PDD - Ver04.1 - LCL May 09 2013 - v7

UNFCCC/CCNUCC
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 Composting of Organic Content of Municipal
Solid Waste in Lahore
Version number of the PDD Version 7
Completion date of the PDD 09/05/2013
Project participant(s) Lahore Compost (Pvt) Limited
Danish Ministry of Climate, Energy and
Building/Danish Energy Agency
International Bank for Reconstruction and
Development (IBRD) as Trustee of the Danish
Carbon Fund
DONG Naturgas A/S
Maersk Olie og Gas AS
Nordjysk Elhandel A/S
Aalborg Portland A/S
Host Party(ies) Pakistan
Sectoral scope and selected methodology(ies) Sectoral scope
Project Activity: 13 Waste Handling and
Disposal

Selected methodology(ies)
AM0025 version 11 titled Avoided emissions
from organic waste through alternative waste
treatment processes
Tool for the Demonstration and Assessment of
Additionalilty Version 5
Tool to Determine Methane Emissions
Avoided from disposal of Waste at a Solid
Waste Disposal Site Version 4
Estimated amount of annual average GHG
emission reductions
108,686 tCO
2
e

UNFCCC/CCNUCC


SECTION A. Description of project activity
A.1. Purpose and general description of project activity
>>
Rapid increase in population, high rate of migration to cities and introduction of disposable items, such
as plastic bags, bottles etc. have created serious environmental problems including inadequate solid and
liquid waste management, lack of safe water and minimal pollution control. Similar to other big cities of
Pakistan, Lahore is witnessing a rapid growth in its population due to rural urban migration from
surrounding areas and other parts of the country. The increase in population has exerted immense
pressure on the social and physical infrastructure of the city leading to various socio-economic and
environmental problems. Inadequate solid waste management has been one of the most visible and
pressing problems in the city leading towards unattractive environment, poor sanitation conditions,
pollution of water bodies, and general environmental degradation.

The Solid Waste Management Department (SWMD) of City District Government Lahore (CDGL) is the
sole authority responsible for the management of Solid Waste generated in the city. The responsibility of
the SWMD consists of the whole process of collection of waste to its satisfactory disposal. However, due
to high population growth and the lack of resources, the waste management has become a challenge for
CDGL. Accordingly, SWMD prioritized the need to address this issue including the possibility of private
sector participation through which waste can be managed and used in an economically beneficial manner.
This arrangement would address the need to dispose off solid waste in economically beneficial ways
without putting extra burden on the Lahore SWMD.

Lahore Compost (Pvt) Limited (LCL) has received the concession from the City District Government,
Lahore (CDGL) to process up to a 1,000 ton per day (TPD) of municipal solid waste (MSW). This will
be achieved in incremental phases over time until 1,000 tpd is achieved. Available statistics suggest that
around 1,900 tonnes of solid waste per days is generated in Aziz Bhatti Town, Ravi Town and Shalimar
Town every working day; out of which around 1,200 tonnes is collected and dumped at the Mahmood
Booti Open Dumping Site. All of this solid waste is available for processing and composting. Various
studies conducted in the past on the quality and composition of the solid waste suggests that the waste
delivered to the project company includes over 55% organic materials.

Composting, in scientifically designed plants, would improve the local environment by reducing health
hazards created by the present practice of dumping of waste in open dump sites and also sequester the
emission of methane generated in the process of anaerobic decomposition of bio-degradable matter. The
Project will also result in the production of compost, which will be used as a soil conditioner/ fertilizer
for improving the quality of soil in and around Lahore.

There are various forms of composting, e.g., aerobic windrow type, anaerobic trench type, in-vessel high
rate composting, vermi-composting etc. LCL has been operating and plans to extend capacity of an
aerobic windrow type composting technology. The capital investment in this composting plant is
primarily for the civil structures and equipment for material handling, turning and screening the
composting material at different stages. The composting technology is relatively simple but in absolute
terms the capital investment is still high. Additionally, the operation and maintenance cost including the
cost of debt servicing is fairly high compared to the low market price of compost. Therefore, additional
support is necessary to make the urban waste based compost plant viable and sustainable. It also requires
specific technical knowledge to manage the biological composting process, which was introduced for the
first time in Pakistan as a result of this project.

Due to a number of reasons, it is very difficult to make waste management projects commercially viable
in Pakistan. As in many other countries, available resources from the Government of Pakistan and
UNFCCC/CCNUCC


revenue accrual in terms of municipal taxation are not adequate. In Pakistan, there is little experience
with the use of compost on a large scale and it is challenging to make commercially viable a composting
project such as the likes of Lahore Compost. The concept of commercial soil conditioner is still not
widely known amongst the farmers, the largest client/ user group. This coupled with the low levels of
certain plant nutrients on a per tonnage basis in comparison to the chemical fertilizers leads to a
relatively low market price of compost. CDM revenues could make a very positive impact in making
such projects sustainable and would also open up possibilities for private sector participation.

The LCL project is first of its kind under Public Private Partnership and is contributing towards
sustainable development of the municipality. The following are the environmental, economic and social
benefits of implementing the project in the area:

1. Environmental Benefit: The project would prevent uncontrolled GHG generation and emission
from waste that would have been disposed off at the open dumping site. Additionally it would reduce the
amount of waste going into the open dumping site thus increasing the lifespan of the waste dumping site.

2. Economical Benefits: Production of soil improver (compost) to battle soil degradation, boost the
farm crop production, thus promoting farmers income and contributing to economic sustainable
development of the region.

3. Social Benefits: Creation of around 80 jobs for locals and staff training to improve skills of the
local residents. The project would also promote sustainable development of Lahore Municipality by
improving the environment quality and demonstrate the commercialized practice of composting that
could assist Pakistans central and southern regions and other countries in meeting the objectives
regarding re-use of waste.

A.2. Location of project activity
A.2.1. Host Party(ies)
>>
Islamic Republic of Pakistan

A.2.2. Region/State/Province etc.
>>
Lahore City District, Punjab

A.2.3. City/Town/Community etc.
>>
Lahore City

A.2.4. Physical/Geographical location
>>
The composting plant is located within the boundaries of Lahore city. The site is adjacent to Mahmood
Booti MSW dumping site. The latitudes and longitudes of the project site are given below:

Latitude: 31.610
o
N
Longitude: 74.382
o
E
UNFCCC/CCNUCC


The map below describes the exact location of the site:

A.3. Technologies and/or measures
>>
Aerobic windrow type composting is considered to be the most suitable technology. The project
involves the production of compost from the organic solid waste using European Technology from
Belgium. Further details about technology and the equipment supplier can be found on its website:
http://www.menart-technology.com/pagesen/start.html. This is a sophisticated method of composting
which complies with the EU regulations and is being used/introduced for the first time in Pakistan.

Given that it is the first introduction of this technology on a commercial basis to Pakistan, the project will
be implemented in incremental phases through learning by doing until 1,000 tpd are achieved. From a
baseline of zero, the first phase of the project activity is a pilot phase to learn about the machinery and
Project location
UNFCCC/CCNUCC


the composting process, before the next incremental phase. This first pilot phase was initiated at 300 tpd,
from which the amount of waste being processed is being slowly increased in phases until 1,000 tpd are
finally reached.

In the aerobic windrow type composting, the incoming garbage is weighed, inspected and then subjected
to preliminary sorting of large non-compostable items followed by crushing to harmonize the input for
composting. Next is stacking in windrows (100-120 m long piles with a base width of about 4m and
height of 2m). These windrows are turned mechanically at consistent intervals. At the end of about 6
weeks of windrowing, the material is fairly stabilized and is ready for screening through a train of rotary
sieves having increasingly smaller openings. Additional equipment is also applied for removing small
stone and grit. Smaller pieces of plastics, glass, rags etc. are removed during this process. At each stage,
some rejects are screened out, which are either picked up by recyclers or more commonly, sent to an
open dumping site.

Compost is dark brown, free-flowing, rich in humus and has a faint musty odour. The humus content
makes it a healthy soil conditioner. Additionally, compost contains a small percentage of plant nutrients
macro (nitrogen, phosphorus and potash) as well as micro. Finished compost is classified as a 100%
organic fertilizer containing primary nutrients as well as trace minerals, humus and humic acids, in a
slow release form. Compost improves soil porosity, drainage and aeration and moisture holding capacity
and reduces compaction. Compost can retain up to ten times its weight in water. In addition, compost
helps buffer soils against extreme chemical imbalances; aids in unlocking soil minerals; releases
nutrients over a wide time window; acts as a buffer against the absorption of chemicals and heavy metals;
promotes the development of healthy root zones; suppresses diseases associated with certain fungi; and
helps plants tolerate drought conditions.

Process flow diagram below further clarifies the processes involved and technology employed.

Collection & transportation
of Solid Waste by CDGL to
project site at weigh bridge
Sorting & crushing of
organic waste for composting
Residue removed from the
screening plant, re-use material
Organic Waste for
composting
Composting
Aerators
Turning
Temp, Moisture & CO2
Monitoring
Compost & Post
Compost Processing /
Packing
Integrated
Quality
Control
UNFCCC/CCNUCC


The Figure below shows the waste dumping site along with the existing composting facility for the pilot
phase and proposed expansion of windrow pad needed for the subsequent phases to reach 1,000 tpd of
processed waste.

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)
Pakistan (Host) Lahore Compost (Pvt) Limited No
Denmark Danish Ministry of Climate,
Energy and Building/Danish
Energy Agency ; International
Bank for Reconstruction and
Development (IBRD) as Trustee
of the Danish Carbon Fund ;
DONG Naturgas A/S ; Maersk
Olie og Gas AS ; Nordjysk
Elhandel A/S; Aalborg Portland
A/S
Yes

LCL, a group company of Saif Group, is a private limited company under the laws of Pakistan especially
set up to operate composting facilities in Pakistan. The company started developing the composting
Screening
& Bagging Waste
Sorting
Proposed
Expansion
of
Existing
Compost
Pad for
Phasing Up
Weigh
Bridge
Existing
Composting
Pad for Pilot
Phase
Project
Boundaries
UNFCCC/CCNUCC


project back in 2001. The company has set up its first composting plant at Mahmood Booti under an
agreement with the City District Government Lahore (CDGL). The project has been setup on Build-
Operate-Transfer basis, whereby the project will be transferred to CDGL after a period of 25 years. This
is the first public-private project in Pakistan on such a large scale in the area of Municipal Solid Waste
(MSW) recycling.

SHL defines and reviews business and investment activities of the Saif Group and provides consultancy
and other related services to associated companies in addition to provide local support and other
representative services to leading transnational corporations. SHL is also the primary implementation
authority of the Saif Group for programs in Human Resource Development and Administrative Support.
SHL is tasked with:

Building networks with project partners and achieving shared objectives through the utilization of
synergies.
Managing network and alliance development.
Nurturing an enterprise culture throughout the organization.
Establishing the benchmark for recruitment and human resource development.

Project Implementation

LCL is responsible for the overall implementation of the composting project in Lahore. The project will
be implemented in incremental phases until 1,000 tpd is achieved.

A.5. Public funding of project activity
>>
The project has no recourse to public funds.

SECTION B. Application of selected approved baseline and monitoring methodology
B.1. Reference of methodology
>>
Approved baseline and monitoring methodology AM0025 version 11 titled Avoided emissions from
organic waste through alternative waste treatment processes has been applied. According to the
methodology AM0025, Tool for the Demonstration and Assessment of Additionalilty Version 5 and
Tool to Determine Methane Emissions Avoided from disposal of Waste at a Solid Waste Disposal Site
Version 4 for estimation of baseline emissions have been used.

B.2. Applicability of methodology
>>
The methodology AM0025 titled Avoided emissions from organic waste through alternative waste
treatment processes is applicable in this project. The project meets applicability criteria set out in the
methodology.

The methodology AM0025 is applicable under the following conditions:

The project Activity involves one or a combination of the following waste treatment options for the
fresh waste that in a given year would have been otherwise disposed of in a landfill:
(a) A composting process in aerobic conditions;
(b) Gasification to produce syngas and its use;
(c) Anaerobic digestion with biogas collection and flaring and/or its use;
(d) Mechanical/thermal treatment process to produce refuse-derived fuel (RDF)/ stabilized biomass
(SB) and its use;
UNFCCC/CCNUCC


(e) Incineration of fresh waste for energy generation, electricity and/or heat.

The project uses composting process in aerobic conditions. Furthermore, for composting the following
condition must be also be complied with:

In case of composting, the produced compost is either used as soil conditioner or disposed of in
landfills.
Furthermore AM0025 is only applicable if the most plausible baseline scenario for the waste treatment
component is identified as either the disposal of waste in landfill without capture of landfill gas or the
disposal of the waste in landfill where the landfill gas is partially captured and subsequently flared.

Based upon the above-mentioned criteria, the methodology is applicable because of the following
reasons:

The project activity involves composting process in aerobic conditions for the fresh waste that would
be otherwise dumped of in a solid waste disposal site (open dumping).
The produced compost soil is used as a soil conditioner.
The proportions and characteristics of different types of organic waste proposed in the project
activity can be determined, in order to apply a multiphase landfill gas generation model to estimate
the quantity of landfill gas that would have been generated in the absence of the project activity.
The baseline scenario, as detailed and described under section B.4, is dumping of waste at Mahmood
Booti dumping site without capture of landfill gas.

There is no regulatory requirement regarding waste disposal in Pakistan. The baseline scenario would
remain unchanged with the waste being disposed off in a solid waste open dumping site. As a result
landfill gas generated would be released in the atmosphere.

Baseline emissions have been calculated as per instructions given under Baseline Emissions that project
participants should use the latest approved version of the Tool to Determine Methane Emissions
Avoided from Dumping Waste at a Solid Waste Disposal Site.

UNFCCC/CCNUCC


B.3. Project boundary
Source GHGs Included? Justification/Explanation
B
a
s
e
l
i
n
e

s
c
e
n
a
r
i
o

Emissions
from
decompositio
n of waste at
the landfill
site
CO
2
Excluded CO2 emissions from the decomposition of organic
waste are not accounted.
CH
4
Included The major source of emissions in the baseline.
N
2
O Excluded N2O emissions are small compared to CH4
emissions. Exclusion of this gas is conservative.
Emissions
from the
electricity
consumption
CO
2
Excluded No electricity consumption in baseline.
CH
4
Excluded Excluded for simplification. This is conservative.
N
2
O Excluded Excluded for simplification. This is conservative.
Emissions
from thermal
energy
generation
CO
2
Excluded No thermal energy generation in the baseline.
CH
4
Excluded Excluded for simplification. This is conservative.
N
2
O Excluded Excluded for simplification. This is conservative.
P
r
o
j
e
c
t

s
c
e
n
a
r
i
o

Onsite fossil
fuel
consumption
on due to the
project
activity
CO
2
Included Fuel used by on-site vehicles
CH
4
Excluded Excluded for simplification. This emission source
is assumed to be very small.
N
2
O Excluded Excluded for simplification. This emission source
Emissions
from onsite
electricity use
CO
2
Included An emission source
CH
4
Excluded Excluded for simplification. This emission source
N
2
Direct
emissions
from waste
treatment
processes
CO
2
Excluded Not included by methodology CO2 emissions
from the decomposition of organic waste are not
accounted.
CH
4
Included The composting process may not be completed and
result in anaerobic conditions.
N
2
O Included An emission source of composting activity
Emissions
from waste
water
treatment
CO
2
Excluded Not included by methodology CO2 emissions
from the decomposition of organic waste are not
accounted.
CH
4
Included Waste water is treated anaerobically and/or released
untreated
N
2

The project boundary is the composting site where the waste is brought in and treated.

B.4. Establishment and description of baseline scenario
>>
AM0025 version 11 requires a procedure of 4 steps for the selection of the most plausible baseline
scenario:

Step 1: identification of alternative scenarios.
UNFCCC/CCNUCC


With the same purpose of waste treatment, there would be 4 alternatives to the proposed project.

Alternative 1: Organic waste composting identical to the proposed project but not undertaken as a CDM
project activity: Methane production would be avoided by breaking down organic matter through aerobic
processes. Composting activity includes processes of municipal waste classification, composting and
automation monitoring, which require high technology. It demands high initial capital investment and
operational & maintenance costs. Given that no market for compost currently exists, the sales of
generated compost faces marketing risks and the ROI (return on investment) cannot reach the minimum
hurdle rate expectations. The step 3 of the section will show that, considering the financial barriers and
market risks, composting without CDM support is not feasible.

Alternative 2: Waste incineration: Waste incineration is suitable for low humidity and high caloric value
wastes. A study was carried out on the municipal solid waste of Lahore metropolitan to ascertain whether
the waste of Lahore municipality is suitable for incineration or not. The study reviled no installation of
incinerator at any landfill site in Lahore due to higher moisture content varying from 50% to 70%, high
ash content ranging between 15% to 25% and volatile combustible content of only 15% to 20% in the
Lahore MSW (Source: LUDP / Solid Waste Disposal Plan 1991 and Environment Impact Assessment of
Mahmood Booti Municipal Solid Waste Dumping Site, Lahore by NESPAK in March 2004). This
NESPAK study was conducted under the orders of the Honourable Lahore high Court where the
residents challenged the project. Moreover installation of incinerators at landfill site would be an
expensive option, technically more challenging to operate and environmentally undesirable. Thus,
incineration at present is not a viable option for waste disposal in Lahore.

Alternative 3: Disposal of the waste on a landfill with electricity generation using the landfill gas
captured from the landfill site: Sanitary landfill or the controlled tipping involves the disposal of the
waste in the prepared trenches or cells. It is a biological process in which number of microorganism
generates different products. Vents are kept for the escape of gasses like Carbon Dioxide and Methane.
An extensive investment is required for landfill gas collection system for possible generation of
electricity. It is also technically not feasible
1
as the conditions for installing a gas collection and
electricity generation system are not met due to the composition of waste, high humidity levels ranging
from 50% to 70% (low humidity levels are required), and high ash content ranging from 15% to 25% in
Lahore (as mentioned in alternative 2) which would require additional equipment that raises the cost
even more, as well as technical design know-how. High investment, technical challenges and lack of
capacity in the local market renders this option unfeasible at present.

Alternative 4: Disposal of Waste on a landfill with landfill gas capture and flaring system. Sanitary
landfill or the controlled tipping involves the disposal of the waste in the prepared trenches or cells.
Vents are kept for the escape of gases like methane and carbon dioxide. This system requires installation
of gas extraction and flaring system at project site. Implementation of this alternate requires extensive
investment
2
but without any economic return. It is also technically not feasible as the quality of waste in
a developing country like Pakistan is not appropriate for this option combined with climatic conditions of
too much humidity (as explained in alternative 2) and volatile combustible content of only 15% to 20%
in Lahore which raises the moisture content of the waste above what is feasible for installing a gas

1
For sources please see the following: 1-World Bank Solid Waste Management in Punjab Sector Policy Dialogue
Note, April 21, 2008; 2-The World Bank PPIAF Punjab Solid Waste Management Reform Study, March 28,
2008; and 3-Landfill Risk Matrix Intro by Mr. Charles Peterson, Senior Waste Management Specialist at the World
Bank.
2
Internal World Bank Policy Note titled Non-Lending Technical Assistance Establishing Integrated Solid Waste
Management in the Large Cities of Pakistan Concept Note.
UNFCCC/CCNUCC


collection and flaring system (requires additional expensive equipment and sophisticated
design/operations knowledge that is not available in Pakistan). As a result, this alternate being capital
intense and technically challenging, makes it technically and financially unfeasible at present.

Alternative 5: Continuation of the current situation baseline scenario, where organic matter is
broken down through uncontrolled anaerobic processes, releasing all produced methane into the
atmosphere. There are no technical and investment barriers to this option. It is a feasible option but
with severe environmental consequences.

Stated alternatives 2, 3 and 4 are not acceptable to the investors owing to the technological and financial
reasons. Technical challenges given the climate and waste quality of Lahore, lack of capacity in the local
market, lack of technological know-how, unaffordable high costs exacerbated by additional
complications given the technical difficulties, render scenarios 2, 3 and 4 above mentioned unfeasible.
Therefore, the following steps were applied to analyze the Alternatives 1 and 5 in order to identify the
baseline scenario.

Sub-step 1b Enforcement of applicable laws and regulations:

The most relevant parts of the legal framework for disposal of waste in Pakistan include:

The Pakistan Environmental Protection Ordinance, 1983
National Conservation Strategy (NCS), 1992;
National Environmental Quality Standards (NEQS), 1993; and
Pakistan Environmental Protection Act, 1997 (PEPA, 1997)
Punjab Solid Waste Management Guidelines, 2007

The Ministry of Environment deals with environment and wildlife issues at the federal level. Two
organizations, the Pakistan Environmental Protection Council (PEPC) and the Pak- EPA, are primarily
responsible for administering the provisions of the PEPA 1997. The provincial environmental protection
agencies (EPAs) are the provincial arms of the federal EPA, which is authorized to delegate powers to its
provincial counterparts.

There is no article enforcing landfill gas extraction, organic waste composting or what-so-ever in
Environmental Protection Law of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan. While the governing laws do not
regulate waste disposal practices, there is no prohibition against composting either. The SOPs of LCL
are in full compliance with the guidelines of Punjab Solid Waste Management Guidelines, 2007 and to
the best international practices of composting across the board.

Step 2: According to the methodology, Step 2 and/or Step 3 of the latest approved version of the Tool
for demonstration and assessment of additionality shall be used to assess which of these alternatives
should be excluded from further consideration (e.g. alternatives facing prohibitive barriers or those clearly
economically unattractive).

In Compliance with the guidance of the CDM EB after the request for review
3
at registration of the project
activity, where the Board considered that the additionality of the project activity is established based on the
barrier analysis, step 3 of the latest version of the Tool for demonstration and assessment of additionality
has been followed. ,

Step 3: Barrier Analysis

3
CDM-EB-52, paragraph 44 (m); 12 February 2010, project 2778
UNFCCC/CCNUCC


Sub-step 3a I dentify barriers that would prevent the implementation of type of the Proposed Project
activity:

Hereafter the relevant key factors are discussed. Each of the factors described below indicates how it
influences the baseline development for the composting project and the GHG emissions at project
activity level.

Key factor 1 -Technical barriers

Although the project is using the simplest form of commercial composting technology, the entire
technology of the aerobic composting process implemented in this project is European and considered
reliable; equipment has been imported from Menart in Belgium for this first of a kind project, as it is not
available in Pakistan. The project starting in 2005
4
, is the first commercial attempt for using such
technology and equipment in Pakistan and there is no prior operational example in Pakistan on which the
management of LCL can rely for ensuring smooth operations of the facility
5
. As a result it faces a
number of technical barriers, such as the lack of technical know-how about the composting process and
running of a compost plant/machinery, and lack of availability of just-in-time after sales support on the
equipment
6
.

To some extent these barriers are expected to be overcome as the market for compost develops and LCL
learns through trial and error. Already LCL is working with local representatives of Menart, the
equipment suppliers, for locally developing the vendor network. It would not only reduce lead-time in
getting after sales service but would result in savings to the company.

Key factor 2 - Market & financial barriers

The Market and Financial Barrier stems from the machinery being very expensive to import without
adequate financial returns being generated to make it economically viable, which results in a very high
cost of investment
7
. This is further exacerbated by Pakistans country conditions of an inflationary
economy and high interest rates, combined with a continually depreciating currency
8
, which makes is
ever more expensive to pay back foreign currency denominated loans and pay for imported parts for
running and maintaining the imported machinery. At the same time, there is no established market for
compost to generate revenues from and it will take time to build a market for compost. Furthermore,
there are government subsidies and extensive farmer outreach programs for chemical fertilizer
9,10
, which
make it even more difficult to compete in the market and build a market for compost.

The market barriers to the project include the difficulty in the promotion and sale of compost and

4
Project starting date is November 1, 2005 corresponding to the 1st payment made to Menart for plant and
machinery (refer to section C.1.1 of the PDD).
5
Evidenced by Dawn newspaper clipping titled Work on Compost Plant Next Week dated March 16th 2005.
6
Evidenced by the production records showing lower production than expected. Plant records have been provided to
DOE during validation site visit.
7
Please see Annex 3 for more details on the costs of investment.
8
Please refer to http://www.statpak.gov.pk/depts/fbs/statistics/yearly_inflation/yearly_inflation/html for details on
inflationary trends for Pakistan, which were cross-checked against the State Bank of Pakistans (is the countrys
Central Bank) data as a part of the Validation process.
9
Subsidies for chemical fertilisers have been provided in Pakistan from 1955 to present, please refer to Fertilizer
subsidy in Pakistan, 2008, Lt Gen. Munir Hafiez and Fauji Fertilizer Company Ltd., Paper compiled for the 2008
IFA Crossroads Asia-Pacific in Melbourne.
10
Subsidies are expected to continue, please refer to page 21 of Pakistan Economic Survey 2008-2009, available at
http://www.finance.gov.pk/admin/images/survey/chapters/02-Agriculture09.pdf and page 150 of Government
budget 2009-2010 available at http://www.finance.gov.pk/admin/images/budget/pink_book_detail_D.pdf
UNFCCC/CCNUCC


financial barriers comprise high initial capital investment and substantial operation and maintenance cost
for the equipment
11
.

The Proposed Project is the first commercial composting project for organic waste in the Punjab province
and in the country itself
12
. In addition to the risk of the investment and high operational & maintenance
costs, there is also the risk of low market demand for the compost in the local market. It will take many
years to build market demand for compost and until this is done, the project cannot be profitable. Given
that the market for compost currently does not exist in the country, it is expected that the company will
experience low sales of compost in the early years
13
, even under the best case scenario. It will take time
to build a market for compost, which is why the project needs carbon revenue to help survive the early
years. Without CDM revenue, the project proponent would face cash flow problems
14
because of
difficulties to secure working capital at competitive rates from the local commercial banks, as they are
reluctant to fund such risky Greenfield projects. There is no way that this project would have been
undertaken without the expectation of carbon revenues
15
. As it is, the time taken by the CDM process is
creating cashflow issues and the project needs the CDM revenue very badly to help it survive in the
meantime.

It is because of this lack of knowledge both from the project entitys and buyers perspectives, that LCL
started a pilot operation in 2006
16
to learn how to use the composting machinery, break in the machinery,
figure out what the optimal operational set-up for equipment is, and learn how to manage the composting
process which can very easily go out of control. Thus, after official inauguration of the company, the first
pilot phase was to try and process upto 300 tpd and learn from this before the next stage of incremental
increase was implemented to eventually achieve the goal of 1,000 tpd. There is no possibility that 300 tpd
would be viable
17
on its own with or without CDM revenue. Moreover, the World Bank Solid Waste
Management in Punjab Sector Dialogue Policy Note/Study (April 21, 2008), which was provided to the
DOE during Validation, also supports that such a size is not viable and recommends that anything under
600 tpd should not even be considered due to lack of financial viability, amongst other barriers.

As part of this pilot phase, a comprehensive Marketing Plan has been adopted to take the compost to the
market. LC has committed 10% of the sales revenue to implement its marketing plan. At the moment,
marketing remains an expensive cost for the project without adequate sales revenue coming in. The
marketing plan has placed emphasis on the extensive sales promotions to give a real understanding of the
benefits of using compost for agricultural activities. Such promotion has been in the form of
demonstration farms in key districts to educate farmers, strengthening of the dealer network, as well as
direct marketing to the farmers. It will take time to change farmer mindsets. Still, for LCL, the
investment cost, debt servicing, and revenue from compost sales is not enough to support 300 tpd only. It
is simply too small an amount to justify an investment of this size. The pilot phase of 300 tpd is not
business as usual practice as the whole facility would not exist without carbon finance. 300 tpd is not
economically viable on its own and the plant would be shut down at this level alone. The pilot project
has been running at a loss, which has increased the accumulated losses
18
. Relative to the investment size

11
12
13
Evidenced by the sale records and Audited financial reports for 2005, 2006, 2007 provided to the DOE during the
validation site visit.
14
Cash flow problems and financial losses have been evidenced by the Audited financial reports for 2005, 2006 and
2007 made available to DOE.
15
Early consideration of CDM has been evidenced by:

Board Minute meeting on July 13, 2004 and Feasibility
Study referring to CDM consideration, July 13, 2004, which were all provided to the DOE during Validation.
16
Official inauguration of company and start of operations on March 31, 2006 as documented in project timeline
provided to DOE.
17
Evidenced by the Audited financial reports for 2005, 2006 and 2007 made available to DOE.
18
Audited financial reports have been made available to the DOE during Validation.
UNFCCC/CCNUCC


of the project, losses of this size are quite a significant percentage of the total investment, which the
project entity continues to absorb under deficit financing.

The lack of financial viability of the project without CDM revenue, high cost of investment and debt
servicing for imported machinery, lack of technical know-how and local capacity, lack of composting
technology in the country without the CDM project, common practice of open dumping of waste on
waste sites or by the side of the road, etc all prevent the implementation of the project activity without
CDM revenue. These barriers being significant enough to prevent project implementation are
documented in detail in all the World Bank waste management studies and official country policy
dialogue notes mentioned above.

Sub-step 3b Show that the identified barriers would not prevent the implementation of at least one of
the alternatives (except the Proposed Project activity):

The above-identified barriers do not affect Alternative 5 (Continuation of the current situation). It faces
no barriers with respect to technology, market and finances. As mentioned above, the waste treatment in
Pakistan is generally operated by the local governments who have limited funds. For the investors, the
Alternatives 2, 3, and 4 are not acceptable because of the technical as well as commercial reasons.
Alternative 1 cannot be used as the baseline scenario without the CDM revenue. In comparison,
alternative 5, continuing the current disposal of waste and allowing the emission of landfill gas would
sustain as a viable alternative in the absence of the project and has been chosen as the baseline scenario.

B.5. Demonstration of additionality
>>
Additionality is determined using the latest version of the methodological tool Tool for
demonstration and assessment of additionality V5.

Step 1: Identification of Alternatives to the Project Activity Consistent with Current Laws and
Regulations

Sub-Step 1a Define Alternatives to Project Activity:
Alternative 1: Organic waste composting identical to the proposed project but not undertaken as a CDM
project activity: Methane production would be avoided by breaking down organic matter through aerobic
processes. Composting activity includes processes of municipal waste classification, composting and
automation monitoring, which require high technology. It demands high initial capital investment and
operational & maintenance costs. The sales of generated compost faces marketing risks and the ROI
(return on investment) cannot reach the minimum hurdle rate expectations. The steps 2 and 3 of the
section will show that the project IRR without CDM revenue is only 15.15%, which is below the
required hurdle rate for Pakistan. Considering the financial barriers and market risks composting without
CDM support is not feasible.

Alternative 2: Waste incineration: Waste incineration is suitable for low humidity and high caloric value
wastes. A study was carried out on the municipal solid waste of Lahore metropolitan to ascertain whether
the waste of Lahore municipality is suitable for incineration or not. The study reviled no installation of
incinerator at any landfill site in Lahore due to higher moisture content varying from 50% to 70%, high
ash content ranging between 15% to 25% and volatile combustible content of only 15% to 20% in the
Lahore MSW (Source: LUDP / Solid Waste Disposal Plan 1991 and Environment Impact Assessment of
Mahmood Booti Municipal Solid Waste Dumping Site, Lahore by NESPAK in March 2004). This
NESPAK study was conducted under the orders of the Honourable Lahore high Court where the
residents challenged the project. Moreover installation of incinerators at landfill site would be an
UNFCCC/CCNUCC


expensive option, technically more challenging to operate and environmentally undesirable. Thus,
incineration at present is not a viable option for waste disposal in Lahore.

Alternative 3: Disposal of the waste on a landfill with electricity generation using the landfill gas
captured from the landfill site: Sanitary landfill or the controlled tipping involves the disposal of the
waste in the prepared trenches or cells. It is a biological process in which number of microorganism
generates different products. Vents are kept for the escape of gasses like Carbon Dioxide and Methane.
An extensive investment is required for landfill gas collection system for possible generation of
electricity. It is also technically not feasible
19
as the conditions for installing a gas collection and
electricity generation system are not met due to the composition of waste and high humidity levels
20

(low humidity levels are required) and high ash content in Lahore which would require additional
equipment that raises the cost even more, as well as technical design know-how. High investment,
technical challenges and lack of capacity in the local market renders this option unfeasible at present.

Alternative 4: Disposal of Waste on a landfill with landfill gas capture and flaring system. Sanitary
landfill or the controlled tipping involves the disposal of the waste in the prepared trenches or cells.
Vents are kept for the escape of gases like methane and carbon dioxide. This system requires installation
of gas extraction and flaring system at project site. Implementation of this alternate requires extensive
investment
21
but without any economic return. It is also technically not feasible as the quality of waste in
a developing country like Pakistan is not appropriate for this option combined with climatic conditions of
too much humidity in Lahore which raises the moisture content of the waste above what is feasible for
installing a gas collection and flaring system (requires additional expensive equipment and sophisticated
design/operations knowledge that is not available in Pakistan). As a result, this alternate being capital
intense and technically challenging, makes it technically and financially unfeasible at present.

Alternative 5: Continuation of the current situation baseline scenario, where organic matter is
broken down through uncontrolled anaerobic processes, releasing all produced methane into the
atmosphere. There are no technical and investment barriers to this option. It is a feasible option but
with severe environmental consequences.
Outcome of sub-step 1a
Stated alternatives 2, 3, and 4 are not acceptable to the investors owing to the technological and financial
reasons. Technical challenges given the climate and waste quality of Lahore, lack of capacity in the local
market, lack of technological know-how, unaffordable high costs further exacerbated by additional
complications given the technical difficulties, render scenarios 2, 3 and 4 mentioned above unfeasible.
Therefore, the following steps were applied to analyze the Alternatives 1 and 5 in order to identify the
baseline scenario.

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

The most relevant parts of the legal framework for disposal of waste in Pakistan include:

The Pakistan Environmental Protection Ordinance, 1983
National Conservation Strategy (NCS), 1992;

19
For sources please see the following: 1-World Bank Solid Waste Management in Punjab Sector Policy Dialogue
Note, April 21, 2008; 2-The World Bank PPIAF Punjab Solid Waste Management Reform Study, March 28,
2008; and 3-Landfill Risk Matrix Intro by Mr. Charles Peterson, Senior Waste Management Specialist at the World
Bank.
20
LUDP / Solid Waste Disposal Plan 1991 and Environment Impact Assessment of Mahmood Booti Municipal
Solid Waste Dumping Site, Lahore by NESPAK in March 2004. Was provided to DOE during Validation.
21
Internal World Bank Policy Note titled Non-Lending Technical Assistance Establishing Integrated Solid Waste
Management in the Large Cities of Pakistan Concept Note.
UNFCCC/CCNUCC


National Environmental Quality Standards (NEQS), 1993; and
Pakistan Environmental Protection Act, 1997 (PEPA, 1997)
Punjab Solid Waste Management Guidelines, 2007

The Ministry of Environment deals with environment and wildlife issues at the federal level. Two
organizations, the Pakistan Environmental Protection Council (PEPC) and the Pak- EPA, are primarily
responsible for administering the provisions of the PEPA 1997. The provincial environmental protection
agencies (EPAs) are the provincial arms of the federal EPA, which is authorized to delegate powers to its
provincial counterparts.

There is no article enforcing landfill gas extraction, organic waste composting or what-so-ever in
Environmental Protection Law of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan. While the governing laws do not
regulate waste disposal practices, there is no prohibition against composting either. The SOPs of LCL
are in full compliance with the guidelines of Punjab Solid Waste Management Guidelines, 2007 and to
the best international practices of composting across the board.

Outcome of sub-step 1b
Alternatives 1 and 5 are in compliance with regulatory requirements since there are no mandatory
applicable laws.

As mentioned in the previous section, in compliance with the guidance of the CDM EB after the request for
review
22
at registration of the project activity, where the Board considered that the additionality of the project
activity is established based on the barrier analysis, step 3 of the latest version of the Tool for demonstration
and assessment of additionality has been followed.

According to the Tool for demonstration and assessment of additionality we are to Proceed to Step 2
(I nvestment analysis) or Step 3 (Barrier analysis).

In Compliance with the guidance of the CDM EB after the request for review at Registration of the project
activity, where the Board considered that the additionality of the project activity is established based on the
barrier analysis, step 3 of the latest version of the Tool for demonstration and assessment of additionalityhas
been followed. ,

Step 3: Barrier Analysis

Without CDM revenue, the project proponent faces a number of technical barriers such as lack of
technical know-how, lack of availability of just-in-time after sales support on the equipment, compost
sales, etc.

Sub-step 3a I dentify barriers that would prevent the implementation of type of the Proposed Project
activity:

Hereafter the relevant key factors are discussed. Each of the factors described below indicates how it
influences the baseline development for the composting project and the GHG emissions at project
activity level.

Key factor 1 -Technical barriers

Although the project is using the simplest form of commercial composting technology, the entire
technology of the aerobic composting process implemented in this project is European and considered

22
CDM-EB-52, paragraph 44 (m); 12 February 2010, project 2778
UNFCCC/CCNUCC


reliable; equipment has been imported from Menart in Belgium
23
for this first of a kind project, as it is
not available in Pakistan The project, starting in November 2005
24
, is the first commercial attempt for
using such technology and equipment in Pakistan and there is no prior operational example in Pakistan
on which the management of LCL can rely for ensuring smooth operations of the facility
25
. As a result it
faces a number of technical barriers, such as the lack of technical know-how and lack of availability of
just-in-time after sales support on the equipment
26
.

To some extent some of these barriers are expected to be overcome as the market for compost develops
and through learning by doing. Already LCL is working with local representatives of Menart, the
equipment suppliers, for locally developing the vendor network. It would not only reduce lead time in
getting after sales service but would result in savings to the company.

Key factor 2 - Market & financial barriers

The Market and Financial Barrier stems from the machinery being very expensive to import without
adequate financial returns being generated to make it economically viable, which results in a very high
cost of investment
27
. This is further exacerbated by Pakistans country conditions of an inflationary
economy
28
and high interest rates, combined with a continually depreciating currency, which makes is
ever more expensive to pay back foreign currency denominated loans and pay for imported parts for
running and maintaining the imported machinery. Furthermore, Pakistans climate and waste composition
characteristics mean that additional cost must be incurred than what is normal to design a gas collection
and flaring system that is appropriate for the high humidity levels driving the investment cost even
higher. At the same time, there is no established market for compost to generate revenues from and it will
take time to build a market for compost. Thus this prevents Alternative 1 from being the baseline
scenario.

The market barriers to the project includes the difficulty in the promotion and sale of compost and added
to this, there is also a financial barrier comprised of high initial capital investment and substantial
operation and maintenance cost for the equipment
29
. Furthermore, there are government subsidies and
extensive farmer outreach programs for chemical fertilizer
30,31
, which make it even more difficult to build
a market for compost.

The Proposed Project is the first commercial composting project for organic waste in the Punjab province
and in the country itself
32
. In addition to the risk of the investment and high operational & maintenance

23
Menart Invoices for imported equipment have been provided as evidence at the time of validation.
24
Project starting date is November 1, 2005 corresponding to the 1st payment made to Menart for plant and
machinery (refer to section C.1.1 of the PDD).
25
Dawn newspaper clipping titled Work on Compost Plant Next Week dated March 16th 2005.
26
Evidenced by the production records showing lower production than expected. Plant records have been provided
to DOE during validation site visit.
27
28
Please refer to http://www.statpak.gov.pk/depts/fbs/statistics/yearly_inflation/yearly_inflation/html for details on
inflationary trends for Pakistan, which were cross-checked against the State Bank of Pakistans (is the countrys
Central Bank) data.
29
Please see Annex 3 for more details on the costs of investment..
30
Subsidies for chemical fertilisers have been provided in Pakistan from 1955 to present, please refer to Fertilizer
subsidy in Pakistan, 2008, Lt Gen. Munir Hafiez and Fauji Fertilizer Company Ltd., Paper compiled for the 2008
IFA Crossroads Asia-Pacific in Melbourne.
31
Subsidies are expected to continue, please refer to page 21 of Pakistan Economic Survey 2008-2009, available at
http://www.finance.gov.pk/admin/images/survey/chapters/02-Agriculture09.pdf and page 150 of Government
budget 2009-2010 available at http://www.finance.gov.pk/admin/images/budget/pink_book_detail_D.pdf
32
UNFCCC/CCNUCC


costs, there is also the risk of low market demand for the compost in the local market. It will take many
years to build market demand for compost and until this is done, the project cannot be profitable. Given
that no market for compost currently exists in the country, it is expected that the company will
experience low sales
33
, of compost in the early years, even under the best case scenario. It will take time
to build a market for compost, which is why the project needs carbon revenue to help survive the early
years
34
. Without CDM revenue, the project proponent would face cash flow
35
problems because of
difficulties to secure working capital at competitive rates from the local commercial banks, as they are
reluctant to fund such risky Greenfield projects.

It is because of this lack of knowledge both from the project entitys and buyers perspectives, that LCL
commenced pilot operations in 2006
36
to learn how to use the composting machinery, break in the
machinery, figure out what the optimal operational set-up for equipment is, and learn how to manage the
composting process which can easily go out of control. Thus, after official inauguration of the company,
the first pilot phase was to try and process up to 300 tpd and learn from this before the next stage of
incremental increase was implemented to eventually achieve the goal of 1,000 tpd. There is no possibility
that 300 tpd would be viable
37
on its own with or without CDM revenue. Moreover, the World Bank
Solid Waste Management in Punjab Sector Dialogue Policy Note/Study (April 21, 2008) also supports
that such a size is not viable and recommends that anything under 600 tpd should not even be considered
due to lack of financial viability, amongst other barriers.

As part of this pilot phase, a comprehensive Marketing Plan has been adopted to take the compost to the
market. LC has committed 10% of the sales revenue to implement its marketing plan. At the moment,
marketing remains an expensive cost for the project without adequate sales revenue coming in. The
marketing plan has placed emphasis on the extensive sales promotions to give a real understanding of the
benefits of using compost for agricultural activities. Such promotion has been in the form of
demonstration farms in key districts, strengthening of the dealer network, as well as direct marketing to
the farmers. It will take time to change farmer mindsets. Still, for LCL, the investment cost, debt
servicing, and revenue from compost sales is not enough to support 300 tpd only. It is simply too small
an amount to justify an investment of this size. The pilot phase of 300 tpd is not business as usual
practice as the whole facility would not exist without the expectations of obtaining carbon finance. 300
tpd is not economically viable on its own and the plant would be shut down at this level alone. The pilot
project has been running at a loss, which has increased the accumulated losses
38
. Relative to the
investment size of the project, losses of this size are quite a significant percentage of the total investment,
which the project entity continues to absorb under deficit financing.

The following evidence was presented to substantiate the barriers noted above. Both of the barriers are
documented in each one of the items listed below, as they point out what the current practices are in the
country, along with the lack of experience with the composting technology, and thus reinforces the
additional financial hurdles that need to be overcome by the project activity:

World Bank Study on Waste Management Practices in Punjab that documents open dumping of
waste as the common practice and provides documentation of multiple financial, technical, and

33
Evidenced by the sale records and Audited financial reports for 2005, 2006, 2007 provided to the DOE during the
validation site visit.
34
Early consideration of CDM has been evidenced by:

Board Minute meeting on July 13, 2004 and Feasibility
Study referring to CDM consideration, July 13, 2004.
35
Cash flow problems and financial losses have been evidenced by the Audited financial reports for 2005, 2006 and
2007 made available to DOE.
36
Official inauguration of company and start of operations on March 31, 2006 as documented in project timeline
provided to DOE.
37
Evidenced by the Audited financial reports for 2005, 2006 and 2007 made available to DOE.
38
Audited financial reports have been made available to the DOE during Validation.
UNFCCC/CCNUCC


policy barriers: World Bank Solid Waste Management in Punjab Sector Policy Dialogue Note,
April 21, 2008.
Executive Summary of World Bank PPIAF Study on Punjab Solid Waste Management
Reform.(Pages IV, V, VI, VIII, & XXI),The World Bank PPIAF Punjab Solid Waste
Management Reform Study, March 28, 2008.
Photos of Mahmood Booti dumping site (without the CDM project the area reserved for the project
would also look like this and have open dumping of waste like the rest of the area) and other
examples of open dumping of waste common practice from Lahore and other cities in Pakistan.
Dawn newspaper article titled Work on Compost Plant Next Week on March 16th 2005. It clearly
states that this project is the first of its kind that is bringing composting technology from Europe to
Pakistan for the first time.
Municipal Solid Waste Management in Lahore City District, Pakistan article/study in Waste
Management magazine
39
. It clearly documents open dumping of waste as common practice.
(Introduction & section 3.2.3 Open Dumps)
World Bank policy note by Agnieska Grundzinska on Solid Waste Management in Punjab Sector
Policy Dialogue Note with government of Pakistan. This note clearly documents common practice
as well as all the barriers mentioned in the PDD, including the lack of financial viability. (Pages 1,
6, 15, & 27)
Meeting with independent local consultant on Lahore Compost project and waste management
during validation site visit.
Meetings with World Bank staff experts on waste management practices in Pakistan Task Team
Leader who heads waste management strategy for World Banks Municipal Services Improvement
project for Pakistan and project Deal Manager during validation site visit.
LUDP/Solid Waste Disposal Plan 1991 and Environment Impact Assessment of Mahmood Booti
Municipal Solid Waste Dumping Site, Lahore by NESPAK in March 2004.
Internal World Bank Policy Note titled Non-Lending Technical Assistance Establishing Integrated
Solid Waste Management in the Large Cities of Pakistan Concept Note. It clearly establishes open
dump sites as the common practice for waste disposal and outlines barriers preventing better waste
management practices. (Page 1)
Landfill Risk Matrix.doc and Landfill Risk Matrix Intro.doc by Charles Peterson. These World
Bank documents list the conditions necessary for landfill gas capture and flaring and the risks
associated with different parameters.

The lack of financial viability of the project without CDM revenue, high cost of investment and debt
servicing for imported machinery, lack of technical know-how and local capacity, lack of composting
technology in the country without the CDM project, common practice of open dumping of solid waste,
all prevent the implementation of the project activity without CDM revenue. These barriers being
significant enough to prevent project implementation is documented in detail in all the World Bank waste
management studies and official country policy dialogue notes mentioned above, in addition to outside
sources presented as a part of the Validation process.

Sub-step 3b Show that the identified barriers would not prevent the implementation of at least one of
the alternatives (except the Proposed Project activity):

The above-identified barriers prevent all other Alternatives but do not affect Alternative 5 (Continuation
of the current situation). It faces no barriers with respect to technology, market and finances. As

39
Can be found at http://www.sciencedirect.com/science?_ob=ArticleURL&_udi=B6VFR-4VDSCVJ-
9&_user=1916569&_rdoc=1&_fmt=&_orig=search&_sort=d&_docanchor=&view=c&_searchStrId=1141037881
&_rerunOrigin=google&_acct=C000055300&_version=1&_urlVersion=0&_userid=1916569&md5=84b26cfc4a6
a06cb97f03e73a07f1c18. Municipal Solid Waste Management in Lahore City District, Pakistan article in Waste
Management magazine volume 29 issue 6 dated June 2009.
UNFCCC/CCNUCC


mentioned above, the local governments who have limited funds generally operate the waste treatment in
Pakistan. For the investors, the Alternatives 2, 3 and 4 are not acceptable because of the technical as well
as commercial reasons. The Alternative 1 cannot be used as the baseline scenario without obtaining any
CDM revenue. In comparison, alternative 5 continuing the current disposal of waste and allowing the
emission of landfill gas would sustain as a viable alternative in the absence of the project and has been
chosen as the baseline scenario.

In conclusion, according to the Tool for the demonstration and assessment of additionality, the baseline
and the proposed project are discussed in details in the section B.4. Among the five alternatives,
Alternatives 1 through 4 without CDM support cant be used as the baseline scenario. In comparison,
Alternative 5 of continuing the current practice of waste disposal and allowing the emissions of landfill
gas is the baseline scenario.

Step 4: Common Practice Analysis

Sub-step 4a Analyze Other Activities Similar to the Proposed Activity:

We are not aware of any project carrying out composting activity on a large commercial scale in the
country. At present composting practices in the country are restricted to low cost static composting
process (anaerobic process). Aerobic composting is capital-intensive project with high running costs. As
the market is not developed for the market, promoting compost is not easy. At present the sales of
compost throughout the country is not recorded and so it is difficult to estimate the market potential of
compost.

Sub-step 4b Discuss Other Similar Options that are Occurring

To the best of knowledge there is no similar activity occurring in the country.

B.6. Emission reductions
B.6.1. Explanation of methodological choices
>>
The emission reduction caused by the proposed project are calculated according to the approved
methodology AM0025 version 11 Avoided Emissions from Organic Waste through Alternative Waste
Treatment Processes and Annex 10 of EB41 Tool to determine Methane Emissions Avoided from
Disposal of Waste at a Solid Waste Disposal Site, V4.

The emissions have been calculated according the followings steps:

1. Project Emissions PE
y

The proposed project uses composting process to treat organic waste. Therefore, the project emissions in
year y are calculated using the following formula:

PE
y
= PE
elec,y
+ PE
fuel,on-site,y
+ PE
c,y
+ PE
a,y
+ PE
g,y
+ PE
r,y
+ PE
i,y
+ PE
w,y

Where:

PE
y
is the project emissions during the year y (tCO
2
e)
PE
elec,y
is the emissions from electricity consumption on-site in year y (tCO
2
e)
PE
fuel,on-site,y
is the emissions on-site due to fuel consumption on-site in year y (tCO
2
e)
PE
c,y
is the emissions during the composting process in year y (tCO
2
e)
PE
a,y
is the emissions during the anaerobic digestion process in year y (tCO
2
e). The project
UNFCCC/CCNUCC


does not include the anaerobic digestion process, so PEa,y = 0
PE
g,y
is the emissions during the gasification process in year y (tCO
2
e). The project does not
include the gasification process, so PEg,y = 0
PE
r,y
is the emissions during the combustion of RDF/stabilized biomass in year y (tCO
2
e).
The project does not include the combustion of RDF/stabilized biomass, so PEr,y = 0
PE
i,y
is the emissions from waste incineration in year y (tCO
2
e). The project does not include
waste incineration, so PEi,y = 0
PE
w,y
is the emissions from waste water treatment in year y (tCO
2
e)

So the calculation equation of PE
y
is:

PE
y
= PE
elec,y
+ PE
fuel,on-site,y
+ PE
c,y
+ PE
w,y
(1)

(i) Emissions from electricity use (PE
elec,y
)

PE
elec,y
= EG
PJ,FF,y
* CEF
elec
(2)

Where:

EG
PJ,FF,y
is the amount of electricity generated in an on-site fossil fuel fired power plant or
consumed from the grid as a result of the project activity, measured using an electricity
meter (MWh).

CEF
elec
is the carbon emissions factor for electricity generation in the project activity
(tCO
2
/MWh). Estimated values are used to ex-ante calculate the emission reduction.
The actual emission reduction will be replaced by the ex-post measured values.

Furthermore, the methodology states that in cases where the electricity is purchased from
the grid, the emission factor is to be calculated according to the Tool to Calculate
Emission Factor for an Electricity System Version 01.1. Accordingly, the emission factor
has been calculated using the Tool to Calculate the Emission Factor for an Electricity
System.

(Lahore Electric Supply Company Limited (LESCO)
(http://www.lesco.gov.pk/LESCO/default.asp) is a wholly owned subsidiary of the Water
& Power Development Authority (WAPDA) of the Government of Pakistan and is
responsible for distribution of electricity to all categories of consumers in the Lahore
area. LESCO issues monthly billing to the consumers and collects electricity charges.
The factor value used in the PDD has been taken from the monthly bills of LESCO for
LCL.)

(ii) Emissions from fuel use on-site (PE
fuel,on-site,y
)

The project uses fuel on-site for vehicles. Therefore, emissions from fuel use on-site are relevant.

PE
fuel,on-site,y
= F
cons,y
* NCV
fuel
* EF
fuel
(3)

Where:

PE
fuel,on-site,y
is the CO
2
emissions due to onsite fuel combustion in year y (tCO
2
e)
F
cons,y
is the fuel consumption on site in year y (litres). Estimated values are used to ex-ante
calculate the emission reduction. The actual emission reduction will be replaced by the
UNFCCC/CCNUCC


ex-post measured values.

NCV
fuel
is the net calorific value of the fuel (MJ/Kg). Net calorific value of 44.007 MJ/Kg has
been used. Calorific Value as per PCSIR report is being used here.

(LCL does not procure fuel directly from the fuel supplier. The reason for this is that the
quantity of fuel required by LCL is too small for the fuel supplier to send out a tanker
with fuel directly to LCL. Thus, LCL goes to market traders who trade smaller quantities
to procure its fuel needs. Therefore the calorific value of the fuel used at project has
been taken from the Lab Test Report of the fuel sample taken from site, which was
carried out by the government owned Pakistan Council of Scientific & Industrial
Research, the only recognized laboratory in Pakistan whose test reports are recognized
and accepted all across the country and abroad. The Lab is ISO 9001 certified).
EF
fuel
is the CO
2
emission factor of the fuel (tCO
2
e). IPCC default value of 74,100 Kg/TJ has
been used.

(iii) Emissions from composting (PE
c,y
)

PE
c,y
= PE
c,N2O,y
+ PE
c,CH4,y
(4)

Where:

PE
c,N2O,y
is the N
2
O emissions during the composting process in year y (tCO
2
e)
PE
c,CH4,y
is the emissions during the composting process due to methane production through
anaerobic conditions in year y (tCO
2
e)

N
2
O emissions (PE
c,N2O,y
)

PE
c,N2O,y
= M
compost, y
* EF
c,N2O
* GWP
N2O
(5)

Where

PE
c,N2O,y
is the N
2
O emissions during the composting process in year y (tCO
2
e)
M
compost, y
is the total quantity of compost produced in year y (tonnes/a). Estimated values are used
to ex-ante calculate the emission reduction. The actual emission reduction will be
replaced by the ex-post measured values.
EF
c,N2O
is the emission factor for N
2
O emissions from the composting process (tN
2
O/t Compost).
Approved value of 0.000043 tN
2
O/t compost has been used.
GWP
N2O
is the Global Warming Potential of nitrous oxide (tCO
2
/tN
2
O). Approved value of
Global Warming Potential (310 tCO
2
/tN
2
O) for N
2
O has been used.

CH
4
emissions (PE
c,CH4,y
)

PE
c,CH4,y
= MB
compost, y
* GWP
CH4
* S
a,y
(6)

Where

PE
c,CH4,y
is the project methane emissions due to anaerobic conditions in the composting process
in year y (tCO
2
e).
MB
compost, y
is the total quantity of methane produced in the solid waste dumping site in the
absence of the composing activity in year y (tCH
4
). According to AM0025 version 11
and Annex 10 of EB 41
st
meeting report Tools to Determine Methane Emissions
UNFCCC/CCNUCC


Avoided from Disposal of Waste at a Solid Waste Disposal Site MB
compost, y
is
calculated by multiplying MB
y
calculated from the Baseline Emissions estimated from
equation 8 by the fraction of waste diverted, from the dumping site, to the composting
activity (fc) relative to the total waste diverted from the landfill to all project activities
(composting).

GWP
CH4
is the Global Warming Potential of methane (tCO
2
/tCH
4
). Approved Global warming
Potential of methane (21 tCO
2
/tCH
4
) has been used.
S
a,y
is the number of samples per year with oxygen deficiency (S
OD,y
)divided by total number
of samples (S
total,y
) taken per year. It primarily indicates waste that degrades under
anaerobic conditions in the composting plant during the crediting period. Currently
limited data is available which is statistically not significant. An Ex ante value of 2%
has been applied in the PDD for S
a
based on these measurements. Ex post this figure will
be replaced by the results of more actual on-site measurements.

(iv) Emissions from waste water treatment (PE
w,y
)

PE
w,y
( or PE
CH4,w,y
)= Q
COD,y
* P
COD,y
* B
O
* MCF
p
* GWP
CH4
(7)

Where:

PE
CH4,w,y
is the project methane emissions from waste water treatment in year y (tCH
4
/y).
Q
COD,y
is the quantity (amount) of wastewater treated anaerobically or released untreated from
the project activity in year y (m
3
/yr). This is not relevant for this project as wastewater is
not treated anaerobically. There is a nominal amount of leachate, which is reused from
an aerated tank and sprayed back on the windrows to irrigate them. Thus, a value of zero
has been used.
P
COD,y
is the Chemical Oxygen Demand (COD) of the waste water measured in tCOD/m
3
.
Since the leachate is reused from an aerated tank and sprayed back on the windrows to
irrigate them, a value of zero has been used.
B
O
is the maximum methane producing capacity (tCH
4
/t COD). Approved value of 0.265 kg
tCH
4
/ kg COD has been applied in this PDD.
MCF
p
is the methane correction factor (fraction). Approved IPCC default value of 0.8 has been
used. This is the value of anaerobic deep lagoon.

GWP
CH4
2
/tCH
4
2
/tCH
4
) has been used.

2. Baseline emissions

As per AM0025 baseline emissions are calculated using the following equation:

BE
y
= (MB
y
MD
reg,,y
) + BE
EN,y
(8)

Where

BE
y
is the baseline emissions in year y (tCO
2
)
MB
y
is the methane produced in the landfill (in this case it is solid waste dumping site) in the
absence of the project in the year y
MD
reg,,y
is the methane that would be destroyed in the absence of project activity in year y. In
this case no methane is being destroyed, this would be 0.
BE
EN,y
is the baseline emissions from generation of energy displaced by project activity in year
y (tCO
2
). No energy generation is taking place, so this value is 0.
UNFCCC/CCNUCC


In cases where regulatory or contractual requirements do not specify MD
reg,,y
, an Adjustment Factor (AF)
has to be used to account for other relevant regulations and contractual obligations or to address safety or
odour concerns. However, as there are no other relevant regulations or contractual obligations especially
related to safety or odour concerns, AF will be 0.

Rate of Compliance

There are no regulations that mandate the use of one of the treatment options. Therefore, this is not
applicable.

Methane Calculations from the landfill in the absence of the Project Activity (MB
y
)

Methodology stipulates that the project participants should calculate the amount methane generated
according to the latest version of the approved Tool to Determine Methane Emissions Avoided from
Disposal of Waste at a Solid Waste Disposal Site. Consequently methane emissions have been
calculated according to EB 41
st
meeting report Annex 10 the methodological tool Tool to Determine
Methane Emissions Avoided from Disposal of Waste at a Solid Waste Disposal Site As per following
equation:

MB
y
= BE
CH4, SWDS,y
(9)

This calculation is based upon first order decay (FOD) model.

BE
CH4, SWDS,y
=*(1-f )*GWP
CH4
*(1 OX)*16/12* F*DOC
f
*MCF*W
j,x
*DOC
j
*e
-kj*(y-x)
*(1-e
-kj
) (10)

Where

BE
CH4, SWDS,y
is the methane emissions avoided during the year y from preventing waste disposal at
solid waste disposal site (SWDS) during the period from the start of the project activity
to the end of the year y (tCO
2
)
is the model correction factor to account for the uncertainties. Default value of 0.9 has
been used here
f is the fraction of the methane captured at SWDS and flared, combusted or used in
another manner. In the baseline scenario, waste is dumped without capture, destruction
or reuse of landfill gas. Therefore, f is 0.
GWP
CH4
2
/tCH
4
2
/tCH
4
) has been used.
OX is the oxidation factor (reflecting the amount of SWDS that is oxidized in the soil or
other material covering the waste.) Since the SWDS in the baseline scenario is solid
waste dumping site without any cover, OX in this case is 0.
F is the fraction of methane in SWDS gas (volume fraction). Approved default value of
0.5 has been used.
DOC
f
is the fraction of the degradable organic carbon. This value has been calculated using
from IPCC Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas Inventories Reference Manual
Chapter 6 Equation 2. The value is 0.77
MCF is the methane correction factor. In this case we are using the approved value of 0.8 for
unmanaged solid waste disposal site (> 5 M deep)
DOC
j
is the fraction of the degradable organic carbon. Approved IPCC default values as per
Volume 5, Table 2.4 have been used
W
j,x
is the amount of organic waste type j prevented from disposal in SWDS in each year x in
tons.
UNFCCC/CCNUCC


K
j
is the decay rates for the waste type j. Approved IPCC default values as per Volume 5,
Table 3.3 has been used.

Where

W
j,x
= W
x
* p
n,j,x
z

W
j,x
is the amount of organic waste type j prevented from disposal in SWDS in each year x in
tons.
W
x
is the total amount of organic waste prevented from disposal in SWDS in each year x in
tons.
p
n,j,x
is the weight fraction of the waste type j in the sample n collected during the year x
z is the number of samples collected during the year x

Baseline Emissions from Generation of Energy Displaced by the Project Activity
The project does not generate electricity utilizing biogas / syngas collected / RDF / stabilized biomass /
combustion heat from incineration. Therefore, this is not applicable.

Baseline Emissions from Electricity and Heat Cogeneration that is Displaced by the Project
Activity
The project does not produce thermal energy utilizing biogas / syngas collected / RDF / stabilized
biomass / combustion heat from incineration. Therefore, this is not applicable.

3. Leakage
The project uses composting process to treat organic waste and is subject to certain types of leakage.
According to the methodology leakage emissions are estimated using the following equation:

L
y
= L
t,y
+ L
r,y
+ L
i,y
+ L
s,y
(11)

Where:

L
y
is the leakage emissions in year y (tCO
2
)
L
t,y
is the leakage emissions from increased transport in year y (tCO
2
e)
L
r,y
is the leakage emissions from the residual waste from anaerobic digester, the gasifier, the
processing/combustion of RDF/stabilised biomass or the compost in case it is disposed
of in the landfill in year y (tCO
2
e). As there is no anaerobic digester, gasifier or RDF
process installed at the project site. Similarly compost is not disposed off in the landfill
site. Therefore, the value is 0.
L
i,y
is the leakage emissions from the residual waste from MSW incinerator in year y
(tCO
2
e). Again, as there is no incinerator, this value is 0
L
s,y
is the leakage emissions from end use of stabilized biomass. Again, as there is no
stabilized biomass, this value is 0

So the equation for L
y
is

L
y
= L
t,y
(12)

Emissions from Transportation (L
t,y
)
The emissions from the transportation (L
t,y
) is calculated using the following equation:

L
t,y
= NO
vehicles,i ,y
* DT
i,y
* VF
cons,i
* NCV
fuel,y
* D
fuel
* EF
fuel
(13)
UNFCCC/CCNUCC


Where:

NO
vehicles,i ,y
is the number of vehicles for transport with similar loading capacity
DT
i,y
is the average additional distance travelled by vehicle type i compare to baseline in year
y in km
VF
cons,i
is the vehicle fuel consumption in letters per kilometre for vehicle type i (l/km)
NCV
fuel,y
is the calorific value of the fuel (MJ/kg or other unit)
D
fuel
is the fuel density (kg/l)
EF
fuel
is the emission factor for the fuel (tCO
2
e/MJ)

The land used for producing compost is adjacent to the solid waste dumping site; in fact project has been
constructed taking a small portion of land from Mahmood Booti waste dumping site. Hence there are no
additional transportation emissions from the collection area to the treatment facility.

The nearest end user for the compost produced is farms located about 6 km away from the project site.

4. Emission Reductions

Emission reductions are calculated using the following equation:

ER
y
= BE
y
PE
y
L
y
(14)

Where:

ER
y
is the emission reductions in year y (tCO
2
e)
BE
y
is the emissions in the baseline scenario in year y (tCO
2
e)
PE
y
is the emissions in the project scenario in year y (tCO
2
e)
L
y
is the leakage emissions in year y (tCO
2
e)

UNFCCC/CCNUCC


B.6.2. Data and parameters fixed ex ante

Data / Parameter CEF
elec

Unit tCO
2
/MWh
Description Carbon emission factor for the production of electricity in the national
grid, which supplies electricity to the project activity.
Source of data Official utility documents. (Lahore Electric Supply Company Limited
(LESCO) (http://www.lesco.gov.pk/LESCO/default.asp) is a wholly
owned subsidiary of Water & Power Development Authority (WAPDA)
of the Government of Pakistan and is responsible for distribution of
electricity to all categories of consumers in the Lahore area. LESCO
issues monthly billing to the consumers and collects electricity charges.
The factor value used in the PDD has been taken from the monthly bills
of LESCO for LCL.)
Value(s) applied 0.48359
Choice of data
or
Measurement methods
and procedures
The CO
2
e emission factor has been calculated using the Tool to
Calculate the Emission Factor for an Electricity System Version 01.1.
Purpose of data Project Emissions
Additional comment -

Data / Parameter NCV
fuel

Unit MJ/kg
Description the net calorific value of the fuel (MJ/Kg)
Source of data Calorific Value as per PCSIR report is being used here.
(LCL does not procure fuel directly from the fuel supplier. The reason for
this is that the quantity of fuel required by LCL is too small for the fuel
supplier to send out a tanker with fuel directly to LCL. Thus, LCL goes to
market traders who trade smaller quantities to procure its fuel needs.
Therefore the calorific value of the fuel used at project has been taken
from the Lab Test Report of the fuel sample taken from site, which was
carried out by the government owned Pakistan Council of Scientific &
Industrial Research, the only recognized laboratory in Pakistan whose test
reports are recognized and accepted all across the country and abroad.
The Lab is ISO 9001 certified).
Choice of data
or
Measurement methods
and procedures
Net Calorific Value as per PCSIR report. The report has been reproduced
with this report.
Purpose of data Project Emissions

Data / Parameter EF
fuel
Unit tCO
2
e/TJ

UNFCCC/CCNUCC


Description is the CO
2
emission factor of the fuel
Source of data 2006 IPCC Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas Inventories
Choice of data
or
Measurement methods
and procedures
Emission factor can either be calculated or in cases where values are not
available, IPCC default values can be used. As local value for the CO
2

emission factor is not available, IPCC default value has been used. The
value has been taken from 2006 IPCC guidelines Volume 2, Table 3.2.1
Purpose of data Project emissions

Data / Parameter EF
c,N2O

Unit tN
2
O/t Compost

Description is the emission factor for N
2
O emissions from the composting process
Source of data Methodology approved value
Choice of data
or
Measurement methods
and procedures
Methodology approved value

Data / Parameter GWP
N2O

Unit tCO2/tN2O
Description is the Global Warming Potential of nitrous oxide
Value(s) applied 310
Choice of data
or
Measurement methods
and procedures
IPCC default value

Data / Parameter GWP
CH4

Unit tCO2/tN2O
Description is the Global Warming Potential of methane
Value(s) applied 21
Choice of data
or
Measurement methods
and procedures
IPCC default value
Purpose of data Baseline emissions
UNFCCC/CCNUCC



Data / Parameter B
O
Unit kg tCH
4
/ kg COD

Description is the maximum methane producing capacity of COD
Source of data Methodology approved value
Choice of data
or
Measurement methods
and procedures
IPCC 2006 guidelines specifies the value for B0 as 0.25 kg CH4/kg COD.
Taking into account the uncertainty of this estimate, project participants
should use a value of 0.265 kg CH4/kg COD as a conservative
assumption for B
O
.

Data / Parameter MCF

Unit N/A

Description is the methane correction factor
Source of data 2006 IPCC Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas Inventories (Volume
5, Table 6.3)
Value(s) applied 0.8 (default values obtained from table 6.3, chapter 6, Volume 5 from
IPCC 2006 guidelines since, the depth of the unmanaged solid waste
dumping site is more than 5 meters).
Choice of data
or
Measurement methods
and procedures
Methodology gives preference to local specific value should be used. In
the absence of local values, MCFp default values can be obtained from
table 6.3, chapter 6, Volume 5 from IPCC 2006 guidelines. Table
recommends using the following values for MCF:
1.0 for anaerobic managed solid waste disposal sites. These must
have controlled placement of waste (i.e., waste directed to specific
deposition areas, a degree of control of scavenging and a degree of
control of fires) and will include at least one of the following: (i) cover
material; (ii) mechanical compacting; or (iii) leveling of the waste.
0.5 for semi-aerobic managed solid waste disposal sites. These must
have controlled placement of waste and will include all of the following
structures for introducing air to waste layer: (i) permeable cover material;
(ii) leachate drainage system; (iii) regulating pondage; and (iv) gas
ventilation system.
0.8 for unmanaged solid waste disposal sites deep and/or with high
water table. This comprises all SWDS not meeting the criteria of
managed SWDS and which have depths of greater than or equal to 5
meters and/or high water table at near ground level. Latter situation
corresponds to filling inland water, such as pond, river or wetland, by
waste.
0.4 for unmanaged-shallow solid waste disposal sites. This comprises
all SWDS not meeting the criteria of managed SWDS and which have
depths of less than 5 metres.
UNFCCC/CCNUCC


Data / Parameter OX

Unit
%
Description is the oxidation factor (reflecting the amount of SWDS that is oxidized in
the soil or other material covering the waste)
Value(s) applied 0
Choice of data
or
Measurement methods
and procedures
The methodology recommends the following two ways of calculating the
value:
Conduct site visit of the solid waste disposal site to assess the type of
cover of the solid waste disposal site. Use 2006 IPCC Guidelines for
National Greenhouse Gas Inventories for the choice of value to be
applied
Use 0.1 for managed solid waste disposal sites that are covered with
oxidizing material such as soil or compost. Use 0 for other types of
solid waste disposal sites.
As the baseline scenario is unmanaged SWDS without cover, OX value in
this case is 0

Data / Parameter F

Unit
-
Description is the fraction of methane in SWDS gas (volume fraction)
Choice of data
or
Measurement methods
and procedures
This factor reflects the fact that some degradable organic carbon does not
degrade, or degrades very slowly, under anaerobic conditions in the
SWDS. A default value of 0.5 is recommended by IPCC.
Purpose of data Baseline Emissions

Data / Parameter DOC
f
Unit
-
Description is the fraction of the degradable organic carbon
Source of data IPCC Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas Inventories Reference
Manual Chapter 6 Equation 2
Choice of data
or
Measurement methods
and procedures
This value has been calculated on the basis of the following equation:
0.014T + 0.28 where T is the temperature
It has been assumed that the temperature in the anaerobic zone of SWDS
remains constant at about 35
o
C regardless of ambient temperature yields a
figure of 0.77 dissimilated DOC
UNFCCC/CCNUCC


Data / Parameter DOC
j
Unit -
Description is the fraction of the degradable organic content (by weight) in waste type
j
5, Table 2.4)
Value(s) applied
Waste Type DOC
j
(%)
Paper/Cardboard 44%
Textile 30%
Food Waste 38%
Wood & Wood Products 50%
Garden Waste 49%
Choice of data
or
Measurement methods
and procedures
In Lahore the mean annual temperature (MAT) is 26
O
C and mean annual
precipitation (MAP) is 30%. Therefore, dry climatic conditions are
applicable and the values of DOC
j
have been given above.


Data / Parameter K
j
Unit
-
Description Is the decay rates for the waste type j
5, Table 3.3)
Value(s) applied
Climate: Tropical

Waste Type
MAT >20
o
C
MAP < 1000 mm
K
j

Paper/Cardboard 0.045
Textile 0.045
Food Waste 0.085
Wood & Wood Products 0.025
Garden Waste 0.065
Choice of data
or
Measurement methods
and procedures
In Lahore the mean annual temperature (MAT) is 26
O
C and mean annual
precipitation (MAP) is 30%. Therefore, tropical and dry climatic
conditions are applicable and the values of K
j
have been given above

B.6.3. Ex ante calculation of emission reductions
>>
As described in section B.6.1, the emission reductions are calculated according to the methodology
AM0025 and Tool to determine methane emissions avoided from disposal of waste at a solid waste
UNFCCC/CCNUCC


disposal site therein. The ex-ante calculation of emissions reductions is completed using the following
steps:

Step 1 Project Emissions

(i) Emissions from electricity use (PE
elec,y
)

As the project uses electricity the project emissions are relevant. The emissions have been calculated
using the following equation:

PE
elec,y
= EG
PJ,FF,y
* CEF
elec

To calculate the emissions from the national grid of Pakistan, the Tool to Calculate the Emission Factor
for an Electricity System Version 01.1 has been used. For calculation purposes, we used the power
generation data of power generation plants connected to the National Grid for the most recent three years
and worked out the Grid Emission Factor of 0.48359 to be used to calculate the project emissions from
use of electricity at the site.

Taking emissions during 2008 as an example:
PE
elec,y
= EG
PJ,FF,y
* CEF
elec
= 874.032 * 0.48359 = 423 tCO
2
/a

Data and results used in ex-ante calculation of PE
elec,y
are shown in Table B.6.3 1 below:
Table B.6.3 1
Parameter Year Value
MWh
elec,y
2008
2009
2010 & onwards
874.0 MWh
943.2 MWh
943.2 MWh
CEF
elec
0.48359
PE
elec,y
2008
2009
2010 & onwards
423 tCO
2
e/annum
456 tCO
2
e/annum
456 tCO
2
e/annum

The emission factor is calculated using the: Tool to Calculate the Emission Factor for an Electricity
System Version 01.1. For this purposes, it is calculated as a combined margin (CM), consisting of the
simple average of the operating margin emission factor (OM) and the build margin emission factor (BM)
by utilizing an ex-ante 3 years data period.

EF
y
= W
OM
* EF
OM,y
+ W
BM
* EF
BM,y

The default weight of the W
OM
and W
BM
are 50% (i.e. W
OM
= W
BM
= 50%).

All margins are expressed in tCO2 / MWh.

The results show that the OM is 0.64314

The emission factor is calculated following the six steps provided by the Tool to Calculate the Emission
Factor for an Electricity System Version 01.1
UNFCCC/CCNUCC


STEP 1 Identification of the Relevant Electric Power System

Pakistan comprises two distinct grids (a) the national grid; and (b) the Karachi Electricity Supply
Company (KESC) grid. Each grid has its own independent dispatch centre, generation and distribution
system. Though interconnected for occasional supply from the national grid to KESC, which ranges from
400-600 MW, there are no material interdependencies between the two grids. The generating plants for
each grid are clearly identifiable and data for each grid is available. By separating KESC generation the
emission factors for the national grid are broadly reduced, providing a correct and conservative estimate
of the impact on grid emission factor for the power projects connected on the national grid. The Lahore
Compost project only uses electricity from the national grid and not from KESC. Accordingly, data
relating to power generation plants connected with the national grid was collected and used to calculate
the grid emission factor.

STEP 2 Selection of Method for Calculating Operating Margin Emission Factor

According to the tool, there are four options for calculation of OM:

a) Simple OM; or
b) Simple adjusted OM; or
c) Dispatch Data Analysis; or
d) Average OM.

The methodology of choice should be Dispatch Data Analysis, however as prescribed and allowed in the
tool, the Simple OM has been selected for the following reason:

i. The National Transmission & Dispatch Company (NTDC) of Pakistan operates the national
dispatch centre but detailed hourly dispatch data is not available for public disclosure;
ii. Low cost must run constitutes less than 50% of the total NTDC grid generation in average of the
five most recent years.

STEP 3 Calculation of Operating Margin Emission Factor (EF
OM,y
)

The Simple OM emission factor (EF
grid,OMysimple,y
) is calculated per option C from the tool as the
generation-weighted average emission per electricity unit (tCO
2
/MWh) of all generation sources serving
the system, not including low-operating cost and must-run power plants and 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, as follows:

Where:
EF
grid,OMsimple,y
Simple operating margin CO
2
emission factor in year y (tCO
2
/MWh)
FC
i,y
Amount of fossil fuel type i consumed in the project electricity system in year y
NCV
i,y
is the

net calorific value (energy content) of fossil fuel type i in year y
EF
CO2,i,y
is the CO
2

emission factor of fossil fuel type i in year y
EG
y
Net electricity generated and delivered to the grid by all power sources serving the
system, not including low-cost / must-run power plants / units, in year y
i identifies all fossil fuel types combusted in power plant / unit m in year y
UNFCCC/CCNUCC


y Identifies 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) in this case
2006-2008

The information has been utilized as follows:

The consolidated grid system generation and energy statistics (Pakistan Energy Yearbook) have been
available in Pakistan for several years and such reliable official data is available to compute the required
factors.

a) Grid system statistics have been analyzed for five years to provide evidence for under
50% of the system being must run-least cost generation and justify use of the Simple OM method;

b) Grid system statistics have been analyzed for the most recent three years to compute
the following:

i. Total generation and analysis by type by fuel used;
ii. Calorific values of the fuel based on official data, and emission factor of fossil fuel;
iii. Total heat value of fuel;
iv. Emissions factors of fossil fuel type and finally the simple operating margin CO
2
emission
factor

Based on these the analysis and official information available for the Pakistan Power System for 2006,
2007 and 2008, the value for the Operating Margin Emissions Factor (OM) is 0.64314.

STEP 4 Identification of the cohort of power units to be included in the build margin

The sample group m consists of the higher in terms of generation of:

(a) The five power plants that have been built most recently; or
(b) The power plant capacity additions in the electricity system that comprise 20% of the system
generation (MWh) and that have been built most recently.

To determine the sample group m, the five most recent additions to the system were compared with the
additions to the electricity system that comprise 20% of the system generation and that have been built
most recently. The comparison is as follows:

(a) The five power plants that have been built most recently contribute 13,074,630 MWh to the grid;
(b) The most recent published total electricity generation in 2008 was 85,189,510 MWh and 20% of
system generation comes to 17,037,902 MWh. Eight of the most recently built power plants contribute
17,140,310 MWh to the grid.

Thus (b) above was selected to calculate the Build Margin emission factor, where the sample m
comprises the eight most recently built power plants.

The tool prescribes that one of two following options may be selected with the proviso that once selected
it cannot be changed during the crediting period:

Option 1. For the first crediting period, calculate the build margin emission factor ex-ante 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
UNFCCC/CCNUCC


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.

Option 2. For the first crediting period, the build margin emission factor shall be updated annually, ex-
post, including those units built up to the year of registration of the project activity or, if information up
to the year of registration is not yet available, including those units built up to the latest year for which
information is available. For the second crediting period, the build margin emissions factor shall be
calculated ex-ante, as described in option 1 above. For the third crediting period, the build margin
emission factor calculated for the second crediting period should be used.

Option 1, EF
BM, y
ex ante, has been selected.

STEP 5 Calculate the Build Margin Emission Factor (EF
BM, y
)

The build margin emissions factor is the generation-weighted average emission factor (tCO
2
/MWh) of all
power units m during the most recent year y for which power generation data is available, calculated as
follows:

Where:
EF
grid,BM,y
is the Build margin CO
2
emission factor in year y
EG
m,y
is the net quantity of electricity generated and delivered to the grid by power unit m in year
y
EF
EL,m,y
is the CO
2
emission factor of power unit m in year y
m identifies the power units included in the build margin
y indicates the most recent historical year for which power generation data is available

The calculations show that the BM is 0.32404

It may be noted that the BM is effected by a large hydropower project, which took over 10 years to
complete but came on stream during the computation period.

STEP 6 Calculate the Emission Factor (EFy)

The Grid Emission Factor is the weighted average of the OM emission factor (EF
OM, y
) and the BM
Emission Factor (EF
BM, y
).

The default weight of the W
OM
and W
BM
are 50% (i.e. W
OM
= W
BM
=50%) and EF
OM,y
and EF
BM,y
are
calculated in Steps 1 and 2 above and are expressed in tCO
2
/MWh.

It is proposed to use the default weights, as there appears little justification to use alternative weights
after a study of the (i) timing of project output; (b) predictability of project output; or (c) suppressed
demand.

Thus the default weights will be used will be W
OM
= 0.50 and W
BM
= 0.50

The baseline emissions factor EFy= W
OM
* EF
OM,y
+ W
BM
* EF
BM,y
is determined as follows:

UNFCCC/CCNUCC


= (0.5 * 0.64314) + (0.5 * 0.32404) = 0.48359 tCO/ MWh.

(ii) Emissions from fuel use on-site (PE
fuel,on-site,y
)

PE
fuel,on-site,y
= F
cons,y
* NCV
fuel
* EF
fuel
(3)


PE
fuel,on-site,y
= F
cons,y
* NCV
fuel
* EF
fuel
= 89,966 * 44.007 * 74.1*1 x 10
-6
= 293 tCO
2
e/annum

Estimated fuel consumption, net calorific value and emission factor of fuel are shown in Table B.6.3 2.
The actual fuel consumption will be measured according to the Monitoring Methodology for ex-post
emission reductions.
Table B.6.3 2
F
cons,y
2008
2009
2010 & onwards
89,966 Liters/year
224,915 Liters/year
224,915 Liters/year
NCV
fuel
44.007 MJ/Kg
EF
fuel
74.10 tCO
2
e/TJ
PE
fuel,on-site,y
2008
2009
2010 & onwards
293 tCO
2
e/annum
733 tCO
2
e/annum
733 tCO
2
e/annum

(iii) Emissions from Composting (PE
c,y
)

(a) N
2
O emissions (PE
c,N2O,y
)

PE
c,N2O,y
= M
compost, y
* EF
c,N2O
* GWP
N2O
(5)

The estimated quantity of compost is shown in the Table B.6.3 3. The actual quantity of compost
(M
compost, y
) will be monitored according to the Monitoring Methodology for ex-post emission reduction
calculations.


PE
c,N2O,y
= M
compost, y
* EF
c,N2O
* GWP
N2O
= 18,876 * 0.000043 * 310 = 252 tCO
2
e/annum
Table B.6.3 3
M
compost, y
2008
2009
2010 &
onwards
18,876 tCO
2
e/annum
52,500 tCO
2
e/annum
52,500 tCO
2
e/annum
EF
c,N2O
0.000043
UNFCCC/CCNUCC


GWP
N2O
310
PE
fuel,on-site,y
2008
2009
2010
252 tCO
2
e/annum
700 tCO
2
e/annum
700 tCO
2
e/annum

(b) CH
4
emissions (PE
c,CH4,y
)

PE
c,CH4,y
= M
compost, y
* GWP
CH4
* S
a,y
(6)

Currently limited data is available. Ex ante value of 2% has been applied in PDD for S
a
. Ex post this
figure will be replaced by the results of actual on-site measurements.

Ex ante calculations for the year 2008 as an example:

PE
c,CH4,y
= M
compost, y
* GWP
CH4
* S
a,y
= 655 * 21 * 2% = 275 tCO
2
e/annum

The calculated results are shown in Table the Table B.6.3 4. Ex post this value will be replaced by the
results if actual on-site measurements.

Table B.6.3 4
M
compost, y
Calculated by
BE
y
= M
compost, y
* GWP
CH4

Where BE
y
is calculated using
first order decay model
GWP
CH4
21
S
a,y
2%
PE
c,CH4,y
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013

275 tCO
2
e/annum
1,020 tCO
2
e/annum
1,714 tCO
2
e/annum
2,358 tCO
2
e/annum
2,958 tCO
2
e/annum
3,516 tCO
2
e/annum
(Complete results are in Annex 3

The value of (PE
c,y
) is calculated as according to the equation (4) below:

PE
c,y
= PE
c,N2O,y
+ PE
c,CH4,y
(4)

The results are shown is Table B.6.3 6.

(iv) Emissions from waste water treatment (PE
w,y
)
UNFCCC/CCNUCC


PE
w,y
( or PE
CH4,w,y
)= Q
COD,y
* P
COD,y
* B
O
* MCF
p
* GWP
CH4
(7)

The project does not involve wastewater treatment and no wastewater is released. Only a very nominal
amount of leachate is produced, which is collected and reused from an aerated tank, and sprayed back on
the windrows to irrigate them for required moisture levels. Therefore, the Ex ante value of Q
COD,y
0 m
3
/yr
and P
COD,y
value of 0 t COD/ m
3
have been applied in this PDD.

Please note that MAT is 26
o
C AND MAP is 30% resulting in dry climatic conditions. Therefore, the
leachate is reused for irrigating windrows and is not released outside of the project.

Ex ante calculations for the year 2008 as an example:

PE
w,y
( or PE
CH4,w,y
) = Q
COD,y
* P
COD,y
* B
O
* MCF
p
* GWP
CH4

= 0 * 0 * 0.265 * 0.8 * 21 = 0 tCO
2
e/annum

results of actual on-site measurements.
Table B.6.3 5
Q
COD,y
2008 & onwards 0 m
3
per year
GWP
CH4
21 tCO
2
/tCH
4

P
COD, y
2008 & onwards 0 tCOD/m
3
per year
B
O
0.265 kg tCH
4
/ kg COD
MCF
p
0.8
PE
w,y

(or PE
CH4,w,y
)
2008 & onwards 0 tCO
2
e/annum

Project emissions are calculated according to the equation (1) shown below:

PE
y
= PE
elec,y
+ PE
fuel,on-site,y
+ PE
c,y
+ PE
w,y
(1)

The results ex ante project emissions for the first crediting period are shown in Table B.6.3 6
Table B.6.3 6: Ex Ante Project Emissions for the First Crediting
Period
Year PE
elec,y
PE
fuel,on-site,y
PE
c,y
PE
w,y
PE
y

2008 423 292 527 0 1,242
2009 456 733 1,720 0 2,909
2010

456 733 2,414 0 3,603
2011 456 733 3,058 0 4,247
2012 456 733 3,658 0 4,847
UNFCCC/CCNUCC


Year PE
elec,y
PE
fuel,on-site,y
PE
c,y
PE
w,y
PE
y

2013 456 733 4,216 0 5,405
2014 456 733 4,735 0 5,924

Step 2 Baseline Emissions

The emissions in the baseline have been calculated using the following formula:

BE
CH4, SWDS,y
=*(1-f )*GWP
CH4
*(1 OX)*16/12* F*DOC
f
*MCF*W
j,x
*DOC
j
*e
-kj*(y-x)
*(1-e
-kj
)

According to the sections B.6.1 and B.6.2, the parameter values used are shown in Table B.6.3 7. The
quantity of ex-ante food waste, garden/park waste, paper, textile and wood/straw prevented from disposal
at the Mamood Booti SWDS is shown in Table B.6.3 8. The actual quantity of organic waste will be
measured according to the Monitoring Methodology for ex-post emission reductions.
Table B.6.3 7: Parameters Values used for the Baseline Emissions
Parameter
s
Paper Textiles Food Garden/Par
k
Wood/Straw
0.9 0.9 0.9 0.9 0.9
F 0 0 0 0 0
OX

0 0 0 0 0
F 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5
DOC
f
0.77 0.77 0.77 0.77 0.77
MCF 0.8 0.8 0.8 0.8 0.8
DOC
j
44% 30% 38% 49% 50%
K
j
0.045 0.045 0.085 0.065 0.025

Table B.6.3 8: Quantities Prevented from Disposal and Baseline Emissions
during the First Crediting Period
Years Paper Textiles Food Garden/Par
k
Wood/Straw Emissions
2008 183 4,347 24,399 30,881 216 13,749
2009 473 11,203 62,884 79,591 556 51,024
2010

473 11,203 62,884 79,591 556 85,687
2011 473 11,203 62,884 79,591 556 117,923
2012 473 11,203 62,884 79,591 556 147,908
2013 473 11,203 62,884 79,591 556 175,801
2014 473 11,203 62,884 79,591 556 201,753
UNFCCC/CCNUCC


Years Paper Textiles Food Garden/Par
k
Wood/Straw Emissions
Total for
the First
Crediting
Period
3,019 71,567 401,700 508,430 3,552 793,845

Step 3 Leakage

The emissions from increased transportation have been treated as leakage. There is no anaerobic
digester, gasifier or RDF process installed at the project site. Nor is there stabilized biomass. The
leakage from transportation has been calculated using the following equation

L
t,y
= NO
vehicles,i ,y
* DT
i,y
* VF
cons,i
* NCV
fuel,y
* D
fuel
* EF
fuel
(13)

The land used for producing compost is adjacent to the solid waste dumping site; in fact project has been
constructed taking a small portion of land from Mahmood Booti waste dumping site. Hence there are no
additional transportation emissions from the collection area to the treatment facility.

The plant is expected to sell within a radius of 70 Km. Ex post this figure will be replaced by the results
of actual on-site measurements for additional transportation emissions according to the Monitoring
Methodology for ex-post emission reduction calculations.

At present there is little information available on fuel consumption. The trucks with varying capacity
has different consumption rate. Ex ante 0.4 litres per kilometre has been used and ex-post will be
replaced with actual number.

L
t,y
= NO
vehicles,i ,y
* DT
i,y
* VF
cons,i
* NCV
fuel,y
* D
fuel
* EF
fuel

= 3,595 * 70 * 0.4 * 44.007 * 0.84 * 74.1*1x10
-6

= 276 tCO
2
e/annum

results of actual on-site measurements according to the Monitoring Methodology.
Table B.6.3 9
NO
vehicles,i ,y
2008
2009
2010 & onwards
3,595
10,000
10,000
DT
i,y
2008
2009 & onwards
70 km
70 km
VF
cons,i
0.4 liters per km
NCV
fuel,y
44.007 MJ/Kg
D
fuel
0.84
EF
fuel
74.1 tCO
2
e/TJ
UNFCCC/CCNUCC


L
t,y
2008
2009 & onwards
276 tCO
2
e/annum
767 tCO
2
e/annum

Step 4 Project Emission Reductions

The project emission reductions are calculated using the following equation:

ER
y
= BE
y
PE
y
L
y
(12)

The results of the first crediting period are summarized in section B.6.4

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)
2008 13,749 1,242 275 12,232
2009 51,025 2,909 766 47,350
2010

85,687 3,603 766 81,318
2011 117,924 4,247 766 112,911
2012 147,909 4,847 766 142,296
2013 175,802 5,405 766 169,631
2014 201,753 5,924 766 195,063
Total 793,849 28,177 4,871 760,801
Total number of
crediting years
7 years
Annual
average over the
crediting period
108,686 tCO
2
e

Please refer to Appendix 4 for detail information on the estimation of emission reduction

B.7. Monitoring plan

The Proposed project is monitored according to the approved methodology version 11 of AM0025
Avoided Emissions from Organic Waste through Alternative Waste Treatment Processes. As the
baseline has been calculated according to the EB 26 meeting report Annex 14 the methodological tool
Tool to determine methane emissions avoided from disposal of waste at a solid waste disposal site, a
few more parameters such as W
j,x
and K
j
should be monitored as well. The chart below summarizes the
implementation arrangement:

UNFCCC/CCNUCC


Please note that while there has been no change in the process itself as described in the PDD, Lahore
Compost (Pvt) Limited (LCL) has now bought its own weigh bridge which is located in the project
boundary area, to have as a backup of the City District Government, Lahore (CDGL)s weigh bridge in
case CDGL weigh bridge is not functional, out of order for any reason, or with a delayed calibration.
Since LCL does not have control over CDGLs weigh bridge, having its own weigh bridge as a backup
provides additional safety over accuracy of measurements since it can control the calibration schedule of
the LCL weigh bridge.
Organic
Waste
Compost
KWh
Meter
Waste
Sorting
Electricity / Power for
Project Operations
Composting
Plant
Sampling
Weighing
Weighing
Oxygen Content
LCL
Sponsors (SHL)
Funding
Bank Financing
Land Allocated by
CDGL to LCL
Equipment Supplier
Composting Facility Construction Work
Compost Soil
Conditioner
Compost Users
Waste
Intake
LCL Weight
Bridge for
backup
CDGL
Weight
Bridge
UNFCCC/CCNUCC


B.7.1. Data and parameters to be monitored

(i) Project emission parameters are:

Data / Parameter EG
PJ,FF,y

Unit MWh
Description Electricity consumption
Source of data Energy Meter
Value(s) applied
2008
2009
2010 & onwards
874.0 MWh
943.2 MWh
943.2 MWh

Measurement methods
and procedures
Monthly meter reading by the Electricity Distribution Company (LESCO)
representative and billing to the company.
Monitoring frequency Continuous as explained below.
QA/QC procedures The energy meter is installed at the site by Lahore Electric Supply
Company (LESCO), also in charge of the meters calibration. The meter is
sealed and tempering with the meter is a criminal offence.
Purpose of data Project Emissions Calculations
Additional comment The electricity consumption is monitored by one calibrated energy meter.
The data is recorded monthly. The total electricity consumption is
accumulated yearly.

Data / Parameter F
cons,y

Unit Litres
Description Fuel consumption on-site during year y of the crediting period
Source of data Purchase invoices and metering
Value(s) applied
2008
2009
2010 & onwards
89,966 Liters/year
224,915 Liters/year
224,915 Liters/year

Measurement methods
and procedures
Purchase invoices and store record for diesel fuel

Monitoring frequency A petrol meter is installed at site. Readings are recorded each time diesel
is taken out for consumption. Total consumption is then verified with the
fuel purchase invoices so ensure accountability for each and every litre
purchased by the company.
QA/QC procedures The fuel consumption can be verified with the paid fuel invoices.

UNFCCC/CCNUCC


Data / Parameter NCV
fuel
Unit MJ/kg
Description The net calorific value of the fuel (MJ/Kg)
Source of data Fuel Supplier
Measurement methods
and procedures
N/A
Monitoring frequency Annually
QA/QC procedures Net Calorific Value as per PCSIR report.
Purpose of data Project Emission Calculations

Data / Parameter M
compost, y

Unit Tonnes
Description Total quantity of compost produced
Source of data Plant records
Value(s) applied
2008
2009
2010 & onwards
18,876
52,500
52,500

Measurement methods
and procedures
All compost produced from the composting plant is weighted on the LCL
electronically calibrated scales. Production data is recorded daily and
accumulated on a monthly and annual basis.
Monitoring frequency Annually as explained in the comments below
QA/QC procedures Compost produced can be crosschecked with sale invoices/receipts of
compost, invoices for free samples & bulk sales, and management
approvals for compost discarding as being not fit for market..

Calibration is carried out routinely on an annual basis. Calibration
certificate from ACME Scales can also be provided.

UNFCCC/CCNUCC


Data / Parameter S
a,y

Unit %
Description Share of the waste that degrades under anaerobic conditions, i.e., samples
with oxygen content of less than 10%
Source of data Company records obtained through oxygen sensor
Value(s) applied 2%
Measurement methods
and procedures
S
a,y
is the number of samples per year with oxygen deficiency
(S
OD,y
)divided by total number of samples (S
total,y
) taken per year. The
oxygen content is measured by calibrated oxygen sensor. The total number
of samples should ensure 20% uncertainty at 95% confidence level. To
achieve this 25 samples per windrow will be taken weekly. The results are
aggregated monthly and then accumulated annually.
Monitoring frequency Weekly as explained above.
QA/QC procedures The oxygen sensors will be calibrated in accordance with stipulation of
instrument supplier.
Additional comment The 2% used in the PDD is based on actual data and measurements taken
until July 2008. Since then operational improvements have resulted in this
being reduced to 1.5%.

Data / Parameter S
OD,y

Unit Number
Description Number of samples with oxygen deficiency
Source of data Company records obtained through oxygen sensor
Value(s) applied 66
Measurement methods
and procedures
The oxygen content is measured using a calibrated oxygen sensor. The
number of samples with oxygen content less than 10 percent is recorded.
The results are taken weekly and aggregated monthly and finally
accumulated annually.
Monitoring frequency Continuous as explained above
QA/QC procedures The oxygen sensors are calibrated in accordance with stipulation of the
instrument supplier.
Additional comment This is based on actual measurements taken so far.

UNFCCC/CCNUCC


Data / Parameter S
total,y

Unit Number
Description Total number of samples taken per year for determination of oxygen
deficiency
Source of data Measurement on site with oxygen sensor
Value(s) applied 3,306
Measurement methods
and procedures
Field records of number of oxygen deficiency measurement samples taken.
Recorded in paper and electronic format. 25 samples/week per windrow
will be taken
Monitoring frequency Continuous as explained above.
QA/QC procedures The oxygen sensors are calibrated in accordance with the stipulations of
the instrument supplier. AM0025 requires that S
total
should be chosen in a
manner that ensures estimation of S
a,y
with 20% uncertainty at 95%
confidence level.
Additional comment For Ex ante estimation, S
a,y
is normally assumed to be zero (no anaerobic
conditions), but we have based the value above on actual measurements
taken.

Data / Parameter f
c

Unit Tonnes
Description Fraction of waste diverted, from the dumping site to the project.
Source of data Company records
Value(s) applied
2008
2009 & onwards
107,864
300,000

Measurement methods
and procedures
Measured by the CDGL weighbridge
Monitoring frequency Continuous as explained below.
QA/QC procedures The CDGL weigh bridges are calibrated on an annual basis. In case the
CDGL weigh bridge is out of order for any reason or with a delayed
calibration, the LCL weigh bridge shall be used to measure the waste
intake. LCL weigh bridge is also calibrated on annual basis to ensure the
accuracy of the equipment. The calibration of both the CDGL and LCL
weigh bridges is carried out by an independent third party.

UNFCCC/CCNUCC


Data / Parameter Amount of Compost Produced
Unit Tonnes
Description The amount of compost produced from the composting process in tonnes
Source of data Company production and sale records, free samples dispatch record and
compost discarding record.
Value(s) applied
2008
2009
2010 & onwards
18,876
52,500
52,500

Measurement methods
and procedures
Packed bags are weighed at the calibrated weighing scale installed with the
packing unit daily and aggregated weekly/annually. Compost sold in bulk
and compost discarded is weighted on the calibrated weighbridge installed
by the LCL. The weigh bridge is calibrated on an annual basis.
QA/QC procedures Quantities appearing on the sales / samples invoices are accumulated and
reconciled with stocks (opening and closing quantities at the specific date.)

(ii) Baseline emission parameters are:

UNFCCC/CCNUCC


Data / Parameter MB
y

Unit tCH
4

Description Methane produced in the landfill in the absence of the project activity in
year y
Source of data Calculated as per the Tool to determine methane emissions avoided from
disposal of waste at a solid waste disposal site
Value(s) applied
Years
2008 655
2009 2,430
2010

4,080
2011 5,615
2012 7,043
2013 8,371
2014 9,607
Measurement methods
and procedures
As per the Tool to determine methane emissions avoided from disposal of
waste at a solid waste disposal site
Monitoring frequency As per the Tool to determine methane emissions avoided from disposal of
QA/QC procedures As per the Tool to determine methane emissions avoided from disposal of
Purpose of data Baseline Emissions Calculations using the Tool to determine methane
emissions avoided from disposal of waste at a solid waste disposal site.
Total waste intake has been aggregated to monthly and then annual
summary.

UNFCCC/CCNUCC


Data / Parameter A
j,x

Unit Tons / day
Description Total amount of organic waste type j prevented from disposal in SWDS
during each year in tons.
Source of data Weighbridge, City District Government records / project participants
Value(s) applied
2008
2009 & onwards
107,864
300,000

Measurement methods
and procedures
All trucks entering the compost plant are weighed with a calibrated
weighbridge that belongs to the City District Government of Lahore,
CDGL.

Given the changes brought about by the installation of a new weighbridge
by the City District Government of Lahore (which are outside of the
project implementers control), the following illustrates the waste
measurement procedures at the site:

Before 01/06/2012: There was only one weighbridge i.e. weighbridge at
Mahmood Booti dumping site. Trucks were weighted at that
weighbridge.

Between 01/06/2012 to 23/09/2012: During this period a new
weighbridge was installed and calibrated at the entrance of the
composting site, hence both weighbridges were operational and used for
weighing MSW.

Between 23/09/2012 to 05/01/2013: The old weighbridge located at
Mahmood Booti dumping site ceased operations and only the
weighbridge at the main entrance of LCL was operational; therefore
trucks were weighted on this weighbridge.

After 05/01/2013: Construction of old weighbridge at Mahmood Booti
dumping site was completed, and both weighbridges are now
operational.

There is no change in procedure of CDGL reporting to LCL for MSW
intake from Mahmood Booti SWDS.

The data is collected on a daily basis and is aggregated monthly and then
on an annual basis.

The total amount of organic waste prevented from disposal is the amount
of organic waste processed at the composting plant. This amount is
determined by the difference between the gross weight of the truck and its
tare weight.

Data will be recorded on a daily basis and stored in electronic format.
Monitoring frequency Measured Continuously. All trucks entering the compost plant have been
weighed on a calibrated weighbridge. The data is collected on a daily basis
and is aggregated monthly and then on an annual basis.
UNFCCC/CCNUCC


QA/QC procedures The CDGL weigh bridges are calibrated on an annual basis.

Since the weigh bridge installed at the dumping site is under direct control
of City District Government of Lahore and LCL cannot exercise any right
to get it calibrated from any independent third party until last it managed to
get it done in December 2010. Therefore to ensure the accuracy of
weighing scale of CDGL, LCL takes an initiative to select waste trucks on
random basis and send them to an independent third party weighing scale
located outside the project boundaries. The results are then compared to
ensure data accuracy.

LCL bought its new weighbridge in February 2011 to have a backup of the
City District Government Lahores weigh bridge in case the CDGL weigh
bridge is not functional, out of order for any reason, or with a delayed
calibration. LCL weigh bridge is also calibrated on annual basis to ensure
the accuracy of the equipment. The calibration of both the CDGL and LCL
weigh bridges is carried out by an independent third party.
Purpose of data Baseline Emissions Calculations

Data / Parameter P
j,x

Unit Tonnes
Description Share of different types of organic waste input into the composting process
Source of data Sampling, sorting and weighing
Value(s) applied Type 2008 2009 & onwards
Paper Waste 183 473
Textile Waste 4,347 11,203
Garden /Park Waste 30,881 79,591
Food Waste 24,399 62,884
Wood/Straws Waste 216 556
Measurement methods
and procedures
N/A
Monitoring frequency One day in every month till 31/12/2008, after that one-day quarterly e.g.
March, June, September and December.
QA/QC procedures N/A

UNFCCC/CCNUCC


Data / Parameter Z
Unit Number
Description Total number of samples collected in year x
Value(s) applied Sample of about 10-15 Kg of waste should be taken randomly form each
sample truckload.
Measurement methods
and procedures
N/A
Monitoring frequency One day in every month till 31/12/2008, after that one day quarterly e.g.
March, June, September, December
QA/QC procedures The trucks are randomly selected for sampling at LCL to ensure that the
waste quantity reported by different types is accurate.

(iii) Leakage emission parameters are:

Data / Parameter NO
vehicles,i,y

Unit Number
Description Vehicles by carrying capacity per year
Source of data Company as well as excise and sales taxation records
Value(s) applied
2008
2009 & onwards
3,595
10,000

Measurement methods
and procedures
N/A
Monitoring frequency Continuous and aggregated annually. As stipulated in Sales Tax Act, every
sale has to be recorded in the prescribed format and relevant
documentation must be onboard vehicles at all time. The record in the
prescribed format includes type of truck used as well as truck carrying
capacity; Sales tax has to be paid before compost produced can leave the
project site under sales. Failure to do so is a punishable offence.

Number of vehicles by carrying capacity can be accumulated annually
using Sales Tax record maintained by the company as well as by the Sales
Tax Department
QA/QC procedures Number of vehicles used can be crosschecked with compost produced, sold
and inventory records.
Purpose of data Leakages Emissions Calculations

UNFCCC/CCNUCC


Data / Parameter DT
i,y

Unit Km
Description Average additional distance travelled by different types of vehicles type
i compared to the baseline in year y
Value(s) applied 70
Measurement methods
and procedures
The project proponent has established dealer and customer network whose
distance from the plant warehouse can be accurately estimated. Compost
is supplied to these dealer networks
Monitoring frequency Annually.
QA/QC procedures Can be checked through transport company and dealer delivery receipts.
Purpose of data Leakages Emission Calculations

Data / Parameter VF
cons,i

Unit Litres per Km
Description Vehicle fuel consumption in litres per kilometre for vehicle type i
Source of data Company records based on the information provided by the transportation
companies
Measurement methods
and procedures
N/A
QA/QC procedures Vehicle type with laden weight and destination of compost shall be
recorded for every vehicle leaving project site.

Data / Parameter D
fuel

Unit Kg/l
Description Density of fuel
Source of data Fuel supplier letter
Measurement methods
and procedures
N/A
QA/QC procedures Lab Test Report of the fuel sample, which was carried out by the
government owned Pakistan Council of Scientific & Industrial Research,
the only recognized laboratory in Pakistan whose test reports are
recognized and accepted all across the country and abroad.

Monitoring Equipment Positioning:

UNFCCC/CCNUCC


B.7.2. Sampling plan
>>
I: Sampling plan for waste-composition

In accordance with the Tool to determine methane emissions avoided from dumping waste at a solid
waste disposal site the waste composition is measured at least quarterly. The purpose of these
measurements is to determine the fraction of each waste stream within the total waste input going to the
composting facility. In accordance with the tool the following waste-streams are to be distinguished:

Wood and wood products
Pulp, paper and cardboard (other than sludge)
Food, food waste, beverages and tobacco (other than sludge);
Textiles
Garden yard, and park waste
Inorganic: Glass, plastic, metal & other inert waste

To ensure that different categories are interpreted similar each quarter, Lahore Compost shall prepare an
instruction-book. The instruction book will contain pictures and descriptions whats included in each
waste-category. These instructions will be the guidance during the quarterly determination work.

Sampling should be done on about twenty incoming vehicles to the project site in one day every month
till 31/12/2008, and after that one day every quarter e.g. Marc, June, September, and December. The
sample should be taken randomly form a truckload, about 10-15 Kg of waste may be sampled from each
sample truck. To ensure random selection every 7
th
incoming truck should be selected for sampling. Data
should be clearly recorded in an electronic format.

II: Sampling Plan for determination of Oxygen Deficiency

Laboratory
Weighbridge
Fuel Pump
Electricity
Meter
UNFCCC/CCNUCC


The sampling plan to determine pockets of anaerobic conditions within windrows is based upon the
statistical methods used by Project 1087 Composting of Organic Waste in Wuzhou (China) and Project
0169 Composting of Organic Waste in Dhaka (Bangladesh). The equation used in both projects is
reproduced below and has been used to estimate the number of samples in this project as well.

n =
t
p
2
* p * (1 p)*N
t
p
2
* p * (1 p) + (N 1) * y
2

Where:

n = Sample Size
t
p
= 1.96 for 95% Confidence Interval
N = Population Size
p = for the true proportion which as a conservative is set as 0.5
y = Sampling error

Here the actual population is countless air molecules in windrows and hence the sample size is extremely
large. It can be calculated that for y (sampling error of 20%), the sample size should be 25 samples per
day. With 5 working days a week and minimum of 5 windrows, this correspond to 25 samples per week
per windrow.

The oxygen measurements are to be taken evenly spread out over the windrows and would use the
following ways:
Oxygen will be measure at the top as well at the bottom layer at the same location. Hence two
samples in vertical alignment will be taken. Windrows high is assumed to be 2 meters
The width of the grid fits width of the windrows which is assumed to 50 meters in this case
Within the grid, the measurement will be taken randomly

III: Moisture Content of Windrows

The moisture content of samples of composting materials from each windrow shall be assessed by:
grasping and clenching the sample in a gloved hand for approximately ten seconds, then opening and
assessing moisture content using table 1 below.

Table Annex 4.5: Moisture assessment index
Index No Sample moisture behaviour Interpretation
1 Water seeps out Too wet
2 More than one droplet appears Too wet
3 One droplet appears OK
4 Compost particles remain packed together and no
droplets appear
OK
5 Compost particles fall away from each other Too dry

The source(s) of any water sprayed onto input materials, windrows being formed or formed windrows
shall be determined in the operations manual.

The following shall be recorded on an electronic monitoring sheet.

UNFCCC/CCNUCC


Evaluations of moisture content and date carried out;
Date and approximate amount of any water added; and
Source of any water e.g. leachate reuse.

Frequency: Weekly for each windrow

B.7.3. Other elements of monitoring plan
>>
Please refer to Annex 4.

SECTION C. Duration and crediting period
C.1. Duration of project activity
C.1.1. Start date of project activity
>>
November 1, 2005

C.1.2. Expected operational lifetime of project activity
>>
28 Years

C.2. Crediting period of project activity
C.2.1. Type of crediting period
>>
Renewable crediting period

C.2.2. Start date of crediting period
>>
June 30, 2009 or the date after project registration

C.2.3. Length of crediting period
Seven years
SECTION D. Environmental impacts
D.1. Analysis of environmental impacts
>>
Environment & Social Impact Assessment prepared and Environment & Social Monitoring Plan has been
adopted by the LCL.

An Environmental & Social Impact Study has been carried out to assess the possible environmental and
social impact of the project. Green Technology Environmental Corporation undertook the Environmental
and Social Assessment (ESA) study to scrutinize possible environmental and social impacts and develop
an Environmental Management Plan aiming at offsetting the identified adverse environmental and social
impacts.

Lahore Compost (Pvt) Limited (LCL), part of Saif Group of Companies, is operating a composting plant
under the pilot phase utilizing organic component of the municipal solid waste collected and transported
to Mahmood Booti open dumping site, Bund Road, Lahore. The facility has been developed under the
concession awarded by the City District Government Lahore (CDGL) on a bid basis. LCL applied for
this bid concession on the expectation of having carbon revenue from the CDM composting project to
make it financially viable. It would not have bid for the concession without the CDM part of the project.
UNFCCC/CCNUCC


Under the concession awarded to it, LCL was required to build, own, operate and transfer the entire
operation and compost fertilizer after 28 years from the date of award of such mandate, back to CDGL.
In April 2006, company inaugurated the pilot production facility installed by Menart Compost Company
Belgium to process municipal solid waste. The pilot phase began by initially processing 300 tpd from
which the amount of waste processed will be increased in phases until the project activity goal of 1,000
tpd is reached. This entire composting project and processing of 1,000 tpd in contrast to the baseline of
no composting being done, is only made possible with the help of CDM revenue.

Plant Description

Project Location

The CDG Lahore allocated the LCL plant site within the premises of the Mahmood Booti open dumping
site, where the plant commenced pilot operations in April 2006, based on which the amount of waste
processed will be slowly increased until 1,000 tpd are reached. The LCL plant facilities include a
concrete platform, processing and storage shade, an office building, and utilities. The infrastructure
facilities at the site in terms of accessibility and electrical power supply are adequate. There is no human
habitation within the LC site or its close proximity, thus the issue of population displacement or
resettlement does not exist.

Project Description

LCL is a composting facility to process up to 1000 tpd of waste to produce compost fertilizer. From pilot
production, LCL is phasing up the facility in phases until processing of 1,000tpd of MSW is achieved.

The plant includes a tube-well with overhead storage tank (10,000 gallons), a 28,000 m2 concrete
platform, leachate basins and drains at strategic locations along the concrete platform, internal access
roads, administration and other buildings. The CDG operates a weighbridge (75 tons) at the entrance of
the Mahmood Booti open dumping site that is also used for weighing the waste intake of the Lahore
compost.

Equipment

The equipment process includes shredding of the moistened waste and creating windrows of compost 2 x
4 x 120m, turning of the windrows for aeration and sieving of the compost to control the particle size.
The plant equipment consists of shredders, turners, screens with meshes 50/50 mm, conveyor belts,
stitching, bagging unit and spare parts, wheeled loaders, diesel generating set, tractors, trolleys, water
basin, buildings, weighbridge and sprinkler system.

Staff

The working day of the compost plant consists of 2 8 hour shifts x 300 days per year. The staff for plant
operation consists of Plant manager, engineers, supervisors, and workers including administrative and
other staff.

D.2. Environmental impact assessment
>>
Environmental Impact Assessment and Mitigations

The phasing up of the composting facility will be fully implemented within the existing project and
stakeholders boundaries, thus having no additional significant environmental and social impact.

UNFCCC/CCNUCC


The ESA study conducted for the phasing up of LCL in 2008 assess the potential impact of phasing up of
composting, define criteria for determining significance and magnitude of the potential impacts, identify
mitigation measures, evaluate the residual impact, and identify monitoring requirements.

Impacts associated with the Construction of Plant

Dust Emissions

As the main facility had already been completed in 2006, current phasing up would only involve the
construction of composting pad. The environmental issue related to dust emission for this phasing up of
the existing facility would not be significant to the people living in the area over 100 meters to the
project site. However, to reduce the even insignificant dust emissions, water sprinkling will be carried
out.

Vehicle and Equipment Exhaust

Combustion exhaust from the vehicles and possible construction of phasing up in the existing facility
may insignificantly affect the ambient air quality of the project area. However, to mitigate this impact, all
vehicles, generators and other equipment will be properly tuned and maintained in good working
condition in order to minimize emission of pollutants.

Soil Contamination

Spills during refueling, discharges during vehicle and equipment maintenance, traffic accidents and
leakages from equipment and vehicles often result in the contamination of soil and potentially that of
surface water bodies at the construction site. Spill prevention trays will be provided and used at refueling
locations. On-site maintenance of vehicles and equipment will avoid such impacts as far as possible. In
case of on-site maintenance, tarpaulin or other impermeable material will be spread on the ground to
prevent contamination of soil. Regular inspections will be conducted to detect leakages in vehicles and
equipment. Fuels, lubricants, and chemicals will be stored in covered bounded areas. Appropriate
arrangements, including shovels, plastic bags and absorbent materials, will be available near fuel and oil
storage areas.

Impacts Associated With Plant Operations

The major potential environmental impacts associated with the operations of the facility which were
found to be significant are discussed below with a summary of their conclusions.

Emissions

The emissions from the plant during the composting process can potentially affect the ambient air
quality. However, adherence to SOPs would largely prevent any significant emission of hazardous gases.
The ambient air quality will be periodically monitored in the vicinity of the plant to ensure that the
concentration levels of the gases are within the permissible limits.

Emissions associated with the plant operations are negligible and their incremental effect on the local
environment is marginal. However, to keep this impact minimal, all vehicles, generators and other
equipment will be properly tuned and maintained in good working condition in order to minimize
emission of pollutants.

Effluents

UNFCCC/CCNUCC


The discharge of increased and untreated liquid effluent can impact the soil as well as the water
resources and consequently humans. Presently, LCL accumulates the leachate in a pond and re-uses by
sprinkling it back on the windrows. Virtually, there is no leachate, which could contaminate the soil.
Secondly, the composting pad is adequately concreted to ensure that there is no seepage of effluent into
the ground. Lastly, the drains carrying the effluent have all been properly concreted to prevent any
seepage into the ground. Periodic monitoring will include the discharge rate of overall wastewater,
chemical analysis of different wastewater streams and groundwater sampling to ensure no seepage into
the ground is occurring.

Odour

The existing LCL site falls within the boundaries of LCL and adjacent to the open dumping site. The
waste in the piling area as well as the waste undergoing the process of composting produces insignificant
additional odour. Although, there is no living community in the project boundaries still, deodorizing
chemicals should be sprayed to counter the odour and reduce its unpleasant effect. Periodic monitoring
should also be carried out at various distances around the site to ensure no odour is smelt by the
inhabitants of the surrounding communities.

I nsects (Disease Vectors)

The waste in the piling area as well as the waste undergoing the process of composting attracts a lot of
different insects such as flies, mosquitoes and wasps which act as disease vectors and spread infections
amongst the inhabitants of the surrounding communities along with having a negative impact on crops. It
should be ensured that spraying of chemicals can be employed to kill the insects and reduce their threat
as a nuisance to the surrounding communities as well as to their agricultural activities. Periodic
monitoring should be carried out to ensure the insects are not adversely affecting the surrounding
communities and their agricultural activities as well as to ensure. Regular spraying of chemicals needs to
be ensured as well in order to kill the insects.

Standard Operating Procedures

LC has already developed and adopted Standard Operating Procedures to operate the facility in lines with
the guidelines available in the local legislations as well as applicable under best international practices
for composting across the board. Accordingly, LCL is committed to implement these SOPs for extended
composting facility.

Environnemental & Social Management Plan (ESMP)

LCL has already developed and adopted a comprehensive management plan to mitigate the
Environmental and Social Impacts due to the existing and expanded composting facility to the
stakeholders. SOPs and emission reduction monitoring plan clearly outlines the procedures for
environmental and social protection in full harmony with the local regulations and ESMP.

Conclusion

The phasing up of the composting facility that is being implemented within the existing project and
stakeholders boundaries has no additional significant environmental and social impact. If SOPs are
followed in the daily operations and ESMP is implemented as advised in the ESIA, future impact of this
proposed phasing up on the areas natural and socioeconomic environment will be minimal.

LCL, as part of its core value, is committed to ensuring that the potential impacts of this phasing up in its
existing composting facility both on environment and socioeconomic climate are fully assessed. It will
UNFCCC/CCNUCC


govern the operations as per the ESMP.

SECTION E. Local stakeholder consultation
E.1. Solicitation of comments from local stakeholders
>>
The background information and anticipated development projects in the area were discussed with the
government officials, CDGL authorities and NGOs like WWF. One week of field and research work in
the village of Mahmood Booti, and surrounding communities, farmers and government offices were
carried out to collect required information. A semi-structured questionnaire was formulated in order to
collect essential socio-economic data from the community and their possible apprehensions regarding the
project. Focused interviews were conducted for gender and social impact assessment.

E.2. Summary of comments received
>>
Stakeholders were engaged to get their opinion on the possible environmental and social impact of the
phasing up of the composting plant and its impact on the development of the local community. As the
phasing up of the project lies within the existing boundaries of the Lahore Compost, trans-boundary
environmental impacts as anticipated by the nearby communities are negligible. However, local
community anticipated possible job openings at the plant site that may contribute to their economic uplift
and provide stable means of earning to the eligible local residents.

E.3. Report on consideration of comments received
>>
All comments received from the stakeholders have been positive. There is no requirement to modify the
phasing up scheme of design and operations of the composting facility. Further LCL is committed to
communicate and resolve the environmental and social impacts, if any, on the stakeholders.

SECTION F. Approval and authorization
>>
Date of Completion of the application of the baseline study and monitoring methodology: 12/06/2009

Name of Entity: Naveed A. Malik with the help of the World Bank Carbon Finance Unit.

Address:
(Naveed Malik) 3
rd
Floor, Kulsum Plaza, Saif Group, Blue Area Islamabad
(Carbon Finance Unit at World Bank, 1818 H St NW, Washington DC 20433, USA)

Phone:
(Naveed Malik) +92 300 850 6935

Fax: +92 51 220 1110

E-mail: naveed@saifgroup.com

- - - - -

UNFCCC/CCNUCC


Appendix 1: Contact information of project participants
Organization name Lahore Compost (Pvt) Limited
Street/P.O. Box MAHMOOD BOOTI, Ring Road
Building
City Lahore
State/Region Punjab Province
Postcode
Country Pakistan
Telephone +92 42 3688 5442/ +92 51 2829 415
Fax +92 51 2277 843/ +92 51 2873 606
E-mail hoor@saifgroup.com
Website www.lahorecompost.com
Contact person Ms. Hoor Yousafzai
Title Chief Executive Officer
Salutation Ms.
Last name Yousafzai
Middle name
First name Hoor
Department CEO
Mobile +92 300 500 2356
Direct fax +92 51 227 4933
Direct tel. +92 51 227 3411
Personal e-mail
UNFCCC/CCNUCC


Organization name International Bank for Reconstruction and Development as Trustee of the
Danish Carbon Fund
Street/P.O. Box 1818 H street NW
Building MC
City Washington
State/Region DC
Postcode 20433
Country USA
Telephone 1202 473 9189
Fax 1202 522 7432
E-mail IBRD-carbonfinance@worldbank.org
Website www.carbonfinance.org
Contact person Ms. Joelle Chassard
Title Manager, Carbon Finance Unit
Salutation Ms.
Last name Chassard
Middle name
First name Joelle
Department CPFCF
Mobile
Direct fax 202-522-7432
Direct tel. 202-458-1873
Personal e-mail IBRD-carbonfinance@worldbank.org
UNFCCC/CCNUCC


Organization name Danish Ministry of Climate, Energy and Building
Street/P.O. Box Amaliegade 44
Building
City Copenhagen K
State/Region
Postcode DK-1256
Country Denmark
Telephone +45-3392-6703
Fax +45-33-11-4743
E-mail fsc@ens.dk
Website
Contact person
Title
Salutation Mr.
Last name Schmidt
Middle name
First name Frederik
Department Danish Energy Agency
Mobile
Direct fax +45-33-11-4743
Direct tel. +45-3392-6703
Personal e-mail fsc@ens.dk

UNFCCC/CCNUCC


Appendix 2: Affirmation regarding public funding
No Public funding from Annex I countries is involved in this project.
UNFCCC/CCNUCC


Appendix 3: Applicability of selected methodology
The methodology AM0025 titled Avoided emissions from organic waste through alternative waste
treatment processes is applicable in this project. The project meets applicability criteria set out in the
methodology.

The methodology AM0025 is applicable under the following conditions:

The project Activity involves one or a combination of the following waste treatment options for the
fresh waste that in a given year would have been otherwise disposed of in a landfill:
(f) A composting process in aerobic conditions;
(g) Gasification to produce syngas and its use;
(h) Anaerobic digestion with biogas collection and flaring and/or its use;
(i) Mechanical/thermal treatment process to produce refuse-derived fuel (RDF)/ stabilized biomass
(SB) and its use;
(j) Incineration of fresh waste for energy generation, electricity and/or heat.

The project uses composting process in aerobic conditions. Furthermore, for composting the following
condition must be also be complied with:

In case of composting, the produced compost is either used as soil conditioner or disposed of in
landfills.
Furthermore AM0025 is only applicable if the most plausible baseline scenario for the waste treatment
component is identified as either the disposal of waste in landfill without capture of landfill gas or the
disposal of the waste in landfill where the landfill gas is partially captured and subsequently flared.

Based upon the above-mentioned criteria, the methodology is applicable because of the following
reasons:

The project activity involves composting process in aerobic conditions for the fresh waste that would
be otherwise dumped of in a solid waste disposal site (open dumping).
The produced compost soil is used as a soil conditioner.
The proportions and characteristics of different types of organic waste proposed in the project
activity can be determined, in order to apply a multiphase landfill gas generation model to estimate
the quantity of landfill gas that would have been generated in the absence of the project activity.
The baseline scenario, as detailed and described under section B.4, is dumping of waste at Mahmood
Booti dumping site without capture of landfill gas.

There is no regulatory requirement regarding waste disposal in Pakistan. The baseline scenario would
remain unchanged with the waste being disposed off in a solid waste open dumping site. As a result
landfill gas generated would be released in the atmosphere.

Baseline emissions have been calculated as per instructions given under Baseline Emissions that project
participants should use the latest approved version of the Tool to Determine Methane Emissions
Avoided from Dumping Waste at a Solid Waste Disposal Site.

UNFCCC/CCNUCC


Appendix 4: Further background information on ex ante calculation of emission reductions
BASELINE INFORMATION

Table Appendix 4 1: Ex Ante Project Emissions
Year PE
elec,y
PE
fuel,on-site,y
PE
c,y
PE
w,y
PE
y

2008 423 292 527 0 1,242
2009 456 733 1,720 0 2,909
2010

456 733 2,414 0 3,603
2011 456 733 3,058 0 4,247
2012 456 733 3,658 0 4,847
2013 456 733 4,216 0 5,405
2014 456 733 4,735 0 5,924
2015 456 733 5,218 0 6,407
2016 456 733 5,667 0 6,856
2017 456 733 6,086 0 7,275
2018 456 733 6,475 0 7,664
2019 456 733 6,837 0 8,026
2020 456 733 7,175 0 8,364
2021 456 733 7,489 0 8,678
2022 456 733 7,782 0 8,971
2023 456 733 8,055 0 9,244
2024 456 733 8,309 0 9,498
2025 456 733 8,454 0 9,643
2026 456 733 8,766 0 9,955

UNFCCC/CCNUCC


Table Appendix 4 2: Ex Ante Project Emission Reductions
Years Estimation of
Project
Activity
Emissions
tCO
2
e
Estimation of
Baseline
Emissions
tCO
2
e
Estimation
of leakage
tCO
2
e
Estimation of
Overall
Emission
Reductions
tCO
2
e
2008 1,242 13,749 275 12,232
2009 2,909 51,025 766 47,350
2010

3,603 85,687 766 81,318
2011 4,247 117,924 766 112,911
2012 4,847 147,909 766 142,296
2013 5,405 175,802 766 169,631
2014 5,924 201,753 766 195,063
2015 6,407 225,900 766 218,727
2016 6,856 248,373 766 240,751
2017 7,275 269,288 766 261,247
2018 7,664 288,758 766 280,328
2019 8,026 306,883 766 298,091
2020 8,364 323,760 766 314,630
2021 8,678 339,475 766 330,031
2022 8,971 354,112 766 344,375
2023 9,244 367,746 766 357,736
2024 9,498 380,446 766 370,182
2025 9,643 392,280 766 381,871
2026 9,955 403,306 766 392,585
Total 128,758 4,694,176 14,063 4,551,355

UNFCCC/CCNUCC


BASELINE INFORMATION - RELATED TO COSTS
40

Supplemental Analysis

The following information was provided to the validator at the time of validation, and is now used as
supplemental baseline information after the EB guidance from EB52

Table Appendix 4 3: Costs of the Project with and without carbon finance and sensitivity analysis

This annex presents analyses based on project costs.

On the assumption of year 2005
Values
Total Investment (US$) 5,524,275
Operational Lifetime (Year) 28
Annual Average Price of Compost (PKR/ton Compost) 80.40
Running costs (US$/Year) 2,272,071
Income Tax 35%
Organic Waste Quantity of Composting Process (t/day) 1,000
Project IRR (without Carbon Finance) 15.15%
Project IRR (with Carbon Finance) 21.20%
Assumed price US$ 11/ ton of CO
2
e,

The source of the relevant data is as follows:

Total investment has been taken from actual audited financial records as well as quotations available
at that time from different vendors, and plant & machinery suppliers;
Running cost is based on management estimates;
Rate of Income Tax has been taken from Pakistan Income Tax Ordinance, 2001;
6 months Kibor Rate.xls is the file that used KIBOR data for input into WACC;
http://www.sbp.gov.pk/ecodata/kibor_index.asp. Provides historical rate of KIBOR from website of
Central Bank of Pakistan;
http://www/brecorder.com/index.php?adate=2007-12-01&stocks=index&b1=+Go+. Karachi Stock
Exchange Data used for IRR determination from The Business Recorder newspaper;
http://www.sbp.gov.pk/publications/prudential/index.htm. Debt and equity ratio of 70:30 from the
Prudential Regulation for Corporate/Commercial Banking of The State Bank of Pakistan which can
be found on page no. 13 (Regulation R-5) of the document available at this website;
http://www.sbp.org.pk/press/2004/jan-21-04.pdf. Press release from State Bank of Pakistan regarding
mandatory use of KIBOR plus a spread for commercial transactions and lending;
http://www.sbp.org.pk/bsd/10YearStrategyPaper.pdf. State Bank of Pakistan Pakistan 10 Year
Strategy Paper for the Banking Sector Reforms which documents mandatory use of KIBOR as a
benchmark plus a risk spread over it to compensate for risk;
http://www.dawn.com/2009/01/26/ebr13.htm. Launch of KIBOR Futures article in Dawn
newspaper dated January 26, 2009;

40
All data and sources of data have been provided to the DOE at Validation.
UNFCCC/CCNUCC


http://www.ppib.gov.pk/tarrif_final.pdf. Guidelines for Determination of Tariffs for IPPs at website
of the governments Private Power and Infrastructure Board. This shows a mandatory spread of 3%
over KIBOR being required for a highly regulated industry like the power sector;
http://www.nepra.org.pk/det_gen_ipps.htm. National Electric Power Regulatory Authority (NEPRA)
of Islamic Republic of Pakistan website showing example of Orient Power and Sapphire Power
companies using a spread of 3% over KIBOR for IPPs.

CDM Impact

The project is not expected to be commercial viable without CDM revenues. The project proponents are
expected to sell emission reduction credits at US$ 11 to generate additional revenue, which would take
IRR from 15.15% to 21.20%. The table below summarizes this in tabular format.

Ratios Without CDM With CDM
Project IRR (%) 15.15% 21.20%

The impact of CDM revenue includes:

CDM revenue would improve financial viability of the project by improving liquidity position of
the company;
Provide assistance in overcoming investment and technological barriers resulting in smooth
operations of the plant; and
Successful operations acting as an incentive for others to explore similar opportunities.

Without the CDM revenue, the project sponsors would not have undertaken the project. It is the
combination of 1,000TPD of waste intake plus the CDM revenue that makes the project viable.

As mentioned under section B.4 Sub-step 1b and above in this section, there is no legislation enforcing
composting of organic waste. The approach is to continue dumping municipal solid waste at waste
dumping sites. As a result landfill gas emitted from these dumping sites will be released directly into the
atmosphere, thereby increase GHG emissions. Hence the current situation is the baseline.

No commercial composting project has been launched in the country. The initial barriers to entry into
this market are enough to stop entrepreneurs from venturing into this sector. Compost market in Pakistan
is not a lucrative business and incentives are not enough to overcome risks mentioned above such as lack
of developed market, technical barriers hindering smooth operations, etc. As a result, the project is not
expected to be viable without additional cash inflow in the form of CDM revenue.

The proposed composting project would divert waste from being disposed off at Mahmood Booti Solid
Waste Disposal Site to Lahore Compost plant site. This results in aerobic conversion of organic waste
into compost resulting in methane emission reductions. This prevented methane emission from dumping
site which otherwise would have occurred is being claimed as emission reductions (ERs).

Sensitivity Analysis

A sensitivity analysis was conducted by altering the following parameters:

Total investment
Composting sales revenue
UNFCCC/CCNUCC


Running costs (Operational and Maintenance costs)

These parameters were selected based on the likelihood to fluctuate most over time. Financial analyses
were performed by altering each of these parameters by 5% interval from -10% to +10%, and assessing
the impact on the project IRR. Table A.4-3 summarizes these findings:

Table A.4-4: Sensitivity analysis of project IRR (without carbon finance)
-10% -5% 0% 5% 10%
Total Investment 16.56% 15.83% 15.15% 14.51% 13.92%
Composting Sales Revenue 11.79%

13.52% 15.15% 16.70% 18.18%
Running Costs 17.20% 16.18%

15.15% 14.09% 13.02%

Though the range of parameters used for sensitivity analysis between a range of -10% and +10% at 5%
intervals are reasonable to analyze the project as per standard market practices, however, a further
analysis in this regard was done to see that at which level of each of the above three parameters, the
project would meet the threshold benchmark rate of return that LCL is assuming, based on the below
rationale

In Pakistan, there is no generally acceptable benchmark rate of project IRR for this type of project. The
average returns from the stock market and private equity funds are higher, ranging between 15% and
30%. Given the current economic climate and cost of borrowing prevailing in the country, we took a
project IRR of 20% as a benchmark rate of return for this Project, which is very conservative. All of this
data is available from public sources and was submitted during the Validation process.
41

41
6 months Kibor Rate.xls is the file that used KIBOR data to come up with benchmark for cost of debt used for WACC;
http://www.sbp.gov.pk/ecodata/kibor_index.asp. Provides historical rate of KIBOR from website of Central Bank of Pakistan;
http://www/brecorder.com/index.php?adate=2007-12-01&stocks=index&b1=+Go+). Karachi Stock Exchange Data used for IRR
determination from The Business Recorder newspaper;
http://www.sbp.gov.pk/publications/prudential/index.htm. Debt and equity ratio of 70:30 from the Prudential
Regulation for Corporate/Commercial Banking of The State Bank of Pakistan which can be found on page no. 13
(Regulation R-5) of the document available at this website;
http://www.sbp.org.pk/press/2004/jan-21-04.pdf. Press release from State Bank of Pakistan regarding mandatory use of KIBOR
plus a spread for commercial transactions and lending;
http://www.sbp.org.pk/bsd/10YearStrategyPaper.pdf. State Bank of Pakistan Pakistan 10 Year Strategy Paper for the Banking
Sector Reforms which documents mandatory use of KIBOR as a benchmark plus a risk spread over it to compensate for risk;
http://www.dawn.com/2009/01/26/ebr13.htm. Launch of KIBOR Futures article in Dawn newspaper dated
January 26, 2009;
http://www.nepra.org.pk/det_gen_ipps.htm. National Electric Power Regulatory Authority (NEPRA) of Islamic
Republic of Pakistan website showing example of Orient Power and Sapphire Power companies using a spread of 3% over KIBOR
for IPPs;
Audited financial report for LCL 2005;
UNFCCC/CCNUCC


The analysis showed that if the needed benchmark rate of return/hurdle rate was 20%, this could only be
reached if there was a 29.10% reduction in Total Investments or 24.10% reduction in Running Cost or
16.38% increase in Composting Sales Revenue. It is not possible to reduce the Total Investments by
29.10% as the machinery has already been imported from Europe and paid for in Euros. It is not possible
to decrease the Running Cost by 24.10%, especially where the project is the only of its kind in the
country with no allied / support industry available and most of the cost items like parts have to be
imported, while the Pakistan rupee keeps on depreciating, making imports more and more expensive to
buy. Moreover, reduction in Running Costs under an inflationary economy like Pakistans is not possible.
Furthermore, no compost market currently exists in the country and it is expected that the company will
experience low sales of compost in early years as it will take time to build a market for compost, which is
why the project needs carbon revenue to help survive the early years. Accordingly, it is not realistic to
expect Compost Sales Revenue to increase by 16.38% and is not expected to do so.

In conclusion, the project IRR remains low even in the case where these parameters change in favour of
the Project, and are still too low for a risky enterprise such as the construction and operation of a
composting plant as a first of its kind project.

Scanned copy of Menart invoice for cost of plant and machinery;
http://www.lesco.gov.pk/LESCO/default.asp. Set tariffs of electricity distribution companies;
http://www.statpak.gov.pk/depts/fbs/statistics/yearly_inflation/yearly_inflation/html. Inflationary trends used for cost escalation
estimates were cross-checked against the State Bank of Pakistans (is the countrys Central Bank) data;
Audited financial report 2006;
Audited financial report 2007.
UNFCCC/CCNUCC


Appendix 5: Further background information on monitoring plan
MONITORING INFORMATION First Revision
MONITORING PLAN FOR ER VERIFICATION OF LAHORE COMPOST (PVT) LIMITED

This is the first revision / update of the Monitoring Plan (Revised MP) prepared for and adopted by the
composting plant of the Lahore Compost Ltd. (LCL) in the context of the planned carbon finance CDM
project. The Revised MP defines standards against which the performance in terms of the projects
Emission Reductions (ERs) will be monitored and verified, in conformance with all relevant
requirements of the CDM of the Kyoto Protocol. This MP will become an integral part of the Lahore
Compost Standard Operation Procedure 2011

I. Use of the Monitoring Plan by the Operator

This Revised MP identifies and updates key performance indicators of the project and sets out the
procedures for metering, monitoring, calculating and verifying the ERs generated by the project.
Adherence to the instructions in the Revised MP is necessary for the operator of the LCL composting
plant to successfully measure and track the impact of the project on the environment and prepare all data
required for the periodic audit and verification process that must be undertaken to confirm the
achievement of the corresponding ERs. The Revised MP is thus the basis for the production of ERs and
accreditation of the ERs within the CDM and will be subject to verification procedures.

The Revised MP can further be updated and adjusted to meet operational requirements. The verifying
Designated Operational Entity (DOE) approves such modifications during the process of initial or
periodic verification. In particular, any shifts in the baseline scenario may lead to such amendments,
which may be mandated by the verifier. Amendments may also be necessary as a consequence of new
circumstances that affect the ability to monitor ERs as described here or to accommodate new or
modified CDM rules.

II. Organizational, Operational, and Monitoring Obligations

Monitoring the projects performance in terms of ERs achievement requires Lahore Compost to first
ensure adherence to the standard operational procedures, and second to fulfil operational data collection
and processing obligations. Lahore Compost has the primary obligation to calculate the project ERs
based on the most recent available information. In addition LCL should establish an organizational
structure in which the roles and responsibilities of monitoring personnel are identified and an ERCP
quality control procedure provided with this Revised MP.

The general manager of the LCL plant will be ex-offiso the ERCP Manager. He/She is responsible for
performing the ERCP and will work under the guidance and control of a MP Steering Committee
comprised of CEO (Chief Executive Officer), COO (Chief Operating Officer), DGM (Deputy General
Manager) Production and Manager Accounts, LCL. Any future queries should be directed to the current
CEO, Ms. Hoor Yousafzai, who has replaced the previous CEO listed in the PDD. Her contact
information is as follows: Ms. Hoor Yousafzai, CEO and Director Lahore Compost Pvt Ltd, Saif Group
of Companies, Kulsum Plaza, 2020 Blue Area, Islamabad, Pakistan. Mobile: +92-300-5002-356. Email:
Hoor@saifgroup.com

III. Data Gathering and Recording

UNFCCC/CCNUCC


Data required for the Revised MP should largely come from either calibrated meters of LCL or third
party (e.g. electricity company). Where calibrated meters cannot be used (e.g. the sampling of waste in
order to determine the actual waste-composition), the ERCP Manager should follow standardized
measuring and sampling procedures explained in this plan, to ensure that the verifying DOE can easily
verify measurements and procedures.

Lahore compost bears the responsibility to maintain and record data and related parameters required to
calculate ERs. Some uncertainties may lead to a deviation between monitored and verified ERs though,
especially due to errors in the data monitoring and processing system. However, LCL under the guidance
of ERCP manager should ensure to minimize such errors and expect verification audits to uncover any
unnoticed errors. The table below details the data and related parameters to be monitored and recorded
by LCL in an electronic format (Excel sheets) and made available to the verifier on request.

Parameter
/ Data
Description Units Source Monitoring
Frequency
Comments / Instructions
EG
PJ,FF,y
Electricity
Consumed
MWh Electric
Meter
Monthly LESCO Electric Company
F
cons,y
Fuel Consumed on
site
Litre Lahore
Compost
Monthly Fuel Issue Notes / LCL
Accounting Department
M
compost, y
Compost Produced Ton LCL Weigh
Bridge +
Packing Plant
Weighing
Scale
Daily Production to be recorded
on daily basis and
consolidated monthly
Intake Waste supplied to
the compost plant
Ton CDGL Weigh
Bridges &
LCL weigh
bridge as a
backup in
case CDGL
weigh bridge
is not
functional or
not calibrated
Daily Intake to be recorded on
daily basis and
Green
Intake
Purely organic
waste purchased by
the compost plant
Ton LCL Weigh
Bridge
Daily Intake to be recorded on
daily basis and
Sampling Sampling of
incoming waste to
determine
percentage of each
type of waste
stream
Percentage
by weight
of each
waste type
Lahore
Compost
One day in
every month till
Dec 31, 2008,
after that one
day quarterly
e.g. March,
June,
September,
December.
Truckloads incoming to
the project site in the test
day should be tested.
Sample of about 10-15 Kg
of waste should be taken
randomly form each
sample truckload. To
ensure random selection
every 7th incoming truck
should be selected for
sampling till the last
truckload entering the
UNFCCC/CCNUCC


Parameter
/ Data
Description Units Source Monitoring
Frequency
Comments / Instructions
project. The minimum
sampling size has been
determined to be twenty
trucks.
S
total,y
Total number of
oxygen tests
conducted
Number Oxygen
measurement
device
Daily A standardized mobile gas
detection instrument
should be used for
measurement. Oxygen
should be measured both
at the top and the bottom
layer of the piles, hence 2
samples in vertical
alignment. A total of 25
samples/week should be
taken on a single windrow
S
OD,y

Number of samples
with oxygen
deficiency (oxygen
content below
10%)
Number Oxygen
measurement
device
Daily SOD testing is part of and
a side result of the Stotal,y
procedure
pH Acidity of the
compost stack
Measuring
Device
Weekly Test performed on each
windrow
Moisture Moisture level in
the compost stack
Weekly Test performed on each
windrow. Refer to annex II
for details
DT
i,y
Average additional
distance travelled
by transport
vehicles of same
type as compared
to the baseline
Km Lahore
Compost
Monthly Monthly data to be
consolidated for the whole
year from sales and
logistics records

IV: ERCP Managers Responsibilities:

As part of the Saif Group Corporate Policy & procedures, all its companies are internally audited by an
external auditor annually. The auditors have also done an internal audit of LCL as a part of this process
and the audit report is submitted to the LCL Board. In addition to this, the ERCP (ERs Calculation
Procedure) Manager should also oversee the operation of the plant and should periodically carry out
internal audits, when required with external assistance, to assure that project activities are in compliance
with the standard operation procedure and with monitoring requirements. The main responsibilities of the
ERCP manager are to ensure the following:

Data handling: maintaining an adequate system for collecting, recording and storing data as
determined in the Monitoring Plan, checking data quality, collection and record keeping procedures
regularly;
UNFCCC/CCNUCC


Reporting: preparing periodic reports that include emission reductions generated, observations
regarding Monitoring plan procedures;
Training: assuring personnel training regarding the performance of the project activities and the
Monitoring plan;
Quality control and quality assurance: complying with quality control and quality assurance
procedures to facilitate periodical audits and verification.

The Lahore Compost has adopted a standard operation procedure that also includes procedures for
training, capacity building, proper handling and maintenance of equipment, emergency plans, and work
conditions and security.

V. Quality control and quality assurance procedures

Regarding quality control and assurance procedures to be undertaken for the monitored data, the
practices to be implemented in the context of project activity are as follows:

Monitoring records:

Readings of all field meters will be registered in either electronic form or on paper worksheets. All other
data collected will also be entered in electronic worksheets and stored. Periodic controls of the field
monitoring records will be carried out to check any deviation from the estimated CERs and according the
Operational Manual for correction or future references.

Periodic reports to evaluate performance and assist with performance management should be prepared
with recommendations to improve the systems or procedures.

Equipment calibration and maintenance:

All meters and other sensors will be subject to regular maintenance and testing regime according to the
technical specifications from the manufacturers to ensure accuracy and good performance.

Calibration of equipment will be performed periodically according to technical specifications and in
agreement with recommendations given by suppliers and/or institutes.

Corrective actions:

Actions to handle and correct deviations from the Revised Monitoring Plan and Operational Manual
procedures will be implemented as these deviations are observed either by the operator or during internal
audits. If necessary, technical meetings between the operator, the developer and the project participant
the project will be held in order to define the corrective actions to be undertaken.

Training:

The operator personnel will be trained in equipment operation, data recording, reports writing, and
operation, maintenance and emergency procedures in compliance with the Operational Manual.

UNFCCC/CCNUCC


Appendix 6: Summary of post registration changes

I. Corrections
>>
The sample size for determination of oxygen deficiency was corrected in accordance with the registered
PDD. The sample size was corrected from 25 per day per windrow to 25 per week per windrow, given
that 5 working days a week and minimum of 5 windrows. This correction is in compliance with the
original sampling plan stated at the time of registration.

II. Permanent changes from registered monitoring plan or applied methodology
>>
A revision to the monitoring plan was requested during 1
st
verification (1
st
Monitoring Period, from
05/04/2010 to 31/12/2010) and was approved on 18/04/2012.

The revision of the monitoring plan included the following four changes:

1) In the registered PDD, the quantity of waste entering the composting plant (A
j,x
f
c
) is monitored
by a weighbridge owned by the CDGL. In order to have better control of this measurement, the
project participant LCL has bought and installed another weighbridge to be used as backup in
case of malfunction or delayed calibration of the main weighbridge.

2) The calibration of interval of the weighbridge scale used for monitoring the amount of Compost
Produced and M
compost, y
is revised from bi-annually to annually in the revised monitoring plan.
The QA/QC procedures for the parameters amount of compost produced and M
compost, y
have also
been further elaborated to better describe how the measured data is cross-checked by sales
invoices.

3) One electricity meter is used for monitoring of EG
PJ,FF,y
instead of 4 mentioned in the registered
PDD. The 4 meters initially mentioned in the PDD could be identified as follows:
a) LCL old meter (serial no 084862) which was installed in January 2006 and damaged in
May 2009; the meter is still there although not functional.
b) LCL new meter (serial no 5438), replacing meter a).
c) CDGL meter.
d) Private domestic meter of local resident, as the land was cultivated by local resident
before the project was installed.
All 4 meters are visible at site, however it was verified by DNV during site visit that only meter
b) is actually used by LCL for monitoring the electricity consumption. Meter c) and d) are owned
by others, which was confirmed by copies of invoices.

4) The parameter EF
fuel
is removed from the list of ex-post monitored parameter. In the registered
PDD the parameter EF
fuel
has been mentioned by mistake in both sections (ex-ante and ex-post).
However in both sections it has been explained as an ex-ante parameter sourced from the 2006
IPCC Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas Inventories.
Additional revisions to the monitoring plan were conducted due to changes on the operations of the
weighbridges by the City District Government of Lahore, which are outside of the project implementers
control, and do not require prior approval of the board. The revision includes a clarification on the
UNFCCC/CCNUCC


measurement operations of the weighbridges during this monitoring period for parameter Aj,x, as
follows:

All trucks entering the compost plant are weighed with a calibrated weighbridge that belongs to the City
District Government of Lahore, CDGL.

Given the changes brought about by the installation of a new weighbridge by the City District
Government of Lahore (which are outside of the project implementers control), the following illustrates
the waste measurement procedures at the site:

Before 01/06/2012: There was only one weighbridge i.e. weighbridge at Mahmood Booti dumping site.
Trucks were weighted at that weighbridge.

Between 01/06/2012 to 23/09/2012: During this period a new weighbridge was installed and
calibrated at the entrance of the composting site, hence both weighbridges were operational and used
for weighing MSW.

Between 23/09/2012 to 05/01/2013: The old weighbridge located at Mahmood Booti dumping site
ceased operations and only the weighbridge at the main entrance of LCL was operational; therefore
trucks were weighted on this weighbridge.

After 05/01/2013: Construction of old weighbridge at Mahmood Booti dumping site was completed,
and both weighbridges are now operational.

There is no change in procedure of CDGL reporting to LCL for MSW intake from Mahmood Booti
SWDS.

- - - - -

History of the document

Version Date Nature of revision
04.1 11 April 2012 Editorial revision to change version 02 line in history box from Annex 06 to
Annex 06b.
04.0 EB 66
13 March 2012
Revision required to ensure consistency with the Guidelines for completing
the project design document form for CDM project activities (EB 66, Annex
8).
03 EB 25, Annex 15
26 July 2006

02 EB 14, Annex 06b
14 June 2004

01 EB 05, Paragraph 12
03 August 2002
Initial adoption.
Decision Class: Regulatory
Document Type: Form
Business Function: Registration

PDD - Ver04.1 - LCL May 09 2013 - v7

Transféré par

Informations du document

Titre original

Copyright

Formats disponibles

Partager ce document

Partager ou intégrer le document

Options de partage

Avez-vous trouvé ce document utile ?

Ce contenu est-il inapproprié ?

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

PDD - Ver04.1 - LCL May 09 2013 - v7

Transféré par

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

UNFCCC/CCNUCC

CDM Executive Board Page 1

Vous aimerez peut-être aussi