Study on the Potential of Clean Development Mechanism (CDM

Transcription

Journal of Environmentally Friendly Processes
Petrotex Library Archive
Journal of Environmentally Friendly Processes
Journal Website: http://www.petrotex.us/2013/03/26/586/
Study on the Potential of Clean Development Mechanism (CDM)
Implementation in Iran's Power Plants
Mohammad Masoud Shalchi1, Javad Asadi1, Pooya Jafari 2, Omid Tavakoli1*
1
School of Chemical Engineering, College of Engineering, University of Tehran, Tehran, Iran
2
Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, University of Houston, 4800 Calhoun, Houston, TX 77204-4003, USA
Corresponding Author Email: [email protected]
Abstract:
Nowadays global warming is a great concern in the world. Clean development mechanism (CDM) is an approach for controlling
global warming. One of the solutions to reduce Greenhouse Gases (GHG) emission in power plants is switching from open cycle
(OC) to combined cycle (CC) power plant which simultaneously resulting on increasing the efficiency. Since today 15 CDM projects
as switching from OC to CC has been registered in official site of CDM projects and 3 cases are implemented in Iran. The amount of
power generated through CDM power plant projects in Iran is 2100 MW and the GHG emission reduction is 2.374008 MtCO 2e/annum.
Iran has 12 open cycle gas turbine (OCGT) with total power production of 8300 MW. By switching OC to CC power plant
approximately 4150 MW of enhanced power could be connected to grid due to increasing efficiency and GHG emission reduction of
this scenario is 10.47 MtCO2e/annum.
Keyword: Clean development mechanism, Greenhouse gas emission, Power plant, Open cycle, Combined cycle.
1.
Introduction
Todays, countries around the world try to reduce the GHG emission which is the main cause of global warming. The United Nation
Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) at 1997 adopted the Kyoto Protocol to contain emissions of GHGs. CDM is
an approach for reaching to the Kyoto Protocol's objective and it is an international cooperation mechanism between developing
countries and industrialized countries and an “offset mechanism” under the UNFCCC’s Kyoto Protocol. Its main objective is to
decrease the overall global costs of implementing a given target for GHG emissions in countries with an established cap on their GHG
emissions (the so-called Annex B countries of the Protocol).1 This is done in the way that parties in Annex B countries pay parties in
countries with no binding caps (non-Annex B countries) to reduce their emissions. Such reductions are in turn credited against the
established emissions quota for the respective Annex B country, thus allowing emissions to increase (be higher than otherwise) in the
latter country [1].
The most important target of the CDM is not to decrease global GHG emissions, but to keep emissions neutral while the costs of
implementing a given emissions level are decreased.2 Cost reductions are gained by shifting implementation costs from (high-cost)
1-
A further, secondary, objective of the CDM is to secure financing to middle- and lower-income countries for energy efficiency improvements,
energy technology projects, and other efforts to simultaneously reduce GHG emissions and support development, generally and in the energy
sector specifically.
2-
It may be argued for an overall more positive impact of the CDM. An offset mechanism similar to the CDM could be necessary for
the Kyoto Protocol to be supported and ratified in the first place, since an agreement lacking an offset mechanism would be more
burdensome on Annex B countries, for given emissions constraints. The tightening of the overall constraints under Kyoto, made
Shalchi, Asadi, Jafari, Tavakoli/Journal of Environmentally Friendly Processes
high-income countries, to (lower-cost) low-income countries. We here however content that the CDM often does not keep emissions
neutral: global emissions can instead increase. This can occur via several different mechanisms.
CDM has two purposes, the first is to help developing countries meet sustainable development (SD) and GHG reductions, and the
second is to let to industrialized countries to control their GHG emissions. Now, a group of researchers have focused on the coadvantages of CDM, and their results are very different. The optimist researchers suggest that CDM has profits not only for host
countries also in industrialized countries. CDM projects bring financial investment in host countries and it also has some other
advantages, including environmental and social advantages. The question is whether or not CDM really contributes to SD to host
countries. Subbarao and Lloyd studied on the 500 registered small-scale CDM projects. They used scoring pattern method for
indicating projects and understood that in the rustic zones, projects which were typically managed by cooperative ventures rather
than money-making corporations are better contributors of sustainable development [2]. Brunt show that renewable CDM projects
in the small scale will amplify the benefit of local enterprises, health, security and education [3].
Nussbaumer found that the potential contribution to local sustainable development of those CDM projects with particular attributes
is compared with ordinary ones [4]. Sutter and Parreño drew similar conclusions. The criteria that they used to measure SD were
employment, distribution of project return and air quality [5]. Drupp evaluated the potential benefits of 48 CDM projects and the
results showed that renewable energy projects may deliver comparatively high SD benefits [6]. Olsen and Fenhann understood that
small-scale projects have a high socio-economic profile, and on average contribute a slightly higher number of SD benefits than
large-scale projects. Large-scale projects, however, contribute relatively more air quality, water, health and other benefits [7].
On the other hand, the negative results are also presented by various studies. Sutter and Parreño carried out an analytical framework
for analyzing CDM projects in terms of their contribution to employment generation, equal distribution of CDM returns, and
improvement of local air quality. They found that about half of all projects are non-additional, and currently no registered CDM
projects had reached the two-fold goals of GHG emission mean-time, contributing to sustainable development [5]. Zhang and Wang
proposed an econometric approach to evaluate the CDM effect on SO 2 emission reductions and found that the CDM did not have a
statistically significant effect in lowering SO2 emissions [8]. Subbarao and Lloyd evaluated 10 CDM projects and found that all of
the cases appear to make significant emission reductions while falling short in delivering direct local benefits. Thus, the projects
have not realized sustainable development benefits envisaged in their creation, and finally suggested that CDM should be reformed
in five alternatives [2].
Besides assessing the CDM effects on SD, Kua further suggested a sustainability-rated CDM (SR-CDM) by applying the gold
standard as a way of assessing the sustainability value of projects with respect to the millennium development goals [9]. In general,
previous research on this topic have been primarily qualitative analysis, and research methods have included taxonomy for
sustainability assessment (Olsen, [10]; Olsen and Fenhann, [7]; Subbarao and Lloyd, [2]) and the multi-criteria method (Nussbaumer,
[4]; Drupp, [6]).
Meanwhile, indicators used include employment generation, equal distribution of CDM projects, poverty reduction, health and
sexual equality (Subbaraoand Lloyd, [2]; Sutter and Parreño, [5]), and technology transfer to developing countries (van der Gaast et
al., 2009; Wang, 2010). Some of the previous research has focused on single, particular project types (e.g., Parnphumeesup and
Kerr, 2011; Purohit, 2008) and others at a project level of all registered CDM projects without distinguishing between project types
(e.g., Subbarao and Lloyd, 2011; Sutter and Parreño, [5]).
Conclusions drawn from these studies are mostly using ‘inconclusive’, ‘theoretically’ or ‘potentially’ when describing CDM's
contributions to SD (Lloyd and Subbarao, [2]; Resnier et al., [11]; Drupp, [6]), which demonstrate a lack of quantitative assessment
of SD effects of CDM projects practice It has also been reflected from policy end. The Marrakech Accords affirm that it is the host
countries’ prerogative to confirm whether a CDM project activity assists it in achieving sustainable development. However, there
are no developing countries who have established an official, standard framework to evaluate the SD effects of CDM projects. (Wang
et al [12]) by studying on the implemented CDM projects in power plants sector in China has shown that although CDM projects
causes 99,000 direct job losses, it has created 3.8 million indirect jobs. Since today 7538 CDM projects has been registered in official
site of CDM projects in UNFCCC and 13 of these projects are implemented in Iran. The amount of emission reduction due to
implementation of CDM projects in Iran is 3,620,014 MtCO2e/annum. The results of this paper indicate that CDM can contribute
to employment in host countries. The aim of this paper is Study on the Potential of CDM Implementation in Iran's Power Plants.
possible by the CDM, would then represent a de facto contribution of the CDM to global emissions reductions. A similar argument
can be made if the CDM mechanism increases the likelihood of Annex B countries’ compliance with any established emissions
constraint.
2
2.
CDM Methodologies in Power Plants Sector
Power plants have a large share of GHG emission. It is about 25% so this section needs to implement the CDM methodologies.
GHG emission can be reduced through increasing efficiency. It's cause to reduce fuel consumption, operational cost and supply
costly power. CDM has special attention to power plants section. Table 1 displays methodologies which refered to power plants.
Table 1. CDM methodology on reduction of plant’ GHG emission [13]
No.
#
Methodo
logy
Description
Baseline scenario
Project scenario
Number
of
registere
d project
1
AM0058
Introduction of a new
primary district heating
system
Fossil fuel is used in a
power plant that only
supplies grid electricity;
fossil fuel is used in
individual boilers that
supply heat to users.
11
2
AM0061
Methodology for
rehabilitation and/or
energy efficiency
improvement in existing
power plants
Continuation of the
operation of the power
plant, using all power
generation equipment
already used prior to the
implementation of the
project, and undertaking
business as usual
maintenance.
Fossil fuel is used in a
power plant that supplies
both electricity to the grid
and heat to individual
users. Fossil fuel
previously used in
individual boilers is no
longer used.
Implementation of energy
efficiency improvement
measures or the
rehabilitation of an
existing fossil-fuel-fired
power plant. As a result,
less fossil fuel is consumed
to generate electricity.
Emission
reduction
(metric
tones CO2
equivalent
per annum)
5,446,012
2
1,095,777
3
AM0062
Energy efficiency
improvements of a power
plant through retrofitting
turbines
Continuation of the current
practice; i.e. the turbine
continues to be operated
without retrofitting.
3
757,546
4
AM0074
New grid connected power
plants using permeate gas
previously flared and/or
vented
1
467,041
5
AM0087
Construction of a new
natural gas power plant
supplying electricity to the
grid or a single consumer
Permeate gas is flared
and/or vented. Electricity
is generated using
processed natural gas or
other energy sources than
permeate gas, or electricity
is provided by the grid.
Power generation using
1) natural gas, but with
different technologies than
the project,
Retrofitting of steam
turbines and gas turbines
with components of
improved design to
increase the energy
efficiency in an existing
fossil fuel power plant.
Thus, fossil fuel
consumption is reduced.
Permeate gas, previously
flared and/or vented at the
existing natural gas
processing facility, is used
as fuel in a new gridconnected power plant.
Power supply to the grid
and/or an existing facility
by a new natural-gas-fired
power plant.
-
-
3
6
AM0100
Integrated Solar Combined
Cycle (ISCC) projects
7
ACM000
7
Conversion from single
cycle to combined cycle
power generation
8
ACM001
1
Consolidated baseline
methodology for fuel
switching from coal and/or
petroleum fuels to natural
gas in existing power
plants for electricity
generation
Construction and operation
of new grid connected
fossil fuel fired power
plants using a less GHG
intensive technology
9
ACM001
3
2) fossil fuels other than
natural gas or renewable
energy, or
3) new or existing captive
power plants at the
existing facility or import
of electricity from the grid.
Electricity is generated in
the grid using morecarbon-intensive fuel.
Electricity is generated
using steam generated
from solar collectors and
reducing the use of fossil
fuel.
-
-
Electricity is generated by
an open-cycle gas power
plant.
The open-cycle gas power
plant is converted to a
combined-cycle one for
more-efficient power
generation.
14
6,549,667
Coal and/or petroleum fuel
is used to generate
electricity.
Natural gas is used to
generate electricity.
3
551,616
a less-efficient new gridconnected power plant
using fossil fuel.
a more-efficient new gridconnected power plant
using less fossil fuel.
6
8,958,813
Table 1 shows that most number of methodologies are related to energy efficiency. Some methodologies change some part of power
plants or the cycle and some of them use the alternative fuels like natural gas or biofuels. ACM0011 is about switching from coal
and/or petroleum fuels to natural gas in existing power plants for electricity generation. Result of implementation of these
methodologies is sustainable development and supply of reliable energy. The total number of registered cases is 40 and emission
reduction is 23,826,472 tCO2e/ annum. In Iran just ACM007 methodology is carried out on power plants and great potential is
available for implementing other methodologies in power plants sector. In this paper the potential of ACM007 methodology
implementation on power plants is studied.
3.
Converting Open Cycle (OC) to Combined Cycle (CC)
The process for converting the energy in a fuel into electric power involves the creation of mechanical work, which is then
transformed into electric power by a generator. Depending on the fuel type and thermodynamic process, the overall efficiency of
this conversion can be as low as 30 percent. This means that two-thirds of the latent energy of the fuel ends up wasted. For example,
steam electric power plants which utilize boilers to combust a fossil fuel average 33 percent efficiency. Simple cycle gas turbine
(GTs) plants average just under 30 percent efficiency on natural gas, and around 25 percent on fuel oil. Much of this wasted energy
ends up as thermal energy in the hot exhaust gases from the combustion process.
A CC power system typically uses a gas turbine to drive an electrical generator, and recovers waste heat from the turbine exhaust
to generate steam. The steam from waste heat is run through a steam turbine to provide supplemental electricity. The overall
4
electrical efficiency of a CC power system is typically in the range of 50–60% and a substantial improvement over the efficiency
of a simple, open-cycle application of around 33% [14].
A CC power system is the traditional technology of choice for most large onshore power generation plants, and is therefore well
established. The technology has also been used on a few offshore installations for over 10 years. Most offshore installations are
designed to generate power from open-cycle gas turbines which offer reduced capital costs, size and weight (per MW installed), but
with compromised energy efficiency and fuel costs per unit output. CC system operation is suitable for stable load applications, but
less suitable for offshore applications with variable or declining load profiles. In a new ‘greenfield’ development incorporating a
CC system design, the size of the gas turbine can be optimized and is likely to be smaller than an equivalent open-cycle
configuration. Additionally, the waste heat recovery unit (WHRU) can replace the gas turbine silencer, thereby mitigating some of
the space and weight constraints. Residual heat may be used instead of fired heaters, thereby improving the overall system
efficiency. As such, the use of CC power technology is dependent on the power and heat demand of the installation. CC technology
is most cost-effective for larger plants. On an installation where the heat demand is large, the waste heat from the WHRU will
normally be used for other heating applications, and hence there will be little residual heat left for power generation.
Retrofitting gas turbine generator technology to convert from simple, open-cycle systems to CC operation is complex and costly;
hence this is not common in offshore installations. The additional topside weight and space necessary to incorporate a steam turbine,
as well as the need for additional personnel on the platform to manage the steam system operations, makes a CC retrofit a challenging
project.
A CC power system typically consists of the following equipment: gas turbines (GTs); waste heat recovery units for steam
generation (WHRU-SG); steam turbines (STs); condensers; and other auxiliary equipment. The figure below illustrates a CC power
system using a gas turbine generator with waste heat recovery and steam turbine generator.
ACM007 methodology is related to switch from OC to CC and represents a couple of scenarios to do that. Table 2 displays the
implemented cases. The total number of registered projects which is implemented with this methodology is 14 and emission
reduction is 6.550667 MtCO2/annum. 3 cases are registered in Iran and emission reduction is 2.374008 MtCO2e/annum. By
implementation of these projects in Iran 2100 MW electricity is connected to the grid and average efficiency has reached from 31%
to 46%.
Table 2. Implemented projects by ACM007 methodology on power plants sector [13]
Number
#
Title
Host
Parties
Other Parties
1
Energas Varadero Conversion from Open Cycle to Combined Cycle
Project
Cuba
2
Conversion of existing open cycle gas turbine to combined cycle at
the Central Termica Patagonia power station, ComodoroRivadavia,
Argentina
Bintulu Combined-Cycle Project STG Unit No.9,
TanjungKidurong, Bintulu, Sarawak
Conversion of existing open cycle gas turbine to combined cycle at
Guaracachi power station, Santa Cruz, Bolivia
Ventanilla Conversion from Single-cycle to Combined-cycle Power
Generation Project
PT Dalle Energy Batam CCGT conversion project, Indonesia
Argentina
Canada
United
Kingdom
Germany
Spain
Switch from Single Cycle to Combined Cycle (CC) CDM Project at
Sanandaj Power Plant
Shirvan Power Plant
Jahrom Power Plant
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
Reductions
(tCO2e/annu
m)
342235
148019
Malaysia
Japan
595460
Bolivia
Germany
Spain
Spain
335279
157317
Iran
United
Kingdom
Switzerland
Iran
Switzerland
783332
Iran
Switzerland
897064
Peru
Indonesia
407296
693612
5
10
PT MitraEnergiBatam CCGT Conversion Project
Indonesia
11
AzitoEnergie, Phase 3 Expansion from Single Cycle to Combined
Cycle
Enersa Cogeneration Project
Conversion of Open Cycle Gas Turbines to Combined Cycle at
Kallpa Thermoelectric Power Plant
Combined Cycle at Loma de la Lata Thermo Unit Project
Côte
dÌvoire
Honduras
Peru
12
13
14
4.
United
Kingdom
111491
446434
Netherlands
Switzerland
Argentina
53561
927957
651610
Potential of Converting OC to CC through CDM Methodology in Iran
Iran has 22 CC, 21 steam power plants and 40 gas turbine power plants. Because of auxiliary equipments for switching the OC to
CC, it’s not economical to implement ACM007 methodology on the power plants with capacity less than 100 MW, so in this article
open cycle gas turbine (OCGT) with electricity generation more than 100 MW are considered. Iran has 15 OCGT that is not
available any plan for converting to CC and capable to implement the CDM methodology on them and table 3 represents the
information of them. By using of ACM007 methodology scenarios based on age of equipments, technology of power plant,
consumption fuel and etc the GHG emission, emission reduction and power gross calculated.
Table 3. OCGT power plants in Iran [15]
Number #
Open cycle gas turbine
Capacity
(MW)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
Persian Gulf (Hormozgan)
Rey
Hafez
Parand
Isfahan south
Asaluyeh
Roudshoor
Chabahar
Zahedan
Shiraz
Mashhad
Kangun
Shariati
Konarak (Chabahar)
ShahidBeheshti (Looshan)
Soufian
990
979
972
954
954
954
789
414
226
196
195
164
150
142.5
120
100
Consumption fuel
Natural gas
Diesel
(1000m3/annum)
(1000lit/annum)
1461999
80672
448397
30711
693645
40485
798946
160131
908740
210199
1160829
121747
864079
298297
0
530740
0
295235
178077
24249
167158
36
279523
0
20948
1614
0
135209
37243
7987
112067
2316
Emission reduction is calculated by this formula:
𝐸𝑅𝑦 = 𝐵𝐸𝑦 − 𝑃𝐸𝑦 − 𝐿𝐸𝑦
(1)
Where ERy is emission reduction per year, BEy is baseline emission per year, PEy is project emission per year and LE y is leakage emission
per year. BEy can be calculated through formula 2:
𝐵𝐸𝑦 = 𝐸𝐺𝑂𝐶,𝑦 ⨯ 𝐸𝐹𝑂𝐶 + 𝐸𝐹𝑔𝑟𝑖𝑑,𝑦 ⨯ (𝐸𝐺𝐶𝐶 − 𝐸𝐺𝑂𝐶,𝑦 )
(2)
6
Where EGOC,y is quantity of generated electricity per year (MWh/yr), EF OC,y is base line emission factor (tCO 2/MWh), EFgrid,y is baseline
emission factor (tCO2/MWh) and EGCC,y is quantity of gross generated electricity per year (MWh/yr).
Formula 3 computes quantity of PEy
𝑃𝐸𝑦 = ∑𝑖 𝐹𝐶𝑖,𝑦 𝐶𝑂𝐸𝐹𝑖,𝑦
(3)
Where FCi,y is fuel consumption of fuel i per year and COEFi,y is CO2 emission coefficient of fuel i. In documents of CDM projects in Iran,
EFgrid,y is 0.708091 tCO2/MWh. In this study has been assumed there are no leakage, so LE y is 0 tCO2/yr. Table 4 displays the potential of
implementation of CDM methodologies in Iran’s power plants. Based on table 4 8300 MW electricity can be connected to the grid and
emission reduction is 10.473902 MtCO2e/annum. The power plants mean efficiency is raised from 31% to 46%. If switching from OC to
CC is implemented through CDM projects, the revenue from carbon credits are about 4,292,700 € in 2013 based on 0.41€/tonne CO 2.
Table 4. Emission reduction of Iran’s power plants by implementation of ACM007 methodology
No.
#
OCGT power
plant
1
Persian Gulf
(Hormozgan)
Rey
Hafez
Parand
Isfahan south
Asaluyeh
Roudshoor
Chabahar
Zahedan
Shiraz
Mashhad
Kangun
Shariati
Konarak
(Chabahar)
ShahidBehesht
i (Looshan)
Soufian
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
5.
Gross
capacity
(MW)
1485
EGOC
(MWh/yr)
EGCC
(MWh/yr)
EFOC
(tCO2/yr)
BEX,y
(tCO2/yr)
PEy
(tCO2/yr)
ERy
(tCO2/yr)
3,294,313
LEy
(tCO2/yr)
0
4,741,704
7,112,556
0.5456362
4,265,593
1468.5
1458
1431
1431
1431
1183.5
621
339
294
292.5
246
225
214
2,124,430
5,346,000
5,454,018
6,296,400
6,678,000
5,781,792
2,278,656
1,262,210
1,027,040
588,120
878,384
66,300
456,599
3,186,645
8,019,000
8,181,027
9,444,600
10,017,000
8,672,688
3,417,984
1,893,315
1,540,560
882,180
1,313,838
99,450
683,302
0.4785800
0.2916855
0.3726205
0.3765400
0.4076485
0.0368332
0.4860374
0.4880933
0.4179380
0.5891514
0.6766270
0.7055869
0.6179272
1,768,854
2,761,662
3,170,599
3,357,730
4,063,274
4,176,636
1,914,259
1,062,956
891,144
554,713
902,679
70,254
442,671
1,040,442
1,589,533
2,152,524
2,527,849
2,812,362
2,682,528
1,503,936
836,596
447,351
346,518
594,338
63,524
383,136
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
728,412
1,172,129
1,018,375
829,881
1,256,912
1,494,108
410,323
226,360
443,793
208,195
308,341
6,730
59,535
180
157,080
235,620
0.6102305
151,467
130,157
0
21,130
150
377,200
565,800
0.6445291
376,662
244,864
0
131,8028
971,650
Integrated Combined Cycle System
Switching from OC to CC can be carried out by using integrated renewable combined cycles. Employing from solar energy in integrated
solar system is one of the available options. Solar combined cycle hybrid technology (Integrated Solar Combined Cycle, ISCC) is the
integration of a combined cycle plant and a solar field, which combines the benefits of solar energy with the combined cycle. With this
technology, solar energy is used as an auxiliary energy supply, increasing the cycle efficiency and reducing associated CO 2 emissions.
The operation of a solar combined cycle hybrid plant is similar to a conventional combined cycle plant. The operation of the gas cycle is
similar in both technologies. The auxiliary energy supply from the solar field supports the steam cycle, which results in increased generation
capacity of the cycle. The solar resource partially replaces fossil fuel use. In this type of plant, therefore, the design and integration of the
solar field in the conventional system is critical for the proper functioning of the plant.
7
Figure 1. Integrated solar combined cycle system
Hybrid plants can refer to new construction as well as the addition of a solar field to an already existing combined cycle plant. The solar
field may use either parabolic trough or tower technology. In CDM methodology integrated combined cycle is considered. AM0100
methodology is about solar integrated combined cycle. Electricity is generated by using steam generated from solar collectors and reducing
the use of fossil fuel.
Other integrated combined cycle is wind turbine. Rabbani and Dincer studied on the wind turbine that was coupled with a combined cycle
to increase the net power output of the plant. In the case of low demand and high penetration, they used extra wind power to compress air
which can be used during a low penetration configuration. During high load demand, all of the wind power is used to drive the pump and
compressor [16].
6.
Conclusion
Iran has great potential for implementation of CDM methodologies in power plants. By switching OCGT to CCGT through ACM007
methodology 4150 MW electricity can be connected to the grid and emission reduction of GHG gas is 10.47 MtCO 2e/annum and the
revenue from carbon credits are about 4,292,700 € in 2013 based on 0.41€/tonne CO 2. Beside because of Iran’s geographical location
switching OC to CC can be done by using of integrated renewable combined cycles.
7.
References
[1] K. Strand, K. E. Rosendahl, “Global emissions effects of CDM projects withrelative baselines”, Resource and
Energy Economics 34 533–548, 2012.
[2] Subbarao, S., Lloyd, B., “Can the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) deliver?”, Energy Policy 39 (3), 1600–1611, 2011.
[3] Brunt, C., Knechtel, A., “Delivering Sustainable Development Benefits Through the Clean Development Mechanism”,
Promoting the Developmental Benefits of the CDM: An African Case Study, Pembina Institute, Alberta, 2005.
8
[4] Nussbaumer, P., “On the contribution of labeled certified emission reductions to sustainable development: a multi-criteria
evaluation of CDM projects”, Energy Policy37 (1), 91–101, 2009.
[5] Sutter, C., Parreño, J.C., “Does the current Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) deliver its sustainable development claim?
An analysis of officially registered CDM projects”, Climatic Change84, 75–90, 2007.
[6] Drupp, M.A., “Does the Gold Standard label hold its promise in delivering higher Sustainable Development benefits? A
multi-criteria comparison of CDM projects”, Energy Policy, 39 (3), 1213–1227, 2011.
[7] Olsen, K.H., Fenhann, J., “Sustainable development benefits of clean development mechanism projects: a new methodology
for sustainability assessment based on text analysis of the project design document submitted for validation”, Energy Policy, 36
(8), 2819–2830, 2008.
[8] Zhang, J., Wang, C., “Co-benefits and additionality of the clean development mechanism: an empirical analysis”, Journal
of Environmental Economic sand Management 62,140–154, 2011.
[9] Kua, H.W., “Improving the clean development mechanism with sustainability-rating and rewarding system”, Progress in
Industrial Ecology—An International Journal 7 (1), 35–51, 2010.
[10] Olsen, K.H., “The clean development mechanism's contribution to sustainable development: a review of the literature”,
Climatic Change 84, 59–73, 2007.
[11] Resnier, M., Wang, C., Du, P., Chen, J., “The promotion of sustainable development in china through the optimization
of a tax/ subsidy plan among HFC and power generation CDM projects”, Energy Policy 35 (9), 4529–4544, 2007.
[12] Wang, C., W.Z., W.C, “Employment Impacts of CDM Projects in China's Power Sector”, Energy Policy 59, 481–491, 2013.
[13] UNFCCC site: https://cdm.unfccc.int
[14] The global oil and gas industry association for environmental and social issues site: http://www.ipieca.org/
[15] Iran Energy Balance 2011-2012: www.saba.org.ir/saba_content/media/image/2013/06/5406_orig.pdf.
[16] Rabbani, M., Dincer, V., Naterer, G.F., “Thermodynamic assessment of a wind turbine based combined cycle”, Energy
44, 321-328, 2012.
9

Study on the Potential of Clean Development Mechanism (CDM

Transcription

Similar documents

Why CDM project in Isabela should be rejected – APC

Glycol Dehydration Units Spec Sheet

1.1MB

Experience with CDM Project Campaigns

CDM for Local Governments : An innovative approach for

Form for submission of Letter to the Board. (version - CDM