Your location: Home

ACTIVITIES IMPLEMENTED JOINTLY (AIJ)
 
Uniform Reporting Format:

Activities Implemented Jointly Under the Pilot Phase

The uniform reporting format contained below is to be used in reporting on activities implemented jointly under the pilot phase. It is noted that the reporting should be consistent with decision 5/CP.1 and 8/CP.2 (reproduced in annexes I and II to this reporting format). The SBSTA notes that the uniform reporting format could possibly require revision in the light of experience gained and methodological work conducted under the pilot phase.

List of Projects

A. Description of project

A 1) Title of project: Cogeneration station SKODA plant Mlada Boleslav

A 2) Participants/actors:

Please fill in one table for each participant/actor. For individuals fill in as from item Function within activity".

Item Please fill in if applicable

Name of organization (a) :

Bayernwerk AG

Name of organization (English):

Department:

Acronym:

Acronym (English):

Function within activity:

Investor

Street:

Nymphenburger Strasse 39

Post code:

80335

City:

Munich

Country:

Germany

Telephone:

+49/89/1254-1

Fax:

+49/89/1254-3906

E-mail:

WWW-URL:

Contact person (for this activity):

-----------------------------------------------------------

Surname:

Eingartner

First name, middle name:

Job title:

Senior Advisor

Direct tel:

+49/89/1254-3387

Direct fax:

+49/89/1254-3081

Direct E-mail:

Organization includes: institutions, ministries, companies, non-governmental organizations, etc. involved in the activity, i.e. research institutes associated with the project, auditors, government agency closely following the activity.

Item Please fill in if applicable

Name of organization (a) :

RWE AG

Name of organization (English):

Department:

Acronym:

Acronym (English):

Function within activity:

Investor

Street:

Kruppstr. 5

Post code:

45128

City:

Essen

Country:

Germany

Telephone:

+49/201/12-0

Fax:

+49/89/12-24972

E-mail:

WWW-URL:

Contact person (for this activity):

-----------------------------------------------------------

Surname:

Dr. Rentz

First name, middle name:

Henning

Job title:

Head of Department Corporate Enviromental Affairs

Direct tel:

+49/201/12-15593

Direct fax:

+49/89/12-15595

Direct E-mail:

Item Please fill in if applicable

Name of organization (a) :

ŠKODA AUTO a.s.

Name of organization (English):

Department:

Acronym:

Acronym (English):

Function within activity:

Investor

Street:

Václava Klementa

Post code:

293 60

City:

Mladá Boleslav

Country:

Czech Republic

Telephone:

Fax:

E-mail:

WWW-URL:

Contact person (for this activity):

-----------------------------------------------------------

Surname:

Foøt

First name, middle name:

Zdenìk

Job title:

Direct tel:

+420/326/817092

Direct fax:

+420/326/817739

Direct E-mail:

Item Please fill in if applicable

Name of organization (a) :

Støedoèeská Energetická a.s. (STE)

Name of organization (English):

Department:

Acronym:

Acronym (English):

Function within activity:

Investor

Street:

Vinohradská 8

Post code:

120 21

City:

Praha 2

Country:

Czech Republic

Telephone:

Fax:

E-mail:

WWW-URL:

Contact person (for this activity):

-----------------------------------------------------------

Surname:

Poláèek

First name, middle name:

Pavel

Job title:

Direct tel:

+420/2/22032209

Direct fax:

+420/2/24221980

Direct E-mail:

Item Please fill in if applicable

Name of organization (a) :

Institut für Industriebetriebslehre und Industrielle Produktion (IIP)

Name of organization (English):

Institute for Industrial Production (IIP)

Department:

Acronym:

Acronym (English):

Function within activity:

Partner for Industrial Accompaniment

Street:

Hertzstr. 16

Post code:

76187

City:

Karlsruhe

Country:

Germany

Telephone:

+49/721/608-4460

Fax:

+49/721/758909

E-mail:

WWW-URL:

Contact person (for this activity):

-----------------------------------------------------------

Surname:

Dr. Fichtner

First name, middle name:

Wolf

Job title:

Researcher

Direct tel:

+49/721/608-4468

Direct fax:

+49/721/758909

Direct E-mail:

wolf.fichtner@wiwi.uni/karlsruhe. de

A 3) Activity:

Item Please fill in if applicable

General description:

Modernisation and renovation of a combined heat and power generation plant

Type of project:a)

Fuel switching / Energy efficiency

Location (exact, e.g. city, region, state):

Czech Republic, Mladá Boleslav

Activity starting date:

Beginning 1995/96

Expected activity ending date:

31.3.1999

Stage of activity:b)

completed: K8012.2.1999, K9017.9.1999

Lifetime of activity if different from ending date:c)

20 years

Technical data:d)

2 coal-fired fluidised bed boilers:

- 2 bleeder type condensing turbines:

total 70-90 MWel

- Surplus thermal output: total 0-150 MWth

3 oil/gas-fired water boilers: total 110 MWth

1 oil/gas-fired auxiliary boiler

Efficiency Factors:

Coal-fired boiler: 93%

Oil/gas-fired boiler: 94%

Turbines: 40%

Utilisation ratio if surplus heat is transferred to the grid: 69%

Since 1995, ŠKO-ENERGO has been operating a cogeneration plant on the premises of the ŠKODA automobile factory in Mladá Boleslav (ÈR) which is intended to essentially supply the works with electricity and heat, and the city of Mladá Boleslav with heat. Before ŠKO-ENERGO, a Czech-German consortium founded in 1995, started operations, ŠKODA's cogeneration plant was operated by ŠKODA alone as an industrial power plant.

With a view to the time-related and technical ageing of the plants and the emission limits applicable in the Czech Republic as of January 1, 1999, it was decided in 1995 to build a new cogeneration plant. Unlike the "old plant" which had a comparably low share of combined heat and power generation (CHP) and a low efficiency using two pure back-pressure turbine-generator sets, the new plant was designed as a controlled-extraction condensing-turbine power plant for full supply of the ŠKODA works the whole year round and was equipped with optimized plant process technology providing high efficiency during CHP operation. When considering the emissions reductions achieved by the new plant, the share of emissions connected to previous electricity supply from the public grid must also be taken into account.

Emissions (SO2 , NO2, particulate) are calculated for the base line, as well, while taking the legal emission concentrations valid since January 1, 1999, into consideration. However when it comes to calculating the CO2 emissions resulting from qual volumes of electricity and heat produced, calculations are based on the fuel volumes (efficiencies) required and fuel specific CO2 emissions.

  • In accordance with the design, the emissions in the subsequent comparison are based on the following electricity and heat demands as of 2000:
  • electricity 415 million kWh/a
  • heat 700 million kWh/a

The cogeneration plant (industrial power plant) which was operated until December 31, 1998, consisted of four lignite-fired intermediate pressure steam generators with a total installed steam capacity of approx. 220 t/h, two (2) back-pressure turbines with an electrical capacity of 2 x 6 MWel as well as two (2) natural-gas-fired hot water boiler systems with an effective heat capacity of 2 x 58 MW MWth.

The plant was basically used for supplying the ŠKODA automobile works and the city of Mlada Boleslav with heat. As a result of the plants and structure available, the amount of electricity to be produced in the combined heat and power process was only small. Therefore, the works' electricity demand was largely met by the public grid.

Taking the required heat volumes and the demand structure into consideration, it may be assumed that an additional natural-gas-fired hot water boiler would have had to be installed in order to cover the demand. Consequently, the heat demand of 700 GWh is based on lignite and fuel with approx. 50 % each. Self-generation is assumed to be only approx. 25 GWh(el) and to cover no more than the power station's internal load.

The following assumptions and values are the basis for calculating the base line:

  • Fuel lignite (50 %), natural gas (50 %)
  • Steam boiler efficiency 87 %
  • Hot water boiler efficiency 94 %
  • Electricity ratio 300 kWh/MWh; additional fuel demand F = 1.2

Lignite: 350 GWh heat* 1/0.87 = 402 GWh lignite

25 GWh(el)* 1.2 = 30 GWh lignite

= 432 GWh lignite

Natural gas 350 GWh heat* 1/0.04 = 372 GWh natural gas

Electricity procurement from the public grid

The following assumptions are made for evaluating the emissions linked to "electricity procurement from the public grid":

  • Condensing-turbine-based electricity generation
  • Total efficiency 30 % (incl. flue-gas desulfurization required as of 1/1/99)
  • Fuel lignite

Supposing electricity purchases of 415 GWh, an equivalent fuel volume of 415/0.3 = 1383 GWh lignite is required.

Summary

Fuel demand for 2.1.1 and 2.1.2 adds up to a total of:

  • Lignite = 432 GWh + 1383 GWh = 1815 GWh
  • Natural gas = 372 GWh

A 4) Cost (to the extent possible):

The new plant in operation since January 1, 1999, consists of two (2) hard-coal-fired high-pressure steam boiler systems with circulating fluidized-bed combustion and a steam capacity of 140 t/h each, one natural-gas-fired HP steam generator with a steam capacity of 60 t/h and two controlled-extraction condensing turbine-generator sets with a capacity of 44.3 MWel each in condensing operation or 35 MWel at a heat capacity of 70 MWth (during quasi-back-pressure operation).

Three (3) natural-gas-fired hot water boilers, with an effective heat capacity of 58 MWth each, are available for heat supply and for meeting peak load demand.

  • fuel: hard coal/natural gas
  • fluidized-bed boiler efficiency 91 % (annual average)
  • hot water boiler efficiency 94 %
  • electricity ratio 500 kWel/MWth
  • electricity loss ratio 0.13 kWh(el)/kWh(th)
  • power station internal load 10 %
  • specific heat consumption 2.85 kWh (fuel)/kWh(el) annual average

Based on the annual load curves and the demand structure for electricity and heat, the following fuel input is required for a heat output of 700 GWh and electricity generation of 460 GWh (415 GWh output and 45 GWh internal load):

Electricity 460 GWh* 2.85

= 1311 GWh fuel Coal = 93 %

= 1219 GWh coal Natural gas = 7 %

= 92 GWh natural gas

Heat 700 GWh

thereof CHP operation 550 GWh* 0.13*2.85

= 204 GWh coal 50 GWh*0.13*2.85

= 18.5 GWh natural gas

Heating operation 90 GWh*1/0.91

= 99 GWh coal 10 GWh*1/0.94

= 10.6 GWh natural gas

Total 1522 GWh coal = 121 GWh natural gas

Item 1996 1997 1998 1999

Cost of the project in million US$:

2,77 2,51 56,7 30,36

AIJ component in US$:

- * -* -* -*

US$ per avoided ton of CO equivalent

- * -* -* -*

The total investment costs will be approx. 92,34 million US$

*The project was originally undertaken as a purely commercial investment. Therfore projectpartners agreed there will be no crediting during the AIJ pilot phase. Therefore no figures are applicable.

A 5) Mutually agreed assessment procedures:

Describe the procedures, including name of organizations involved ) :

The scientific accompaniment of the project is carried out by an independent scientific research institut, the Institut for Industrial Production (IIP), Karlsruhe (Germany).

The IIP analyses the AIJ criteria of Dec.5/COP1 to be fulfilled by the project and suitability of the project type as JI project. Therefore, baseline determination, emissions reduction calculation. local impacts and the other AIJ criteria are analysed in detail.

  • a) Please ensure that detailed contact information for all organizations mentioned is reported under section A.2 above.

B. Governmental acceptance, approval or endorsement

Bearing in mind that all activities implemented jointly under this pilot phase require prior acceptance, approval or endorsement by the Governments of the Parties participating in these activities, which shall be shown as follows:

  • (a) In the case of joint reporting, the report is submitted by the designated national authority of one participating Party with the concurrence of all other participating Parties as evidenced by attached letters issued by the relevant national authorities;

    (b) In the case of separate reporting, the reports are submitted separately by the designated national authority of each and every participating Party. Information will only be compiled once reports have been received from all participating Parties.

B 1) For the activity:

  • * First report and joint reporting: please add copies of letters of endorsement by each designated national authority of Parties involved in the activity.

    * Subsequent reports:

    • Activity was: 9 suspended

      9 terminated earlier

      Describe:

B 2) This report is a joint report:

  • 9 Yes, forward copy of agreement/endorsement by the designated national authorities involved

    9 No

B 3) General short comment by the government(s) if applicable:

C. Compatibility with and supportiveness of national economic development and socioeconomic and environment priorities and strategies

Describe (to the extent possible) how the activity is compatible with and supportive of national economic development and socio economic and environment priorities and strategies

The new czech laws (valid 1.1.1999) are fullfilled. Sustainable labour for 90local workers. Cheap, clean and reliable energy supply for the SKODA plant and for the households.

D. Benefits derived from the activities implemented jointly project

  • Whenever possible, quantitative information should be provided. Failing that, a qualitative description should be given. If quantitative information becomes available, it could be submitted using the update(s). (If the amount of quantative information is too large, the source could be indicated.)
Item Please fill in

Describe environmental benefits in detail:

(1)

  • (1) The legal limit values applicable in the Czech Republic are taken into account when calculating the individual pollutant emissions "for the base line, as well" (*).

Particulates

  • (mg/m³) Sulfur dioxide

    (mg/m³) Nitrogen dioxide

    (mg/m³) C-monoxide

    (mg/m³)

Particulates (t/a) SO2 NO2 CO

Solid fuels

legal limit values

min d.r.* = 85 %

100 500 (max) 650 250

Solid fuelsv voluntary limit values

min d.r.* = 85 %

50 400 (max) 200 250

Gaseous fuel

legal limit values

10 35 200 100

Gaseous fuel

voluntary limit values

10 35 100 100
  • (*) min d.r. = required minimum desulphurization rate > 85 %
  • = 100 % - (100 % * SO2 out/SO2 in) > 85 %
Item Please fill in

Do quantitative data exist for evaluation of

environmental benefits?

Yes (2)

(2) Comparison of emissions

Old plant (the new legal limits valid, 1.1.1999, are taken into account)

The fuel used for the „old cogeneration plant" as well for the baseline"external condesing power plants" was" Bohemian lignite".

The fluegas flows (waste gas flows) arising during combustion are needed to determine pollutant emissions (annual loads), with the exception of CO2 emissions, since the limit values are concentration limits(e.g. mg SO2/m3 flue gas).

In accordance with the legal regulations in the Czech Republic, the limit values have to be ralated to „dry flue gas", i.e. after escape of the water vapor - the evaporated moisture of the fuel (water content): when using lignite, to a residual oxygen content in the flue gas of 6 %.

Thus, the annual pollutant load is calculated from the specific fluegas flow rate (m3/kWh fuel, standard condition, dry , 6% O2) multiplied by the annual amout of fuel used multiplied by the respective emission limit value. The latest limit values are used both for ¨baseline" and „new line" to také account of „worstcase scenarios".

As agreed with the authorities, the emission limit values valid as of January 1, 1999, are also used for „baseline" calculations.

Calculation

Conservatively, further calculations have been based on hightquality Bohemian lignite.

According to fuel literature:

C = 52% by weight : H2 = 42% by weight : O2 + N2 = 13% by weight: H2O = 24% by

weight: ash = 6% by weight: californic value = 20,1 MJ/kg

With complete combustion usig the reference formula for lignite with up to 7,5% ash

Vo n = (0,898 0,239 Hu + 1634)/990(mm3/kg) = 6,0 m3/kg

and after deduction of VH20 = 0,77 m3/kg

the "theoretical dry flue gas quality (standard condition) is Vo ,n = 5,23 m3/kg

The theoretical CO2 content is 18,35 % by weight.

Based on a residual content of 6 % O2 in the flue gas, this results in:

O2 = 21 ( C O2max - C O2real)/CO2max, with 6% O2: CO2real= 13,1%

This results in an air/fluegas ratio:

Lambda = CO2max /CO2real = 18,35/13,1 = 1,4

V = Lambda *Vo ,n = 1,4* 5,23m3/kg fuel

corresponding to:

7,32 * 3600/20100 (m3/kg/h*Ws/J) = 1.31 m3/KWh = 1.31 * 105 m3/GWh fuel

multiplied by the anual amount of fuel of 1815 GWh:

1815 GWh/a * 1.31 *106 m3/GWh = 2377.65 * 106 m3/a = 2.378.000.000 m3/a

This value must then be multiplied with the respective emission limit values.

The fluegas quantities of hard coal and natural gas are calculated accordingly.

The respective annual CO2 loads are calculated by multiplying the specific CO2 emissions of the respective fuels by the annual amounts of fuel computed for baseline and new line.

(Note: dimensions attachments k = 103, M = 106, G = 105 to be observed)

Technology:

For compliance with the emission limit values valid as of January 1,1999,the technologies used to retrofit the lignite-fired power plants in the Czech Republic to meet the limit values valid of as January1,1999, can basically also be used for the old plants of SKO-ENERGO.

Examples:

In line with the emission limit values valid as of January1,1999, the following technologies and plant arrangements have been available.

Basically, it can be assumed that due to low thermal Nox formation an large volume furnaces no additional plants for Nox removal are required for the combustion of lignite. Possibly, so-called primary measures (air temperature reduction, etc.) would have been sufficient although efficiencies would have deteriorated.

  1. Dust filter plant (electrostatic precipitator) – desul

a1) Desulphurization system as a SO2 wet scrubbing system

The resulting byproducts are ash (fly ash), which can either be landfilled or used in the building materials industry, and highgrade gypsum which can also be used in the building materials industry. The disadvantage is waste water with a high chloride content which has to be evaporated or discharged via a body of running water.

a2) Desulphurization system as a quasi-dry spray absorption system

Here, too, the main quantity of fly ash comes from the electrostatic precipitator. The byproduct from desulphurization is a mixture of calcium sulfite (CaSO3) and calcium sulphate (CaSO4) as well as admixtures of caCl and free lime.

This product is virtually unusable so that the cost of disposal is comparably high. Compared to the wetscrubbing process, the advantage is that there is no waste water and capital expenditure is lower. Due to dry dust formation, it may be necessary to install a (small) fabric filter downstream of the desulphurization systém in order to meet dust limit values.

  1. Desulphurization system (as a quasidry spray absorption plant) - dust filter plant (only as fabric filter plant)

As there is no further fly ash separation upstream of desulhurization, a mixture of fly ash, calcium sulfite and calcium sulphate will arise from the desulphurization process. This mixture can only be separated by means of fabric filter plants as the acid content is high and temperatures are low. This gives rise to large amount of a byproduct which can only be used to a limited extent and the disposal of which in landfills, pits and the like must be paid for. What is an advantage is the relatively low capital expenditure required for the overall plant and the nonoccurrence of waste water.

Note on dust filter plants/solids separators. For the separation of fly ash arising from combustion, the old plant would have had to be retrofitted with highgrade electrostatic precipitators with at least four zones in order to be able to comply whit the dust limit values valid as of January 1, 1999. Due to conceptional and technical deficiencies, it would have been impossible to reconstruct or retrofit the existing dust collection plants (multicyclones and twozone electrostatic precipitators) to meet the required collection efficiency. The direct utilization of fabric filter plants downstream of the boiler is impossible due to the high fluegas temperatures of the old plant (danger of fire).

New cogeneration plant with special combustion technology (cirkulating fluidizedbed combustion)

The following premises were decisive for the conceptual design and technology of the new cogeneration plant, particularly with regard to environmental protection:

Appreciable fuel savings and thus maximum environmental efficiency and conservation of resources by combined heat and power generation (cogeneration) instead of the hitherto largely separate generation of heat and power (in separate plants). According to the design, there is a fuel savings potential of some 20%.

  • Innovative combustion technology (integrade pollutant limitation, no additional (tailend) plants and systems.
  • Simple, lowcost and directly usable feedstock (auxiliary agent) for desulphurization (CaCO3)
  • Byproduct which is largely reusable in the building materials industry (mixture of fly ash + CaSO4)
  • Even with hard coal, no additional processes nor auxiliary agents (feedstock) are required for NOX reduction thanks to lower temperatures in the furnace
  • Switching from hard coal to lignite
  • hard coals of different orif´gin and quality can be used
  • th use of hard coal instead of lignite considerebly reduces resulting ashes which have to be disposed of
  • the use of hard coal instead of lidnite considerably reduces the volume of rail and road transport

Lignite 1815 GWh* 1.31 million m³ flue gas/GWh = 2,378,000,000 m³ flue gas

Natural gas 372 GWh* 1.01 million m³ flue gas/GWh = 376,000,000 m³ flue gas

Particulates (t/a) SO2 (t/a) NO2 (t/a) CO (t/a)
238 1189 1546 595
4 13 75 38
S approx. 240 S approx. 1200 S approx. 1620 S approx. 630

New plant

Hard coal (HC) 1522 GWh* 1.31 million m³ flue gas = 1,994,000,000 m³ flue gas

Natural gas (NG) 121 GWh* 1.01 million m³ flue gas = 122,000,000 m³ flue gas

Particulates (t/a) SO2 (t/a) NO2 (t/a) CO (t/a)
100 798 399 499
1 4 12 12
S approx. 100 S approx. 800 S approx. 410 S approx. 510

Comparison

Particulates (t/a) SO2 (t/a) NO2 (t/a) CO (t/a)
S approx. 240 S approx. 1200 S approx. 1620 S approx. 630
S approx. 100 S approx. 800 S approx. 410 S approx. 510
approx. 140 approx. 400 approx. 1210 approx. 120

Considering the planned electricity and heat volumes for the works and the city of Mladá Boleslav (electricity: 415 GWh; heat: 700 GWh) the following emissions reductions are to be found in comparison to the baseline: "limit values applicable as of 1/1/99":

Particulates 140 t/a

Sulfur dioxide (SO2) 400 t/a

Nitrogen oxides (as NO2) 1 210 t/a

Carbon monoxide (CO) 120 t/a

Item Please fill in

Describe social/cultural benefits in detail:

see Point C.

Do quantitative data exist for evaluation of social benefits?

No

Describe economic benefits in detail:

internal datas not to be puplished

Do quantitative data exist for evaluation of

economic benefits?

internal datas not to be puplished

  • E. Calculation of the contribution of activities implemented jointly projects that bringabout real, measurable and long-term environmental benefits related to the mitigation of climate change that would not have occurred in the absence of such activities

The legal limit values applicable in the Czech Republic are taken into account when calculating the individual pollutant emissions "for the base line, as well" (*).

Two variants are calculated for the "new plant":

a) Legal limit values valid since 1/1/99

b) Limit values based on the statements made in the licensing procedure, i.e. "voluntary limit values" which are even lower than the legally required limit values.

(*) The determination of applicable limit values for the new plant is based on plants with a furnace thermal rating > 300 MW, according to the German definition of plants. The same applies to the plants belonging to the public grid since this category occurs in most cases, and with respect to the existing larger power plant units and when individual combustion plants are considered.

Varying reference oxygen contents which may occur due to different combustion systems are not taken into account, either.

Specific CO2 emissions:

Lignite = 0.40 kgCO2/kWh (fuel) = 400 t CO2/GWh lignite

Hard coal = 0.33 kgCO2/kWh (fuel) = 330 t CO2/GWh hard coal

Natural gas = 0.19 kgCO2/kWh (fuel) = 190 T CO2/GWh natural gas

Energy-related flue-gas volume (dry):

Lignite (21.5 MJ/kg) = 1.31 million m³/GWh (6 % O2)

Hard coal (30.0 MJ/kg) = 1.31 million m³/GWh (6 % O2)

Natural gas (43.9 MJ/kg) = 1.01 million m³/GWh (3 % O2)

Comparison of emissions

Old plant (the new legal limits valid, 1.1.1999, are taken into account)

Lignite 1815 GWh* 1.31 million m³ flue gas/GWh = 2,378,000,000 m³ flue gas

Natural gas 372 GWh* 1.01 million m³ flue gas/GWh = 376,000,000 m³ flue gas

CO2 (t/a)
726 000 (L)
70 680 (NG)
S approx. 797 000

New plant

Hard coal (HC) 1522 GWh* 1.31 million m³ flue gas = 1,994,000,000 m³ flue gas

Natural gas (NG) 121 GWh* 1.01 million m³ flue gas = 122,000,000 m³ flue gas

CO2 (t/a)
502 260 (HC)
23 000 (NG)
S approx. 525 000

Comparison

CO2 (t/a)
S 797 000
S 525 000
Emissions reductions
approx. 272 000

Considering the planned electricity and heat volumes for the works and the city of Mlada Boleslav (electricity: 415 GWh; heat: 700 GWh) the following emissions reductions are to be found in comparison to the baseline: "limit values applicable as of 1/1/99":

Carbon dioxide (CO2) 272 000 t/a

Fill in the following tables as applicable:

Summary table: Projected emission reductions:

GHG Year 1999 ... Year 2018

A) Project baseline scenario

CO2 797.000 797.000
CH4
N2O
other

B) Project activity scenario a)

CO2 525.000 525.000
CH4
N2O
other

C) Effect ( B-A )

CO2 272.000 272.000
CH4
N2O
other

D) Cumulative effect

CO2 5.440.000
CH4
N2O
other
  1. Includes indirect GHG leakage.

Summary table: Actual emission reductions:

GHG Year 1 Year 2 ... Year X

A) Project baseline scenario

CO2
CH4
N2O
other

B) Project activity data a)

CO2
CH4
N2O
other

C) Effect ( B-A )

CO2
CH4
N2O
other

D) Cumulative effect

CO2
CH4
N2O
other
  1. Includes indirect GHG leakage.
  • F. Bearing in mind that the financing of activities implemented jointly shall be additional to financial obligations of Parties included in Annex II to the Convention within the framework of the financial mechanism as well as to current official development assistance flows, please indicate

Source of project funding

including pre-feasibility phase

(For each source one line)

Amount

Bayernwerk AG

9.750.000 USD

RWE Energie AG

9.750.000 USD

Škoda automobilová a.s.

2.300.000 USD

Støedoèeská Energetická a.s.

1.100.000 USD
  • Commerzbank AG / Hypovereinsbank (A-Loun) 45.000.000 USD

    European Investment Bank (B-Loun) 47.000.000 USD

    100% letter of comfort by Bayernwerk/RWE Energie AG

    G. Contribution to capacity building, transfer of environmentally sound technologies and know-how to other Parties, particularly developing country Parties, to enable them to implement the provisions of the Convention. In this process, the developed country Parties shall support the development and enhancement of endogenous capacities and technologies of developing country Parties

  • transfer of knowhow to the Czech Republic regarding planning, construction and operation of such plants (personnel training, increase in special marketable knowledge of plant construction and export)
  • Use of domestic fuels to secure national independence as well as jobs
  • H. Additional comments, if any, including any practical experience gained or technical difficulties, effects, impacts or other obstacles encountered

    Fill in as appropriate:

H 1) Any practical experience gained:

H 2) Technical difficulties:

H 3) negative impacts and/or effects encountered:

  • Whenever possible, quantitative information should be provided. Failing that, a qualitative description should be given. If quantitative information becomes available, it could be submitted using the update(s). (If the amount of quantitative information is too large, the source could be indicated.)
Item Please fill in

Describe environmental negative impacts/effects in detail:

Do quantitative data exist for evaluation of environmental negative impacts/effects?

Yes/no

Describe social/cultural negative impacts/effects in detail:

Do quantitative data exist for evaluation of economic

negative impacts/effects?

Yes/no

Describe economic negative impacts/effects in detail:

Do quantitative data exist for evaluation of social negative impacts/effects?

Yes/no

H 4) Other obstacles encountered:

H 5) Other: