PROJECT DESIGN DOCUMENT (PDD)

Transcription

1 CDM Executive Board Page 1 PROJECT DESIGN DOCUMENT FORM FOR CDM PROJECT ACTIVITIES (F-CDM-PDD) Version 04.1 PROJECT DESIGN DOCUMENT (PDD) Title of the project activity Kpone Thermal Power Project of Volta River Authority, Ghana Version number of the PDD 1 Completion date of the PDD 31/08/2012 Project participant(s) Volta River Authority Host Party(ies) Republic of Ghana Sectoral scope and selected methodology(ies) Energy Industries (renewable - / non-renewable sources) and; Baseline Methodology for Grid Connected Electricity Generation Plants using Natural Gas - AM 0029, Version 03 Estimated amount of annual 398,926 tco 2 average GHG emission reductions

2 CDM Executive Board Page 2 SECTION A. Description of project activity A.1. Purpose and general description of project activity The purpose of project activity (Kpone Thermal Power Project) is construction of a new MW combined cycle technology based power plant, using natural gas as fue. Project activity utilizes two gas turbine generators of MW (Alstom make) with dual fuel firing capability and one steam turbine (110 MW) resulting a total project capacity of 330 MW. The project would be constructed by Volta River Authority of Republic of Ghana. Electricity generated by the project activity would be evacuated to the national grid operator. Further details on technology of the project are presented in Section A.3. Greenhouse Gas emitted by the project activity is on account of on-site combustion of natural gas and the start-up fuel, used for the generation of electricity. Description below indicates Scenario prior to start of project activity, project scenario and baseline. Scenario prior to start of project activity: Ghana has an installed capacity of 1,974 MW comprising of thermal and hydro facilities. Electricity demand is growing at about 10% per annum. Scenario existing prior to start of project, electricity generation is relying heavily on natural gas open-cycle technology power plants and liquid fuel power plants using either open-cycle / combined cycle technology. Details of scenario prior to the start of the project are presented in Section A.3. Baseline: Ghana s is expected to face severe electricity shortages with demand far outstripping the supply. Because of the intermittent nature of the monsoon, country has faced severe shortage of electricity in 2010 and 2011 resulting in load shedding. The existing power plants are unable to attain full generation capacity as a result of limitations in rising fuel prices and uncertainty in rainfall and water inflows into hydroelectric power facilities. This is rendering the country opt towards fossil fuels. In the absence of proposed project, electricity would be generated fossil fuel technologies as noted from scenario prior to start of project Therefore, Baseline is similar to scenario prior to the start of project activity. Project scenario: Project activity relies on technologically superior combined cycle technology which is not prevalent in the region. Project activity generate equivalent electricity comparable to the scenario existing prior to the implementation of the project activity using higher efficiency technology thereby consuming lesser fuel and emitting lesser GHG emissions. GT11N2 achieves a dry low NOx emission level of 25 ppm (conservative) when operating at base-load with project fuel. GT11N2 fleet has proven record of high reliability and availability with more than 1.5 million fired hours. Technology opted for project is environmentally safe and is proven across several locations in the world. As a result of project activity, 3,989,266 tco 2 would be abated during the crediting period. Contribution of the project activity to sustainable development The project activity contributes to sustainable development goals as follows. Social sustainability 1. Project participant is committed to welfare of local community providing livelihood opportunities.

3 CDM Executive Board Page 3 2. Project participant will undertake, if required, skilling/re-skilling of local community in order to utilize the services both during construction and operations phases. 3. Project activity will create both direct and indirect employment to the local community. Economic sustainability 1. Increased electricity generation would support regional economic growth in Ghana. 2. While 66% of Ghana has electricity access, three northern regions of has electricity access to about 30%. Project activity will enhance the development of evacuation infrastructure. 3. Consultants and contractors associated with project would be economically benefited. Environmental sustainability 1. Project activity not only reduces CO 2 emissions, but also reduces other pollutants such as SO x 1. Technological sustainability 1. Project activity would assist in transfer of technology from Annex-I countries and necessary capacity building not only in Ghana, but in the entire Africa. 2. Upgradation of Technological base would occur leading to lesser emissions and adoption of superior combined cycle technology. 3. Success of the project activity will encourage upcoming plants to adopt superior technology. A.2. Location of project activity A.2.1. Host Party(ies) The Republic of Ghana A.2.2. Region/State/Province etc. Greater Accra A.2.3. City/Town/Community etc. Tema A.2.4. Physical/Geographical location GPS Coordinates of the Project activity are and Source: Brochure of GT11N2 Gas Turbine - Website of Alsthom

4 CDM Executive Board Page 4 A.3. Technologies and/or measures Scenario prior to start of project activity: Scenario existing prior to start of project activity is relying on hydro power plants, natural gas liquid fuel power plants (open-cycle / combined cycle) and natural gas power plants (open-cycle). Details of scenario prior to the start of the project activity (In terms of capacity) are presented below: # Plant Capacity MW Date of Commissioning Technology Commissioned Plants 2 1 Akosombo 1, Hydro 2 Kpong Hydro 3 TAPCO (T1)-Combined Cycle Natural Gas/LCO 4 TICO (T2 Plant)-Open Cycle Diesel 5 Mines Reserve-Open Cycle Diesel 6 Emergency Diesel Res.-Open Cycle Natural Gas/LCO 7 TT1PP-Open Cycle Diesel 8 Sunon Asogli-Combined Cycle Natural Gas Based on the Combined Emission Factor Data published for the most recent year (2009) 3, details of scenario prior to the start of project activity (In terms of GWh of electricity generated) are as below: 2 Source: National Energy Statistics

5 CDM Executive Board Page 5 # Plant A Hydro Power Plant 1 Akosombo 5,836 5,251 3,101 Hydro Power as part % of Total = (A)/(C) 34.69% 36.46% 55.68% B Thermal Power Plants 2 Kpong 1, TAPCO (T1 Plant) ,521 4 TICO (T2 Plant) 1,034 1,063 1,417 5 Mines Reserve Plant Emergency Diesel Reserve Kumasi Reserve Power Aggreko TT1PP Imports Thermal Power as part % of Total = (B)/(C) 65.31% 63.54% 44.32% C Total 9,135 8,539 7,433 This indicates the scenario prior to the implementation of the project activity is increasingly relying on fossil fuels (47.36% increase between 2007 and 2009) as a source for electricity generation. Plants used for the computation of build margin demonstrate that the generation is predominantly skewed towards fossil fuels in Ghana. According to the Primary energy mix of Ghana, published for , wood fuels is the predominant fuel (54.2%), followed by liquid based fossil fuels (33%) 4. In 2011, Ghana s total electricity consumption was 11,200 GWh (approx.) with a system peak demand of 1,665 MW. Higher technical losses prevailing in the sector is a hindranance for end-use electricity consumption. It is decided to address the Based on the estimated demand growth of 10%, it is estimated that, by 2015, peak demand will increase to 2,300 MW outstripping the current capacity available. Keeping the increased availability of fossil fuels (natural gas mainly), need to establish the reserve margin of 20% and potential supply of electricity of neighbouring countries in West Africa, Government of Ghana set a target of increasing the capacity to 5,000 MW by It has been decided to address both the increased capacity as well as reduced losses and project activity is conceptualized to address the need to fulfil the energy requirements in a sustainable manner. Baseline: Baseline is similar to scenario prior to start of project activity. Project scenario: Project activity utilizes combined cycle technology which is not prevalent in the region. Project will commence Open Cycle operations by September 2013 and Combined Cycle Operations later by 3 Calculations of Combined Margin Emission Factor For National Energy Statistics

6 CDM Executive Board Page /2015 (tentative). As a result of technology deployed for electricity generation, project activity consumes much lesser fossil fuel. GT11N2 gas turbine selected for the project activity achieves dry low NOx emission level of 25 ppm conservative when operating at base load with natural gas. GT11N2 fleet has a proven record of high reliability and availability with more than 1.5 million fired hours. Technology opted for the project activity is environmentally safe and is proven across several locations in the world. As a result of project activity, 3,989,266 tco 2 would be abated during the crediting period. A.4. Parties and project participants Party involved (host) indicates a host Party Private and/or public entity(ies) project participants (as applicable) Indicate if the Party involved wishes to be considered as project participant (Yes/No) Republic of Ghana (Host) Volta River Authority No France ENERCAP No A.5. Public funding of project activity There are no public funding in the project activity. SECTION B. Application of selected approved baseline and monitoring methodology B.1. Reference of methodology Approved baseline methodology AM0029, version 03 Baseline Methodology for Grid Connected Electricity Generation Plants using Natural Gas B.2. Applicability of methodology Proposed project activity meets applicability conditions mentioned in the methodology as follows: First Conditions of applicability: The project activity is the construction and operation of a new natural gas fired grid-connected electricity generation plant Justification: Kpone Thermal Power Plant is a green field combined cycle power plant based on natural gas as the fuel. The plant construction is expected to begin in 2012 and project will be commissioned by Therefore, condition specified in is fulfilled. Footnote # 1 under applicability condition: Natural gas should be the primary fuel. Small amounts of other startup or auxiliary fuels can be used, but can comprise no more than 1% of total fuel use, on energy basis. Justification: Natural gas the primary fuel used by project and start-up fuel if used shall be less than 1% of the total fuel use. Second Conditions of applicability: The project activity is the construction and operation of a new natural gas fired grid-connected electricity generation plant Justification: Geographical and physical boundaries of the baseline grid can be clearly identified Information regarding baseline is available in public domain. Therefore, condition specified in is fulfilled.

7 CDM Executive Board Page 7 Third Conditions of applicability: Natural gas is sufficiently available in the region or country, e.g. future natural gas based power capacity additions, comparable in size to the project activity, are not constrained by the use of natural gas in the project activity Justification: Natural gas is sufficiently available in the country. Natural gas based power plants comparable to the size of the project activity are not constrained by use of natural gas in project activity. With gas discoveries made, in 2007, in Jubilee gas field (800 Billion Cubic Feet / Billion Cubic meters 5 ), availability of natural gas is ensured not only for the project activity, but also for comparable projects. Gas supply from Nigeria via the West African Gas Pipeline is expected to come on stream soon thereby addressing the issues of fuel supply 6. Footnote # 2 under applicability condition: In some situations, there could be price-inelastic supply constraints (e.g. limited resources without possibility of expansion during the crediting period) that could mean that a project activity displaces natural gas that would otherwise be used elsewhere in an economy, thus leading to possible leakage. Hence, it is important for the project proponent to document that supply limitations will not result in significant leakage as indicated here. Justification: Project plant would not limit the availability of natural gas to other plants or to the other sections of the economy where could have been used. So leakage does not arise. Above justification confirms all applicability conditions are being met by project activity. B.3. Project boundary Spatial extent of project boundary includes power generation capacity situated at project site and power plants considered for calculation of baseline CO 2 emission factor (EF BL,CO2,y ). As National Interconnected Transmission System (national grid of Ghana), is inter-connected with transmission networks of neighbouring countries (Ivory Coast, Togo, Benin and Burkina Faso), National Interconnected Transmission System considered as the project boundary. Pictorial representation of the project boundary is presented below. 5 Status Report On the Jubilee Field Oil and Gas Development By the Management of Ghana National Petroleum Corporation Ghana s Infrastructure, A Continental Perspective - F/WPS5600.pdf

8 CDM Executive Board Page 8 CO 2 Emission Project Boundary (National Interconnected Transmission System) Fuel Analyser Reports for NCV y Fuel Supplier Turbine Gas Flow Meter for FC y Gas Turbine and Generator Gas Turbine and Generator Heat Recovery Steam Generator Steam Turbine and Generator Heat Recovery Steam Generator Electricity Generation by existing capacity and Baseline Generator Transformer Main and Check meters for EG PJ,y Utility Invoice Following are the greenhouse gas required to be considered under AM0029 and are considered in the application of the methodology. Baseline Project Activity Source Gas Included? Justification / Explanation Power generation CO 2 Yes Main emission source in baseline CH 4 No Excluded for simplification. This is conservative. N 2 O No Excluded for simplification. This is conservative. On-site fuel combustion due to the project activity CO 2 Yes Main emission source CH 4 No Excluded for simplification N 2 O No Excluded for simplification. B.4. Establishment and description of baseline scenario The latest approved version of Tool for the demonstration and assessment of additionality has been used to identify baseline. Description of procedure for selection of baseline scenario and identification of baseline scenario is described below Section B.5. B.5. Demonstration of additionality In line with the requirements of methodology, most recent version of Tool for the demonstration and assessment of additionality is applied to the project activity. Application is described below: Prior consideration of CDM for the implementation of the Project activity

9 CDM Executive Board Page 9 Since start date of project activity ( (Signing of amended EPC contract - 20/07/2012) is after 02/08/2008, as per paragraph 2, Annex 13, EB 62, projects participant has intimated prior consideration to both UNFCCC and DNA. Copies of correspondence is submitted for Validation. Step 1: Identify plausible baseline scenarios For the identification of baseline scenario, following approach has been adopted in line with the requirement of methodology. In line with the methodological requirements, project participant has identified 12 plausible alternatives to that of the project activity. Sub-step 1 a: Define alternative scenarios to the proposed project activity: As per the cited additionality tool, following scenarios are identified as alternative to project activity: Plausible Alternative 1. Proposed project without being registered as a CDM project 2. Gas based Project using Open Cycle 3. Conversion of existing Gas based Project using Open Cycle to Combined Cycle 4. Liquid fuels project using Combined Cycle technology 5. Liquid fuel Project using Open Cycle technology Justification The proposed project without being registered as a CDM project activity is an alternative to project activity. Combined cycle technology is not prevalent in thye region as discussed in Section B.5. Proposed project was aimed to improve lower operational efficiency prevalent in Ghana. Although the alternative is a plausible alternative to the other third party investors, Investment decision was made with CDM revenues taken into account. Therefore, the alternative is considered as a credible alternative to the project activity. Keeping in mind the principles of protection of natural resources and other sustainable development criterion, Project participant decided not to implement the project with Open Cycle technology. However, There are several open-cycle projects operational in Ghana. The scenario, therefore, is considered a credible alternative to the project activity. Therefore, the scenario is a credible alternative to the project activity. There are projects using open-cycle technology for power generation in Ghana. These projects can be converted into combined cycle to become an alternative. Conversion of existing Open cycle based 220 MW Takoradi 2 Expansion and Tema Thermal Power Plant I into combined cycle is an example for such an alternative 7. Therefore, the scenario is a credible alternative to the project activity. There are two diesel based power plants (together with 180 MW capacity), using combined cycle technology, implemented in Ghana in Takoradi 3 expansion is an example for Light Crude Oil based power plant under implementation under this alternative 8. Therefore, the alternative is considered as alternative to project activity. Keeping in mind the principles of protection of natural resources and other sustainable development criterion, Project participant decided not to implement the project with Open Cycle technology. However, There are open-cycle projects operational in Ghana. The scenario, therefore, is 7 Achievements In The Power Sector Since 2009 January 8 Environmental and Social Review Summary - Ghana Expansion and Enhancement of the Takoradi Power Project

10 CDM Executive Board Page 10 Plausible Alternative 6. Hydro Power Project Justification considered a credible alternative to the project activity. Therefore, the scenario is a credible alternative to the project activity. Hydro power plants are under construction Ghana, such as 400 MW Bui Hydro Power. Therefore the scenario, is considered a credible alternative to the project activity. Further analysis of each of the identified plausible alternatives is described below. Methodology Condition 1: Realistic and credible in terms of output & services (Peak vs. base load): Alternative 1: Proposed project without being registered as a CDM project Alternative is realistic and credible to the project activity in terms of output and services Conclusion: Yes Alternative 2: Gas based Project using Open Cycle Alternative is realistic and credible to the project activity in terms of output and services Conclusion: Yes Alternative 3: Conversion of existing Gas based Project using Open Cycle to Combined Cycle Alternative is realistic and credible to the project activity in terms of output and services in the long-term as the conversion of the technology on short-run would compel the project to remain out of the grid. Keeping the short-term issues in mind, the alternative is not considered realistic. Conclusion: No Alternative 4: Liquid fuels project using Combined Cycle technology Alternative is realistic and credible to the project activity in terms of output and services Conclusion: Yes Alternative 5: Liquid Fuel Project using Open Cycle technology Alternative is realistic and credible to the project activity in terms of output and services Conclusion: Yes Alternative 6: Hydro Power Plant Alternative is not realistic and credible to the project activity in terms of output and services. Project plant is expected to operate at a Load level of 85% (base-load) as against the Load level noted (34.69%) in Section A.3. Conclusion: No Methodology Condition 2: Realistic and credible in terms of Fuel: Alternative 1: Proposed project without being registered as a CDM project

11 CDM Executive Board Page 11 Alternative is realistic and credible to the project activity in terms of fuel. Conclusion: Yes Plausible Alternative 2: Natural Gas based Project Open Cycle Alternative is realistic and credible to the project activity in terms of fuel. Conclusion: Yes Alternative 3: Conversion of existing Gas based Project using Open Cycle to Combined Cycle Alternative is realistic and credible to the project activity in terms of fuel Conclusion: Yes Alternative 4: Liquid fuels project using Combined Cycle technology Alternative is realistic and credible to the project activity in terms of fuel. Conclusion: Yes Alternative 5: Liquid Fuel Project using Open Cycle technology Alternative is realistic and credible to the project activity in terms of fuel. Conclusion: Yes Alternative 6: Hydro Power Plant Alternative is not relying on the fossil fuels for power generation. Since there are hydro resources prevailing in the host country, alternative is considered realistic and credible to project activity. Conclusion: Yes Methodology Condition 3: Realistic and credible in terms of efficiency: Alternative 1: Proposed project without being registered as a CDM project According to default efficiency published as part of Tool to calculate the emission factor for an electricity system, efficiency of combined cycle technology is 60%. Since the technology used is common, the alternative is considered realistic and credible to the project activity. Conclusion: Yes Plausible Alternative 2: Natural Gas based Project Open Cycle According to the default efficiency published Tool to calculate the emission factor for an electricity system, efficiency of the open cycle power plant is 39.5%. Therefore, the Alternative is not realistic and credible to the project activity in terms of efficiency Conclusion: No Alternative 3: Conversion of existing Gas based Project using Open Cycle to Combined Cycle Alternative is realistic and credible to the project activity in terms of efficiency Conclusion: Yes

12 CDM Executive Board Page 12 Alternative 4: Liquid fuels project using Combined Cycle technology According to the default efficiency published in Tool to calculate the emission factor for an electricity system, efficiency of open cycle power plant is 46%. Therefore, the Alternative is not realistic and credible to the project activity in terms of efficiency Conclusion: No Alternative 5: Liquid Fuel Project using Open Cycle technology According to the default efficiency published in Tool to calculate the emission factor for an electricity system, efficiency of open cycle power plant is 39%. Therefore, the Alternative is not realistic and credible to the project activity in terms of efficiency Conclusion: No Alternative 6: Hydro Power Plant There is no thermal efficiency involved with the technology of the alternative. Therefore, the alternative is not realistic and credible to the project activity. Conclusion: No Methodology Condition 4: Realistic and credible in terms of technical lifetime: Alternative 1: Proposed project without being registered as a CDM project According to the Tool to determine the remaining lifetime of equipment, technical lifetime of combined cycle technology is 200,000 hours. Since the technology similar to the project activity, alternative is considered realistic and credible alternative to the project activity. Conclusion: Yes Alternative 2: Natural Gas based Project Open Cycle According to the Tool to determine the remaining lifetime of equipment, technical lifetime of gas turbines is 200,000 hours. Since the technology similar to the project activity, alternative is considered realistic and credible alternative to the project activity. Conclusion: Yes Alternative 3: Conversion of existing Gas based Project using Open Cycle to Combined Cycle Alternative is realistic and credible to the project activity in terms of technical life time Conclusion: Yes Alternative 4: Liquid fuels project using Combined Cycle technology According to the Tool to determine the remaining lifetime of equipment, technical lifetime of diesel / oil/ gas fired generator sets is 50,000 hours. Therefore, alternative is considered realistic and credible alternative to the project activity. Conclusion: No Alternative 5: Liquid Fuel Project using Open Cycle technology

13 CDM Executive Board Page 13 According to the Tool to determine the remaining lifetime of equipment, technical lifetime of diesel / oil/ gas fired generator sets is 50,000 hours. Therefore, alternative is considered realistic and credible alternative to the project activity. Conclusion: No Alternative 6: Hydro Power Plant According to the Tool to determine the remaining lifetime of equipment, default technical lifetime of hydro turbines is 150,000 hours. Therefore, alternative is considered realistic and credible alternative to the project activity. Conclusion: Yes Summary outcome of the above analysis is described below: Services Fuel Efficiency Lifetime Alternative 1 Yes Yes Yes Yes Alternative 2 Yes Yes Yes Yes Alternative 3 No Yes Yes Yes Alternative 4 Yes Yes Yes No Alternative 5 Yes Yes Yes No Alternative 6 No Yes No Yes Outcome of step 1a: As noted from the above analysis, project has 3 alternatives. These are. 1) Alternative 1: Proposed project without being registered as a CDM project 2) Alternative 2: Gas based Project using Open Cycle Sub-step 1b: Consistency with mandatory applicable laws and regulations All the three alternatives are in compliance with applicable laws and regulations including Ghanaian Environmental Protection Act 1994, The Environmental Assessment Regulations 1999 (LI 1652), The National Environmental Action Plan, 1991 and The National Environmental Policy, Outcome of step 1b: As the applicable legislation neither restrict the selection / use of technology of the plausible alternatives, all of the identified scenarios are consistent with the regulatory framework in Ghana. Step 2: Investment Analysis Applicable methodology require identification of economically most attractive baseline by using Substep 2b (Option III: Apply benchmark analysis), Sub-step 2c (Calculation and comparison of financial indicators), and Sub-step 2d (Sensitivity Analysis) of the Tool for demonstration assessment and of additionality. Investment analysis is detailed below. Sub-step 2b: Option III: Apply Benchmark Analysis: Out of the two options, investment comparison analysis is used for the project activity and Levelized Cost of Electricity LCE (in USD/kWh) is selected, as financial indicator. Based on Annex 5 of Projected

14 CDM Executive Board Page 14 Costs of Generating Electricity (2005 update) published by International Energy Agency (IEA) 9, formula applied to calculate the LUCE is as follows 10 : Where LUCE t [( I t M t F )(1 r) [ E (1 r) t t t t ] t ] I t : Capital expenditures in the year t M t : Operation and maintenance F t : Fuel expenditures in the year t E t : Electricity generation in the year t r: Discount rate Such an approach of LCE would not take into account profit expectations of project proponent and complies with Guidance 13 of Annex 5, EB 62. Financial Assumptions 1) Assumptions Common for All Alternatives 11 : Description Unit Input Project GCV of Natural Gas kcal/scm 12,500 Natural Gas Price USD/MMBTU 6.00 Operational Expenses Mn. USD/MW 0.15 PPA Tenure Years 25 Annual Inflation % Notice to Proceed with the Construction of Project 31/01/2012 Load level % 90 Debt/Equity 70/30 13 Interest Rate on Term Loan % per annum 10 Loan Period Tenure In years 15 Moratorium Period after CoD In Quarters 2 2) Assumptions Specific to the Alternatives 14 : 9 Source: IEA, Projected Costs of Generating Electricity, 2005 update LCE calculation would not take working capital, taxes, into account across all financial models. 11 Expectation of PP unless the source is not specified 12 Annual Inflation in US for Expectation of PP, to be at 70/30 or 75/25 14 Expectation of PP

15 CDM Executive Board Page 15 Description Unit Alternative 1 Alternative 2 Project Related Project Capacity MW Construction Months from NTP Efficiency % Project Cost Project Cost Per MW USD LCE of the Project activity is presented in the following table. Alternative Scenario LCE Alternative 1: Proposed project without being registered as a CDM project Alternative 2: Gas based Project using Open Cycle Conclusion: It is noted LCE of Alternative 1 is below that of Alternative 2 and also Project without being registered as a CDM is prohibited by higher LCE. Therefore, project requires the CDM revenues to remain financially attractive. Sub-step 2d: Sensitivity Analysis: Since none of the items impact the project cost or project revenues by more than 20%, sensitivity analysis is not conducted. Step 3: Barrier Analysis Barrier Analysis is not conducted for the project activity. Step 4: Common Practice Analysis As mentioned under Step 4 of the, project activity is required to compliment additionality with Common practice analysis as a credibility check. Step 4a: The proposed CDM project activity(s) applies measure(s) that are listed in the definitions section above As per Additionality Tool, project activity falls under measure (b). Since different technologies are opted for generation of electricity as output and differ from other technologies on account of fuel, fuel is considered as a basis for the segregation of the different technologies. Sub-step 4a(1): Calculate applicable output range as ±50% of design output / capacity of the project activity. 15 Capacity with Steam Turbine 16 Capacity without Steam Turbine

16 CDM Executive Board Page 16 Capacity of Project activity after the conversion from single cycle to combined cycle is MW. Therefore, output range is computed as MW (-50% of capacity of project activity) and 500 MW (+50% of capacity of the project activity). Sub-step 4a(2): Identify all plants that deliver the same output or capacity As per the Grid emission factor published for Ghana, There are 2 power plants (N all ) that deliver same output within the applicable range and have started commercial operations prior to start date of project activity. None of the projects are registered as CDM projects. Details of the projects are as below # Name of the plant Capacity Fuel 1 Akosombo 1,020 MW Hydro 2 TAPCO (T1 Plant) 330 MW Natural Gas/LCO Sub-step 4a(3): Identify the technologies different from the technologies applied in the Project activity Based on criterion, 1 plant use technology other than Combined cycle technology (N diff ). Details of the plant are as below. # Name of the plant Capacity Fuel 1 Akosombo 1,020 MW Hydro Step 1. Calculate Factor F and N all - N diff # Description Value 01 Total Number of plants noted after Step 1 (N all ) 2 02 Total Number of plants that uses feedstock other than natural gas (N diff ) 1 Factor (F) = 1 - (N diff )/( N all ) 0.5 N all -N diff 1 Conclusion: Above table indicates, project activity is not a common practice as it fails to comply with conditions i.e., F>0.5 and (N all -N diff )>3. Therefore, project activity is deemed as not common. Step 4b: The proposed CDM project activity(s) does not apply any of the measures that are listed in the definitions section above As noted from Table mentioned in Step-1, in Ghana, there is only one operational power plant which is considered similar to the project activity. There are no similar activities currently under implementation. Plant which is operational has received concessionary loans provided by World Bank and others 17. Therefore, the existing project actitiy is not comparable to the subject project activity. This describe the technology is not diffused in the applicable geographical area and project activity is NOT a common practice. This confirms the project activity is additional. B.6. Emission reductions B.6.1. Explanation of methodological choices 17 News Artciles on the web

17 CDM Executive Board Page 17 >> AM0029/Version 03 mandated equations for calculating Baseline Emissions (BE y ), Project Emissions (PE y ), Leakage (LE y ) and Emission Reductions (ER y ). Description of Procedure for Assessing Baseline Emissions - BE y. Methodological choices Ex-ante assessment of BE y is computed by multiplying with EG PJ,y and EF BL,CO2,y in accordance with equation (2) of AM0029, Version 03. Equation for the estimation of BE y is as noted below: BE y = EG PJ,y EF BL, CO2, y Where, EG PJ,y = Electricity generation in the project plant during the year in MWh EF BL, CO2, y = CO 2 emission factor of the Baseline EF BL, CO2, y is computed from the value of minimum of the three options noted. Whereas under Option-1 of EF BL,CO2 involve computation through Build Margin, Option-2 of EF BL,CO2 involve computation through Combined Margin, and Option-3 of EF BL,CO2 involve computation of emission factor based on the technology and fuel identified for the baseline. Under Option-3, EF BL,CO2 y is computed as per equation (3) of AM0029, Version 03, indicated below. COEFBL EF BL, CO2, y = EFBL, CO2 ( tco 2 / Mwh) *3.6GJ / MWh. Option Used BL Since the Option-2 yields the lowest value among the three equations, value Published by the national authorities of Ghana used for the project activity. Detailed information is Appendix 4. Description of Procedure for Assessing Project Emissions - PE y Methodological choices Ex-ante assessment of PE y is computed, by multiplying FC f,y with COEF f,y in accordance with equations (1) of AM0029, Version 03. PE y = FC f,y COEF f,y Where, FC f,y = Total volume of natural gas / liquefied natural gas or other fuel f combusted in the project plant or other startup fuel (m 3 or similar) in year y COEF f,y = CO 2 emission coefficient (tco 2 /m 3 or similar) in year for each fuel used COEF f,y is computed as mentioned in equation (1a) of the methodology described below:

18 CDM Executive Board Page 18 COEF f,y = NCV y EF CO2f,f,y OXID f Where, NCV y = Net calorific value per m 3 of natural gas in year y (GJ/m 3 ) as determined from the fuel supplier, wherever possible, otherwise from local or national data. EF CO2f,f,y = CO 2 emission factor per m 3 of natural gas in year y (tco 2 /GJ) as determined from the fuel supplier, wherever possible, otherwise from local or national data. OXID f = Oxidation factor of natural gas. Option Used Since the methodological choices are restricted to only one option, equations mentioned shall be used. Description of Procedure for Assessing Leakage - LE y Methodological choices LE y may result from fuel extraction, processing, liquefaction, transportation, re-gasification and distribution of fossil fuels outside of the project boundary. This includes mainly fugitive CH 4 emissions and CO 2 emissions from associated fuel combustion and flaring. Hence LE y is conclude as the sum of LE CH4,y and LE LNG, CO2,y as described under equation (4) of the methodology given below: LE y = LE CH4,y LE LNG, CO2,y Where, LE y : = Leakage emissions during the year y in tco 2 e LE CH4,y : = Leakage emissions due to fugitive upstream CH 4 emissions in the year y in t CO 2 e LE LNG,CO2,y : = Leakage emissions due to fossil fuel combustion/electricity consumption associated with the liquefaction, transportation, re-gasification and compression of LNG into a natural gas transmission or distribution system during the year y in t CO 2 e Computation of LE CH4,y : LE CH4,y should be multiplied by quantity of natural gas consumed by project in year y with an emission factor for fugitive CH 4 emissions (EF NG,upstream,CH4 ) from natural gas consumption and subtract emissions occurring from fossil fuels used in the absence of the project activity, as described under equation (5) of the methodology given below: LE CH4,y = [FC y NCV y EF NG, Upstream, CH4 EG PJ, y EF BL, Upstream, CH4 ] GWP CH4] EF BL,upstream,CH4 should be calculated consistent with EF BL,CO2 Computation of LE LNG,CO2,y : LE LNG,CO2,y : = FC y EF CO 2, upstream, LNG Where,

19 CDM Executive Board Page 19 LE LNG,CO2,y : = Leakage emissions due to fossil fuel combustion/electricity consumption associated with the liquefaction, transportation, re-gasification and compression of LNG into a natural gas transmission or distribution system during the year y in tco 2 e FC y : = Quantity of natural gas combusted in the project plant during the year y in m³ EF CO2,upstream,LNG: = Emission factor for upstream CO 2 emissions due to fossil fuel combustion / electricity consumption associated with the liquefaction, transportation, regasification and compression of LNG into a natural gas transmission or distribution system Since there is no LNG used, LE LNG,CO2,y is not calculated. B.6.2. Data and parameters fixed ex ante (Copy this table for each piece of data and parameter.) Data / Parameter EF NG, upstream, CH4 Unit tch 4 /PJ Description Emission factor for upstream fugitive methane emissions of natural gas from production, transportation, distribution, and, in the case of LNG, liquefaction, transportation, re-gasification and compression into a transmission or distribution system, in t CH4 per GJ fuel supplied to final consumers. Source of data Table 2: Default emission factors for fugitive CH 4 upstream emissions as provided in page 9/14 of AM0029, Version 03. Value(s) applied 296 Choice of data or Measurement methods and procedures Purpose of data Additional comment Data / Parameter Unit Description Table 2: Default emission factors for fugitive CH 4 upstream emissions as provided in page 9/14 of AM0029, Version 03 Computation of Leakage of the power plants. Consideration of IPCC value is credible. Therefore, the same is followed. EF Oil, upstream, CH4 tch 4 /PJ Default Emission factor for fugitive CH 4 upstream emissions for Oil Source of data IPCC default Tier 1 emission factors provided in Volume 3 of the 1996 Revised IPCC Guidelines Value(s) applied 4.1 Choice of data or Measurement methods and procedures Purpose of data Additional comment Since methodology referred value is published by IPCC, consideration of the same is appropriate. Approach directed by the methodology is complied. Computation of Leakage of the power plants. Consideration of IPCC value is credible. Therefore, the same is followed.

20 CDM Executive Board Page 20 Data / Parameter Unit Description GWP, CH4y No unit Global warming potential of CH 4 valid for the relevant commitment period. Source of data The Science of Climate Change: Summary for Policymakers and Technical Summary of the Working Group I Report. Value(s) applied 21 Choice of data or Measurement methods and procedures Purpose of data Additional comment Since the value is taken from the UNFCCC, measurement methods and procedures will not be applied., Computation of Leakage of the power plants. Consideration of IPCC value is credible. Therefore, the same is followed. Data / Parameter Unit Description EF Oil, upstream, CH4 tch 4 /kt Default Emission factor for fugitive CH 4 upstream emissions for Oils Source of data IPCC default Tier 1 emission factors provided in Volume 3 of the 1996 Revised IPCC Guidelines Value(s) applied 4.1 Choice of data or Measurement methods and procedures Purpose of data Additional comment Since the value IPCC published, consideration of the same is appropriate. Computation of Leakage of the power plants. Consideration of IPCC value is credible. Therefore, the same is followed. Data / Parameter Unit Description COEF BL tco 2 e/gj CO 2 Fuel emission coefficient of the identified baseline fuel. Source of data Table 1.4 of Chapter 1 of Vol.2 (Energy) of 2006 IPCC Guidelines on National GHG inventories. Value(s) applied Choice of data or Measurement methods and procedures Purpose of data Additional comment B.6.3. Ex ante calculation of emission reductions COEF BL published by IPCC is considered. Measurement procedure applied by IPCC is appropriate and is adopted.. Computation of Project Emissions. Consideration of IPCC value is credible. Therefore, the same is followed. As per the protocol specified in the methodology, ex-ante emission reductions of the project acticvity are computed. Summary of the computations are presented below and details of the same are appended in Appendix-4.

21 CDM Executive Board Page 21 BE y : BE y is computed by multiplying EG PJ,y with minimum of EF BL,CO2,y Summary of BE y Computation is presented below. Year EG PJ, y (In MWh) EF BL,CO2 (t CO 2 /MWh) BE y (tonnes of CO 2 e) Year 1 2,628, ,422,926 Year 2 2,628, ,422,926 Year 3 2,635, ,426,824 Year 4 2,628, ,422,926 Year 5 2,628, ,422,926 Year 6 2,628, ,422,926 Year 7 2,635, ,426,824 Year 8 2,628, ,422,926 Year 9 2,628, ,422,926 Year 10 2,628, ,422,926 PE y : Ex-ante estimate of PE y, is assessed by multiplying FC f,y with COEF f,y. Summary PE y computation, based on the design parameters of the project, is presented below. Year FC NG,y MMSCM COEF NG,y t CO 2 /m 3 PE y (tonnes of CO 2 e) Year , ,314,174 Year , ,314,174 Year , ,317,774 Year , ,314,174 Year , ,314,174 Year , ,314,174 Year , ,317,774 Year , ,314,174 Year , ,314,174 Year , ,314,174 LE y : Fugitive CH 4 emissions are computed from FC NG,y, NCV NG,y, EF NG,upstream,CH4, EG PJ,y and GWP CH4. Summary computation is presented below. Year LE CH4,y (t CO 2 e) LE LNG,CO2,y (t CO 2 e) LE y (t of CO 2 e) Year 1 143, ,722 Year 2 143, ,722 Year 3 144, ,115 Year 4 143, ,722 Year 5 143, ,722 Year 6 143, ,722 Year 7 144, ,115 Year 8 143, ,722 Year 9 143, ,722 Year , ,722 EXCEL file indicating the detailed computation of emission reductions is attached to the PDD.

22 CDM Executive Board Page 22 B.6.4. Summary of ex ante estimates of emission reductions Year Baseline emissions (t CO 2 e) Project emissions (t CO 2 e) Leakage (t CO 2 e) Emission reductions (t CO 2 e) Year 1 880,496 1,422, , ,708 Year 2 880,496 1,422, , ,708 Year 3 882,909 1,426, , ,800 Year 4 880,496 1,422, , ,708 Year 5 880,496 1,422, , ,708 Year 6 880,496 1,422, , ,708 Year 7 882,909 1,426, , ,800 Year 8 880,496 1,422, , ,708 Year 9 880,496 1,422, , ,708 Year ,496 1,422, , ,708 Total 8,809,788 14,237,057 1,438,003 3,989,266 Total number of 10 crediting years Annual average over the crediting period 880,979 1,423, , ,927 B.7. Monitoring plan B.7.1. Data and parameters to be monitored (Copy this table for each piece of data and parameter.) Data / Parameter Unit Description Source of data Value(s) applied Choice of data or Measurement methods and procedures Purpose of data Additional comment EG PJ,y MWh Net electricity generated by project activity during monitoring period. EG PJ,y will be measured by main and check meters installed at plant site. Value of EG PJ,y for the calculation of emission reductions is as below. # Description Value 1 Non-leap years 2,628,526 2 Leap years 2,635,727. Parameter will be monitored through two meters (main and check) installed at evacuation point. Monitored data will be recorded at regular interval and used for invoicing. Monitoring equipment shall comply to both Power Purchase agreement and relevant national grid guidelines. Purpose of the data is assessment of emission reductions. Monitored data shall be recorded and archived, for Crediting Period + 2 years, in paper/electronic format.

23 CDM Executive Board Page 23 Data / Parameter FC f,y Unit m 3 Description Total volume of gas consumed by project activity during monitoring period. (for ex-ante assessment, monitoring period is considered as one year). Source of data Source of data is the invoice / flowmeter at project site by fuel supplier. Value(s) applied Choice of data or Measurement methods and procedures Purpose of data Additional comment Following values of FC f,y has been used for calculation of emission reductions. No Description FC f,,y (MMSCM) 1 Non-leap years 328, Leap years 329, Quantity of natural gas supplied to the project activity is monitored continuously (for invoicing) and recorded at regular interval. Detailed data is presented in Appendix-4. Purpose of the data is computation of project emissions and assessment of emission reductions. Monitored data shall be recorded and archived, for Crediting Period + 2 years, in paper/electronic format. Data / Parameter NCV NG,y Unit kcal/m 3. This value will be converted to GJ/m 3 Description Weighted average NCV of Natural Gas Source of data Value of NCV shall be sourced from the invoices of supplier. Value(s) applied For ex-ante emission reductions, 48GJ/Ton (IPCC Default value equivalent to a GCV of 12,750 kcal/m 3 ) is used. Choice of data Data provided by the fuel supplier will be used. Details of the same are included or in Appendix-4. Measurement methods and procedures Purpose of data Purpose of the data is computation of project emissions and assessment of emission reductions. Additional comment Data will be recorded in paper/electronic format and archived for Crediting Period + 2 years.

24 CDM Executive Board Page 24 Data / Parameter OXID f Unit - Description Oxidation factor Source of data 2006 IPCC Guidelines on National GHG inventories. Value(s) applied For the purposes of ex-ante emission reductions, OXID f of is used. Choice of data or Measurement methods and procedures Purpose of data Additional comment IPCC Published data will be used. No additional QA/QC procedures may need to be planned Data / Parameter PE y Unit tco 2 /m 3 Description Project emission due to combustion of fuel Source of data Calculated based on the COEF f,y and FC f,y. Value(s) applied. # Description Value 1 Non-leap years 1,314,174 2 Leap years 1,317,774. Choice of data Equation (1) of the methodology is used. or Measurement methods and procedures Purpose of data Computation of Project Emissions and Emission Reductions Additional comment No additional QA/QC procedures may need to be planned. Data will be recorded in paper/electronic format and archived for Crediting Period + 2 years. Data / Parameter EF CO2,NG,y Unit tco 2 /GJ Description Emission factor of natural gas. Source of data 2006 IPCC Guidelines on National GHG inventories.. Value(s) applied For the purposes of ex-ante emissions, T CO 2 /GJ is used. Choice of data Measurement methods and procedures not required as IPCC Published data will or be used. Measurement methods and procedures Purpose of data Additional comment Computation of Emissions Coefficient of Project fuel No additional QA/QC procedures may need to be planned. Data will be recorded in paper/electronic format and archived for Crediting Period + 2 years.

25 CDM Executive Board Page 25 Data / Parameter COEF y Unit tco 2 /m 3 Description CO 2 emission coefficient of Natural Gas Source of data COEF y will be calculated using NCV y, EF CO2f,f,y and OXID f of the Natural Gas. Value(s) applied For the purposes of ex-ante emission reductions, tco 2 /m 3 is used. Choice of data Equation (1a) will be used to compute the value of COEF y. Measurement or methods and procedures not required as IPCC Published data will be used. Measurement methods and procedures Purpose of data Additional comment B.7.2. Sampling plan Since the input values are IPCC based, No additional QA/QC procedures may need to be planned. Project activity does not require any sampling plan involved. Therefore, not applicable. B.7.3. Other elements of monitoring plan No elements other than those mentioned above shall be monitored. SECTION C. Duration and crediting period C.1. Duration of project activity C.1.1. Start date of project activity Since the earliest date earliest date at which the implementation or construction or real action of a CDM project commences with the signing of the major commercial contract, date of signing of such commercial contract is concluded as the start date of the project. In the case of subject project, such a commercial contract is signed on 20/07/2012. Therefore, the start date of the project is 20/07/2012. C.1.2. Expected operational lifetime of project activity 200,000 hours C.2. Crediting period of project activity C.2.1. Type of crediting period Fixed C.2.2. Start date of crediting period 2014 C.2.3. Length of crediting period 10 years SECTION D. Environmental impacts D.1. Analysis of environmental impacts Pre-Construction Phase 1) Potential Impact on Cultural Heritage