Professional Documents
Culture Documents
page 1
CONTENTS
D. Environmental impacts
E. Stakeholders’ comments
Annexes
page 2
Document Version 04
The project activity comprises an Anaerobic Baffled Reactor (ABR) which is a high rate anaerobic
wastewater treatment and a biogas recovery system. Operated by Cassava Waste To Energy Co., Ltd.
(CWTE), this new wastewater treatment facility will receive 3 wastewater streams from the native starch
plant, the citric acid plant and the modified starch plant, with an average COD around 13,385 mg/L. ABR
is designed to remove around 90% of the COD prior to release to the existing lagoons.
The recovered methane rich biogas will be channeled back to AMSCO to generate heat and electricity for
its production process. Prior to this project, AMSCO has been consuming approximately 8.8 million
litres of heavy fuel oil per year. The project is expected to supply approximately 7.1 million Nm3 of
biogas per year for heat generation, which can replace approximately 4.2 million litres of heavy fuel oil
per year, and around 1.9 million Nm3 for electricity generation. Any excess biogas will be flared.
page 3
The project can expect to deliver multiple benefits in respect of sustainable development in Thailand,
including:
Environmental benefits
⇒ Reduction of methane emission which is a potent GHG;
⇒ Reduction in the odour and nuisance associated with the old open treatment system;
⇒ Reduction of air pollution such as SO2 and PM10 from displacement of heavy fuel oil with
biogas;
⇒ Improvement of wastewater quality as ABR is design to remove around 90% of the COD in the
wastewater prior to release to the existing lagoons;
⇒ Conservation of groundwater resources from the use of HDPE lining which can prevent
wastewater from contaminating groundwater;
⇒ Reduction in usage of non-renewable energy, i.e. heavy fuel oil and grid electricity generated
mainly from fossil fuel;
Social benefits
⇒ Involvement of local communities through attitude surveys and public participation meeting, in
which most people accepted the project;
⇒ Extended benefits to local communities, including:
o Reduction of health problems and nuisance related to the odour from open lagoon
wastewater treatment system;
o CWTE will be open to local community as a biogas education centre – a request
expressed during the public participation meeting to show how this concept can be
applied to other sources of organic wastewater;
o Increased employment by employing 22 full time staffs to operate the system;
Economic benefits
⇒ Reduction in the dependency on oil imports while at the same time enhancing energy security by
increasing diversity of fuel supply;
⇒ Enhancing competitiveness of cassava processing industry in Thailand which is currently facing
a lot of competitive pressure in the global market;
⇒ Promoting technological excellence and innovation in Thailand by being a clean technology
demonstration project, which could be replicated across Thailand and the region, and by
demonstrating the use of a new financial mechanism for funding of the renewable energy and
waste management sector via the CDM; and
⇒ Building confidence for project developers in agro-industries in the efficacy, cost and safety of
biogas systems as an emerging cassava waste-to-energy technology within the SE Asia region.
PROJECT DESIGN DOCUMENT FORM (CDM PDD) - Version 03.1.
page 4
Street address: 19 Moo 8 Theenanond Rd., Tambol Phontong, Amphur Muang, Kalasin, 46000
THAILAND
PROJECT DESIGN DOCUMENT FORM (CDM PDD) - Version 03.1.
page 5
CWTE project
page 6
Note: This diagram is used for illustration only and is not the actual design of ABR at CWTE project.
Source: Adapted from KM Foxon, P Dama and CA Buckley, Application of Aquatic Modelling to the Design of an Anaerobic
Baffled Reactor for Peri-urban Sanitation
The key design parameters of the ABR plant at CWTE are summarised in Table 1.
The biogas generated from the ABR plant is captured and stored under the high density polyethylene
(HDPE) cover, and is piped back to AMSCO. The project is expected to recover approximately
9.4 million Nm3 of biogas per year, which will be used for onsite heat and electricity generation for the
production process of the cassava plant. Dual fuel burners, which are a relatively new technology to
Thailand, will be installed at these boilers. Prior to this project, AMSCO has been consuming
approximately 8.8 million litres of heavy fuel oil per year to generate heat in its production process. Any
excess biogas will be sent to flare, which is an enclosed flare with a capacity to burn up to 2,000 m3/hr of
biogas. There is no use of fossil fuel in the existing and new wastewater treatment facility.
The effluent from the ABR, which has most of the organic materials removed, is channeled to the
existing lagoons for further treatment. Although AMSCO does not discharge the treated wastewater to
the environment, it is the industry best practice to treat the wastewater to meet the effluent discharge
standard anyway.
Figure 3 and Figure 4 illustrate pre-project scenario and aerial photo of existing lagoons, respectively.
PROJECT DESIGN DOCUMENT FORM (CDM PDD) - Version 03.1.
page 7
Fuel Oil
CO2
CO2 CO2
Fuel
Wastewater
Emissions
PROJECT DESIGN DOCUMENT FORM (CDM PDD) - Version 03.1.
page 8
The dimensions and surface areas of existing lagoons are illustrated in Table 2.
The total surface area of existing lagoons is 262,900 m2 and, with the depth of at least 3 metres, the
capacity of the lagoons is 788,700 m3.
PROJECT DESIGN DOCUMENT FORM (CDM PDD) - Version 03.1.
page 9
Fuel Oil
CO2
CO2 CO2
biogas
biogas
ABR biogas
CH4
Fuel
Wastewater
Emissions
The treatment plant will be controlled by the Supervisory Control And Data Acquisition system or the
SCADA system, which is a central system that monitors and controls a complete site or a system spread
out over a long distance. Not only will the SCADA system ensure the smooth operation of the treatment
plant, it will also ensure that the necessary data will be monitored and stored according to the CDM
monitoring requirements.
Safety is another priority of the plant. The gas pressure in the pipeline is monitored continuously and
should it drop, due to for example a leak in the pipeline, the blower will stop operating automatically. In
case of electricity outage where the blowers and flaring system will not be operating; the biogas under
the HDPE cover can be released through the manual pressure release valves to prevent any damages to
the system from excessive pressure.
PROJECT DESIGN DOCUMENT FORM (CDM PDD) - Version 03.1.
page 10
A.4.4 Estimated amount of emission reductions over the chosen crediting period:
>>
Years Annual estimation of emission reductions
in tonnes of CO2 e
2008 (2 months) 14,398
2009 87,586
2010 87,586
2011 87,586
2012 87,586
2013 87,586
2014 87,586
2015 87,586
2016 87,586
2017 87,586
2018 (10 months) 73,188
Total estimated reductions (tonnes of CO2 e) 875,857
Total number of crediting years 10
Annual average over the crediting period of
estimated reductions (tones of CO2 e) 87,586
page 11
B.1. Title and reference of the approved baseline and monitoring methodology applied to the
project activity:
>>
− Version 04 of AM0022 – Avoided Wastewater and On-site Energy Use Emissions in the
Industrial Sector
− Tool to determine project emissions from flaring gases containing methane (agreed during the
Executive Board 28th meeting, no version indicated)
B.2 Justification of the choice of the methodology and why it is applicable to the project
activity:
>>
The proposed project activity meets each of the applicability conditions of the methodology, as justified
in the following table.
− It can be shown that the baseline is the continuation − It is shown in Section B.4 that in the absence of the
of a current lagoon system for managing wastewater. project activity, the most likely baseline scenario is
In particular, the current lagoon based system is in the continuation of a current lagoon system for
full compliance with existing rules and regulations. managing wastewater, which is in full compliance
with existing rules and regulations.
− The depth of the anaerobic lagoons should be at − The depth of the anaerobic lagoons is at least 3 m.
least 1m.
PROJECT DESIGN DOCUMENT FORM (CDM PDD) - Version 03.1.
page 12
page 13
page 14
page 15
B.3. Description of the sources and gases included in the project boundary
>>
Source Gas Included? Justification
Lagoon-based CO2 No Biogenic CO2 from renewable sources
wastewater treatment CH4 Yes
N2O No Ignored emission, as per AM0022 version 04
Heat generation CO2 Yes
Baseline
B.4. Description of how the baseline scenario is identified and description of the identified
baseline scenario:
>>
Baseline Determination
The baseline determination methodology consists of a six-step process in order to define the baseline
scenario and to demonstrate that the continuation of current practices (existing lagoon based waste water
treatment system without biogas use or flaring of the biogas) is the baseline scenario:
page 16
Scenario 4 The proposed anaerobic treatment facility not undertaken as a CDM project activity;
and
Scenario 5 New aerobic wastewater treatment facilities.
Legal Barrier
• Does the practice violate any host country laws or regulations or is it not in compliance with
them?
The Notification No.2 of the Thai Ministry of Industry (B.E. 2539) requires effluent discharges into
watercourses to have, inter alia, COD not exceeding 120 mg/L and 5-day BOD not exceeding 20 mg/L
(with an exception to starch plants that 5-day BOD is not to exceed 60 mg/L). Given the high strength
organic wastewater from AMSCO, it will be illegal to release wastewaters directly to a nearby water
body (Scenario 1). The legal barrier is an absolute barrier in the sense that illegal options can not be the
baseline. As such, this alternative will not be further discussed.
However, the Notification does not specify how the wastewater should be treated to achieve its
requirements. AMSCO operates closed water cycle systems1 with no discharges of final effluents to the
aquatic environment, and therefore requires no wastewater discharge permit2. The existing lagoons has
been approved by the Ministry of Industry, and has been inspected by the Ministry of Industry every
year. Moreover, Thailand does not enforce any controls on the emission of CH4 from wastewater
treatment facilities in any sector. Therefore, Scenarios 3, 4 and 5 can achieve the same discharge
standard requirement and would present a legal option.
1
In addition to evaporation, the treated wastewater can also be reused to wash tapioca and to sprinkle the grass field.
2
The design of the lagoons has already taken into account of rainfall. The designed treatment capacity of the lagoons is
8,460 m3/day while the actual wastewater generated was only 5,110 m3/day. This results in excess capacity of 3,360 m3/day or
100,800 m3/month. The 30-year average rainfall in the area of Kalasin province where the project is situated shows that
September has the highest amount of rainfall 221.4 mm within that month
(http://www.tmd.go.th/en/province_stat.php?StationNumber=48390). Given the surface area of the lagoon of 262,900 m2, the
total amount of rainfall into the lagoons in September would be 58,101 m3, which is lower than the excess capacity that the
lagoon has. Thus, the lagoon has enough capacity to prevent overflow due to rainfall.
PROJECT DESIGN DOCUMENT FORM (CDM PDD) - Version 03.1.
page 17
Technical Barrier
• Is this technology option currently difficult to purchase through local equipment suppliers?
• Are skills and labour to operationalize and maintain this technology in country insufficient?
• Is this technology outside common practice in similar industries in the country?
• Is performance certainty not guaranteed within tolerance limits?
• Is there real, or perceived, technology risk associated with the technology?
Open lagoons, described as Scenario 2, have been used extensively in Thailand and in this region as a
cost effective solution for treating organic wastewater in this tropical climate. Lagoon system is
considered low risk because it does not require any advanced technology and is easy to operate and
maintain.
Covered anaerobic treatment technologies (Scenarios 3 and 4) have been introduced to Thailand for more
than 10 years with supports from the government but there continues to be low confidence amongst
investors in the efficacy and operating costs of anaerobic treatment technologies as it is largely unproven
as yet on a commercial scale in Thailand. The anaerobic system is seen as a high risk with limited
performance guarantee as it requires constant and ongoing precise management of a variety of elements
such as water flows, pH and temperature. Furthermore, neither the technology, nor the requisite skills to
build and operate such systems are generally available locally. All major equipment required for the
operation of the anaerobic digester and the biogas power plant were sources overseas because this
technical capacity was not available in Thailand. Moreover, because this anaerobic digestion technology
is not common in Thailand, there is a lack of skilled manpower to operate and maintain this technology.
As such, CWTE has engaged wastewater treatment experts from overseas to consult on the design of the
system, system start-up, and 1-year training of staff to operate and maintain this technology.
Anaerobic treatment system is considered as high risks because it relies fully on the function of a
biological system that is neither 100% characterised, nor performance guaranteed. The function of the
biological system is sensitive to the changes in the environment, such as changes in chemical
composition, amount of organic load, pH, temperature, etc. These harmful changes can be caused by a
host of problems such as mismanagement of the ABR or mixing pond, improper recycling of the
wastewater or the introduction of chemical agents into the system. This system therefore requires
constant and ongoing precise management of a variety of elements, water flows, pH etc. Overall they are
perceived as a risky solution.
PROJECT DESIGN DOCUMENT FORM (CDM PDD) - Version 03.1.
page 18
Scenario 5 aerobic treatment is an alterative waste management choice but is normally associated with
high operating cost with high electricity consumption. Moreover, aerobic treatment systems are often
used to treat low organic load wastewater.
Technology issues are therefore considered a major barrier to the anaerobic scenario, Scenarios 3 and 4,
and mid-range barrier to Scenario 5 aerobic alternative and no barrier to Scenario 2 current pond based
management system.
Financial Barrier
• Is the technology intervention financially less attractive in comparison to other technologies
(taking into account potential subsidies, soft loans or tax windows available)?
• Is equity participation difficult to find locally?
• Is equity participation difficult to find internationally?
• Are site owners/ project beneficiaries carrying any risk?
• Is technology currency (country) denomination a risk?
• Is the proposed project exposed to commercial risk?
Scenario 2, the existing lagoons, does not face any financial barrier because the existing system is
already installed and requires no further investment. The only identifiable cost of the existing lagoons is
the opportunity cost of alternative land use. Once the new wastewater treatment facility is in operation,
AMSCO does not plan to reclaim the land from the existing lagoons, which demonstrates that the
opportunity cost of alternative land use is very low.
Commercial risk represents one barrier that prevent the unfamiliar wastewater treatment technologies to
establish in Thailand and in this region. Cassava products are highly competitive; the plant owners are
reluctant to take on a large investment in unfamiliar technology such as anaerobic treatment system
(Scenarios 3 and 4) or aerobic treatment technology (Scenario 5) because it could put their core business
at risk. It is also difficult to find local entrepreneurs that are willing to assume this commercial risk.
CWTE is financed exclusively by foreign investors who are willing to take on high risk project that result
in GHG emission reductions. Without the expectation of CERs, this project would not have taken place.
PROJECT DESIGN DOCUMENT FORM (CDM PDD) - Version 03.1.
page 19
Financial barriers are perceived to be major barriers to the project scenario of adopting anaerobic
treatment technology (Scenarios 3 and 4) and major barriers to the aerobic waste management alternative
(Scenario 5). Conversely, they do not pose barriers to the continued prevailing practice of pond systems.
Social Barriers
• Is the understanding of the technology low in the host country/industry considered?
Although there are some slight discomforts to local community associated with odour from the lagoons
(Scenario 2) that could happen from time to time, the local community has generally accepted it as the
standard operating practice by commercial entities in Thailand. Scenarios 3 and 4 – anaerobic facilities –
on the other hand, present social barriers of perceived biogas explosion risk, as emerged from the attitude
survey and the public participation meeting. Significant amount of investment in the safety equipment is
required to ensure that the safety risks are minimal.
Social issues are therefore considered a minor barrier to Scenarios 3, 4 and 5 – anaerobic and aerobic
treatment technologies – and no barrier to Scenario 2 current pond based management system.
PROJECT DESIGN DOCUMENT FORM (CDM PDD) - Version 03.1.
page 20
If industrial facility would like to discharge wastewater outside their facilities, it will have to meet
wastewater effluent standards. Otherwise, there is no specific environmental regulation in Thailand,
which prescribe certain methods of wastewater treatment for certain industry. The main objective of
industrial wastewater treatment is to maintain compliance with local regulation at the lowest cost. For
this reason, the open lagoon system in Scenario 2 has become the standard operating practice in Thailand
and in this region. Energy production as in Scenario 4, which is even more capital intensive and requires
even greater management resources than the simple digestion process, is not a priority. There is little or
no positive experience of utilising aerobic or anaerobic technologies (Scenarios 3, 4 and 5) in a Thai
context, and therefore these are not considered a high management priority.
Furthermore, cash flow is crucial to starch plants for running their business in Thailand. Investment in a
new biogas technology requires large amount of cash investment, which will significantly affect the cash
flow of the starch plant. Unless the benefit for investment in biogas is assured with acceptable payback
period, the owner of starch plant will not take such risky investment.
CDM brings together outside investor who is willing to invest in high-risk projects, competent
technology provider, and the owner of the wastewater stream, and offers an effective solution to this
circumstance. This has become a financial innovation for solving environmental problems that can be
replicated in Thailand and elsewhere.
Such barriers can be confirmed by the study undertaken by the Energy Policy and Planning Office
(EPPO)3 which found that most of cassava starch plants choose to retain wastewater in their open ponds
because of insufficient knowledge / confidence in the technology, high investment cost compared to
cheap land price, the resulting operating cost throughout the treatment life. As such, the Ministry of
Energy then started a pilot demonstration of biogas system in starch industry, in which 9 factories have
been selected and received financial support from the Energy Conservation Promotion Fund (ENCON),
as shown below.
3
Energy Policy and Planning Office, Ministry of Energy, Seminar on the Promotion of Production of Biogas from Wastewater as
an Alternative Energy and for Environmental Improvement, At Ballroom, Sirikit Convention Centre 29 August 2007, pp.46-47,
http://www.thaibiogas.com/book_pdf.php?PDF=Part2.pdf
PROJECT DESIGN DOCUMENT FORM (CDM PDD) - Version 03.1.
page 21
In addition to the above 9 projects that have received financial support from ENCON Fund, there are
other 11 biogas projects being implemented without support from ENCON Fund. These projects need
financial incentives from CDM to overcome the prevailing practice barriers, including:
From the evidence shown above, it is conclusive that an anaerobic wastewater treatment system with
methane recovery, Scenario 4, is not a common practice in cassava processing industry in Thailand due
to insufficient knowledge / confidence, and the high investment cost compared to open lagoons. Those
plants that have implemented the biogas system either received financial support from the ENCON Fund,
or they have to seek financial support from CDM.
page 22
Business culture issues are considered a significant barrier to anaerobic treatment technologies and no
barrier to the current pond based management system.
Scenario 4 Proposed
treatment without
Scenario 1 Direct
aerobic treatment
Scenario 5 New
Continuation of
current lagoons
Scenario 2
as CDM
body
Barrier Tested
Legal Y N N N N
Technical NA* N Y Y Y
Financial NA* N Y Y Y
Social NA* N Y Y N
Business Culture NA* N Y Y Y
Key – Y: barrier exists; N: barrier does not exist; NA: question is not relevant
* The legal barrier is an absolute barrier in the sense that illegal options can not be the baseline. Since the direct release to nearby
water body is illegal, no further assessment of this option is carried out.
Step 6: Conclusion
This analysis confirms that the continuation of the current open lagoon system is the most plausible
baseline option.
PROJECT DESIGN DOCUMENT FORM (CDM PDD) - Version 03.1.
page 23
B.5. Description of how the anthropogenic emissions of GHG by sources are reduced below
those that would have occurred in the absence of the registered CDM project activity (assessment
and demonstration of additionality):
>>
As per the methodology, if the baseline determination demonstrates that the baseline is different from the
proposed project activity not undertaken as a CDM project activity, it may be concluded that the project
is additional.
Section B.4 above demonstrates that the most plausible baseline option is the continuation of the current
open lagoon system, and the project is, therefore, additional.4
The baseline emissions are determined from equation (8) to equation (11) of AM0022. Since AM0022
does not provide separate equation for calculating baseline methane emission from lagoons, equation (2),
(3), (5) and (6) are repeated, and are denoted as equation (2a), (3a), (5a) and (6a) to distinguish them
from equations to calculate the project emissions. Where it is important to distinguish the baseline
parameters in these equations from the project emission parameter, a subscript BL is added to indicate a
baseline parameter. Since the project proponent does not wish to claim emission reduction from
displacement of grid electricity, equation (10) is omitted.
The emission reductions are calculated in equation (12). The integrity of the calculation is confirmed
using equation (13) of AM0022.
All inputs into each equation and the result of each calculation are shown in tabulated format and in a
transparent manner so as to enable the reader to reproduce the calculation.
4
As per the guideline for completing the PDD, if the starting date of the project activity is before the date of validation, evidence
shall be provided that the incentive from the CDM was seriously considered in the decision to proceed with the project activity.
It can be shown from the Energy Supply and Purchase Agreement between CWTE and AMSCO made on Jan 11, 2006 (which is
before start date of the project 23 Jan 2006) that the incentive from the CDM was seriously considered in the decision to
proceed with the project activity. In addition, the following press releases from Toyota Tusho and TEPCO - the
major shareholders of CWTE have shown that CDM has been considered at the start of the project.
http://test.toyotsu.co.jp/press/en/20060208_2pasttoyotsu.cfm
http://www.tepco.co.jp/en/press/corp-com/release/06020801-e.html
PROJECT DESIGN DOCUMENT FORM (CDM PDD) - Version 03.1.
page 24
Justification of the These values were estimated from the aerial photo as shown in Figure 4 and
choice of data or Table 2.
description of
measurement methods
and procedures
actually applied :
Any comment:
PROJECT DESIGN DOCUMENT FORM (CDM PDD) - Version 03.1.
page 25
page 26
page 27
Where:
PROJECT DESIGN DOCUMENT FORM (CDM PDD) - Version 03.1.
page 28
Note that there is no use of fossil fuel in the project activity (ie. in the wastewater treatment facility).
Where:
ECH4_lagoons is the methane emissions from the lagoons (t CO2e)
Mlagoon_anaerobic is the amount of organic material removed by anaerobic processes in the lagoon system
(kg COD)
EFCH4 is the methane emission factor (kg CH4 / kg COD). A default COD to Methane
conversion factor of 0.21 kg CH4/kgCOD is used5. If the methodology is used for waste
water containing materials not akin to simple sugars a CH4, a different emissions factor
different has to be estimated and applied. Where a metric for organic wastewater flows
other than COD is to be applied, the developer should set out the case for a relevant
carbon emission factor.
GWPCH4 is the Global Warming Potential of methane (GWPCH4 = 21)
Mlagoon_ anaerobic = Mlagoon _ total −Mlagoon_ aerobic − Mlagoon _ chemical _ ox −Mlagoon _ deposition (3)
Where:
Mlagoon_total is the total amount of organic material removed in the lagoon system from equation 5 (kg
COD)
Mlagoon_aerobic is the amount of organic material degraded aerobically in the lagoon system (kg COD).
Surface aerobic losses of organic material in pond based systems equal to 254 kg COD
per hectare of pond surface area and per day is assumed to be lost through aerobic
5
Source: IPCC, Good Practice Guidance and Uncertainty Management in National Greenhouse Gas Inventories,
page 5.16.
PROJECT DESIGN DOCUMENT FORM (CDM PDD) - Version 03.1.
page 29
processes. Where other more project specific losses can be determined, these should be
applied.
Mlagoon_chemical_ox is the amount of organic material lost through chemical oxidation in the lagoon system
(kg COD)
Mlagoon_deposition is the amount of organic material lost through deposition in the lagoon system from
equation 6 (kg COD)
Where:
Mlagoon_aerobic is the amount of organic material degraded aerobically in the lagoon system (kg COD).
Surface aerobic losses of organic material in pond based systems equal to 254 kg COD
per hectare of pond surface area and per day is assumed to be lost through aerobic
processes. Where other more project specific losses can be determined, these should be
applied.
Arealagoons is the pond surface area
Raerobic is the Aerobic Decomposition of COD at lagoon surfaces
Project Organic Material Entering Lagoon System from New Anaerobic Water Treatment System, based
on the design of 90% COD removal, is:
Mlagoon_ input = Minput _ total · (1− RNAWTF) (4)
Where:
Mlagoon_input is the input of organic material from the new project anaerobic waste water treatment
facility into the lagoon system (kg COD)
Minput_total is the total amount of organic material fed into the new project water treatment facility
(kg COD)
RNAWTF is the total organic material removal efficiency of the new project water treatment facility
(-). It is a project specific factor used to estimate how much COD will be removed from
the system. The most appropriate manner to estimate this factor is to undertake pilot
plant trials with a pilot scale digester system prior to project implementation. Where this
is not possible, manufacturer’s estimates as to equipment removal efficiencies may be
applied. This factor will be used to determine estimates of COD flows to the project
lagoon system, and the related monitoring methodology (AM0022 “Avoided Wastewater
PROJECT DESIGN DOCUMENT FORM (CDM PDD) - Version 03.1.
page 30
and On-site Energy Use Emissions in the Industrial Sector”) sets out how the actual
amount of COD can be monitored to allow calculation of actual project emissions.
Sources of
Vinput_total CODinput_total Operating days Minput_total
Wastewater
3
m /d mg O2/l days/year kg COD/year
N1 3,000 15,000 300 13,500,000
N2 500 7,500 300 1,125,000
CA1 280 25,000 348 2,436,000
CA2 500 17,000 348 2,958,000
CA3 280 6,000 348 584,640
M 550 4,500 330 816,750
Total 21,420,390
Note: N = Native starch, CA = Citric acid and M = Modified starch.
Where:
Mlagoon_total is the total amount of organic material removed in the lagoon system through various
routes (kg COD)
Rlagoon is the total organic material removal ratio of the lagoon (-). It is a project specific factor,
and is equal to the proportion of organic material removed (through all routes) within the
boundaries of the lagoon system under consideration. This factor should be determined
by carrying out a series of biochemical tests prior to project implementation. These tests
will determine the COD flows into the system, and the COD flows out of the system at
the system boundary. The relative difference of COD flowing in and out of the system
over a period of time will allow determination of the Total Organic Material Removal
Ratio.
Where:
Rdeposition is the organic material deposition ratio of the lagoon. It is equal to the proportion of
organic material physically sedimented in lagoons within the project boundaries. It is a
PROJECT DESIGN DOCUMENT FORM (CDM PDD) - Version 03.1.
page 31
project specific factor derived by assessing the relative ability of COD in the waste water
stream to sediment in the project boundaries, through pre project analysis.
Where:
the sum is made over two routes r for methane destruction (heating and power generation);
Vr is the biogas combustion process volume in route r (Nm3)
CCH4_r is the methane concentration in biogas (tCH4/Nm3) to be measured on wet basis
fr is the proportion of biogas destroyed by combustion (-)
PEflare are the project emissions from flaring of the residual gas stream (tCO2e) calculated
following the procedures described in the “Tool to determine project emissions from
flaring gases containing Methane”.
Biogas will be routed for heat and electricity generation. Any excess biogas will be flared.
Biogas
combustion Proportion Vr CCH4* fr** GWPCH4 ECH4_IC
3
t CH4/Nm
3
Nm biogas % t CO2e /t CH4 tCO2e/year
Heating 75% 6,896,915 0.00043 99.50% 21 311
Power 20% 1,839,177 0.00043 99.50% 21 83
Flare 5% 459,794 0.00043 90.00% 21 458
Total 100% 9,195,887 852
*assume % methane in biogas = 60% and density of CH4 = 0.7154 kg/Nm3 (IPCC 1996 Reference Manual p1.124)
**IPCC 1996 Reference Manual Table 1-6
PROJECT DESIGN DOCUMENT FORM (CDM PDD) - Version 03.1.
page 32
Where
TMRG,h Mass flow rate of methane in the residual gas in the hour h
FVRG,h Volumetric flow rate of the residual gas in dry basis at normal conditions in hour h
fvCH4,RG,h Volumetric fraction of methane in the residual gas on dry basis in hour h (NB: this
corresponds to fvi,RG,h where i refers to methane).
ρCH4,n Density of methane at normal conditions (0.7154 kg/m3)
8760
GWPCH 4
PE flare , y = ∑ TM RG ,h × (1 − η flare ,h ) × (f15)
h =1 1000
Where
PEflare,y Project emissions from flaring of the residual gas stream in year y
TMRG,h Mass flow rate of methane in the residual gas in the hour h
ηflare,h Flare efficiency in the hour h
GWPCH4 Global Warming Potential of methane valid for the commitment period
page 33
Methane emissions from the ABR are expected to be zero in this project. Because the ABR is being
operated effectively under sub atmospheric pressures, it is reasonable to expect that air will actually be
sucked in as opposed to biogas leaking out. There is no storage of biogas after blowers before
consumption. Wxcess biogas will be sent directly to flare. Any direct vent of CH4 will be monitored and
accounted for in the project emission when flare temperature is lower than 500°C. Nonetheless, leaks
from the biogas transporting pipeline will be monitored.
Where:
EBL are the Total Baseline Emissions (t CO2e)
ECH4_lagoons_BL are the fugitive methane emissions from lagoons in the baseline case (t CO2e). They are
calculated with baseline data based on equation 2 in the section on project emissions.
ECO2_heat _BL are the CO2 emissions from on site fossil heat generation in the baseline case (t CO2) that are
displaced by generation based on biogas collected in the anaerobic treatment facility.
ECO2_grid_BL are the CO2 emissions related to electricity supplied by the grid in the baseline case
(t CO2) that are displaced by generation based on biogas collected in the anaerobic
treatment facility.
On Site Heat Generation Emissions displaced by generation based on biogas collected in the
anaerobic treatment facility
In calculating CO2 emissions from on site heat displaced by biogas collected in the anaerobic treatment,
the use of fossil fuels is considered:
ECO2_heat_BL = F ⋅NCV ⋅ EF (9)
Where:
F is the corresponding amount of fossil fuel displaced by the use of biogas for the
generation of on site heat (unit). This is estimated as product of :(1) Average specific fuel
consumption for the output of the facility, estimated using 3 years historical data; and (2)
the annual production.
PROJECT DESIGN DOCUMENT FORM (CDM PDD) - Version 03.1.
page 34
NCV is the net calorific value of the fossil fuel considered (TJ/unit). Site specific local NCV
values should be applied where available; however, should this information not be
available, IPCC data may suffice for that specific country.
EF is the carbon emission factor of the fossil fuel considered (t CO2/TJ).
The captured biogas will be combusted in steam and hot oil boilers to generate heat for the drying
process of the starch factory. In the absence of the project activity, the starch factory would have to burn
fuel oil to generate the same amount of heat energy. The baseline emission from combustion of fuel is
shown in the following table.
On site and/or off site Grid Power Generation Emissions displaced by generation based on biogas
collected in the anaerobic treatment facility
For displaced electricity generated off site different quantification processes for carbon emission factors
(CEF) may be applied:
• Sub 15MW Generation: Where the project will have sub 15MW of installed capacity the small
scale procedures for sub 15MW electricity generation for export to a grid, as set out by the
CDM Executive Board, may be applied (under 1D, Renewable Energy Projects for a Grid).
• 15MW+ Generation: Where the project will have more than 15MW of installed capacity the
approved consolidated methodology ACM0002 should be applied.
Where:
EL is the amount of electricity displaced by the electricity generated from the biogas
collected from the anaerobic treatment facility. This is estimated as product of :(1)
Average specific electricity consumption for the output of the facility, estimated using 3
years historical data; and (2) the annual production .
CEF is the carbon emission factor for the electricity displaced by the electricity generated
from the biogas. If in the baseline situation only one source of power is used (onsite
production or grid), then apply the corresponding carbon emission factor. If the two
sources are used in the baseline situation, apply the lowest among (i) carbon emission
factor of the grid as discussed above (t CO2e/MWh) and (ii) carbon emission factor of the
on site electricity generation equipment displaced (tCO2e/MWh).
Although the project activity will generates electricity that will displace grid electricity, the project
proponent does not wish to claim emission reduction from the displacement of grid electricity, so
ECO2_grid = 0
PROJECT DESIGN DOCUMENT FORM (CDM PDD) - Version 03.1.
page 35
Baseline Organic Material Entering Lagoon System from New Anaerobic Water Treatment System is:
Mlagoon_input_BL = Minput_total (11)
Where:
Mlagoon_input_BL is the input of organic material from the new project anaerobic waste water treatment
facility into the lagoon system (kg COD)
Minput_total is the total amount of organic material fed into the baseline water treatment facility (kg
COD). It is the same amount as fed into the project water treatment facility.
Minput_total Mlagoon_input_BL
kg COD/year kg COD/year
21,420,390 21,420,390
Where:
ECH4_lagoons_BL is the methane emissions from the lagoons in the baseline (tCO2e)
Mlagoon_anaerobic_BL is the amount of organic material removed by anaerobic processes in the lagoon
system in the baseline (kg COD)
EFCH4 is the methane emission factor (kg CH4 / kg COD). A default COD to Methane
conversion factor of 0.21kg CH4/kgCOD is used. If the methodology is used for waste
water containing materials not akin to simple sugars a CH4, a different emissions
factor different has to be estimated and applied. Where a metric for organic
wastewater flows other than COD is to be applied, the developer should set out the
case for a relevant carbon emission factor.
GWPCH4 is the Global Warming Potential of methane (GWPCH4 = 21)
Mlagoon_ anaerobic_BL = Mlagoon _ total −Mlagoon_ aerobic − Mlagoon _ chemical _ ox −Mlagoon _ deposition (3a)
Where:
Mlagoon_total_BL is the total amount of organic material removed in the lagoon system from equation 5
(kg COD)
Mlagoon_aerobic_BL is the amount of organic material degraded aerobically in the lagoon system (kg
COD). Surface aerobic losses of organic material in pond based systems equal to 254
kg COD per hectare of pond surface area and per day is assumed to be lost through
aerobic processes. Where other more project specific losses can be determined, these
should be applied.
PROJECT DESIGN DOCUMENT FORM (CDM PDD) - Version 03.1.
page 36
Mlagoon_chemical_ox_BL is the amount of organic material lost through chemical oxidation in the lagoon
system (kg COD)
Mlagoon_deposition_BL is the amount of organic material lost through deposition in the lagoon system from
equation 6 (kg COD)
The amount of organic material lost through chemical oxidation in the lagoon system is estimated from
the following equation:
Where:
Mlagoon_total_BL is the total amount of organic material removed in the lagoon system in the baseline
through various routes (kg COD)
Rlagoon_BL is the total organic material removal ratio of the lagoon (-) in the baseline. It is a project
specific factor, and is equal to the proportion of organic material removed (through all
routes) within the boundaries of the lagoon system under consideration. This factor
should be determined by carrying out a series of biochemical tests prior to project
implementation. These tests will determine the COD flows into the system, and the COD
flows out of the system at the system boundary. The relative difference of COD flowing
in and out of the system over a period of time will allow determination of the Total
Organic Material Removal Ratio.
page 37
Where:
Rdeposition_BL is the organic material deposition ratio of the lagoon in the baseline. It is equal to the
proportion of organic material physically sedimented in lagoons within the project
boundaries. It is a project specific factor derived by assessing the relative ability of COD
in the waste water stream to sediment in the project boundaries, through pre project
analysis.
Leakage
Emission Reductions
Emission reductions, ER (t CO2e) are calculated as the difference between baseline (equation 8) and
project (equation 1) emissions (see equation 12 below). Leakage is considered to be negligible.
ER = EBL – Eproject (12)
EBL Eproject ER
t CO2e/year tCO2e/year t CO2e/year
88,438 852 87,586
Nevertheless it has to be verified that this equation delivers a conservative estimate of emission
reductions i.e. that the emissions of CH4 from the lagoons in the baseline situation are not higher than the
total emissions of biogas from the digester and the lagoons in the project situation. Therefore calculate:
ECH4_lagoon_BL – (ECH4_lagoon + ECH4_NAWTF + ECH4_coll) (13)
Where:
ECH4_coll is the amount of methane expressed in (tCO2e) contained in the biogas collected from the
anaerobic treatment facility (i.e. the sum of the biogas sent to heaters, the biogas sent to
the gen sets and the biogas sent to the flare)
If this difference is positive, it has to be deducted from the result obtained through the equation (12) in
order to obtain the final estimation of the emissions reductions. The equation (13) test from the applied
methodology AM0022 Version 04 is to be conducted during verification.
PROJECT DESIGN DOCUMENT FORM (CDM PDD) - Version 03.1.
page 38
Emission
ECH4_lagoons_BL ECH4_lagoons ECH4_NAWTF ECH4_coll discrepancy
t CO2e/year t CO2e/year t CO2e/year t CO2e/year t CO2e/year
75,729 0 0 82,892 -7,163
B.7 Application of the monitoring methodology and description of the monitoring plan:
page 39
Description of COD should be measured daily and composite sample is preferred to single
PROJECT DESIGN DOCUMENT FORM (CDM PDD) - Version 03.1.
page 40
measurement methods sample to obtain the most representative COD value. Samples should be stored
and procedures to be in a refrigerator before being taken to the laboratory for analysis.
applied:
Recording frequency Daily
QA/QC procedures to COD should be sampled frequently, and cross checked by tests carried out by
be applied: accredited laboratory each week.
Any comment: Indicator of baseline wastewater methane emissions. Organic material
concentration can be sampled on site, but off-site analysis by an accredited lab is
recommended.
page 41
QA/QC procedures to Biogas meters should be subject to a regular maintenance and testing regime to
be applied: ensure accuracy. Where erroneous meter readings are encountered, specialist
contractors will be employed to recalibrate meters.
Any comment: Volume in Nm3, normalised to take into account pressure and temperature.
Data / Parameter: -
Data unit: dm3/year
Description: Fossil fuel volume equivalent to generate the same amount of heat generated
from the biogas collected in the anaerobic treatment facility
Source of data to be Calculation
used:
Value of data applied 4,128,727
for the purpose of
calculating expected
emission reductions in
section B.6
Description of This is calculated from Vr_heating * PCH4 * CVCH4 / CVfueloil
measurement methods
and procedures to be
applied:
Recording frequency Continuously
QA/QC procedures to
be applied:
PROJECT DESIGN DOCUMENT FORM (CDM PDD) - Version 03.1.
page 42
Any comment: The biogas collected from the new anaerobic wastewater treatment facility will
partially replace fuel oil in the existing boilers through the installation of dual
fuel burner. Baseline emission from combustion of displaced fuel oil can be
calculated directly by multiplying the amount of heat generated from the biogas
(TJ) by the emission factor of fossil fuel (t CO2/TJ).
page 43
page 44
page 45
page 46
QA/QC procedures to Flow meters are to be periodically calibrated according to the manufacturer’s
be applied: recommendation.
Any comment:
Data / Parameter: -
Data unit: -
Description: Indication that the flare operates within the range of operating conditions
according to the manufacturer’s specifications during the hour h.
Source of data to be Measurements by project participants
used:
Value of data applied
for the purpose of
calculating expected
emission reductions in
section B.6
Description of Flame is detected using a UV sensor.
measurement methods
and procedures to be
applied:
Recording frequency Every 20 minutes when flare operates.
QA/QC procedures to Flare will operate automatically including flame ignition when it detects gas
be applied: pressure more than 5 millibar. However, if the flame is not detected, the flare gas
valve will be closed automatically. This parameter is recorded as a double check
that the automatic sensing operates properly.
Any comment: Only applicable in case of use of a default value
page 47
page 48
Data / Parameter: -
Data unit: t COD/year
Description: Organic material removed from wastewater facility
Source of data to be Calculation
used:
Value of data applied 19,278
for the purpose of
calculating expected
emission reductions in
section B.6
Description of The amount of organic material removed from wastewater facility is calculated
measurement methods from the difference between the amount of organic material entering the system
and procedures to be boundary (Vinput_total * CODinput_total) and the organic material leaving the system
applied: boundary (Vlagoon_input * CODlagoon_input).
Recording frequency Annually
QA/QC procedures to
be applied:
Any comment: Removals of COD after monitoring and prior to entry to the lagoon system
should be recorded to ensure CH4 emissions are not overestimated. This maybe
material screened out after the wastewater concentration is recorded.
page 49
Description of
measurement methods
and procedures to be
applied:
Recording frequency Annually
QA/QC procedures to The measurement should be carried out to international standards.
be applied:
Any comment: Volume of biogas is standardised at 0°C and 1atm.
The monitored data of such parameters as wastewater flows, biogas flows, methane contents, will be
continuously and automatically stored on to the server by an automatic data logger. However, there are
some other parameters that are logged into electronic format by hand by CWTE staff, such as COD,
amount of oxidising agents, etc. In this case, there might be scope for input errors. Analysis of trend data
will provide an opportunity to identify anomalous results, and the taking of appropriate corrective action
to maintain data quality. All the documentation of input data, such as laboratory analysis of COD,
oxidising agents or biogas calorific values shall be kept for recheck. Coordination of basic training
procedures for operational staff is also essential so that they are able to fulfill the requirements the
proposed monitoring plan, taking into account the QA/QC issues highlighted above.
All the data should be backed up on to other media (CD-ROM, floppy disk) at regular intervals to
prevent data losses. CWTE has also developed procedures for project performance review, procedure for
corrective actions to improve future monitoring and reporting before submitted for verification.
B.8 Date of completion of the application of the baseline study and monitoring methodology
and the name of the responsible person(s)/entity(ies)
>>
The application of the baseline study and monitoring methodology has been completed on 23/07/2007.
The name of the responsible person and contact address are shown below.
Wichet Phothiwisutwathee
ERM-Siam, Co Ltd
17th floor, Wave Place Building
Wireless Road, Lumpini, Pathumwan
Bangkok 10330
Thailand
page 50
Not applicable.
C.2.2.2. Length:
>>
10 years 0 month.
PROJECT DESIGN DOCUMENT FORM (CDM PDD) - Version 03.1.
page 51
The analysis of environmental impacts of the project activities was undertaken in comparison of the
impacts of the old anaerobic lagoon system. Three aspects of environmental impacts were identified as a
result of the wastewater treatment operation, which are:
• Odour – since the new wastewater treatment system operates in a closed system, undesirable
odour will be significantly reduced;
• Wastewater pollution – the new wastewater system can remove more than 90% of organic
matter in the wastewater so that environmental impacts of possible overflow during the rainy
season or of groundwater contamination will be significantly reduced. Since the ABR system is
constructed using HDPE lining, its impacts on groundwater contamination will be as well
significantly reduced;
• Safety – since biogas will be captured and stored, the issue of gas safety becomes a concern.
However, the risk of any explosion will be very unlikely because the biogas, once leaked from its
storage, will disperse quickly upward and will not build up near to the ground surface. Moreover,
the amount of gas stored will be minimal since it will constantly be sent to the starch plant. The
biogas will be flared when the plant is operating. Nonetheless, to avoid any risk of fire, no matter
how unlikely, ignition sources, including smoking in the proximity of the biogas plant must be
strictly prohibited.
Overall, there appear to be no significant negative impacts the new wastewater treatment operation
compared with the old system. Most environmental aspects are expected to improve after implementing
the ABR system. Although gas safety can have negative impacts, its impacts are not significant since
biogas will not be stored in large amount and the risks of explosion or fire are very unlikely.
D.2. If environmental impacts are considered significant by the project participants or the host
Party, please provide conclusions and all references to support documentation of an environmental
impact assessment undertaken in accordance with the procedures as required by the host Party:
>>
The environmental impacts are considered not significant.
PROJECT DESIGN DOCUMENT FORM (CDM PDD) - Version 03.1.
page 52
E.1. Brief description how comments by local stakeholders have been invited and compiled:
>>
The process by which comments by local stakeholders was received is through meetings with the
community leaders, an attitude survey and a public participation event.
Participants to the meetings were the heads of villages in the project’s sensitive area. The main activities
during the meeting include:
• Project introduction;
• Presentation about biogas generation technology;
• Questions and answers; and
• Attitude survey using questionnaire.
Attitude survey
In addition to the meetings, additional door-knocking attitude survey was also conducted. A brief
summary of wastewater treatment system and biogas was introduced to the respondents prior to asking
the questions and filling in the questionnaire forms.
The target areas for attitude survey were drawn from the villages within the sensitive area. The sensitive
area is defined as the area within 3 km from the project site, as this area was most likely to be affected by
the project’s operation. Figure 8 shows the villages that lie within 3 km of the project site, encircled by
the red line.
PROJECT DESIGN DOCUMENT FORM (CDM PDD) - Version 03.1.
page 53
Moo 1
Ban Nong Phon Moo 9
Moo 6
Ban Non Thong
Ban Rueng Na Kae
Moo 4
Ban Kham Mek
Moo 6
Ban Huai Si Thon Moo 3
Ban Khok Nam Kliang
Project Site
Moo 8
Ban Mo Din Daeng
Moo 7
Ban Phontong
Moo 9
Ban Ham Hae
Moo 2
Ban Phontong
Moo 1
Ban Ham Hae
The sampling size was determined based on a 95% confidence interval. A total sampling size of 307 was
taken, which accounted for approximately 20% of the total number of households, as provided in Table
3.
PROJECT DESIGN DOCUMENT FORM (CDM PDD) - Version 03.1.
page 54
Organisation Number of
participants
Kalasin Irrigation Project 2
Disaster Prevention and Mitigation Work, Kalasin Municipality Office 1
Kalasin Provincial Office of Electricity Authority 1
Kalasin Provincial Office 1
Kalasin Provincial Office of Waterworks Authority 1
Kalasin Provincial Industry Office 1
Phontong Sub-district Administrative Organisation 1
Phai Sub-district Administrative Organisation 3
Phontong community leaders 7
Phai community leaders 2
Phontong Health Centre 1
Nong Phon Health Centre (Phai Sub-district) 1
Schools 6
AMSCO 2
CWTE 3
Clean THAI 1
ERM 3
Total 37
PROJECT DESIGN DOCUMENT FORM (CDM PDD) - Version 03.1.
page 55
page 56
• Risk of the biogas leakage and explosion was the main rationale of negative responses (3%)
• Most respondents believed the project would benefit them and their families through reduction in
nuisance odour (54%), village and environmental development (38%) and benefits as an
alternative energy (10%)
The issues of concerns from the participants during the public participation event, and responses from
CWTE had been summarised and shown in the following table.
Issues Responses
Would the project be able to deliver CWTE confirmed that the odour would be significantly reduced after the
a reduction of nuisance odour? project has been in operation for a few months.
Would the farmers be able to use of The treated water could be used to water the plants since the water is rich
treated wastewater? in plant nutrient.*
Were the fish in the post-treatment The fish in the post-treatment ponds were kept as an indicator showing
ponds edible? the level of its contamination. It was not recommended that the fish in
the post-treatment ponds be taken as food.
How the sampling size was The attitude survey’s sampling size accounted for around 20% of the total
calculated and what was the number of households in the project’s adjacent area. The sampling size
associated level of confidence? had been calculated based on a 95% confidence interval.
How would CWTE get rid of the The plastic cover, which was made of HDPE, can be recycled after the
plastic cover after 10-year of its end of its useful life.
useful life?
How would CWTE make sure that CWTE confirmed that the operation and safety system were the best
the operation of the biogas plant is practice, which included:
safe? - Hour-to-hour use of the biogas produced, otherwise the gas will
be flared;
- If the blower does not work, the biogas in the covered system will
be automatically released;
- It is impossible that an explosion occurred in under the cover
since the biogas could never ignite without oxygen; and
- There will be 26 of project staff working 3 shifts, 24/7, and the
system is scheduled to be checked on an hourly basis.
* The treated wastewater can potentially be distributed to local farmers, but in practice, it is confirmed that no treated wastewater
is to be provided to farmers, or to be discharged outside the plant.
E.3. Report on how due account was taken of any comments received:
>>
As explained in the environmental impact assessment section above, the risk of explosion is unlikely
because when there is a gas leak, the leaked biogas will disperse quickly upward into the atmosphere as it
PROJECT DESIGN DOCUMENT FORM (CDM PDD) - Version 03.1.
page 57
is lighter than air. Since, methane will not build up above the ground surface, the resulting chance of a
gas explosion, therefore, does not appear possible.
Nonetheless, to reduce all the possibilities of fire, the following measures must be undertaken.
• Ignition sources, including smoking in the proximity of the biogas plant, are strictly prohibited. A
warning sign should be made and affixed at the biogas storage area. Such warning signs might
read, for example, ‘no-smoking, matches or open flames’, or ‘flammable gas, keep fire away’;
• All staff working at the biogas plant shall receive adequate training on fire safety;
• CWTE shall set up a routine check to ensure no leakage of biogas; and
• CWTE shall supply sufficient fire fighting equipment located within the plant area and maintain
them in good condition.
PROJECT DESIGN DOCUMENT FORM (CDM PDD) - Version 03.1.
page 58
Annex 1
page 59
page 60
page 61
Annex 2
No Annex-I country financial support for this project has been received.
PROJECT DESIGN DOCUMENT FORM (CDM PDD) - Version 03.1.
page 62
Annex 3
BASELINE INFORMATION
page 63
page 64
The calculation of Rlagoon is described below. As per the methodology, the organic removal ratio is
calculated by undertaking a series of chemical analyses on the lagoon site. A series of Chemical Oxygen
Demand samples should be taken at the inlet point to the lagoon system, or wherever the wastewater
enters the system boundaries. In parallel, a series of COD samples should be taken at the point of exit
from the lagoon system or system boundaries.
page 65
• There are different grades of the products. in The higher quality of The product, more water is required for The washing
process.
• The point of sampling is outdoor and the sample could be diluted by rain.
Since the starch plant does not discharge any wastewater from the existing lagoons, the COD sample of
the final ponds will be used as if it is the sampling point of exit from the lagoon system.
To be most conservative, the Rlagoon of modified starch plant, 96.2%, is selected to represent as a
parameter Rlagoon of all wastewater streams.
page 66
Annex 4
MONITORING INFORMATION