

1. Baseline emissions (BEy)

The baseline emissions are a product of electrical energy baseline (EGBL,y) which is expressed in MWh of electricity produced by the renewable generating unit multiplied by the grid emission factor. BEy = EGBL,y* EFCO2,grid,y

Where; BEy is the Baseline emissions in tCO2y EGBL,y is the quantity of net electricity supplied annually to the grid as a result of the implementation of the CDM project activity in MWh EFCO2,grid,y is the CO2 emissions factor of the grid supplied The following steps are described in “Tool to calculate the emission factor for an electricity system.11” Step 1: Identify the relevant electricity systems. The net sum of electricity generated by the proposed project will be exported to the Rwandan Electric Grid. The project electricity system is defined by the power plants in Rwanda which are physically connected through transmission and distribution lines to the project activity through the national grid. The Republic of Rwanda does import electricity from The Democratic Republic of Congo as well as Uganda both of which are host countries. As per the “Tool to calculate baseline emissions factor for a grid connected electricity system”, imports from connected electricity systems located in another host country (ies), the emission factor is (zero) 0 tCO2 per MWh.

Figure 3: Map of Rwanda's Electricity grid

11 http://cdm.unfccc.int/methodologies/PAmethodologies/tools/am-tool-07-v2.1.pdf


16

Step 2: Choose whether to include off-grid power plants in the project electricity system (optional) Project participants may choose between the following two options to calculate the operating margin and build margin emission factor: Option I: Only grid power plants are included in the calculation. Option II: Both grid power plants and off-grid power plants are included in the calculation. Off-grid power plants should meet at least a threshold of 10% of the total capacity of grid power plants in the electricity system for their inclusion in the calculation of the grid emission factor12. For purposes of this PDD Option 1 has been selected because the contribution of off-grid power stations to Rwanda is minimal and subsequently verifiable data for off-grid plants is widely unavailable. Step 3: Select a method to determine the operating margin (OM) The calculation of the operating margin emission factor (EFgrid,OM,y) is based on one of the following methods: (a) Simple OM; or (b) Simple adjusted OM; or (c) Dispatch data analysis OM; or (d) Average OM. In accordance with the guidelines established in the tool, the Simple OM (method (a.)) has been selected to calculate the operating margin emission factor. Justification for selection of the simple OM is described as follows:

1. According to the tool, the simple OM is applicable to the project if the low-cost/must run resources constitute less than 50 % of the total grid generation in an average of 5 most recent years or based on long-term averages for hydro-electric power production. Low-cost/ must run sources are defined as power plants that are dispatched independently of the daily or seasonal load of the grid. These are typically renewable energy power plants such as hydro plants.

The total contribution of Rwanda’s renewable energy sources to the national electricity generation mix is 48.4%. This extends over a 5 year period as is demonstrated in the table below Year 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 Percentage Contribution

56.74% 20.71% 19.9% 36.83% 29.23%

12 Annex 2 of the Tool to calculate baseline emissions factor for a grid connected electricity system.


17

Table 4: Contribution of low-cost/must run sources to the total grid generation mix13

2. Calculation using the dispatch data (method c) analysis is not publicly available in Rwanda. This information is absolutely necessary for the (method c) to be applicable absence of which disqualifies its use.

The emissions factor can be calculated using either of the two following data vintages:

1. Ex ante option where calculations are based on a 3-year generation-weighted average, based on the most recent data available.

2. Ex post option where the emission factor is determined for the year in which the project activity displaces grid electricity, requiring the emissions factor to be updated annually during monitoring.

A 3 year ex-ante vintage has been selected, accordingly the most recent data from the last three years, namely; 2007, 2008 and 2009 will be used to calculate the simple OM emission factor with a fixed emissions factor determined at the validation stage. The project participant will make this data available at the time of submission of the CDM-PDD to the DOE for validation. Step 4: Calculate the operating margin emission factor according to the selected method.

(a) Simple OM selected The simple OM emission factor is calculated as the generation-weighted average CO2 emissions per unit net electricity generation (tCO2/MWh) of all generating power plants serving the system, not including low-cost/must-run power plants/units. The Simple OM may be calculated based on the following options:

1. Option A: Based on the net electricity generation and a CO2 emission factor of each power unit

2. Option B: Based on the total net electricity generation of all power plants serving the system and the fuel types and total fuel consumption of the project electricity system.

Data on fuel consumption, types of fuel and net electricity generation for each of the plants in Rwanda which supply the national grid is publicly available, therefore Option A (Calculation based on average efficiency and electricity generation of each plant) has been selected to calculate the OM emissions factor under the simple OM method. Option A is provided as follows:

13http://www.rema.gov.rw/dna/index.php?option=com_docman&task=doc_details&gid=24&Itemid=


18

EFgrid,OMsimple,y, = ……………………………………… (1.)

Where: EFgrid,OMsimple,y= Simple operating margin CO2 emission factor in year y (tCO2 /MWh) EGm,y= Net quantity of electricity generated and delivered to the grid by power unit m in year y (MWh) EFEL,m,y= CO2 emission factor of power unit m in year y (tCO2 /MWh) m = All power units serving the grid in year y except low-cost / must-run power units y = Using the ex-ante option, y is the three most recent years for which data is available at the time of submission of the CDM-PDD to the DOE for validation. Determination of EFEL,m,y

Option A1. If for a power unit m data on fuel consumption and electricity generation is available, the emission factor (EFEL,m,y) should be determined as follows: Option A1 is provided as follows:

EFEL,m,y= …………………….. (2.)

Where: EFEL,m,y= CO2 emission factor of power unit m in year y (tCO2/MWh) FCi,m,y= Amount of fossil fuel type i consumed by power unit m in year y (Mass or volume unit) NCVi,y= Net calorific value (energy content) of fossil fuel type i in year y (GJ/mass or volume unit) EFCO2,i,y= CO2 emission factor of fossil fuel type i in year y (tCO2/GJ) EGm,y= Net quantity of electricity generated and delivered to the grid by power unit m in year y (MWh) m = All power units serving the grid in year y except low-cost/must-run power units


19

i = All fossil fuel types combusted in power unit m in year y y =Either of the three most recent years for which data is available at the time of submission of the CDM-PDD to the DOE for validation (ex ante option). The details of the calculations are provided in Annex 3. For each of the most recent years for which data are available (2007, 2008, and 2009), first determine the emissions, then the total electricity generation. Then determine the Simple Operating Margin Emissions Factor as the total emissions over these three years divided by the total generation over the same period. The Simple OM emission factor is calculated ex-ante as a 3-year average (2007-2009) EFgrid,OMsimple,y= 0.7082tCO2/MWh Step 5: Identify the group of power units to be included in the build margin The sample group of power units m used to calculate the build margin consists of either:

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

(b) The set of power capacity additions in the electricity system that comprise 20% of the system generation (in MWh) and that have been built most recently

For vintage data, the project participant has selected the ex-ante vintage option. In accordance with the tool, for the first crediting period, calculation of the build margin emission factor is based on the most recent information available on units already built for sample group m at the time of CDM-PDD submission to the DOE for validation. For the second crediting period, the build margin emission factor should be updated based on the most recent information available on units already built at the time of submission of the request for renewal of the crediting period to the DOE. For the third crediting period, the build margin emission factor calculated for the second crediting period should be used. This option does not require monitoring the emission factor during the crediting period. Step 6: Calculate the build margin emission factor The build margin emissions factor is the generation-weighted average emission factor (tCO2/MWh) of all power units m during the most recent year y for which power generation data is available, calculated as follows:

EFgrid,BM,y= ……………………….… (3.)


20

Where: EFgrid,BM,y= Build margin CO2 emission factor in year y (tCO2 /MWh) EGm,y= Net quantity of electricity generated and delivered to the grid by power unit m in year y (MWh) EFEL,m,y= CO2 emission factor of power unit m in year y (tCO2/MWh) m = Power units included in the build margin y = Most recent historical year for which power generation data is available. Based on the formulae above in Step5, the EFgrid,BM,y is established as 0.7007 tCO2 /MWh (see Annex 3). Step 7: Calculate the combine margin emissions factor The CM emissions factor is calculated as follows: EFgrid,CM,y = EFgrid,OM,y × WOM + EFgrid,BM,y × WBM……………………………………………..(4.)

Where: wOM = Weighting of OM emissions factor (%) wBM = Weighting of BM emissions factor (%) As indicated in the Tool, for all power generation projects other than wind and solar power, the weights Wom and Wbm are each = 0.5. Using these values and the values of Operating Margin and Build Margin emission factors, the Combined Margin Emission Factor can be calculated as 0.7044 tCO2MWh.

3. Project Emissions (PEy) For most renewable energy project activities, PEy = 0. The only consideration for project leakage for hydro applications is the water reservoirs.

4. Leakage The proposed project activity is installed as a new renewable energy application; as such there is no transference of energy generating equipment from any other project. Therefore, Leakage is zero.

5. Emissions Reductions


21

The emission reductions (ERy ) by the Project activity during a given year y is the difference between baseline emissions (BEy ), project activity emissions (PEy ) and leakage (Ly ), as follows. Emission reductions are calculated as follows: ER y = BE y − PE y − LE y

Therefore, the ex-ante annual emission reductions ( ERy ) calculation by the proposed project activity is the difference between baseline emissions ( BE y) and project emissions, that is: ERy=BEy − PEy− LEy As has been established the PEy and the LEy are both equal to 0. Therefore; ERy=BEy = 27,768.24 (tCO2e)

B.6.2. Data and parameters that are available at validation: Data / Parameter: EFCO2,grid,y and EFgrid,CM,y Data unit: tCO2/MWh Description: CO2 emission factor of the grid in year y Source of data used: Literature review of the 2009 Grid Emission Factor 2009 commissioned and

published by REMA( DNA of Rwanda) Value applied: 0.7044tCO2/MWh Justification of the choice of data or description of measurement methods and procedures actually applied :

This is the weighted average of the operating and built margin emission factor, calculated according to the CDM tool to calculate the emission factor of an electricity grid.

Any comment: Calculated as weighed sum of the OM and BM emission factors

Data / Parameter: EFgrid,OM,2009 Data unit: tCO2/MWh Description: CO2 operating margin emission factor of the grid. Source of data used: Literature review of the detailed 2009 Rwanda grid Emission factor published

by the Rwanda Environmental Management Authority. Value applied: 0.7082 tCO2 / MWh Justification of the choice of data or description of measurement methods and procedures actually applied :

This data has been sourced from the Rwandan DNA’s (REMA) website. Information on the Grid Emission Factor has been made publicly available. This data will be used be in calculation of baseline emissions.

Any comment: Calculated in accordance with the methodological tool to calculate the emission factor for an electricity system version 02.1.0.


22

Data / Parameter: EFgrid,BM,2009 Data unit: tCO2/MWh Description: CO2 build margin emission factor of the grid. Source of data used: Literature review of the detailed 2009 Rwanda grid Emission factor published

by the Rwanda Environmental Management Authority. Value applied: 0.7007 tCO2 / MWh Justification of the choice of data or description of measurement methods and procedures actually applied :

This data has been sourced from the Rwandan DNA’s (REMA) website. Information on the Grid Emission Factor has been made publicly available. This data will be used be in calculation of baseline emissions.

Any comment: Calculated in accordance with the methodological “Tool to calculate the emission factor for an electricity system version 02.1.0.”

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

Baseline Emissions: The baseline emissions are the product of electrical energy baseline (EGBL,y), expressed in MWh of electricity produced by the renewable generating unit multiplied by the grid emission factor. Accordingly the Grid emission Factor has been calculated in accordance with “Tool to calculate the emission factor for an electricity system” and the following values have been established by the most recent publicly available data from the REMA GEF 2007-2009 report. OM emission factor, EFgridOMsimple2007 -2009 = 0.70817 t CO2/MW14 BM emission factor, EFgridBM, 2008 = 0.7007 t CO2/MWh CM emission factor, EFgridCM2010 = 0.7044 t CO2/MWh Therefore the Baseline emissions are BEy= EGbl,y* EFco2,grid,2007-2009

BEy= 39,420MWh * 0.70442 tCO2/MWh

BEy= 27,768.24 mtCO2e ERy=BEy − PEy− LEy As has been established in section B.6.2 the PEy and the LEy are both equal to 0. Therefore; ERy=BEy = 27,768.24 (tCO2e)

14See Annex 3


23

Therefore the annual emission reductions from the proposed project activity are 27,768.24 mtCO2e and 276,124.80 for the entire 10 year fixed crediting period

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

>> Estimated emission reductions to be realized by implementation of the proposed project activity are summarized in the following table. Year Estimation of

baseline emissions (tCO2 e)

Estimation of project activity emissions (tCO2 e

Estimation of leakage (tCO2 e

Estimation of overall emission reductions (tCO2 e)

2012 27,768.24 0 0 27,768.24 2013 27,768.24 0 0 27,768.24 2014 27,768.24 0 0 27,768.24 2015 27,768.24 0 0 27,768.24 2016 27,768.24 0 0 27,768.24 2017 27,768.24 0 0 27,768.24 2018 27,768.24 0 0 27,768.24 2019 27,768.24 0 0 27,768.24 2020 27,768.24 0 0 27,768.24 2021 27,768.24 0 0 27,768.24 Total tonnes of CO2 emission reductions over crediting period

277,682.4

0

0

277,682.4

Table 7: Summary of ex-ante estimation of emissions reduction B.7 Application of a monitoring methodology and description of the monitoring plan:

B.7.1 Data and parameters monitored: B.7.1 Data and parameters monitored:

Data / Parameter: EGy Data unit: MWh Description: Net Electricity exported by the project activity to the grid in year y. Source of data to be used:

Electricity meter

Value of data applied for the purpose of calculating expected emission reductions in section B.5

39,420 MWh.

Description of measurement methods

The net sum of electricity exported to the grid will be monitored by metering equipment. All records will be stored on electronic databases. The value of the


24

and procedures to be applied:

net electricity exported will be established as the difference between exports and imports to and from the grid Meter readings will be provided by RECO to the Project Owner every month. The Project Participant will review readings and upon analysis; approve and proceed to store the data.

QA/QC procedures to be applied:

. Sales record to the grid and other records are used to cross check this data and hence ensure consistency. Calibration of the metering equipment is established under Rwandan regulations for the same. A 2% margin of error has been provided for under the PPA. Additional provisions for auxiliary meters and testing have also been facilitated in the PPA to further facilitate accuracy in readings.

Any comment: The data will be archived electronically for two years after the end of the crediting period.

Data / Parameter: EGm,y

Data unit: MWh Description: Net quantity of electricity generated and delivered to the grid by power unit m in

year y. Source of data to be used:

RECO records

Value of data applied for the purpose of calculating expected emission reductions in section B.5

Information is available in excel spread sheet in annex 3.

Description of measurement methods and procedures to be applied:

Measured continuously by electricity meters and recorded monthly.


This data will be directly used for calculation of emission reductions.

Any comment: Data / Parameter: Cap

Data unit: W Description: Installed capacity of the hydro power plant after implementation of the project

activity Source of data to be used:

Mushishito SHP project site.

Value of data applied for the purpose of calculating expected emission reductions in

5,000,000


25

section B.5 Description of measurement methods and procedures to be applied:

Determine the installed capacity based on recognized standards.


Any comment:


26

B.7.2 Description of the monitoring plan:

>> The monitoring plan for the proposed project activity will be implemented in accordance with the following procedural steps:

1. Objectives: The monitoring plan for the proposed project activity is established so as to guarantee accurate and verifiable data needed to calculate the net electricity exported to the Rwandan National Grid and the subsequent emissions reductions realized from the project activity. The Build Emission Factor is established at validation stage and will not be subject to monitoring during the crediting period. Key Parameters for monitoring includes: electricity exports to the national grid; net electricity exported to the national grid and the installed capacity of the project activity.

2. Roles and Responsibilities: Monitoring of the above stated parameters will be a collective effort of the project owner, REFAD, Rwanda, the project participant, Viability Africa, LLC and the off-take partner, Rwanda Electricity Corporation, RECO. The primary responsibility however lies with the project owner as a majority of the related monitoring tasks are identical to their Operations and Maintenance obligations.

a. REFAD Rwanda, Ltd. As project owner, REFAD Rwanda, Ltd. will be responsible for recording electricity exports and imports. This data will be recorded per kilowatt hour. The electricity meters will be read on-site and housed at the power station at the project site. Operational staff hired by the project owner will be responsible for daily operations of the plant. All records kept by the project owner will be recorded in an electronic database. This data will be confirmed and weighed against sales records from RECO for accuracy. In accordance with the Power Purchase Agreement the metered readings kept by RECO will be used as the accurate data on electricity sales to the national grid. Subsequently this data will be used to calculate emissions reductions generated from the project.

b. Viability Africa, LLC The pre-mentioned project participant will ensure REFAD Rwanda is trained so that monitoring takes place in accordance with the guidelines established in the approved baseline methodology AMS-ID. Similarly the project participant will cross-reference all data collected and collated to verify that the data is accurate i.e. devoid of any anomalies in the accurate data collected vis-à-vis projected data on electricity sales.

3. Metering and Calibration. The electricity metering equipment will be properly configured according to the Government of Rwanda’s national regulations and standards. The metering equipment will be pre-checked for Quality Control and Assurance by certified entities to ensure compliance with recent international standards before the proposed project activity is implemented.


27

4. Data collection & recording The project owner and the Rwanda Electricity Corporation, (RECO) will read the meters and record the data on a monthly basis. All written documents such as maps, diagrams and reports will be stored and available for the verification so that the reliability of the information may be checked. All data should be archived for two years after the end of the crediting period. The project owner will keep and back up the original and copies of electricity sales and purchase receipts for each month provided by the RECO for cross check purposes.

5. Monitoring Structure The project developer will implement an operations and management structure where monitoring responsibilities will be explicitly defined. The operation and management department will be responsible for ERS monitoring, recordkeeping and the implementation of proper QA procedures. All the information from this department will be consistent and easily verifiable with all the relevant data from other departments in case an external audit should require it. All operation and management procedures will be adapted to include the carbon monitoring component and the adequate accounting of the emission reductions. The person in charge of the carbon credits monitoring will report to the operation and management manager and will receive training in accordance with the owners training procedures. This individual area will be in charge of the following activities: See Annex 4 for further details on the monitoring plan. B.8 Date of completion of the application of the baseline and monitoring methodology and the name of the responsible person(s)/entity(ies) >> Date of completion of the baseline study and monitoring plan 30/06/ 2011. Viability Africa, LLC, the project participant and CDM consultant, was the entity responsible for the application of the baseline and monitoring methodology for the Mushishito SHP project. Contact information of Viability Africa, LLC: Mr Kyle Denning [email protected] Viability Africa, LLC Daykio Building, Chania Avenue, Kilimani, P.O. Box 35026 - 00200 Nairobi, Kenya Tel: + 254 (0) 700 414 253


28

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: >> In accordance with the approved modalities and procedure for the CDM, the project start date is June, 2011. This represents the date at which construction of the hydro project activity began.

C.1.2. Expected operational lifetime of the project activity: >> 25 years as per the life time of the Power Purchase Agreement. 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: >> N/A C.2.1.2. Length of the first crediting period: >> N/A C.2.2. Fixed crediting period: C.2.2.1. Starting date: >> July 1st 2012 C.2.2.2. Length: >> 10 years


29

SECTION D. Environmental impacts >> D.1. If required by the host Party, documentation on the analysis of the environmental impacts of the project activity: >> The government of Rwanda through the Rwanda environment Management Authority pursuant to the statute that establishes the latter mandates that a complete EIA study and report be conducted for a series of project lists for which this project activity qualifies. Sub Article 2) of the Environmental Impact Assessment Regulations, 2007 states any project listed under Impact Level III of Schedule I to these Regulations shall require a full environmental impact assessment by the preparation of an environmental impact report, unless the Authority refuses permission. The construction of a hydro power project facility is in this category and thus must be subjected to full scale EIA. A complete Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) for the proposed project was carried out by independent consultants hired by the project owner, REFAD Rwanda. The EIA study and report was approved by the Rwanda Development Board (RDB) upon approval the project developer was awarded EIA certificate number N RDB/3/EC 77/ 09/2010 on the 28th of September 2010. The EIA certificate was issued and copied to the Ministry of Infrastructure, the Rwanda Electric Corporation and the Rwanda Environmental Management Authority and the Local authority in the Nyamagabe District in which the project is to be implemented. The following summary briefly highlights the major focus points of the EIA report. Commented raised Response

Water and hydrological consequences Water quality will be affected by sedimentation and this during construction phase

Mitigation measures o No digging or grubbing will be done during clearance of the reservoirs. Trees in the areas to be flooded will be harvested prior to inundation; and, o Site drainage systems will include sedimentation basins. o Water quality downstream will be monitored visually on a daily basis, with samples taken and analysed on periodic basis.

Flooding downstream the two rivers is a possibility o Water quality downstream will be monitored visually on a daily basis, with samples taken and analysed on periodic basis. o The amount of the fertilizer used in the catchment should be monitored to avoid eutrophication.

Air quality


30

Dust generated around the project site and along the access roads could impact health of the population and negatively affect photosynthesis Emissions of GHGs could increase cause of bad maintained vehicles and machines

Mitigation o Dust will be controlled by following standard good site practices, including: • Stockpiles of friable material will be grassed in order to prevent wind throw (and sediment run-off to the river during wet weather); • During dry conditions, access roads will be wetted or treated with a biodegradable (e.g. lignin-based) road sealing product to prevent dust generation; • Batching plant, conveyors, etc. to be suitably contained to minimise offsite dust; • Trucks containing friable material will be covered if using public highways; and, • A maintenance programme for plant and vehicles will be implemented, to ensure emissions of particulates, SO2 and NO2 are minimized.

Road Hazard and Safety Mitigation o A traffic management plan should be developed, in consultation with community representatives. It is expected to include: • All drivers to undergo driving and vision tests prior to recruitment; • All drivers to receive training on the operation of their specific vehicle, and in awareness of pedestrians and cyclists; • Repair of road shoulders and appropriate markings to separate pedestrian areas to traffic on public roads; • Appropriate speed limits for project vehicles; • All vehicles to be lit front and back at night; and, • Vehicle safety classes will be held in the affected villages, in particular for pedestrians and bicyclists.

Noise and vibration Noise pollution and vibration are real possibilities due to activities during construction

Appropriate mitigation measures

Social economic issues


31

AIDS/HIV is susceptible to impact the population cause of employees coming far from the surrounding communities

Mitigation measures REFAD Rwanda is committed to measures that will reduce the risk of an increase in STDs/HIV/AIDS as a result of the project. For this reason, the following human resource management policies will be adopted. • No construction camp will be erected at the project sites; • Unskilled workers (labourers) will be recruited, as available, from the local population and particularly from the villages affected by the project. Therefore these workers will remain resident in their homes, which will reduce the need for accommodation for single male unskilled workers. • An STD/HIV/AIDS awareness and prevention programme will be incorporated into the training package for all workers. This will be developed and delivered by NGOs with solid track record in Rwanda; • A programme designed specifically for promoting safe sex for the construction workforce will be developed. Condoms will be made available to workers if wanted, via the site clinic; and, • An STD/HIV/AIDS awareness and prevention programme will be delivered to local communities. This will be developed and delivered by the same NGO) in coordination with the District Health Officers. • The measures outlined above are intended to minimize the risk of an increase in STDs as a result of the project. Appropriate mitigation measures

Vegetation Destroyed vegetation should be replanted and indigenous species considered

Mitigation measures o Cutting of trees from the pine woodlots in the area proposed for the project facilities is unavoidable. The proponent should therefore undertake a reforestation program to restore the wood mass felled during the project development. The woodlot should be expanded twice the number felled. o REFAD Rwanda should also establish a tree nursery for planting along the banks of Rukarara and Mushishiro rivers as a mechanism of preventing siltation of the reservoirs and distribute


32

to the local communities to protect the soil from erosion. o In homesteads where trees will be felled, compensation should be undertaken depending on the value of the tree in question. If it’s a fruit tree, an appropriate compensation consume rate with the value of the tree to the household economy and nutritional benefits foregone until a new source can mature to provide the same benefit to the owners. Alternative mitigation measures should

Analysis Socio-cultural and socio-economic aspects that can influence the project

Opportunities - Availability of labour force - Enough cooperatives of coffee - Existence of business centres - The need of electricity in the area

Constraints - Fear of compensation in Kind for people that will lose the land to pave way to weir, dams and canals. - Poor payment and long hours of work per day.

Institutional aspects that can influence the project Opportunities - Enough police security - Unity and reconciliation committee - Availability of health centres, S. Schools & Small Industries

Constraints - Poor lodging and restaurants in the area

Historical & political aspects that can influence the project

Opportunities - Enough security in the project area and the surroundings - District authorities support the project as it is in line with government strategies and policies.

Constraints - Poor sensitization and mobilization about the project.

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: >> During the construction and operation periods, the mitigation measure required in EIA will be strictly executed by the project owner. In addition, inspection checks will be carried out by the Environmental Management Authority during construction and operation period to make sure that the project consistent with the mitigation measures established in the EIA and meet national and local environmental standards.


33

Through these measures, the adverse impacts on the environment caused by the project will be controlled and kept to a minimum. Thus no significant environmental impacts are identified for the project. SECTION E. Stakeholders’ comments >> E.1. Brief description how comments by local stakeholders have been invited and compiled: >> A stakeholders’ meeting for the project was held at the Top Tower hotel, Kigali, Rwanda on April, 2011. Multiple mediums were used for communicating the date and venue of this meeting. Personal letters sent to each of the identified stakeholders, invitation emails sent to relevant organizations, physical adverts handed out in the local community at the project site, as well as advertisement posters placed at local community locations and throughout Kigali. All of these invitations informed potential stakeholders and/or interested parties of the project, the purpose of the meeting and of the time, date and location. The stakeholders’ consultation started at 1400 hours on 29/04/2011 with the attendance of sixteen people. Delivering the presentation during the meeting were the CDM consultant (Viability Africa), project developer and the DNA of Rwanda. Viability Africa opened the meeting by introducing the participants in attendance and outlined the objectives of the meeting. The DNA of Rwanda explained the CDM; its progress, its purpose, and its future. Viability Africa explained the project by outlining the planned project activity in a non-technical manner and the audience was able to see pictures of the project site as well as pictures of already commissioned similar project to gain a strong understanding and feel for the goals of the project owners. Kris Gahiga, a member of REFAD Rwanda, then explained the project in French to ensure that all attendees clearly understood the project. A local translator additionally explained the project in Kinyarwanda to the local community members who were present. There were multiple questions and comments throughout the presentation, all of which were recorded in the meeting minutes as well as a video compilation of the meeting and through multiple photographs taken. After the presentation, the attendees posed a variety of questions for clarification. A list of the questions and clarifications are listed below (some comments and questions were not direct but can be summarized in the following):

1. What are the environmental consequences of the project? 2. What about the other projects being developed on the same river? 3. What are the concerns with the hydrology? 4. Where will the input materials for the project are sourced? Why not locally? 5. Will the project reach financial closer? 6. Has a PPA been signed? 7. Where will the project power go?

E.2. Summary of the comments received: >> All the stakeholders’ comments were analysed and summarized as shown below. Each participant completed a participant evaluation form and these filled participant evaluation forms were collected.


34

Most of the comments of the participants were positive and supportive to the project rather than objective or critical. Of all the engaged stakeholders in attendance at the meeting, 100% supported the construction of the project. A good number believed that the project would positively impact on the development of the local economy. However, the major public advice towards this project waste give close attention to the problem of external sourcing of the materials for the project, the impacts of the project on fish and wildlife, and the job creation to the local community. Therefore these concerns must be considered. With the implementation of the project, the public generally hopes that the project will spur local economic and infrastructural development and increase income and social benefits. E.3. Report on how due account was taken of any comments received: >> All clarification sorted from the concerned parties, that is, the project owner and the consultants were responded to and relevant recommendations incorporated in due time. The answers to the comments as presented in the previous section are described and summarized below:

1. What are the environmental consequences of the project? Answer: A complete EIA was conducted and approved by REMA. Viability Africa offered to provide the EIA to any interested stakeholder who would like to review. Also, a summary of the environmental impacts of the project was provided at the meeting. Viability Africa and REFAD Rwanda highlighted the precautions taken to mitigate as many negative environmental consequences as possible. However, some negative impact will be impossible to avoid, and it was emphasized that a holistic view of the benefits and consequences of the project needed to be maintained. All environmental comments such as the impact on the river, wildlife, fisheries, and overall plants and nature in the region would be mitigated to preserve and not destruct as much as possible of the project site. Additionally, currently in place infrastructure such as roads and bridges would be used to eliminate the need for as much new construction as possible.

2. What about other projects being developed on the same river? Answer: These projects and their impact are fully accounted for in the feasibility study and additionally the project on Mushishiro River will be unique. The Mushishiro project will provide security for production when projects on Rukarara impact the project’s capacity for generation. Rukarara will be impacted by projects upstream, and current hydrology analysis after the implementation of this project is being closely monitored to meet production of the new system.

3. What are the concerns with hydrology? Answer: The project has been analysed and reviewed using decades of data and even today reporting continues from the site to ensure quality input data into the feasibility study. The new data is coming from hydrology studies as well as direct readings for projects upstream for the Rukarara project site.

4. Where will input materials for the project be sourced? Why not all locally? Answer: There are quality concerns when using all local resources. As many local workers and resources will be employed but only if such utilization will not jeopardize the overall success of the project. A


35

French firm will do the EPC work for the project and will guarantee quality results. The local community and Rwandan government have been engaged in the project since day one and all measures to support the local economy, whether sourcing for physical or human resources, will be emphasized throughout project construction and operation.

5. Will the project reach financial closure? Answer: The project will reach financial closure by Q3 2011.

6. Has a PPA been signed? Answer: Yes and has been considered investment worthy by multiple financial institutions that have analysed the investment opportunity.

7. Where will the power go? Answer: The power will be sold to the Rwanda National Grid at a fixed agreement between the Project Company and the utility company. The project activity has complied with all the applicable conditions detailed in the consents and agreements. As per the UNFCCC requirement the PDD will be published at the validator’s /UNFCCC website for public comments. All stakeholders were encouraged to continue to provide additional feedback as it arose throughout the development and implementation of the project, and were provided multiple avenues to communicate with the project developer and consultants both locally and abroad.


36

Annex 1

CONTACT INFORMATION ON PARTICIPANTS IN THE PROJECT ACTIVITY Organization: Renewable Energy For Accelerated development, Rwanda (REFAD) Ltd Street/P.O.Box: 6381 Kigali, Rwanda Building: 2nd Floor, Concord Building, Blvd de l’UmugandaKacyiru City: Kigali State/Region: Postfix/ZIP: Country: Rwanda Telephone: +33 67 470 4930 FAX: E-Mail: [email protected] URL: www.refad-group.com Represented by: Jacques Ntogue Title: Vice-president of business development Salutation: Last Name: Ntogue Middle Name: First Name: Jacques Department: Mobile: Direct tel: Personal E-Mail: [email protected] Organization: Viability Africa, LLC Street/P.O.Box: P.O. Box 35026 (00200) Building: Suite B1-3, Daykio Building State: Nairobi State/Region: Postfix/ZIP: Country: Kenya Telephone: +254 700 414 253 FAX: E-Mail: [email protected] URL: www.viabilityafrica.com Represented by: Kyle Denning Title: Managing Director Salutation: Last Name: Denning Middle Name: First Name: Kyle Mobile: Direct tel:


37

Personal E-Mail: [email protected]


38

Annex 2

INFORMATION REGARDING PUBLIC FUNDING

No public funding is involved in this project activity.


39

Annex 3

BASELINE INFORMATION

Plants Capacity

Commissioning

Plant Type

Generation (Kwh)

Fuel Consumption

in litres

Fuel consumption in tonnes

Carbon Emissi

on Factor (tCO2 / t Fuel)

tCO2 tCO2/ MWh

GIHIRA 1.8 1984 Hydro 5,908,750 GISENYI 1.2 1959 Hydro 4,380,560

NTARUKA 11.25 1959 Hydro 15,350,620

MUKUNGWA 12 1982 Hydro 40,094,200

Solar energy 0.25 2007 Solar -

Methane gas

4.5 2008 Methane

-

Total RE

65,734,130

Jabana

7.8

2004 HFO 25,397,799 6,459,510 6,007 3.127 18,784.725

0.740

Jabana II 20 2009 HFO - - 3.127 - -

Gatsata

4.77 2004 HFO 14,071,873 3,900,096 3,627 3.127 11,341.763

0.806

Aggreko I Gikondo

10

2005 Diesel 10,653,130 2,798,873 2,337 3.186 7,446.571 0.699

Aggreko II Mukungwa

5 2006 Diesel - - - 3.186 - -

Total thermal 50,122,802 Gisoro 1,806,552 Mururu II - Goma (Electrogaz)

16,109

Total export 1,822,661

Rusizi 1 20,891,800 Rusizi 2 64,564,000 Goma(Snel) 100,819 Kabale(UEB) 3,594,337 Total Import 89,150,956 Total LCMR%

57%

Total Generation

115,856,932

Table 8: Total Generation and LCMR % 2005


40

Plants Capacit

y Commiss

ioning Plant Type

Generation (Kwh)

Fuel Consumption in litres

Fuel consumption

in tonnes

tCO2 tCO2/ MWh

GIHIRA 1.8 1984 Hydro 6,032,050 GISENYI 1.2 1959 Hydro 3,814,850 NTARUKA 11.25 1959 Hydro 1,197,400 MUKUNGWA 12 1982 Hydro 22,880,700 Solar energy 0.25 2007 Solar

Methane gas

4.5 2008 Methane

Total RE

33,925,000

Jabana

7.8

2004 HFO 18,943,230 4,874,180 4,533 14,174 0.748

Jabana II 20 2009 HFO - - - -

Gatsata 4.77 2004 HFO 1,184,000 338,308 315 984 0.831

Aggreko I Gikondo

10

2005 Diesel 82,256,473 21,708,919

18,127 57,758 0.702

Aggreko II Mukungwa

5 2006 Diesel 27,477,795 7,237,833 6,044 19,257 0.701

Total thermal 129,861,498

Gisoro 2,033,200

Mururu II - Goma (Electrogaz)

-


Rusizi 1 20,528,400

Rusizi 2 40,784,000

Goma(Snel) - Kabale(UEB) 2,785,000 Total Import

64,097,400

Total LCMR%

21%

Total Generation

163,786,498



41

Plants Capacity

Commissioning

Plant Type

Generation (Kwh)


Fuel consumption

in tonnes

tCO2 tCO2/ MWh

GIHIRA 1.8 1984 Hydro 7,196,241 GISENYI 1.2 1959 Hydro 5,590,680 NTARUKA 11.25 1959 Hydro 2,143,346 MUKUNGWA 12 1982 Hydro 18,102,400 Solar energy 0.25 2007 Solar 124,283

Methane gas

4.5 2008 Methane

-

Total RE

33,156,950

Jabana

7.8

2004 HFO 11,029,740 3,051,032 2,837 8,873 0.804

Jabana II 20 2009 HFO - - - - -

Gatsata 4.77 2004 HFO 1,979,000 539,900 502 1,570 0.793

Aggreko I Gikondo

10

2005 Diesel 79,214,470 21,501,137 17,953 57,205 0.722

Aggreko II Mukungwa

5 2006 Diesel 41,013,850 10,635,261 8,880 28,296 0.690

Total thermal

133,237,060

Gisoro 2,144,300

Mururu II 2,000 Goma (Electrogaz)

-


Rusizi 1 19,791,640

Rusizi 2 64,944,000 Goma(Snel) - Kabale(UEB) 673,500 Total Import

85,409,140

Total LCMR%

20%

Total Generation

166,394,010



42

Plants Capacity

Commissioning

Plant Type

Generation (Kwh)


Fuel consumption

in tonnes

tCO2 tCO2/ MWh


Methane gas

4.5 2008 Methane

-

Total RE

71,544,031

Jabana

7.8

2004 HFO 5,451,600 1,192,060 1,109 3,467 0.636

Jabana II 20 2009 HFO - - - -

Gatsata 4.77 2004 HFO - - - -

Aggreko I Gikondo

10

2005 Diesel 78,203,264 20,418,708 17,050 54,325 0.695

Aggreko II Mukungwa

5 2006 Diesel 39,039,848 10,102,670 8,436 26,879 0.688

Total thermal

122,694,712

Gisoro 2,108,950


-


Rusizi 1 20,156,127

Rusizi 2 64,258,000 Goma(Snel) - Kabale(UEB) 74,000 Total Import

84,488,127

Total LCMR%

37%

Total Generation

194,238,743

Table 11: Total Generation and LCMR 2008


43

Plants Capacity

Commissioning

Plant Type

Generation (Kwh)


Fuel consumption

in tonnes

tCO2 tCO2/ MWh


Methane gas

4.5 2008 Methane

3,311,590

Total RE

102,572,838

Jabana

7.8

2004 HFO 16,325,766 3,635,143 3380.68299 10,571.26 0.648

Jabana II 20 2009 HFO 73,866,951 18,981,462 17652.75966 55,199.47 0.747

Gatsata 4.77 2004 HFO - - - - -

Aggreko I Gikondo

10

2005 Diesel 42,820,811 11,077,134 9249.40689 29,471.39 0.688

Aggreko II Mukungwa

5 2006 Diesel 12,732,117 3,230,130 2697.15855 0.675

Total thermal

145,745,645

Gisoro 2,622,837


197,794


Rusizi 1 14,337,080

Rusizi 2 47,448,000

Goma(Snel) 125,726 Kabale(UEB) 475,500 Total Import

62,386,306

Total LCMR%

41%

Total Generation

248,318,483

Table 12: Total Generation and LCMR% 2009


44

Average LCMR2005-2009 (%)

Table 13: average LCMR % 2005-2009

HFO Density 0.93 kg/l Diesel density 0.835 kg/l

Table 14: Fuel Oil Densities

Capacity (MW) Commissioning

Plant type

Carbon Emission factor (tCO2/t fuel)

2009 Generation (kwh)

2009 Generation (MWh)

2009 Fuel consumption (litre)

2009 Fuel consumption (tonne) tCO2 tCO2/MWh

Solar energy 0.25 2007 Solar 362,917

363

-

-

- 0

Methane gas 4.5 2008 Methane 3,311,590

3,312

-

-

- 0

Jabana II 20 2009 HFO 3.127

73,866,951

73,867

18,981,462

17,653

55,199.47 0.747

Aggreko I Gikondo 10 2005 Diesel

3.186

42,820,811

42,821

11,077,134

9,249

29,471.39 0.688

Aggreko II Mukungwa 5 2006 Diesel

3.186

12,732,117

12,732

3,230,130

2,697

8,593.96 0.675

Total generation of 5 most recently built plants

133,094

2009 total generation

248,318

% generation 53.60%

Total CO2 93,264.81

Build margin 0.7007

Table 15: Build Margin 2009 OM2007-2009 0.7082 tC02/MWh BM2009 0.7007 tC02/MWh CM2007-2009 0.7044 tC02/MWh Table 16: Combine Margin 2009


45


46

Annex 4

MONITORING INFORMATION

- - - - -

Off take Partner: Rwanda Electricity Corporation Project Owner: Renewable Energy for Accelerated Development Ltd. (REFAD) Project Participant/ CDM Consultant: Viability Africa, LLC For purposes ensuring the integrity of all data used to determine baseline emissions and GHG emission reductions realized, the project activity will implement the following monitoring plan. The primary objective of the plan is to accurately source, interpret/analyse and store the data so needed. An agreement is made before commissioning of the plant and subsequent operations between the project owner and project participant. The agreement will be to the effect that the distribution of tasks will be set in place to ensure efficient and accurate monitoring. Responsibilities: 1. Project Owner (REFAD) A majority of the tasks that will be carried out for monitoring of the project activity will be carried out by REFAD because off their role of operations and management. These tasks include:

• Maintenance of facility equipment in accordance with best utility practices. • Installation of primary and secondary metering equipment15 • Physical reading of REFAD controlled (secondary) metering equipment. • Day-to-day management of plant facility • Storage of data sourced from meter readings. • Training of O&M staff • Substantiation of data from primary and secondary meters upon receipt of sales receipts. • Submit data to Project participant

The project owner will delegate tasks which are specific to CDM to the project participant. 2. Project Participant (Viability Africa, LLC)

• Electronic archiving of data monitored for years after the end of the crediting period. • Verification of project owner’s data recording and operations to ensure conformity to monitoring

plan. • Attend annual verification

15 All metering equipment will be provided by RECO.


47

• Audits data received from project participant. • Registration of project activity under the CDM. • Training staff of REFAD on monitoring requirements • Prepare annual monitoring reports for verification by Designated Operational Entity (D.O.E)

Data storage and archiving: 1. RECO.

• Issue sales receipts to REFAD which will reflect actual metered quantities. • Maintain an operation log with records of:

o Real electricity production from project activity o Changes in operational statistics o Outages o Operation of protective devices o Routine maintenance

Records of the information will be made available to REFAD upon request. Copies of the operating logs and records will be provided. 2. REFAD

• Store operating logs and reports provided by RECO. • Submitting monitored data to Viability Africa, LLC for cross-checking. • Billing for electricity imported from the national Grid to the Mushishito SHP.

Quality Control and Assurance: Metering and Calibration: RECO will provide all the electronic meters to be installed for the project activity. These meters meet both national and international standards. REFAD will install primary and secondary meters which will be installed and calibrated to the same readings initially. In the event of a disparity between primary and secondary meters, the quantity of electricity delivered to the grid will be established by the average of both meter readings. Primary meters shall be sealed. These seals can only be broken for purposes of inspection, testing and adjustment by RECO or its agents. Prior notice of which will be issued to REFAD as the latter retains its right to be present in such an instance. The project owner will test the meters at least once a year. Metering equipment found to be inaccurate shall be repaired, adjusted/replaced by RECO. Metering accuracy has been set to Rwandan Regulatory standards and agreed upon in the Power Purchase Agreement. All meters installed at the project site are subject to regular inspection by RECO. This will guarantee the project owner maintains best utility practices.


48

CDM – Executive Board PROJECT DESIGN DOCUMENT FORM (CDM...

Documents

Transcript of CDM – Executive Board PROJECT DESIGN DOCUMENT FORM (CDM...