clea developme t mecha ism project desig docume t …

PROJECT DESIGN DOCUMENT FORM (CDM

CDM – Executive Board

PROJECT DESIG DOCUME T FORM (CDM

Version 03

A. General description of the small scale

B. Application of a

C. Duration of the

D. Environmental impacts

E. Stakeholders’

Annex 1: Contact information on participants in the proposed small scale

Annex 2: Information regarding public funding

Annex 3: Baseline information

Annex 4: Monitoring Information

PROJECT DESIGN DOCUMENT FORM (CDM-SSC-PDD) - Version 03

1

CLEA DEVELOPME T MECHA ISM

PROJECT DESIG DOCUME T FORM (CDM-SSC

Version 03 - in effect as of: 22 December 2006

CO TE TS

General description of the small scale project activity

Application of a baseline and monitoring methodology

Duration of the project activity / crediting period

Environmental impacts

Stakeholders’ comments

Annexes

Annex 1: Contact information on participants in the proposed small scale

Annex 2: Information regarding public funding

information

Annex 4: Monitoring Information

Version 03

SSC-PDD)

Annex 1: Contact information on participants in the proposed small scale project activity



Version Number

Date

01 21 January

2003

02 8 July 2005

03 22 December

2006


2

Revision history of this document

Description and reason of revision

Initial adoption

• The Board agreed to revise the CDM SSC PDD to reflect

guidance and clarifications provided by the Board since

version 01 of this document.

• As a consequence, the guidelines for completing CDM SSC

PDD have been revised accordingly to version 2. The latest

version can be found at

<http://cdm.unfccc.int/Reference/Documents

• The Board agreed to revise the CDM project design

document for small-scale activities (CDM

into account CDM-PDD and CDM-NM.

Version 03

The Board agreed to revise the CDM SSC PDD to reflect

guidance and clarifications provided by the Board since

consequence, the guidelines for completing CDM SSC

PDD have been revised accordingly to version 2. The latest

http://cdm.unfccc.int/Reference/Documents>.

The Board agreed to revise the CDM project design

scale activities (CDM-SSC-PDD), taking

NM.



SECTIO A. General description of

A.1 Title of the small-scale

Title: Aberdares Improved Cook Stoves

Version: V.09

Completion date: 24/04/2012

A.2. Description of the

Background to and purpose of project

In Kenya 70% of the national energy supply is

demand coming from the domestic sector.

amongst other shortfalls is only able to produce 10% thermal efficiency.

growth rate of 2.7%3 it is not surprising to find that between 1990 and 2005 Kenya lost forest cov

a rate of 0.3-0.5%/year, with protected forest making up only 1.6% of land coverage

situation is not sustainable and Kenya’s ability to meet future

scenario is questionable, as highlighted by the Kenyan Ministry of Energy in a 2002 report

of significant quantities of non

contributing to anthropogenic climate change.

Added to environmental pressures is the poor quality of life experienced by the rural

traditional wood stoves which

efficiencies. A WHO report concluded

hazard for many of the world’s poorest,

range of health problems such as acute respiratory infections (ARI) in children, chronic obstructive lung

diseases (such as chronic bronchitis and asthma), lung cancer and pregnancy

estimated that 4-5% of global deaths occur as a result of exposure to smoke particulates.

The ‘Aberdares Improved Cook Stove project’ will address these issues by

wood-burning improved cook

revenues expected Recipients

use of the stove by local community groups engaging with the project developers.

1 “Kenya: Integrated assessment of the Energy Policy”, UNEP, 2006

http://www.unep.ch/etb/areas/pdf/Kenya%20ReportFINAL.pdf

2 UNFCCC Methodology AMS-II

http://cdm.unfccc.int/UserManagement/FileStorage/AUBHMWJVKFSY9D1380NOI5ET26ZQLG

3 “State of the world’s forests 2009”, FAO, 2009 :

4 “State of the world’s forests 2009”, FAO, 2009, “

2006

5 “Study on Kenya’s energy demand, supply and policy strategy for households, small scale industries and service

establishments”, Republic of Kenya Ministry of Energy, 2002.

6 “The health effects of indoor air pollution exposure in developing countries”, WHO, 2002 :

http://whqlibdoc.who.int/hq/2002/WHO_SDE_OEH_02.05.pdf


3

General description of small-scale project activity

scale project activity:

Title: Aberdares Improved Cook Stoves

Description of the small-scale project activity:

Background to and purpose of project

In Kenya 70% of the national energy supply is met through use of biomass fuels, with

demand coming from the domestic sector.1 Traditional cooking involves the use of a 3

only able to produce 10% thermal efficiency.2 Combined with a population

it is not surprising to find that between 1990 and 2005 Kenya lost forest cov

with protected forest making up only 1.6% of land coverage

situation is not sustainable and Kenya’s ability to meet future energy needs under a business

as highlighted by the Kenyan Ministry of Energy in a 2002 report

of significant quantities of non-renewable biomass also gives rise to large quantities of greenhouse gasses,

contributing to anthropogenic climate change.

Added to environmental pressures is the poor quality of life experienced by the rural

which generate a large amount of smoke within the home due to poor combustion

A WHO report concluded ‘Indoor air pollution is a major environmental and public health

hazard for many of the world’s poorest, most vulnerable people.’ Biomass smoke has been linked to a


diseases (such as chronic bronchitis and asthma), lung cancer and pregnancy

5% of global deaths occur as a result of exposure to smoke particulates.

Improved Cook Stove project’ will address these issues by

improved cook stoves in households within the project area.

Recipients will receive stoves in exchange for co2e rights

use of the stove by local community groups engaging with the project developers.

“Kenya: Integrated assessment of the Energy Policy”, UNEP, 2006 :


II-G


“State of the world’s forests 2009”, FAO, 2009 : http://www.fao.org/docrep/011/i0350e/i0350e00.HTM

“State of the world’s forests 2009”, FAO, 2009, “Kenya: Integrated assessment of the

mand, supply and policy strategy for households, small scale industries and service

establishments”, Republic of Kenya Ministry of Energy, 2002.

“The health effects of indoor air pollution exposure in developing countries”, WHO, 2002 :

http://whqlibdoc.who.int/hq/2002/WHO_SDE_OEH_02.05.pdf

Version 03

biomass fuels, with 90% of this

Traditional cooking involves the use of a 3-stone fire, which

Combined with a population

it is not surprising to find that between 1990 and 2005 Kenya lost forest coverage at

with protected forest making up only 1.6% of land coverage by 2005.4 This

ergy needs under a business-as-usual

as highlighted by the Kenyan Ministry of Energy in a 2002 report.5 The burning

renewable biomass also gives rise to large quantities of greenhouse gasses,

Added to environmental pressures is the poor quality of life experienced by the rural poor, using

generate a large amount of smoke within the home due to poor combustion

Indoor air pollution is a major environmental and public health

Biomass smoke has been linked to a


diseases (such as chronic bronchitis and asthma), lung cancer and pregnancy-related outcomes. It is

5% of global deaths occur as a result of exposure to smoke particulates.6

Improved Cook Stove project’ will address these issues by distribution of domestic

households within the project area. Thanks to the carbon

in exchange for co2e rights and be directed in correct

use of the stove by local community groups engaging with the project developers. Pilot studies have


http://www.fao.org/docrep/011/i0350e/i0350e00.HTM

Kenya: Integrated assessment of the Energy Policy”, UNEP,

mand, supply and policy strategy for households, small scale industries and service

“The health effects of indoor air pollution exposure in developing countries”, WHO, 2002 :



shown the stoves to reduce fuel consumption

environment for recipients and

annually as a result of the project.

non-renewable biomass will be correspondingly reduced.

As the stoves will be distributed without monetary charge

market saturation in an area, allowing as many households as possible to benefit from the improved stove.

The way in which a cook uses the stove is also a key influencing factor in the fuel savings made

expected therefore that by making such improved stoves commonplace within a community, and hence

building strong local understanding of the technology, higher levels of

Technology to be employed

Pilot studies have shown the large majority of households within the project area to be cooking for

domestic purposes only, on three

cluster. For these reasons the project

will be distributed for domestic use only

under development and may be included in the project if available at the appropriate time. If this should

occur the appropriate clustering would be organised.

The improved stoves (known as the

inner ceramic liner surrounded by

horizontal (combined) fuel and air intake, terminating in a firebox with a vertical outlet on which the

cooking pot rests. Relative to the three stone fire, this type of stove a

temperatures to be reached and improved fuel/air mixing, he

This reduces the amount of smoke produced.

temperature difference between the low inlet and the outlet,

top directly onto the cooking pot in order to achieve high levels of thermal transfer. Despite the

combustion gasses remaining in the house, the improved combustion efficiencies mean that smoke levels

are dramatically reduced.

7 Refer to file ‘PDD supplementary calculations v.02’ for details.

8 Page 10 “Solid fuel household cook stoves: characterisation of performance and e

bioenergy 33 (2009) 294-305. http://www.pciaonline.org/files/Stoves_Paper_Final_Color_2.26.09.pdf


4

shown the stoves to reduce fuel consumption significantly7. This will result in

and reduced pressure on local forests, with a reduction of wood being burnt

annually as a result of the project. By reducing fuel consumption, CO2 emissions from combustion of

renewable biomass will be correspondingly reduced.

distributed without monetary charge, the project can expect to achieve high levels of


he way in which a cook uses the stove is also a key influencing factor in the fuel savings made

that by making such improved stoves commonplace within a community, and hence

building strong local understanding of the technology, higher levels of fuel savings

shown the large majority of households within the project area to be cooking for

domestic purposes only, on three-stone fires using wood fuel. There is one main representative household

he project will initially employ a single model of

stributed for domestic use only. More advanced and efficient models of stove are currently


appropriate clustering would be organised.

(known as the Carbon Zero Kenya or CZK stove) are a

inner ceramic liner surrounded by clay bricks and mortar, using a ‘rocket’ style design

and air intake, terminating in a firebox with a vertical outlet on which the

Relative to the three stone fire, this type of stove a

and improved fuel/air mixing, hence higher levels of combustion

This reduces the amount of smoke produced. There is no chimney as such,

temperature difference between the low inlet and the outlet, and the hot combustion gasses



Refer to file ‘PDD supplementary calculations v.02’ for details.

Page 10 “Solid fuel household cook stoves: characterisation of performance and emissions”, Biomass and

http://www.pciaonline.org/files/Stoves_Paper_Final_Color_2.26.09.pdf

Version 03

This will result in an improved living

reduction of wood being burnt

emissions from combustion of

, the project can expect to achieve high levels of


he way in which a cook uses the stove is also a key influencing factor in the fuel savings made.8 It is

that by making such improved stoves commonplace within a community, and hence

fuel savings will be achieved.

shown the large majority of households within the project area to be cooking for

stone fires using wood fuel. There is one main representative household

model of wood-burning stove, which

More advanced and efficient models of stove are currently


are a fixed construction of an

and mortar, using a ‘rocket’ style design. This consists of a

and air intake, terminating in a firebox with a vertical outlet on which the

Relative to the three stone fire, this type of stove allows higher combustion

levels of combustion are achieved.

There is no chimney as such, draft is created by the

the hot combustion gasses pass out of the



missions”, Biomass and

http://www.pciaonline.org/files/Stoves_Paper_Final_Color_2.26.09.pdf



The stove consists of an inner firebox

possible; a grey cast iron plate that is specificall

viewing whilst operating the fire;

flow during combustion and keeping the wood on

bricks. It is a high performance, ergonomically designed cook

builder and the user in mind.

Research into the environmental impact of

gas emissions generated as a result of this would be insignificant in relation to

the lifespan of the stoves. Further detai

Brick Housing

Secondary Air Breather


5

Image 1. Diagrammatic view of stove

The stove consists of an inner firebox being a standardised fired-ceramic liner

plate that is specifically shaped for optimum efficiency;

perating the fire; a secondary air intake to assist with the fire starting, maximising air

flow during combustion and keeping the wood on a brick loading platform;

It is a high performance, ergonomically designed cook stove that was designed with

builder and the user in mind.

Research into the environmental impact of producing construction materials suggests that the greenhouse

gas emissions generated as a result of this would be insignificant in relation to

the lifespan of the stoves. Further details are discussed under leakage.

Brick Housing

Ceramic Liner

Secondary Air Breather

Version 03

1. Diagrammatic view of stove

ceramic liner, made locally where

y shaped for optimum efficiency; an open front ease of

a secondary air intake to assist with the fire starting, maximising air

and the outer skin of fired

stove that was designed with both the

suggests that the greenhouse

gas emissions generated as a result of this would be insignificant in relation to the reductions made over

Metal Pot Plate

Wood Loading Area



The pilot project and development work have been funded by co2balance UK

implementation of the project;

will implement this project with the assistance of local stove con

stove maintenance will be managed similarly.

1st) LSC was held: 27

th April

2nd

) LSC report is submitted to the Gold Standard Registry

commence under regular project cycle

3rd) Pilot construction undertaken

During the elapsed time between the local stakeholder consultation and the start of pilot stove

construction other scopes of the project were advanced as for example reinforcement of community

engagement, building the electronic database to track stoves individually, further internal training on

project implementation, etc. Country logistics allowed start construction of the pilot stoves a few months

later when the necessary resources were put in place to e

Construction of the rest of stoves (to meet the maximum allowable emissions reductions for a small scale

activity) is planned for early 2011

Date

July 2010

4th) Project construction/operation schedule

July 2010

Jan 2011

Feb 2011

Mar 2011

Apr 2011

May 2011

Jun 2011

Jul 2011

Aug 2011

Sept 2011

Oct 2011

Nov 2011

Dec 2011

As shown above, the first stage was the

pilot stoves commenced, hence the application for registration is under

active cycle. Stove construction

constructed. It is anticipated that the full amount of

time.


6

The Carbon Zero Kenya Cook-Stove (CZK)

pilot project and development work have been funded by co2balance UK

implementation of the project; VER sales will constitute the only revenue stream.

implement this project with the assistance of local stove contractors.

stove maintenance will be managed similarly.

April 2010

) LSC report is submitted to the Gold Standard Registry 25th

June 2010

commence under regular project cycle application)

Pilot construction undertaken



building the electronic database to track stoves individually, further internal training on


later when the necessary resources were put in place to ensure an adequate implementation.

tion of the rest of stoves (to meet the maximum allowable emissions reductions for a small scale

activity) is planned for early 2011.

Stoves constructed in period Total stoves operational

149

/operation schedule

Date Stoves constructed in period

July 2010 149

Jan 2011 0

Feb 2011 0

Mar 2011 2,000

Apr 2011 5,600

May 2011 2,400

Jun 2011 4,000

Jul 2011 4,000

Aug 2011 4,000

Sept 2011 4,000

Oct 2011 24,884

Nov 2011 0

Dec 2011 0

the first stage was the stakeholder consultation. Following this

hence the application for registration is under the regular cycle

Stove construction then will continue on a regular basis till all the project stoves are

anticipated that the full amount of stoves will be complete within the shortest possible

Version 03

pilot project and development work have been funded by co2balance UK Ltd, as will the

itute the only revenue stream. Carbon Zero Kenya Ltd

Long term monitoring and

June 2010 (construction can now



building the electronic database to track stoves individually, further internal training on


nsure an adequate implementation.

tion of the rest of stoves (to meet the maximum allowable emissions reductions for a small scale

Total stoves operational

149

Stoves constructed in period

24,884

ollowing this the construction of the

the regular cycle and not the retro-

is till all the project stoves are

within the shortest possible



Sustainability

As well as reducing greenhouse gas emissions this project will contribute to sustainability

development goals in a number of ways including:

• Reducing householders exposure to health damaging biomass smoke

• Reducing pressure on

• Improved livelihood of the poor

• Increased rate of technology transfer

A detailed discussion of the impact of the project on sustainable development can be found in the

accompanying Gold Standard Passport.

A.3. Project participants:

ame of Party involved (*)

((host) indicates a host Party)

Kenya (host)

United Kingdom

The project is voluntary and as such official endorsement from the Parties is not required, the Kenyan

DNA (NEMA) is however, aware of the project

local stakeholder’s meeting an

Confirmation of the non-EIA requirement is available at validation.

A.4. Technical description of the

A.4.1. Location of the

A.4.1.1.

Republic of Kenya

A.4.1.2.

The activities will take place within

A.4.1.3.

The project activities will take place within

Province: Central Province

District: Lari District

Divisions: Lari and Gatamaiyu (Total of 30,779 HHS)

Locations/Sub-location breakdown as below:


7

As well as reducing greenhouse gas emissions this project will contribute to sustainability

in a number of ways including:

Reducing householders exposure to health damaging biomass smoke

Reducing pressure on local woodland and hence biodiversity

Improved livelihood of the poor

Increased rate of technology transfer


accompanying Gold Standard Passport.

:

ame of Party involved (*)

((host) indicates a host Party)

Private entity project

participants

Kindly indicate if the Party

involved wishes to be

considered as a project

participant (Yes/ o)

N/A

co2balance UK Ltd


aware of the project as this is the host country. NEMA were invited to the

local stakeholder’s meeting and also engaged to confirm the EIA non-requirement status of the project.

EIA requirement is available at validation.

Technical description of the small-scale project activity:

A.4.1. Location of the small-scale project activity:

Host Party(ies):

Region/State/Province etc.:

activities will take place within the Central Province of Kenya.

City/Town/Community etc:

The project activities will take place within the Kenyan country as follows:

Gatamaiyu (Total of 30,779 HHS)

location breakdown as below:

Version 03

As well as reducing greenhouse gas emissions this project will contribute to sustainability and millennium


Kindly indicate if the Party

involved wishes to be

considered as a project

participant (Yes/ o)

No

No


. NEMA were invited to the

requirement status of the project.



Lari Division

Location

Sub location

Location

Sub location

Location

Sub location

Location

Sub location

Location

Sub location

Location

Sub location

Gatamaiyu Division

Location

Sub location

Location

Sub location

Location

Sub location

A.4.1.4.

unique identification of this

For the purposes of this project the boundaries

sub-locations as illustrated below.

36.669109°.


8

Kamae

Kamae

Kamukombini

Kinale

Kinale

Mukeu

Kijabe

Bathi

Magina

Mbauini

Kijabe

Gitithia

Gitithia

Nyambari

Lari

Lari Scheme

Githirioni

Kirenga

Kirenga

Gituamba

Kambaa

Escarpment

Gatamaiyu

Kagwe

Kamuchege

Nyanduma

Nyanduma

Gachoire

Kamburu

Kamburu

Kagaa

Matimbei

Details of physical location, including information allowing the

unique identification of this small-scale project activity :

project the boundaries have been defined as the political boundary

below. The central point (shown with a pin on the map is at

Version 03

Details of physical location, including information allowing the

litical boundary to include all

The central point (shown with a pin on the map is at -0.938073°,



The stoves will be individually tracked using GPS co

boundary. Furthermore, each stove is marked with a unique identification number

and kept on the electronic database

allow the individual tracking of each stove to avoid double


9

The stoves will be individually tracked using GPS co-ordinates to ensure they fall within the

Furthermore, each stove is marked with a unique identification number

and kept on the electronic database; this includes household occupants and GPS co

allow the individual tracking of each stove to avoid double counting and boundary issues.

Version 03

e they fall within the project

Furthermore, each stove is marked with a unique identification number that will be uploaded

; this includes household occupants and GPS co-ordinates. That will

counting and boundary issues.



A.4.2. Type and category(ies) and technology/measure of the

The project falls under the Energy Efficiency

toolkit.

The project technology of the generic ‘rocket stove’ type is well proven to be environmentally safe and

sound in relation to the baseline ‘three

distributed to a number of households within the project area and households trained in efficient use of

the stoves to ensure successful transfer of this technology type to the area in question.

A.4.3 Estimated amount

2010

2011

2012

2013

2014

2015

2016

2017

Total estimated reductions (tonnes

CO2e)

Total number of crediting years

Annual average of the estimated

reductions over the crediting

period

Year

A.4.4. Public funding of the

There is no public or ODA funding for this project activity, all revenue for the project will be derived

from the sales of VERs. Please see annex

A.4.5. Confirmation that the

large scale project activity:

In accordance with the guidelines recorded in EB54, Annex 13, paragraph 7, t

project activity is exempted from undergoing a de

Refer to Excel file ‘PDD Supplementary Data Aberdares v.07

SECTIO B. Application of a bas

9 MacCarty, N., Ogle, D., Still, D., Bond, T. & R

warming impact of five major types of

(2), pp. 5-14. Accessed from

studies


10

A.4.2. Type and category(ies) and technology/measure of the small

The project falls under the Energy Efficiency – Domestic type and category according to the GSV2.1

y of the generic ‘rocket stove’ type is well proven to be environmentally safe and

sound in relation to the baseline ‘three-stone’ technology. 9 The rocket stove technology will be



Estimated amount of emission reductions over the chosen crediting period

-3

23,578

73,833

73,833

73,833

73,833

73,833

73,833

Total estimated reductions (tonnes 466,576

Total number of crediting years 7

Annual average of the estimated

reductions over the crediting 66,653

ER - Estimation of annual emissions reductions in tonnes CO

A.4.4. Public funding of the small-scale project activity:

funding for this project activity, all revenue for the project will be derived

Please see annex 2 in the passport for a copy of ODA letter as proof of this.

A.4.5. Confirmation that the small-scale project activity is not a debundled

guidelines recorded in EB54, Annex 13, paragraph 7, t

exempted from undergoing a de-bundling check.

upplementary Data Aberdares v.07’ for calculations.

Application of a baseline and monitoring methodology

MacCarty, N., Ogle, D., Still, D., Bond, T. & Roden, C., (2008). ‘A laboratory comparison of the global

g impact of five major types of biomass cooking stoves’, Energy for Sustainable Development

14. Accessed from http://www.aprovecho.org/lab/pubs/researchlib/category/20/performance

Version 03

small-scale project activity:

according to the GSV2.1

y of the generic ‘rocket stove’ type is well proven to be environmentally safe and

The rocket stove technology will be



crediting period:

ER - Estimation of annual emissions reductions in tonnes CO2e

funding for this project activity, all revenue for the project will be derived

for a copy of ODA letter as proof of this.

debundled component of a

guidelines recorded in EB54, Annex 13, paragraph 7, the proposed small-scale

for calculations.

A laboratory comparison of the global

Energy for Sustainable Development 12

http://www.aprovecho.org/lab/pubs/researchlib/category/20/performance-



B.1. Title and reference of the

small-scale project activity:

The small-scale project activity falls within the ‘Energy Efficiency

the Gold Standard ‘Methodology for improved cook

up to date version of the methodology at the time of submission.

Additionality is demonstrated using the UNFCCC Tool for the demonstration and

additionality (Version 05.2) which shows that the project would not be possible without VER revenues.

B.2 Justification of the choice of the project category:

The applicability criteria of the chosen methodology will be addressed in turn to

methodology is applicable to the proposed project activity. Sections in italics represent the criteria

specified by the methodology, Section I, pg. 2.

1. The ‘methodology is applicable to programs or activities introducing improved cook

water treatment technology (e.g. water filters) and practices to households and institutions

result in improved kitchen regimes within a distinct geographical area.

The project activity is introducing improved cook

defined in section A.4. The activity will be r

higher thermal and combustion efficiency,

kitchen regimes10

in the form of reduced fuel use

levels of indoor air pollution.

2. ‘The project activity is implemented by a project coordinator who acts as project participant.’

The project activity is being implemented by co2balance UK Ltd, who also act as project participant.

3. ‘The individual households and institutions will not act as project participants.’

The individual household stove recipients will not act as project part

rights transfer form confirming that the rights to GHG emission reductions are transferred to the PP as

payment for the improved cook stove.

4. ‘The methodology addresses the switch from cook

or domestic homes having significant green

or zero emissions.’

The pilot project for the proposed project activity has shown that the activity will replace 3

stoves that have significant GHG emissions with improved stoves having over 50% less GHG emissions.

Refer to PDD section B.6.3 for details.

10 According to Section I, page 2 of the methodology: ‘

which determine green-house gas emissions arising from energy use in the kitchen.’


11

Title and reference of the approved baseline and monitoring methodology

:

scale project activity falls within the ‘Energy Efficiency – Domestic’ category and wi

Methodology for improved cook-stoves and kitchen regimes V.02

up to date version of the methodology at the time of submission.

Additionality is demonstrated using the UNFCCC Tool for the demonstration and


Justification of the choice of the project category:

The applicability criteria of the chosen methodology will be addressed in turn to


specified by the methodology, Section I, pg. 2.

‘methodology is applicable to programs or activities introducing improved cook

water treatment technology (e.g. water filters) and practices to households and institutions

result in improved kitchen regimes within a distinct geographical area.

introducing improved cook-stoves to households within

The activity will be replacing inefficient open wood fires with

higher thermal and combustion efficiency, and training householders in their use

the form of reduced fuel use, corresponding GHG emission reductions, and

‘The project activity is implemented by a project coordinator who acts as project participant.’


‘The individual households and institutions will not act as project participants.’

The individual household stove recipients will not act as project participants and will all sign a carbon


payment for the improved cook stove.

‘The methodology addresses the switch from cook-stoves and kitchen regimes

or domestic homes having significant green-house gas emission to those having considerably less

The pilot project for the proposed project activity has shown that the activity will replace 3

have significant GHG emissions with improved stoves having over 50% less GHG emissions.

Refer to PDD section B.6.3 for details.

According to Section I, page 2 of the methodology: ‘The term “regime” is used to enco

house gas emissions arising from energy use in the kitchen.’

Version 03

approved baseline and monitoring methodology applied to the

Domestic’ category and will utilise

stoves and kitchen regimes V.02’. This is the most

Additionality is demonstrated using the UNFCCC Tool for the demonstration and assessment of


The applicability criteria of the chosen methodology will be addressed in turn to show that this


‘methodology is applicable to programs or activities introducing improved cook-stoves or

water treatment technology (e.g. water filters) and practices to households and institutions that

result in improved kitchen regimes within a distinct geographical area.’

within the geographical region

wood fires with wood-stoves of a

and training householders in their use, will result in improved

, corresponding GHG emission reductions, and lowered

‘The project activity is implemented by a project coordinator who acts as project participant.’


‘The individual households and institutions will not act as project participants.’

icipants and will all sign a carbon


stoves and kitchen regimes used in institutions

house gas emission to those having considerably less

The pilot project for the proposed project activity has shown that the activity will replace 3-stone wood

have significant GHG emissions with improved stoves having over 50% less GHG emissions.

The term “regime” is used to encompass a range of practices



5. ‘Kitchen regimes with significant green

one fuel type and more than one s

shift in the apportionment of fuel types and/or adoption of new fuels and cook

water treatment technology.’

The Kitchen Surveys carried out indicate that wood is the main fuel u

are used in household kitchen regimes. The ‘switch to low emission regimes’ will involve adoption of

new cook stoves and may or may not involve a shift in apportionment of fuel types.

6. ‘The shift may occur in a phased

increase over the project years in adoption of an improved fuel mix, improved stoves and/or


It is intended that the improved cook stoves will be

crediting year of the project activity.

of use of baseline technology by educating local people on the health and environmental benefits of

abandoning inefficient baseline technology entirely.

being maintained free of charge over a 7 year period, along with an education programme and clear

benefits to the households is thought to provide incentive for use over the

7. ‘Low-emission cook-stoves and regimes replace relatively high

Again, the pilot project for the proposed project activity has shown that the activity will replace 3

wood stoves that have significan

emissions. Refer to PDD section B.6.3 for details.

8. ‘The project boundary can be clearly identified, and the stoves counted in the project are not

included in another voluntary market or CDM

The project boundary has been clearly demarcated using political divisions recognised in Kenya. The

stoves counted are individually marked with a project specific identification code that is referenced in al

records relating to the stove, stored in the project proponents’ database. This ensures that the stoves are

not accidentally counted in other project activities.

9. ‘The project is located in a single country

The project is located in Kenya and no other

10. The improved cook-stoves do not number more than ten per kitchen and have a continuous useful

energy outputs of less than 50kW (defined as total energy delivered usefully from start to end of

operation divided by time of operation)

A single stove only will be introduced into each kitchen counted by the proposed project activity. Using

the results of the baseline study, the continuous useful energy output has been estimated at

11. ‘Examples of project technologies are improved biomass stov

The project technology in this case will be an improved biomass stove.

11 Please refer to the file ‘PDD supplementary data Aberdares v.02’.


12

‘Kitchen regimes with significant green-house gas emissions may involve the use of more than

one fuel type and more than one stove type, and the switch to low emission regimes may involve a

shift in the apportionment of fuel types and/or adoption of new fuels and cook


The Kitchen Surveys carried out indicate that wood is the main fuel used in the area, although other fuels


and may or may not involve a shift in apportionment of fuel types.

‘The shift may occur in a phased manner, a program or project comprising a progressive



It is intended that the improved cook stoves will be progressively introduced t

crediting year of the project activity. The project will introduce a mechanism to encourage the cessation


nt baseline technology entirely. The improved stove being given free of charge and


benefits to the households is thought to provide incentive for use over the baseline technology.

stoves and regimes replace relatively high-emissions baseline scenarios

Again, the pilot project for the proposed project activity has shown that the activity will replace 3

wood stoves that have significant GHG emissions with improved stoves having over 50% less GHG

emissions. Refer to PDD section B.6.3 for details.

The project boundary can be clearly identified, and the stoves counted in the project are not

included in another voluntary market or CDM project (i.e. no double-counting takes place)


stoves counted are individually marked with a project specific identification code that is referenced in al


not accidentally counted in other project activities.

The project is located in a single country’

The project is located in Kenya and no other country.

stoves do not number more than ten per kitchen and have a continuous useful


operation divided by time of operation)

ve only will be introduced into each kitchen counted by the proposed project activity. Using

the results of the baseline study, the continuous useful energy output has been estimated at

‘Examples of project technologies are improved biomass stoves...’

The project technology in this case will be an improved biomass stove.

Please refer to the file ‘PDD supplementary data Aberdares v.02’.

Version 03

house gas emissions may involve the use of more than

tove type, and the switch to low emission regimes may involve a

shift in the apportionment of fuel types and/or adoption of new fuels and cook-stoves and/or

sed in the area, although other fuels


and may or may not involve a shift in apportionment of fuel types.

manner, a program or project comprising a progressive


introduced to the kitchens over the first

The project will introduce a mechanism to encourage the cessation


The improved stove being given free of charge and


baseline technology.

emissions baseline scenarios.’

Again, the pilot project for the proposed project activity has shown that the activity will replace 3-stone

t GHG emissions with improved stoves having over 50% less GHG

The project boundary can be clearly identified, and the stoves counted in the project are not

counting takes place)’


stoves counted are individually marked with a project specific identification code that is referenced in all


stoves do not number more than ten per kitchen and have a continuous useful


ve only will be introduced into each kitchen counted by the proposed project activity. Using

the results of the baseline study, the continuous useful energy output has been estimated at 1.72kW.11



12. ‘Examples of Baseline technologies are biomass stoves…’

The baseline technology in this case will be an improved biomass stove.

The project will be classified as small

definition laid out by the CDM EB

average annual energy savings of

result in a limitation of wood

the project will determine the maximum

wood saved per stove) to achieve the maximum emission

refer to file ‘PDD supplementary data Aberdares v.02’ for d

B.3. Description of the project boundary:

The project boundary is determined as

a. The project boundary is defined as the domestic kitchen

recorded.

b. The target area as defined in

c. The Fuel Collection Area

Surveys. The results analysis

local area walking /with

Greenhouse gasses that can be

Source

Base

lin

e

Cooking,

production

of fuel, and

transport of

fuel

Source

Pro

ject

Cooking,

production

of fuel, and

transport of

fuel

12 For full details see file ‘NRB study’ report uploaded to the GS registry and provided to the DoE.


13

‘Examples of Baseline technologies are biomass stoves…’

The baseline technology in this case will be an improved biomass stove.

ect will be classified as small-scale in accordance with the Gold Standard rules, which follow the

definition laid out by the CDM EB. Small scale energy efficiency projects are defined as producing

energy savings of <60GWhe or <180GWhth per annum. Applying that

wood saved by the project. Likewise, such a maximum

determine the maximum amount of stoves to implement (dependent on the amount of

to achieve the maximum emission reductions claimed for the project scale.

refer to file ‘PDD supplementary data Aberdares v.02’ for details of these calculations

project boundary:

determined as specified in the methodology.

The project boundary is defined as the domestic kitchens in which each stove is installed,

efined in section A.4.1.4.

The Fuel Collection Area has been defined based on the information gathered by the Kitchen

ults analysis12

showed that the majority of households collect their fuel from the

walking /with donkey cart and the rest buy it locally.

that can be included in the project and baseline are as tabulated below.

Source Gas Included? Justification/Explanation

Cooking,

production

of fuel, and

transport of

CO2 Yes Important source of

emissions

CH4 Yes Important source of

emissions

N2O Yes Can be significant in some

fuels

Source Gas Included? Justification/Explanation

Cooking,

production

of fuel, and

transport of

CO2 Yes Important source of

emissions

CH4 Yes Important source of

emissions

N2O Yes Can be significant in some

fuels

For full details see file ‘NRB study’ report uploaded to the GS registry and provided to the DoE.

Version 03

Standard rules, which follow the

Small scale energy efficiency projects are defined as producing

per annum. Applying that thermal limit will

Likewise, such a maximum amount of wood saved by

(dependent on the amount of

reductions claimed for the project scale. Please

etails of these calculations.

s in which each stove is installed,

has been defined based on the information gathered by the Kitchen

showed that the majority of households collect their fuel from the

included in the project and baseline are as tabulated below.

Justification/Explanation

Important source of

Important source of

Can be significant in some

Justification/Explanation

Important source of

Important source of

Can be significant in some

For full details see file ‘NRB study’ report uploaded to the GS registry and provided to the DoE.



B.4. Description of baseline and its

The project baseline has been developed in line with the chosen methodology

– Domestic type and category according to the GSV2.1 toolkit.

1. Determine customer groups “or clusters”

Step 1.1: Establish a pilot

A small number (149) of pilot stoves were built in the project area

the purposes of carrying out surveys and tests required for baseline development. A

record (PDR) containing the names and addresses/locations of the stove beneficiaries was created and

stored in the project developer

Step 1.2: Provisionally assess fuel types, fuel mix, and kitchen regimes.

Provisional assessments made by local staff established

project areas is carried out using fir

sellers. 1% of households surveyed later were found to be using charcoal as their main fuel.

In accordance with the methodology

a) Renewable and Non

Wood fuel and charcoal

88% in the project scenario.

b) Renewable energy fuels, sourced or methods with zero green

such as some agricultural residues/coppiced wood, biogas, solar cookers, heat retention

cookers (excluding sustainably produced woody biomass which is cov

above)

one identified

c) Alternative fuels (AF) emitting green

as fossil fuels, dung, some crop residues) defined as fuels which do not fall into the above

two categories

LPG and Kerosene use were identified as used for 7% of cooking events in the baseline and

8% in the project scenario, it is anticipated that these levels will remain under 10% each

year of the crediting period.

The results of the Kitchen Surveys showed that 93% of

for warmth, this dropped slightly to 89% in the project scenario.

13 Refer to ‘KS1 Results looking at fuel split’ excel file.


14

baseline and its development:

The project baseline has been developed in line with the chosen methodology,

Domestic type and category according to the GSV2.1 toolkit.

1. Determine customer groups “or clusters”

Step 1.1: Establish a pilot distribution record (PDR).

of pilot stoves were built in the project area between 09/07/2010

the purposes of carrying out surveys and tests required for baseline development. A

ng the names and addresses/locations of the stove beneficiaries was created and

stored in the project developer’s database.


Provisional assessments made by local staff established that almost exclusively domestic cooking in the

project areas is carried out using firewood fuel gathered from local forests or purchased from firewood

1% of households surveyed later were found to be using charcoal as their main fuel.

accordance with the methodology these have been divided into the following categories:

Renewable and Non-renewable Woody Biomass, which includes all wood

Wood fuel and charcoal were used for 93% of cooking events in the baseline and

ject scenario.13

Renewable energy fuels, sourced or methods with zero green-house gas emissions (RE),


cookers (excluding sustainably produced woody biomass which is cov

Alternative fuels (AF) emitting green-house gases during production or combustion (such


ene use were identified as used for 7% of cooking events in the baseline and


year of the crediting period.

The results of the Kitchen Surveys showed that 93% of households in the baseline situation utilised fuel

for warmth, this dropped slightly to 89% in the project scenario.

Refer to ‘KS1 Results looking at fuel split’ excel file.

Version 03

and the Energy Efficiency

09/07/2010 & 12/07/2010 for

the purposes of carrying out surveys and tests required for baseline development. A pilot distribution

ng the names and addresses/locations of the stove beneficiaries was created and


that almost exclusively domestic cooking in the

wood fuel gathered from local forests or purchased from firewood

1% of households surveyed later were found to be using charcoal as their main fuel.

these have been divided into the following categories:

renewable Woody Biomass, which includes all wood-fuels.

were used for 93% of cooking events in the baseline and

house gas emissions (RE),


cookers (excluding sustainably produced woody biomass which is covered in category (a)

house gases during production or combustion (such


ene use were identified as used for 7% of cooking events in the baseline and


households in the baseline situation utilised fuel



Step 1.3: Analyze renewability fraction of wood

An assessment was made by C4 Eco

Aberdares region (refer to ‘NRB Study’ separate report

Step 1.4: Divide pilot distribution record (PDR)

No major cluster distinctions were identified at this stage and hence the PDR was not split.

Step 1.5: Carry out a qualitative survey (Kitchen Survey

Kitchen Surveys were carried out

described in the baseline report

standard ‘PHP’ programming language function;

validation purposes.

The results of the surveys were assessed by

the file ‘Baseline Report-Aberdares

“The non-intervention group is very similar to the pilot group, with the notable exception of charcoal

used, and location of cooking (among some other more minor differences). Future KS should expl

highlight these differences which may or may not require them to be categorised as a significantly

different cluster.”

Furthermore, the results of the KS showed:

- Only data from the dry season is presented post installation. Seasonal variations si

installation of the CZ stove will be documented in subsequent KS. The cooking patterns using the

traditional stove shows no significant change between seasons in terms of people cooked for and

number of meals cooked.

- Randomly selected HH for the KP

people as the household size

- In order for the KPT to be representative approximately 55% of the HH should have at least one

child <10.

- The difference in charcoal used between the pilot and non

this may define a discreet cluster in future kitchen surveys. Households using more charcoal and

the pilot group would likely result in lower wood

not be conservative.

- All households enrolled should primarily use firewo

represent the total population survey.

- In order to ensure representative and conservative

KPTs should still be using three stone fires at least once per day; and around 45% still using a

charcoal stove at least once per day.

- It is striking that 80% of households are still using three stone fires alongs

nearly 30% cooking on them three times each day. This raises serious questions about the degree

to which the CZ stoves are being used in households, given that the average number of meals

cooked per day is less than three.

- Generally the location of stove affects personal exposure levels more than total fuel consumption

or GHG emissions. Yet it should

necessitate increased additional use of the stove for space heating in

14 Refer to the file ‘Baseline Report


15

Step 1.3: Analyze renewability fraction of wood-fuels.

An assessment was made by C4 Eco Solutions (Pty) Ltd of the renewability fraction

‘NRB Study’ separate report).

Divide pilot distribution record (PDR) into major groups or clusters.


ep 1.5: Carry out a qualitative survey (Kitchen Survey – KS)

Kitchen Surveys were carried out mid September as directed by the independent consultant

report.14

Survey participants were randomly selected from the PDR

programming language function; this process was documented for each selection for

The results of the surveys were assessed by HED and identified only one cluster for this project

Aberdares-Final V01’ uploaded to the GS registry):

intervention group is very similar to the pilot group, with the notable exception of charcoal

used, and location of cooking (among some other more minor differences). Future KS should expl


he results of the KS showed:

Only data from the dry season is presented post installation. Seasonal variations si



number of meals cooked.

Randomly selected HH for the KPT are likely to provide a representative sample but HH with >9

as the household size should be avoided to achieve a conservative estimate of fuel savings.

In order for the KPT to be representative approximately 55% of the HH should have at least one

The difference in charcoal used between the pilot and non-intervention group should be noted, as


the pilot group would likely result in lower wood fuel savings, so applying the same baseline may

All households enrolled should primarily use firewood to represent the pilot group in order

ent the total population survey.

In order to ensure representative and conservative data, around 80% of households enrolled in


charcoal stove at least once per day.

It is striking that 80% of households are still using three stone fires alongs



cooked per day is less than three.

Generally the location of stove affects personal exposure levels more than total fuel consumption

or GHG emissions. Yet it should be considered that cooking in a separate kitchen could

necessitate increased additional use of the stove for space heating in

Baseline Report-Aberdares-Final V01’ uploaded to the GS registry.

Version 03

Solutions (Pty) Ltd of the renewability fraction of wood fuel in the

into major groups or clusters.


independent consultant HED and as

were randomly selected from the PDR using a

this process was documented for each selection for

ly one cluster for this project (Refer to

intervention group is very similar to the pilot group, with the notable exception of charcoal

used, and location of cooking (among some other more minor differences). Future KS should explore and


Only data from the dry season is presented post installation. Seasonal variations since the



T are likely to provide a representative sample but HH with >9

should be avoided to achieve a conservative estimate of fuel savings.

In order for the KPT to be representative approximately 55% of the HH should have at least one

intervention group should be noted, as


fuel savings, so applying the same baseline may

od to represent the pilot group in order to

data, around 80% of households enrolled in


It is striking that 80% of households are still using three stone fires alongside the CZ stove, with



Generally the location of stove affects personal exposure levels more than total fuel consumption

considered that cooking in a separate kitchen could

necessitate increased additional use of the stove for space heating in the main house. However

’ uploaded to the GS registry.



this does not seem to be the case in the group with a CZ stove, as 90.9% of the people who do not

use their fuel for purposes other than cooking have a separate kitchen. The KPT should include

some households that cook inside the ho

- Lighting was not mentioned by participants and may have required a direct question. It is

assumed some fuel is used for lighting. This theme should be explored in more depth with

subsequent KS as it can potentially have a large impact on fuel consumpt

particularly in a cool wet climate such as Aberdares.

- None of the HH in either study group was using the stove for commercial purposes.

Subsequently, 45 households

conclusions above from the KS results.

made.

Step 1.6: Refine demarcation of clusters and populate Project Database

As the project database is simply the distribution record re

reductions and at this stage only one cluster has been identified, the two records

identical. The ‘project database’ is a separate section of the PPs database

addition of clusters, and recalculation of emission reductions based on the results of monitoring activities.

2. Calculate baseline emissions

Step 2.1: Estimate expected variation and improvement in emission reductions

An appropriate statistical analysis was carried out by

Step 2.2: Specify the units of emission reduction or fuel consumption

The units of emission reduction selected were

Step 2.3: Make quantitative measurements (Kitchen Performance Tests)

Kitchen Performance Tests were carried out

report, using the HHs selected from the previous survey (KS).

sampling criteria for the KPTs. In summary:

• HH with MORE than 9 people should be excluded; otherwise a random selection of HH

sizes are acceptable

• Approx 55% of households should have at least 1 child under 10 years

• HH should primarily use firewood

• 80% of HHs should be using a three stone fire at l

• Approx 45% of HHs should be using a charcoal stove at least once per day

• Around 7% of HHs should cook in the home; the remainder in separate kitchens.

• Be willing to participate in the KT.

Step 2.4: Calculate baseline

A 4-day paired KPT (3 full days or 72 hours monitored, requiring 4 days of visits) was considered to be a

good option. Households were asked to cook as normal during the KPT in order to account for any


16



some households that cook inside the house.

Lighting was not mentioned by participants and may have required a direct question. It is


subsequent KS as it can potentially have a large impact on fuel consumpt

particularly in a cool wet climate such as Aberdares.

None of the HH in either study group was using the stove for commercial purposes.

households were randomly selected from the KS group by

clusions above from the KS results. This would produce a conservative assessment of fuel savings


As the project database is simply the distribution record re-organised for the c

reductions and at this stage only one cluster has been identified, the two records

The ‘project database’ is a separate section of the PPs database however,

recalculation of emission reductions based on the results of monitoring activities.

2. Calculate baseline emissions


An appropriate statistical analysis was carried out by HED and is documented in the

Step 2.2: Specify the units of emission reduction or fuel consumption

The units of emission reduction selected were tCO2e/stove/year.


Performance Tests were carried out mid-October as specified and documented in the baseline

using the HHs selected from the previous survey (KS). The previous section has presented the

sampling criteria for the KPTs. In summary:

HH with MORE than 9 people should be excluded; otherwise a random selection of HH

Approx 55% of households should have at least 1 child under 10 years

HH should primarily use firewood

80% of HHs should be using a three stone fire at least once per day

Approx 45% of HHs should be using a charcoal stove at least once per day

Around 7% of HHs should cook in the home; the remainder in separate kitchens.

Be willing to participate in the KT.

Step 2.4: Calculate baseline

(3 full days or 72 hours monitored, requiring 4 days of visits) was considered to be a

Households were asked to cook as normal during the KPT in order to account for any

Version 03



Lighting was not mentioned by participants and may have required a direct question. It is


subsequent KS as it can potentially have a large impact on fuel consumption and GHG emissions

None of the HH in either study group was using the stove for commercial purposes.

were randomly selected from the KS group by HED according to the

would produce a conservative assessment of fuel savings


organised for the calculation of emission

reductions and at this stage only one cluster has been identified, the two records were at this stage

however, and allows for the

recalculation of emission reductions based on the results of monitoring activities.


is documented in the baseline report.


as specified and documented in the baseline

The previous section has presented the

HH with MORE than 9 people should be excluded; otherwise a random selection of HH

Approx 55% of households should have at least 1 child under 10 years

east once per day

Approx 45% of HHs should be using a charcoal stove at least once per day

Around 7% of HHs should cook in the home; the remainder in separate kitchens.

(3 full days or 72 hours monitored, requiring 4 days of visits) was considered to be a

Households were asked to cook as normal during the KPT in order to account for any



retained use of a baseline stove.

section B.6.3. and the fuel savings identified by the KPT shown below.

Leakage

As specified in the chosen methodology the following sources of leakage have been assessed for this

project.

a) Some users of the efficient stoves respond to

increasing consumption of fuels with GHG emission characteristics

stoves, to the extent that project emissions are higher

cooking energy is constant. This is

This is accounted for by the design of the KPT and KS, as

residual use of retained baseline technology

b) The project activity stimulates increased use of a high emission fuel either for cooking or

purposes outside the project boundary (as would be the case for example if

an increase in 7RB consumption

activity).

15

In accordance with the methodology

as it can be demonstrated that a mechanism is put in place by the PP to provide an incentive for the surrendering of

the old stoves by beneficiaries. Th

with no intrinsic form or value i.e. three stones, and b) where the project technology is exchanged for carbon rights

only (no monetary exchange). Based on the incentive for

reduces fuel costs or time spent collecting fuel, the PP will monitor use of stoves as part of the quarterly monitoring

Kitchen Survey (MKS), including reasons for no use or retained use of baseline

use of baseline technology is determined, the PP will re

accordingly.


17

retained use of a baseline stove.15

The baseline and project emissions calculations are documented in PDD

and the fuel savings identified by the KPT shown below.

kg/HH/day

Firewood Comsumption 3-stone stove 7.38

Saving Adj for lower bound of 90% confidence 2.23

Therefore, t/HH/year

Firewood Consumption 3-stone stove 2.69



a) Some users of the efficient stoves respond to the fuel savings associated with higher efficiency

increasing consumption of fuels with GHG emission characteristics by retaining some use of inefficient

stoves, to the extent that project emissions are higher than those calculated from the assum

cooking energy is constant. This is sometimes referred to as the ‘rebound’ effect.

This is accounted for by the design of the KPT and KS, as they include relevant questions to assess

residual use of retained baseline technology, refer to the footnote on this page also

b) The project activity stimulates increased use of a high emission fuel either for cooking or

purposes outside the project boundary (as would be the case for example if efficient cooking stimulated

consumption - possibly because the 7RB fuel becomes cheaper due to the project

ance with the methodology, the use of baseline stoves along with the improved stoves is allowed as long


the old stoves by beneficiaries. There is an issue in applying this concept to a project a) replacing baseline stoves


only (no monetary exchange). Based on the incentive for the beneficiary being intrinsic to the technology, which


Kitchen Survey (MKS), including reasons for no use or retained use of baseline technology. If significant retained

use of baseline technology is determined, the PP will re-visit the incentive situation and make modifications

Version 03

lculations are documented in PDD


the fuel savings associated with higher efficiency stoves by

by retaining some use of inefficient

than those calculated from the assumption that

sometimes referred to as the ‘rebound’ effect.

they include relevant questions to assess

footnote on this page also.

b) The project activity stimulates increased use of a high emission fuel either for cooking or for other

efficient cooking stimulated

7RB fuel becomes cheaper due to the project

the use of baseline stoves along with the improved stoves is allowed as long


ere is an issue in applying this concept to a project a) replacing baseline stoves


the beneficiary being intrinsic to the technology, which


technology. If significant retained

ituation and make modifications



Householders targeted by the project

the fuel in question is not part of an economic market

on the NRB is unlikely to result in increased use of the fuel outside of the project area. In any case the

NRB fraction will be periodically

changes in the future.

c) By virtue of promotion and marketing of a new model and type of stove with high

stimulates substitution of a cooking fuel or stove type with

commonly using a cooking fuel or stove

is not eligible as an evolving baseline.

All stove recipients cook on 3 stone fires, in which case the only scenario producing this leakage would

be a recipient reducing use of renewable fuels such as crop residues. This will be captured through

monitoring KS and KPTs.

d) The project population compensates for loss of the space heating effect of inefficient

adopting some other form of heating or b

This is possible in some areas covered by the project, any compensation will however be covered in the

results of the KPT (which encompasses all wood

other fuels for space heating)

e) The traditional stoves displaced are re

than would have occurred in the absence of the project.

In all cases the traditional stoves replaced are three rocks

product as such. There is nothing limiting the use of three stone cooking across the country

is lowest, price is zero), which is why this

therefore be discounted.

f) Significant emissions from transportation or construction involved in the project activity,

emissions associated with production/transport of the efficient stoves

of project fuels (for example briquette manufacture

An assessment of project construction

data Aberdares v.02’. All bricks and liners used

manufactured into bricks and the liner in the same factory in Mombasa, 700 km a

area. Both bricks and liners, are transported by truck (10 tonne to 48 tonne truck types) into the pro

area where stocked up in a central storage till a pick up truck delivers them to the communities. Emissions

from production and transportation are

potential impact of construction materials used is detailed also.

of fuel (likely zero) will only decrease with the implementation of the project which will reduce fuel

consumption.

g) The non-renewable biomass

who previously used renewable energy sources.

There is no evidence to suggest significant (if any) use of renewable energy for cooking in the project

region as found in the Kitchen Surveys. As solar ovens are not available, renewable energy use for


18

Householders targeted by the project do buy wood as well as collect it for free from the surroundings.

the fuel in question is not part of an economic market outside the project boundary


periodically monitored as requested by the methodology

c) By virtue of promotion and marketing of a new model and type of stove with high

stimulates substitution of a cooking fuel or stove type with relatively high emissions by households who

cooking fuel or stove type with relatively lower emissions, in cases where such a trend

evolving baseline.


reducing use of renewable fuels such as crop residues. This will be captured through

d) The project population compensates for loss of the space heating effect of inefficient

adopting some other form of heating or by retaining some use of inefficient stoves.


(which encompasses all wood-fuel use) and the KS (which will pick up on any use of

and so this need not be separately assessed.

e) The traditional stoves displaced are re-used outside the boundary in a manner suggesting

than would have occurred in the absence of the project.

nal stoves replaced are three rocks; these have no market value and are not a

product as such. There is nothing limiting the use of three stone cooking across the country

, which is why this cooking method is so widespread. This

f) Significant emissions from transportation or construction involved in the project activity,

associated with production/transport of the efficient stoves themselves, or

of project fuels (for example briquette manufacture and supply may be energy-

construction emissions has been made and is detailed in

ricks and liners used are fired clay. The raw material (clay) is extracted and

manufactured into bricks and the liner in the same factory in Mombasa, 700 km a

bricks and liners, are transported by truck (10 tonne to 48 tonne truck types) into the pro


from production and transportation are assessed in ‘PDD supplementary data Aberdares v.02’

potential impact of construction materials used is detailed also. Any emissions associated with delivery


renewable biomass saved under the project activity is used by non

who previously used renewable energy sources.



Version 03

do buy wood as well as collect it for free from the surroundings. As

tside the project boundary, reduction in pressure


as requested by the methodology and used to inform of any

c) By virtue of promotion and marketing of a new model and type of stove with high efficiency, the project

relatively high emissions by households who

type with relatively lower emissions, in cases where such a trend


reducing use of renewable fuels such as crop residues. This will be captured through

d) The project population compensates for loss of the space heating effect of inefficient cook-stoves by

inefficient stoves.


(which will pick up on any use of

used outside the boundary in a manner suggesting more usage

these have no market value and are not a

product as such. There is nothing limiting the use of three stone cooking across the country (technology

read. This leakage source can

f) Significant emissions from transportation or construction involved in the project activity, including

themselves, or production/transport

-intensive).

has been made and is detailed in ‘PDD supplementary

fired clay. The raw material (clay) is extracted and

manufactured into bricks and the liner in the same factory in Mombasa, 700 km away from the project

bricks and liners, are transported by truck (10 tonne to 48 tonne truck types) into the project


‘PDD supplementary data Aberdares v.02’; the

Any emissions associated with delivery


saved under the project activity is used by non-project households/users





cooking would likely be use of animal dung or crop r

availability/proximity to the home rather than due to a shortage of wood fuel

independent factor. This leakage source can therefore be discounted.

h) The non-renewable biomass saved under the p

project activities.

To the best knowledge of the project proponent there are at present no similar projects registered under

the GS or CDM within the project area, this source of leakage is therefor

developing similar projects within the host country however these are all being carefully developed

through an electronic database available along the project period

In summary, risks a), c) & d)

& g) are discounted, risk f) is subsumed in annex 3,

database.

Thus the total leakage factor applied is

further leakage in future years after the first one is not expected.

B.5. Description of how the anthropogenic emissions of GHG by sources are reduced below

those that would have occurred in the abs

There has not been a previous announcement that the project activity would go ahead without the

Standard. The project activity is financed upfront for future Gold Standard VERs as the only sou

funding and so the project activity could not go ahead without VER revenues.


additionality (Version 05.2) which shows that the project would not be possible

Step 1: Identification of alternative

regulations.

Sub-step 1a: define alternatives to the project activity:

Alternative 1: Stoves are designed, marketed,

as a Gold Standard VER project.

Under this alternative scenario the project would proceed as laid out in this document.

This would provide the same energy output,

livelihoods and other contributions to sustainable development identified.

some retained use of baseline stove for occasional heating purposes as identified in the

baseline study

Alternative 2: Continuation of the current situation

Without the intervention of the project and use of carbon finance it is

status quo will change


19

cooking would likely be use of animal dung or crop residues which will be used due to ease of

availability/proximity to the home rather than due to a shortage of wood fuel

This leakage source can therefore be discounted.

renewable biomass saved under the project activity is used to justify the baseline


the GS or CDM within the project area, this source of leakage is therefore avoided.


through an electronic database available along the project period in order to avoid any conflicting issues.

& d) are subsumed by the KPT, risk b) is subsumed by the NRB

discounted, risk f) is subsumed in annex 3, and finally, risk h) is subsumed by the electronic

Thus the total leakage factor applied is 0.0179 tCO2/stove for the first year of the project

further leakage in future years after the first one is not expected.

Description of how the anthropogenic emissions of GHG by sources are reduced below

those that would have occurred in the absence of the registered small-scale

There has not been a previous announcement that the project activity would go ahead without the

tandard. The project activity is financed upfront for future Gold Standard VERs as the only sou

funding and so the project activity could not go ahead without VER revenues.


(Version 05.2) which shows that the project would not be possible

Step 1: Identification of alternatives to the project activity consistent with current laws and

step 1a: define alternatives to the project activity:

designed, marketed, built and distributed by a stove builder without registering

as a Gold Standard VER project.


provide the same energy output, result in the biomass savings, improved

livelihoods and other contributions to sustainable development identified.


study.

Continuation of the current situation – use of traditional cooking with 3

Without the intervention of the project and use of carbon finance it is

will change.

Version 03

esidues which will be used due to ease of

availability/proximity to the home rather than due to a shortage of wood fuel, therefore being an

roject activity is used to justify the baseline of other


e avoided. The proponent is


to avoid any conflicting issues.

, risk b) is subsumed by the NRB analysis, risk e)

and finally, risk h) is subsumed by the electronic

tCO2/stove for the first year of the project only. Thus,

Description of how the anthropogenic emissions of GHG by sources are reduced below

scale CDM project activity:

There has not been a previous announcement that the project activity would go ahead without the Gold

tandard. The project activity is financed upfront for future Gold Standard VERs as the only source of


(Version 05.2) which shows that the project would not be possible without VER revenues.

to the project activity consistent with current laws and

distributed by a stove builder without registering


result in the biomass savings, improved

livelihoods and other contributions to sustainable development identified. There may be


traditional cooking with 3-stone fireplaces.

Without the intervention of the project and use of carbon finance it is unlikely that the



Outcome of sub-step 1a: Two realistic and credible alternatives to the project activity have been

identified.

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

In Kenya there is no law or regulation that applies to the efficiency of cooking stoves or that requires th

use of efficient stoves, and none is expected to be introduced during the project hence all cook stove

distribution is a voluntary action.

compliance with the mandatory laws and regulations i

Outcome of sub-step 1b: Two realistic and credible alternative scenarios to the project activity that are

in compliance with mandatory legislation and regulations taking into account the enforcement in the

region and EB decisions on national a

Step 2: Investment Analysis

Sub-step 2a: Determine appropriate analysis method

As the proposed project activity generates no financial or economic benefits

the simple cost analysis (option

Sub-step 2b: Option I. Apply simple cost analysis

The costs associated with the proposed activity and

which will demonstrate that at least one alternative is less costly than the proposed activity.

Proposed activity

Despite the development of various improved stoves within Kenya

very low penetration of the technology in rural wood

The rocket-stove cost price is

provided to the DoE.

Material

Fired Clay Bricks

Liner

Metal Plate

Normal Cement

Sodium silicate

Lime

Sand

Vermiculite

Contractors (design/ supervision)

Mason

Total (

16 http://www.hedon.info/WomenAnd


20

Two realistic and credible alternatives to the project activity have been

step 1b: Consistency with mandatory laws and regulatory

In Kenya there is no law or regulation that applies to the efficiency of cooking stoves or that requires th


distribution is a voluntary action. Hence the alternatives identified in Sub-step 1a above are in

compliance with the mandatory laws and regulations in Kenya.

Two realistic and credible alternative scenarios to the project activity that are


region and EB decisions on national and/or sectoral policies and regulations have been identified.

Step 2: Investment Analysis

step 2a: Determine appropriate analysis method

As the proposed project activity generates no financial or economic benefits other than the VER revenues,

the simple cost analysis (option I) will be applied, as suggested by the additionality tool

step 2b: Option I. Apply simple cost analysis

The costs associated with the proposed activity and alternatives identified in Step 1


Despite the development of various improved stoves within Kenya over the last 3

of the technology in rural wood-burning households (referenced in barrier analysis)

stove cost price is €17 (breakdown cost is shown below; supporting evidence has been

Material Qty Unit Unit Cost (€)

Fired Clay Bricks 45 Bricks € 0.06

Liner 1 - € 1.07

Metal Plate 1 - € 2.68

Normal Cement 0.2 Bag -

Sodium silicate 0 Kg € 2.68

Lime 0 Bag € 4.02

Sand 0.3 Barrow -

Vermiculite 0 Bag € 6.26

Contractors (design/ supervision) - stove € 4.47

Mason 1 stove € 5.10

Total (€)

http://www.hedon.info/WomenAndEnergyProject-Kenya

Version 03

Two realistic and credible alternatives to the project activity have been

In Kenya there is no law or regulation that applies to the efficiency of cooking stoves or that requires the


step 1a above are in

Two realistic and credible alternative scenarios to the project activity that are


nd/or sectoral policies and regulations have been identified.

other than the VER revenues,

, as suggested by the additionality tool.

identified in Step 1 are documented here


over the last 30 years16

, there has been

(referenced in barrier analysis).

is shown below; supporting evidence has been

Total (€)

€ 2.82

€ 1.07

€ 2.68

€ 0.89

€ 0.00

€ 0.00

€ 0.27

€ 0.00

€ 4.47

€ 5.10

€ 17



In line with the estimated distribution potential of

area this would require funding of

issued to the proponent over the first 7 years of the project (after GS deductions). Retailing the VERs at

€8 each (indicative estimated price)

burden of putting the project through the Gold Standard as well as making the project an investment

opportunity for financiers.

Alternative 1

Under this alternative scenario the project would be im

would incur the same build costs of

or other carbon financing mechanism this would have to be funded in another manner, either by sales or

charitable donations.

A brief assessment of the ability of householders to fund their own stove has been made

the International Fund for Agricultural Development (IFAD) 53% of Kenya’s rural population live below

the poverty line.17

The average income in Kenya

the rural poor 83% of the household budget is spent on food

A Ministry of Energy study found the cost of firewood to stand between 77KSh/tonne and

1,200KSh/tonne. Also, at the national level,

remove firewood at a cost of KES39

analysed individually: if buying fuel at low price estimate, if buying fuel at

collection of fuel paying permit and if own collection of fuel not paying permit.

Calculations have been made

stove at the cost price of €17

on the data tabulated below for the three possible situations stated abo

which would be the best scenario economically.

Average income (K

Average income (K

Proportion of income spent on food (%)

Fuel price 1 = low estimation (K

Fuel price

Permit cost (K

Permit cost (K

Cost of rocket stoveTable showing initial data used to assess the study below.

17 http://www.ruralpovertyportal.org/web/guest/country/home/tags/kenya

http://www.fao.org/fileadmin/templates/ess/documents/food_security_statistics/country_profiles/eng/Kenya_E.pdf

18 http://www.soko-kenya.com/SOKO_Proposal.pdf

19 http://www.unicef.org/infobycountry/kenya_statistics.html

20 “Kenya: Integrated assessment of the

http://www.unep.ch/etb/areas/pdf/Kenya%20ReportFINAL.pdf21

“study on Kenya’s energy demand, supply and policy strategy for households, small scale industrie

establishments”, Republic of Kenya Ministry of Energy, 2002


21

ed distribution potential of 51,033 improved cook stoves in the defined project

a this would require funding of €882,785. In this scenario a proposed total of


(indicative estimated price) would provide a surplus of €3.8m, sufficient to cover the additional


Under this alternative scenario the project would be implemented as per the proposed activity and thus

would incur the same build costs of €882,785. However, without registration through the Gold Standard


A brief assessment of the ability of householders to fund their own stove has been made


The average income in Kenya is KES4,000 – KES4,250 per month

the rural poor 83% of the household budget is spent on food20

.


1,200KSh/tonne. Also, at the national level, many householders are able to purchase a monthly permit to

firewood at a cost of KES39/month21

or for free from the local area.

if buying fuel at low price estimate, if buying fuel at

of fuel paying permit and if own collection of fuel not paying permit.

Calculations have been made to assess the ability of households in the target area to purchase a rocket

(breakdown cost available in the supplementary excel sheet info file) based

on the data tabulated below for the three possible situations stated above plus the free collection option,

which would be the best scenario economically.

Average income (KES/month) 4,250

Average income (KES/year) 51,000

Proportion of income spent on food (%) 83%

Fuel price 1 = low estimation (KES/tonne) 77

Fuel price 2 = high estimation (KES/tonne) 1,200

Permit cost (KES/month) 39

Permit cost (KES/year) 468

Cost of rocket stove (KES) 1,935Table showing initial data used to assess the study below.

http://www.ruralpovertyportal.org/web/guest/country/home/tags/kenya


kenya.com/SOKO_Proposal.pdf

http://www.unicef.org/infobycountry/kenya_statistics.html

Kenya: Integrated assessment of the Energy Policy”, UNEP, 2006 :


“study on Kenya’s energy demand, supply and policy strategy for households, small scale industrie

establishments”, Republic of Kenya Ministry of Energy, 2002

Version 03

improved cook stoves in the defined project

In this scenario a proposed total of 443,748VERs will be


m, sufficient to cover the additional


plemented as per the proposed activity and thus

. However, without registration through the Gold Standard


A brief assessment of the ability of householders to fund their own stove has been made: According to


250 per month18,19

(~€40), and for


householders are able to purchase a monthly permit to

Thus the four options were

if buying fuel at low price estimate, if buying fuel at high price estimate, if own

of fuel paying permit and if own collection of fuel not paying permit.

to assess the ability of households in the target area to purchase a rocket

(breakdown cost available in the supplementary excel sheet info file) based

ve plus the free collection option,

4,250

51,000

1,200

1,935 Table showing initial data used to assess the study below.


“study on Kenya’s energy demand, supply and policy strategy for households, small scale industries and service



Therefore, for the three possible scenarios stated above plus the

the best scenario economically, the different fuel costs to calculate the average household income

remaining after meeting the basic needs of fuel and food were projected. The cost of a rocket stove as a

proportion of this remaining income was then calculated and is shown in the table below. Each scenario

was assessed independently:

The results show that, based in the fuel use

conservative scenarios householders wishing to purchase a stove would have to save at least

remaining income for a year (calculations available in the supplementary excel info file). This does not

take into account any of the other costs of living such as clothing and schooling, it seems most likely then

that the majority of householders would not be able to independently purchase a rocket stove.

Alternatively the project could rely on charitable donations, however

small scale and sporadically when donor funding is available.

This alternative is likely to be more costly than the proposed activity.

Alternative 2

There are no costs associated with the continuation of cooking on a 3 stone

clearly less costly than the proposed activity.

It is concluded that the proposed activity is more costly than at least

so the assessment can proceed

apply Step 3: Barrier Analysis also.

Step 3: Barrier Analysis

Sub-step 3a: Identify barriers that would prevent the implementation of the proposed

activity:

(a) Investment barriers

Government funding

This is discussed in step 4 below.

Private funding

Significant up-front investment has been required to research, test and develop an appropriate

stove for the rural Kenyan situation. A study by the World Bank found that 53% of small

business in Kenya identified


22

Therefore, for the three possible scenarios stated above plus the free collection option, which would be



this remaining income was then calculated and is shown in the table below. Each scenario

Fuel use (t/hh/year) 2.90

If buys fuel: low estim 23%

If buys fuel: high estim 37%

If collects: paying permit 24%

If collects: free collection 22% Table showing cost of rocket stove as % of annual

HH income after purchasing food and fuel.

The results show that, based in the fuel use determined in the baseline study

conservative scenarios householders wishing to purchase a stove would have to save at least


he other costs of living such as clothing and schooling, it seems most likely then


Alternatively the project could rely on charitable donations, however this would

when donor funding is available.

This alternative is likely to be more costly than the proposed activity.

There are no costs associated with the continuation of cooking on a 3 stone

clearly less costly than the proposed activity.

t is concluded that the proposed activity is more costly than at least one alternative

the assessment can proceed to Step 4 (Common practice analysis). The proponent has opted to

: Barrier Analysis also.

step 3a: Identify barriers that would prevent the implementation of the proposed

Investment barriers

discussed in step 4 below.

front investment has been required to research, test and develop an appropriate


business in Kenya identified access to finance as a major business constraint, ranking this as the

Version 03

free collection option, which would be



this remaining income was then calculated and is shown in the table below. Each scenario

determined in the baseline study, even in the most

conservative scenarios householders wishing to purchase a stove would have to save at least 22% of their


he other costs of living such as clothing and schooling, it seems most likely then


ould only be possible for a

fire, thus this alternative is

one alternative (Alternative 2),

he proponent has opted to

step 3a: Identify barriers that would prevent the implementation of the proposed GS VER project

front investment has been required to research, test and develop an appropriate


access to finance as a major business constraint, ranking this as the



second largest obstacle, 83% of small businesses rely on internal funding/returns for investment.

Given this, it is unlikely that a source of funding could be found for a start

proposed.

The proposed project activity is being developed by co2balance UK Ltd.

established in 2003 in the carbon of

organisation, will manage the implementation of the

Co2balance UK Ltd has a number of offices and permanent employees, established with funding

obtained from retail sales of carbon, shareholders and private investors.

all investment made) is based around the existence of

without which projects would be cash negative as the stoves are

legal ownership of the co

be made in a single Kenyan S

As for obtaining private investment in such a business, s

political and economic environment

has a credit rating of ‘B

downgraded after the post

The poor credit rating embodies aspects of political instability and wide

2009, The World Bank Institute

aspects as political stability, corruption, rule of law, and government effectiveness from 1996 to

2008. The rating is displayed as a percentile and interpreted as the percentage of countries

rank below the one in question. Concerning “Political Stability and Absence of Violence” in

Kenya in 2008, the report stated, with 90 per cent confidence, that 80 per cent of countries are

more stable and less violent then Kenya. Additionally, 70 per

perform better than Kenya in “Control of Corruption” in 2008 with 90 per cent confidence.

Finally, a study by the World Bank found that 53% of small business in Kenya identified access

to finance as a major business constr

businesses rely on internal funding/returns for investment.

develop market efficient cook stoves are significant, and until a reduction in costs could be

proven, there would be no market. Given this financial case, for such a business it is unlikely that

a source of funding could be found.

In summary, there is no or insufficient private capital due to the actual or perceived risk of

conducting business in the

22 http://www.enterprisesurveys.org/CustomQuery/Country.aspx?econom

23 Kenya’s Credit Rating Outlook Raised to ’Stable’ by S&P 2008, March 10th).

www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601116&sid=aGLaHAcFh8sQ&refer=africa

24 Governance Matters 2009: Country Data Report for Kenya, 1998

http://info.worldbank.org/governance/wgi/pdf/c116.pdf


23

second largest obstacle, 83% of small businesses rely on internal funding/returns for investment.

Given this, it is unlikely that a source of funding could be found for a start

The proposed project activity is being developed by co2balance UK Ltd.

established in 2003 in the carbon offset industry. Carbon Zero Kenya Ltd, a separate

organisation, will manage the implementation of the project activity.

has a number of offices and permanent employees, established with funding

obtained from retail sales of carbon, shareholders and private investors.

all investment made) is based around the existence of carbon revenues as a source of income,

without which projects would be cash negative as the stoves are exchanged for a householders

legal ownership of the co2e emissions reductions. This level of investment made would unlikely

be made in a single Kenyan SME with the same business model.

As for obtaining private investment in such a business, studies, reports, and surveys show that the

political and economic environment in Kenya is not ideal for foreign investment. Kenya currently

has a credit rating of ‘B’, which is five levels below investment grade.

downgraded after the post-election violence in 2007/2008.

The poor credit rating embodies aspects of political instability and wide

2009, The World Bank Institute published governance ratings for Kenya. The report covers such


2008. The rating is displayed as a percentile and interpreted as the percentage of countries



more stable and less violent then Kenya. Additionally, 70 per cent of countries were shown to

perform better than Kenya in “Control of Corruption” in 2008 with 90 per cent confidence.


to finance as a major business constraint, ranking this as the second largest obstacle, 83% of small

businesses rely on internal funding/returns for investment.25

The up


n, there would be no market. Given this financial case, for such a business it is unlikely that

a source of funding could be found.


conducting business in the host country, Kenya.

http://www.enterprisesurveys.org/CustomQuery/Country.aspx?economyid=101&year=2007&characteristic=size

Kenya’s Credit Rating Outlook Raised to ’Stable’ by S&P 2008, March 10th). Bloomberg

/news?pid=20601116&sid=aGLaHAcFh8sQ&refer=africa

Governance Matters 2009: Country Data Report for Kenya, 1998-2008 (2009, June).

http://info.worldbank.org/governance/wgi/pdf/c116.pdf

Version 03

second largest obstacle, 83% of small businesses rely on internal funding/returns for investment.22

Given this, it is unlikely that a source of funding could be found for a start-up business as

The proposed project activity is being developed by co2balance UK Ltd. a private business

fset industry. Carbon Zero Kenya Ltd, a separate

has a number of offices and permanent employees, established with funding

obtained from retail sales of carbon, shareholders and private investors. The business model (and

carbon revenues as a source of income,

exchanged for a householders

. This level of investment made would unlikely

tudies, reports, and surveys show that the

is not ideal for foreign investment. Kenya currently

which is five levels below investment grade.23

The credit rating was

The poor credit rating embodies aspects of political instability and wide-spread corruption. In

published governance ratings for Kenya. The report covers such


2008. The rating is displayed as a percentile and interpreted as the percentage of countries that



cent of countries were shown to

perform better than Kenya in “Control of Corruption” in 2008 with 90 per cent confidence.24


aint, ranking this as the second largest obstacle, 83% of small

The up-front costs required to


n, there would be no market. Given this financial case, for such a business it is unlikely that


yid=101&year=2007&characteristic=size

Bloomberg, Retrieved from

2008 (2009, June). World Bank Institute.



(b) Technological barriers

Although the generic

to overcome the numerous

Investment is required in

materials; transportation of materials; education programme, amongst other things.

there is existing ceramic manufacturing capacity within the countr

specific components

utilised would not have been developed without the anticipated carbon finance.

product quality is also an important fa

Ceramic Jiko (KCJ)

urban dwellers. It has been found that although widely disseminated, the product efficiency and

durability has dwindled due to a lack of enforced standards and cost

in the market.26

Despite the presence of improved cook stoves in Kenya for 30 years

stoves in rural Kenya

typically using inefficient

barriers.2930

Clearly marketing and education is required to encourage the uptake and continued

use of improved stoves, this is a challenge in the rural communities of the proposed activities.

Skilled labour: In addition there is a lack of an adequately trained local workforce capable of

constructing and maintaining stoves at present

technology to be utilised

capacity to be built due to the financial barriers stated above.

(c) Barriers due to prevailing practice

Habitual use of traditional stoves imposes a very strong influence on the baseline scenario,

resulting in continuation of use of tradi

introduce improved cook

dwelling charcoal users.

Although significant efforts have been made to produce an improved stove that is similar in use to

three stone cooking, there remain some differences in the way a user must approach cooking.

Without community-based staff

widespread adoption would occur.

26 Pg. 56“Study on Kenya’s energy demand, supply and policy strategy for households, small scale industries and

service establishments”, Republic of Kenya Ministry of Energy, Sept 2002.

27 http://www.hedon.info/WomenAndEnergyProject


service establishments”, Republic of Kenya

29 http://www.hedon.info/RocketMudStovesInKenya

30 www.unep.ch/etb/areas/pdf/Kenya%20ReportFINAL


24

Technological barriers Inter alia

‘rocket stove’ technology is not new, significant funding has been

the numerous technological barriers to implementation

required in: researching, developing and testing the design

materials; transportation of materials; education programme, amongst other things.

there is existing ceramic manufacturing capacity within the country,

that have been developed for the project. The specific technology to be

utilised would not have been developed without the anticipated carbon finance.

product quality is also an important factor to consider, especially in light of the successful Kenya

which is independently produced and marketed for charcoal consuming


has dwindled due to a lack of enforced standards and cost-

Despite the presence of improved cook stoves in Kenya for 30 years27

stoves in rural Kenya is not widespread (estimated at 4% penetration

inefficient three stone fires due to a number of technological and financial


toves, this is a challenge in the rural communities of the proposed activities.


constructing and maintaining stoves at present, specific training in constructi

technology to be utilised. There is no clear development of a market that would drive such

capacity to be built due to the financial barriers stated above.

Barriers due to prevailing practice inter alia

traditional stoves imposes a very strong influence on the baseline scenario,

resulting in continuation of use of traditional three stone fires. There have been some efforts t

introduce improved cook-stoves in Kenya however success has been limited

ling charcoal users.



based staff to provide education and guidance on stove use it is unlikely that

widespread adoption would occur.

Pg. 56“Study on Kenya’s energy demand, supply and policy strategy for households, small scale industries and


http://www.hedon.info/WomenAndEnergyProject-Kenya



http://www.hedon.info/RocketMudStovesInKenya

www.unep.ch/etb/areas/pdf/Kenya%20ReportFINAL.pdf

Version 03

significant funding has been required

of the specific technology.

researching, developing and testing the design; financing construction

materials; transportation of materials; education programme, amongst other things. Although

y, financing is required for

have been developed for the project. The specific technology to be

utilised would not have been developed without the anticipated carbon finance. Maintenance of

ctor to consider, especially in light of the successful Kenya

which is independently produced and marketed for charcoal consuming


-cutting measures to remain

27, the use of improved wood

(estimated at 4% penetration28

), with householders

due to a number of technological and financial


toves, this is a challenge in the rural communities of the proposed activities.


, specific training in construction is required for the

. There is no clear development of a market that would drive such

traditional stoves imposes a very strong influence on the baseline scenario,

. There have been some efforts to

however success has been limited mainly to urban-



to provide education and guidance on stove use it is unlikely that





Outcome of sub-step 3a:

Barrier

Investment – private funding

Technological - development

Technological - QA

Technological - training

Prevailing practice

Clear barriers such as poor access to finance, low attractiveness of Kenya

high quality technology, and low education about the improved technology offered

that may prevent the implementation of alternative scenario

Sub-step 3b: Show that the identified barriers would not prevent

the alternatives (except the proposed project activity)

None of the identified barriers

stone fires, from occurring.

“If both Sub-steps 3a – 3b are satisfied, proceed to Step 4 (Common practice analysis)”.

Step4: Common practice analysis

Sub-step 4a: Analyze other activities similar to the proposed project activity:

Improved cook stoves started to appear in Kenya in 1981

Renewable Sources of Energy’

Upesi Stoves

The Upesi project started in 1995, it was supported by Intermediate Technology Development Group

(ITDG) the aim was to commercialise the Upesi stove in Western Kenya.

in collaboration with GTZ 9 years previously:

was distributed by Ministry of Agriculture employees,

by GTZ in order to make distribution viable in rural areas. After 8 years the support was withdrawn and

so the project did not continue on any significant scale

The stove is a simple fired clay liner (see image) wh

ground to improve efficiency and durability. Original testing

expected life of around 4 years.

31 http://www.hedon.info/TheUpesiRuralStovesProject


25

Barrier Prevents scenario 1? Prevents scenario 2?

private funding Yes – not available

development Yes – funding required

QA Yes – consistent

funding required

training Yes – funding required

Prevailing practice - education Yes – funding required

such as poor access to finance, low attractiveness of Kenya for external investment, lack of

high quality technology, and low education about the improved technology offered

that may prevent the implementation of alternative scenario 1.

step 3b: Show that the identified barriers would not prevent the implementation of at least

the alternatives (except the proposed project activity)

None of the identified barriers discussed above prevent alternative 2, continuation

3b are satisfied, proceed to Step 4 (Common practice analysis)”.

Step4: Common practice analysis

step 4a: Analyze other activities similar to the proposed project activity:

mproved cook stoves started to appear in Kenya in 1981 following the UN ‘Conference on New and

Renewable Sources of Energy’


commercialise the Upesi stove in Western Kenya. This stove had been developed

ion with GTZ 9 years previously: Potters were trained in the production of the liner and it

was distributed by Ministry of Agriculture employees, price (~120KES) and distribution were subsidised


so the project did not continue on any significant scale31

The stove is a simple fired clay liner (see image) which can be either used on it

ground to improve efficiency and durability. Original testing* showed up to 43% wood savings and an

expected life of around 4 years.

http://www.hedon.info/TheUpesiRuralStovesProject

Version 03

Prevents scenario 2?

No

No

No

No

No

for external investment, lack of

high quality technology, and low education about the improved technology offered have been identified

the implementation of at least one of

continuation of cooking on three

3b are satisfied, proceed to Step 4 (Common practice analysis)”.

following the UN ‘Conference on New and


This stove had been developed

Potters were trained in the production of the liner and it

and distribution were subsidised


can be either used on its own or built into the

showed up to 43% wood savings and an



After 5 years the Upesi project had trained a number of

liner, it was estimated that 16,000 had been distributed.

The Rural Stoves West Kenya (R

project working with the Ministry of Agriculture through the Home Economics Officers, the interest

being that through the reduced pressure on non

which was of interest to the Ministry of Agricul

Agriculture dropped off, the level of production decreased as the subsidies, in the form of free transport

for the stoves and controlled prices

prices.

32 Photo taken from http://www.hedon.info/TheUpesiRuralStovesProject

33 Rural Stoves West Kenya: http://practicalaction.org/?id=t4sl_casestudy_stoves

34 Taken from http://www.pisces.or.ke/pubs/pdfs/PISCES_Kenya_Report_2010.pdf


26

Upesi liner

32

After 5 years the Upesi project had trained a number of people in marketing as well as production of the

liner, it was estimated that 16,000 had been distributed.

The Rural Stoves West Kenya (RSWK) project (building the mandeleo/upesi/jiko Kisasa


being that through the reduced pressure on non-renewable biomass - rate of deforestation was reduced

which was of interest to the Ministry of Agriculture. When funding (1990 -


he stoves and controlled prices were removed and the poorer purchasers were unable to aff

Built-in Upesi/Mandeleo stove34

http://www.hedon.info/TheUpesiRuralStovesProject

http://practicalaction.org/?id=t4sl_casestudy_stoves

http://www.pisces.or.ke/pubs/pdfs/PISCES_Kenya_Report_2010.pdf

Version 03

people in marketing as well as production of the

/jiko Kisasa stoves33

), was a


rate of deforestation was reduced

1995) from the Ministry of


were removed and the poorer purchasers were unable to afford higher



Similar observations have been made regarding the Kuni Mbili, promoted by KENGO, the wood fuel

version of the KCJ which is subsidised and often sold at cost or less than cost

considered acceptable as the stove is still in demonstration, but when subsidies are removed the success of

the Kuni Mbili commercialisation is in question. There are only 20,000 of these stoves in operation in

Kenya at present.36

The Kenyan Ceramic Jiko was first pioneered two decades ago and has broken into the urban market,

however over this time stove quality has deteriorated as price competition has led producers to cut costs

in response to competition38

charcoal than conventional ones, today this is 24%. Consumers

efficiency but a notice the decline in appearance and robustness.

The Private Sector Development in Agriculture (PDSA) stove project was

of the German Federal Ministry for Economic Cooperation and Development (BMZ)

this project was to distribute ~180,000 ICS

districts of Kenya, including Kisumu. The project focussed on commercialising a number of stove

technologies, dometic ICS were; the

built in & a new model, the rocket

35

Kuni Mbili

http://www.hedon.info/CookingStovesForCommercialSustainableProductionAn

36 http://www.hedon.info/CookingStovesForCommercialSustainableProductionAndDisseminationInAfrica

37 Taken from http://www.bioenergylists.org/stovesdoc/Ezzati/Home%20Page%20of%20Majid%20Ezzati.htm

38 DFID http://povertystoves.energyprojects.net/


27


version of the KCJ which is subsidised and often sold at cost or less than cost

ered acceptable as the stove is still in demonstration, but when subsidies are removed the success of


Kuni Mbili37

was first pioneered two decades ago and has broken into the urban market,

however over this time stove quality has deteriorated as price competition has led producers to cut costs 38

. Improved Kenyan stoves tested in the 1980s consumed

charcoal than conventional ones, today this is 24%. Consumers are not necessarily aware of drop in

efficiency but a notice the decline in appearance and robustness.

The Private Sector Development in Agriculture (PDSA) stove project was carried out by GTZ on behalf

of the German Federal Ministry for Economic Cooperation and Development (BMZ)

this project was to distribute ~180,000 ICS by 12/2008 within rural and urban


, dometic ICS were; the existing Jiko Kisasa (formally mandeleo/upesi) liner, Jiko Kisasa

rocket mud stoves.

http://www.hedon.info/CookingStovesForCommercialSustainableProductionAndDisseminationInAfrica


http://www.bioenergylists.org/stovesdoc/Ezzati/Home%20Page%20of%20Majid%20Ezzati.htm

http://povertystoves.energyprojects.net/

Version 03


version of the KCJ which is subsidised and often sold at cost or less than cost35

. This is currently

ered acceptable as the stove is still in demonstration, but when subsidies are removed the success of


was first pioneered two decades ago and has broken into the urban market,

however over this time stove quality has deteriorated as price competition has led producers to cut costs

1980s consumed 30-50% less

not necessarily aware of drop in

carried out by GTZ on behalf

of the German Federal Ministry for Economic Cooperation and Development (BMZ). The objective of

rural and urban households in a number of


Jiko Kisasa (formally mandeleo/upesi) liner, Jiko Kisasa

dDisseminationInAfrica


http://www.bioenergylists.org/stovesdoc/Ezzati/Home%20Page%20of%20Majid%20Ezzati.htm



It is reported37

that by Dec 2007, 24 individuals were involved in the production of fixed Jiko Kisasa

stoves and 220 trained in constructing rocket stoves.

Sub-step 4b: Discuss any similar Opt

A recent assessment of the PDSA project

rocket stove (similar quality to the proposed activitie

as those targeted by the propo

was also found that the lowest number of households utilising ICS was in the area where the proposed

activity will be developed.41

order of responses) were cost, no interest & don’t know where to buy them

activity addresses these issues.

Although a number of improved cook stove dissemina

have been subsidised by external funding and have not lead to widespread common use of improved cook

stoves in rural Kenya use of improved wood stoves in rural Kenya is estimated at 4% penetration

repeated efforts at commercialisation suggest that they have not been successful despite subsidising

stoves. The distinction between these and the proposed activi

for legal entitlement to the co2e rights,

even to buy a subsidised stove. On top of this the stove quality will be higher due to the

39 Taken from http://www.gtz.de/de/dokumente/en

40 Pg 35 http://www.gtz.de/de/dokumente/en






28

Two pot rocket stove39


and 220 trained in constructing rocket stoves.

step 4b: Discuss any similar Options that are occurring:

A recent assessment of the PDSA project40

showed that no poor households had the more expensive

to the proposed activities technology) and that low income households such

as those targeted by the proposed activity had only 16% of ICS despite making up half the population.

the lowest number of households utilising ICS was in the area where the proposed

Surveying showed that the main reasons for people not owning an ICS (in

order of responses) were cost, no interest & don’t know where to buy them

s these issues.

improved cook stove dissemination activities have been observed in Kenya,


use of improved wood stoves in rural Kenya is estimated at 4% penetration

eated efforts at commercialisation suggest that they have not been successful despite subsidising

stoves. The distinction between these and the proposed activity is that stoves are given in exchange only

for legal entitlement to the co2e rights, and in the poorest rural communities, thus reaching those unlikely

even to buy a subsidised stove. On top of this the stove quality will be higher due to the

http://www.gtz.de/de/dokumente/en-kenya-results-assessment-stoves-2009.pdf


dokumente/en-kenya-results-assessment-stoves-2009.pdf


rgy demand, supply and policy strategy for households, small scale industries and


Version 03


showed that no poor households had the more expensive

and that low income households such

sed activity had only 16% of ICS despite making up half the population. It

the lowest number of households utilising ICS was in the area where the proposed

Surveying showed that the main reasons for people not owning an ICS (in

order of responses) were cost, no interest & don’t know where to buy them42

. Clearly the proposed

tion activities have been observed in Kenya, all


use of improved wood stoves in rural Kenya is estimated at 4% penetration43

. The

eated efforts at commercialisation suggest that they have not been successful despite subsidising

ty is that stoves are given in exchange only

e poorest rural communities, thus reaching those unlikely

even to buy a subsidised stove. On top of this the stove quality will be higher due to the use of centralised

2009.pdf

2009.pdf

2009.pdf

2009.pdf

rgy demand, supply and policy strategy for households, small scale industries and



production of the key components (pot rests and ceramic liner) and

can be put in place with a project building many stoves in a short period and a small geographical area.

In this sense it is anticipated that product quality differentiates the proposed project from others.

It is therefore concluded that t

B.6. Emission reductions:

B.6.1. Explanation of methodological choices:

The project proponent has elected to use a fixed baseline

capacity limitation the construction of the stoves will take

project, as indicated in section

crediting year. Each stove build date is i

reductions calculated on an individual basis. A 1 week lead time is accounted for between construction

and operation of the stove, this leads to a conservative assessment of the emission reduct

accurate calculation of emission reductions under a progressive distribution scenario.

distribution record will be accordingly built

baseline approach.

The exact equations given in the methodology were not used however the method and calculated results

are not altered. This is approved by the methodology (page 19, penultimate paragraph); “

to derive emission reduction values on a per Unit basis directly

calculation of project emission reductions (and of baseline and project emissions) accordingly, in cases

where this results in the most transparent and clear mode of calculation, and where this is consistent with

the calculations above”.

Changes made are demonstrated below.

Original calculations from methodology:

∑∑ −−= yiyiy PEBEER ,,

Where:

ERy = Emissions reductions in total project population in year y (tCO

BEi,y = Baseline emissions of cluster i in year y (tCO

PEi,y = Project emissions of cluster i in year y (tCO

LEi,y = Leakage of cluster i in year y (tCO

Within each cluster emissions are calculated thus:

yyiyi BE7BE ×= ,, …………Eqn ER.1b

yyiyi PE7PE ×= ,, …………Eqn ER.1c

Where:


29

production of the key components (pot rests and ceramic liner) and more stringent QA pr



It is therefore concluded that the project is additional.

Emission reductions:

Explanation of methodological choices:

project proponent has elected to use a fixed baseline, inline with the chosen methodology.

limitation the construction of the stoves will take place throughout the first

section C.1.1. All project stoves will have been constructed by the end of the first

Each stove build date is individually recorded in the proponent’s database and emission


, this leads to a conservative assessment of the emission reduct

accurate calculation of emission reductions under a progressive distribution scenario.

distribution record will be accordingly built into the database to justify the application of the fixed

ions given in the methodology were not used however the method and calculated results

are not altered. This is approved by the methodology (page 19, penultimate paragraph); “

to derive emission reduction values on a per Unit basis directly from the KT tests, and modify the mode of



Changes made are demonstrated below.

Original calculations from methodology:

∑− yiLE , …………Eqn ER.1a

Emissions reductions in total project population in year y (tCO2e/yr)

Baseline emissions of cluster i in year y (tCO2e/yr)

Project emissions of cluster i in year y (tCO2e/yr)

Leakage of cluster i in year y (tCO2e/yr)

Within each cluster emissions are calculated thus:

…………Eqn ER.1b

…………Eqn ER.1c

Version 03

more stringent QA procedures that



inline with the chosen methodology. Due to

the first crediting year of the

All project stoves will have been constructed by the end of the first

ndividually recorded in the proponent’s database and emission


, this leads to a conservative assessment of the emission reductions made and

accurate calculation of emission reductions under a progressive distribution scenario. Likewise, the

to justify the application of the fixed-

ions given in the methodology were not used however the method and calculated results

are not altered. This is approved by the methodology (page 19, penultimate paragraph); “It is legitimate

from the KT tests, and modify the mode of





Ni,y = the number of Units in cluster i

××= ,,, blyblyblnrby EFBXBE

+∑(Non-CO2 emissions during cooking)

+∑(GHG emissions during production of the fuels) …………Eqn B.1a

Where:

BEy = baseline emissions in year y (in tonnes CO2e per year) specific to cluster and Unit chosen

Xnrb,bl,y = the non-renewable fraction of the woody biomass harvested in the project collection area in year

y in the baseline scenario

Bbl,y = the mass of woody biomass consumed during cooking in the baseline in year y (tonnes/year)

EFbl,bio,co2 = the CO2 emission factor for use of the biomass fuel in the baseline scenario in tonnes CO2

per tonne fuel

AFbl,i,y = The mass of alternative fuel i

throughout the project period, in tonnes. This mass can be set to zero in cases where the KT is

appropriately designed to subsume alternative fuels (approach 3).

EFaf,co2,i = The CO2 emission

tonne fuel.

Non-CO2 emissions during cooking

∑ ×= ( , yblB

GHG emissions during production of the fuels

= , yblnrb BX ×

+∑( ,, yiblAF

+∑ ×( , ybl EFB

+∑( ,, yiblAF

Where:

EFbl,bio,non-co2,i = Emission factor for GHG gas i in the baseline scenario in units of tonnes gas per tonne

wood-fuel

EFaf,non-co2 gas i = Non-CO2 emission factor during cooking for alte

gas per tonnes fuel

EFbio,prod,co2 = CO2 emission factor for wood

EFaf,prod,co2,i = CO2 emission factor for fuel I during production in tonnes gas per tonnes fuel


30

= the number of Units in cluster i

∑ ×+ )( ,2,,,2,, iCOafyiblCObiobl EFAF

CO2 emissions during cooking)

∑(GHG emissions during production of the fuels) …………Eqn B.1a

= baseline emissions in year y (in tonnes CO2e per year) specific to cluster and Unit chosen

renewable fraction of the woody biomass harvested in the project collection area in year

y biomass consumed during cooking in the baseline in year y (tonnes/year)

= the CO2 emission factor for use of the biomass fuel in the baseline scenario in tonnes CO2

= The mass of alternative fuel i in the baseline in year y in accordance with trends projected



= The CO2 emission factor for use of the alternative fuel i in the baseline in tonnes of CO2 per

CO2 emissions during cooking

∑ −− ×+× () _2,,,,,2,, gascononiafyiblicononbiobl EFAFEF


2,, coprodbioEF×

× ),2,, icoprodafEF

− )__2,, igascononprodbioEF

−× )__2,,, igascononprodiafEF …………Eqn B.1c

= Emission factor for GHG gas i in the baseline scenario in units of tonnes gas per tonne

CO2 emission factor during cooking for alternative fuel i for GHG gas i in tonnes

= CO2 emission factor for wood-fuel during production in tonnes gas per tonnes fuel

= CO2 emission factor for fuel I during production in tonnes gas per tonnes fuel

Version 03

∑(GHG emissions during production of the fuels) …………Eqn B.1a

= baseline emissions in year y (in tonnes CO2e per year) specific to cluster and Unit chosen

renewable fraction of the woody biomass harvested in the project collection area in year

y biomass consumed during cooking in the baseline in year y (tonnes/year)

= the CO2 emission factor for use of the biomass fuel in the baseline scenario in tonnes CO2

in the baseline in year y in accordance with trends projected


factor for use of the alternative fuel i in the baseline in tonnes of CO2 per

)_ igas …………Eqn B.1b

= Emission factor for GHG gas i in the baseline scenario in units of tonnes gas per tonne

rnative fuel i for GHG gas i in tonnes

fuel during production in tonnes gas per tonnes fuel

= CO2 emission factor for fuel I during production in tonnes gas per tonnes fuel



EFbio,prod,non-co2 gas i = Non-CO2 emission factor for wood

fuel

EFaf,prod,non-co2 gas i = Non-CO2 emission factor for alternative fuel i for GHG gas i during production in

tonnes gas per tonnes fuel

××= ,,, pjypjypjnrby EFBXPE

+∑(Non-CO2 emissions during cooking)

+∑(GHG emissions during production of the fuels) …………Eqn P.1a

Where:

BEy = project emissions in year y (in tonnes CO2e per year) specific to cluster and Unit chosen

Xnrb,pj,y = the non-renewable fraction of the woody biomass harvested in the project collection area in year

y in the project scenario

Bpj,y = the mass of woody biomass consumed during cooking in the project each year (tonnes/year)

AFpj,i,y = The mass of alternative fuel i in the



Non-CO2 emissions during cooking

∑ ×= ( ,,, biopjypj EFB


= ,, bioypjnrb EFBX ××

+∑ ×( ,,, afyipj EFAF

+∑ ×( ,, prodbioypj EFB

+∑ ×( ,,, iafyipj EFAF

Calculations used in this project

The KPT was appropriately designed

of the methodology). So, the KPT measures fuel consumption of the primary fuel only, while the

households involved are carrying on a degree of typical fu

RE forms during the KPT itself. Therefore, any secondary fuel is treated as zero in both the baseline and

the project scenarios. Therefore,

Furthermore, for the reasons set out in B.6.2 EF

This leaves the following equations:


31

CO2 emission factor for wood-fuel during production in tonnes gas per tonne

CO2 emission factor for alternative fuel i for GHG gas i during production in

∑ ×+ )( ,2,,,2,, iCOafyipjCObiopj EFAF

CO2 emissions during cooking)

∑(GHG emissions during production of the fuels) …………Eqn P.1a

= project emissions in year y (in tonnes CO2e per year) specific to cluster and Unit chosen

le fraction of the woody biomass harvested in the project collection area in year

= the mass of woody biomass consumed during cooking in the project each year (tonnes/year)

= The mass of alternative fuel i in the project in year y in accordance with trends projected



CO2 emissions during cooking

∑ −− ×+ )() __2,,,,,2, igascononiafyipjiconon EFAF …………Eqn P.1b


2,, coprod

),2, icoprod

− )__2, igascononprod

− )__2,, igascononprodi …………Eqn B.1c

Calculations used in this project:

he KPT was appropriately designed following the third form to calculate the baseline (refer to page 12


households involved are carrying on a degree of typical fuel and stove-type mixing and/or typical use of


the project scenarios. Therefore, all alternative fuels, AFbl,i,y and AFpj,i,y were set to zero.

or the reasons set out in B.6.2 EFbio,prod,co2 and EFbio,prod,non-co2 gas i

This leaves the following equations:

Version 03

fuel during production in tonnes gas per tonne

CO2 emission factor for alternative fuel i for GHG gas i during production in

∑(GHG emissions during production of the fuels) …………Eqn P.1a

= project emissions in year y (in tonnes CO2e per year) specific to cluster and Unit chosen

le fraction of the woody biomass harvested in the project collection area in year

= the mass of woody biomass consumed during cooking in the project each year (tonnes/year)

project in year y in accordance with trends projected


…………Eqn P.1b

following the third form to calculate the baseline (refer to page 12


type mixing and/or typical use of


were set to zero.

were also set to zero.



,,, blyblyblnrby EFBXBE ××=

+ ( ,,, nonbioblybl EFB ×∑

,,, pjypjypjnrby EFBXPE ××=

+ ( ,,, nonbiopjypj EFB ×∑

Since:

∑∑ −−= yiyiy PEBEER ,,

As there is only one cluster this reduces to:

( )( )yyyy 7PEBEER ×−=

( )yy 7LE ×−

Hence:

=yER

(( ,,, yblyblnrb EFBX ××

-( ,,, ypjypjnrb EFBX ××

( )yy 7LE ×−

Since in all cases:

ypjnrbyblnrb XX ,,,, =

And

2,,2,, CObiopjCObiobl EFEF =

And

cononbiopjicononbiobl EFEF ,,,2,, −− =

The equation can be rearranged thus:


32

2,, CObiobl

),2 iconon−

2,, CObiopj

),2 iconon−

∑− yiL ,

As there is only one cluster this reduces to:

2,, CObioblEF + )( ,2,,, icononbioblybl EFB −×∑

2,, CObiopjEF + )( ,2,,, icononbiopjypj EFB −×∑ ) y7× )

ico ,2

The equation can be rearranged thus:

Version 03



=yER ( ( ),,, ynrbypjybl XBB ×−

+ ( )∑ ×− ypjybl EFBB ,,

( )yy 7LE ×−

As this project is accounting for methane (CH

(CO2), the equation is then:


+ ( ),, bioypjybl EFBB ×−

+ ( )bioypjybl EFBB ,, ×−

( )yy 7LE ×−

As stoves are being constructed progressively, the equations used in the proponent’s database will

account for this as follows:

For each stove the following calculation is made:

=ystoveER , (( ( ),, ypjybl BB ×−



365÷ )

×days operational

This is then summed for each vintage, and the leakage subtracted based on the number built

vintage.

B.6.2. Data and parameters that are available at validation:

The project proponent has elected to use a fixed baseline, in line with the chosen methodology, and hence

the following parameters will be

Data / Parameter: Ny

Data unit: Number

Description: Number of stoves in year

Source of data used: Calculated fr

Value applied: 51,033

Justification of the

choice of data or

description of

measurement methods

and procedures actually

applied :

Deemed valid by methodology.

Any comment: Details of calculations available to validator.


33

2,CObioy EF×

− icononbioEF ,2, y7× )

As this project is accounting for methane (CH4) and Nitrous Oxide (N2O) as well as

2,CObioy EF×

4,CHbio

O7bio 2, ) y7× )


For each stove the following calculation is made:

2,, CObioynrb EFX ×

4,CHbio

O7bio 2, ))

This is then summed for each vintage, and the leakage subtracted based on the number built

Data and parameters that are available at validation:


the following parameters will be available at validation but not monitored:

Number

Number of stoves in year

Calculated from ex-ante

51,033


Details of calculations available to validator.

Version 03

O) as well as Carbon Dioxide


This is then summed for each vintage, and the leakage subtracted based on the number built during that




Data / Parameter: EFbl.bio,co2

Data unit: tCO

Description: CO

Source of data used: Calculated from

Value applied: 1.7472


choice of data or

description of

measurement methods


applied :


Any comment: Details of calculations available to validator.

Data / Parameter: EFpj.bio,co2

Data unit: tCO

Description: CO

Source of data used: Calculated from IPCC defaults



choice of data or

description of

measurement methods


applied :

Deeme

Any comment:

Data / Parameter: EFaf,co2

Data unit: tCO

Description: CO

Source of data used: N/A

Value applied: N/A


choice of data or

description of

measurement methods


applied :

The Kitchen Survey identified that

beneficiaries

Any comment:

Data / Parameter: EFbl.bio,non

Data unit: tCO

Description: Non


v.02’.



choice of data or



34

bl.bio,co2

tCO2/t_biomass

CO2 emission factor arising from use of wood-fuel in baseline scenario

Calculated from IPCC defaults

1.7472


Details of calculations available to validator.

pj.bio,co2

tCO2/t_biomass

CO2 emission factor arising from use of wood-fuel in project scenario

Calculated from IPCC defaults

1.7472


af,co2

tCO2/t_fuel

CO2 emission factor arising from use of alternative fuel

N/A

N/A

The Kitchen Survey identified that no alternative fuels were used by project

beneficiaries.

bl.bio,non-co2

tCO2/t_biomass

Non-CO2 emission factor arising from use of wood-fuel in baseline scenario

Calculated from IPCC defaults – refer to ‘PDD supplementary data Aberdares

v.02’.

0.1176


Version 03

fuel in baseline scenario

fuel in project scenario

emission factor arising from use of alternative fuel

alternative fuels were used by project

fuel in baseline scenario

refer to ‘PDD supplementary data Aberdares



description of

measurement methods


applied :

Any comment:

Data / Parameter: EFpj.bio,non

Data unit: tCO

Description: Non


v.02’.



choice of data or

description of

measurement methods


applied :


Any comment: Refer

Data / Parameter: EFaf, non

Data unit: tCO

Description: Non


Value applied: N/A


choice of data or

description of

measurement methods


applied :

The Kitchen Surveys identified that n

beneficiaries.

Any comment:

Data / Parameter: EFbio,prod,co2

Data unit: tCO

Description: CO

Source of data used: IPCC defaults or project

Value applied: 0


choice of data or

description of

measurement methods


applied :

As revealed in the

transported manually

household and so does not generate any production related CO

Any comment:

Data / Parameter: EFaf,prod,co2

Data unit: tCO


35

pj.bio,non-co2

tCO2/t_biomass

Non-CO2 emission factor arising from use of wood-fuel in project scenario

Calculated from IPCC defaults – refer to ‘PDD supplementary data Aberdares

v.02’.

1176


Refer ‘PDD supplementary data v0.2’ for further details.

af, non-co2

tCO2/t_fuel

Non-CO2 emission factor arising from use of alternative fuel

N/A

N/A

The Kitchen Surveys identified that no alternative fuels were used by project

beneficiaries.

bio,prod,co2

tCO2/t_fuel

CO2 emission factor arising from production of wood

IPCC defaults or project-relevant measurement reports

As revealed in the baseline Kitchen Surveys (annex 3) fuel is harvested and

transported manually (walking and/or donkey cart) by each individual

household and so does not generate any production related CO

af,prod,co2

tCO2/t_fuel

Version 03

fuel in project scenario

refer to ‘PDD supplementary data Aberdares

for further details.

emission factor arising from use of alternative fuel

alternative fuels were used by project

emission factor arising from production of wood-fuel

measurement reports

Kitchen Surveys (annex 3) fuel is harvested and

by each individual

household and so does not generate any production related CO2 emissions.



Description: Non


Value applied: N/A


choice of data or

description of

measurement methods


applied :

The

project beneficiaries.

Any comment:

Data / Parameter: EFbio,prod,non

Data unit: tCO

Description: Non

Source of data used: IPCC defaults or

Value applied: 0


choice of data or

description of

measurement methods


applied :

As revealed in the

transported manually

hou

emissions.

Any comment:

Data / Parameter: EFaf,prod,non

Data unit: tCO

Description: Non


Value applied: N/A


choice of data or

description of

measurement methods


applied :

The


Any comment:

Data / Parameter: Xnrb,bl,y

Data unit: Fraction

Description: Non

Source of data used: Report compiled by Anthony Mills (PhD) and Diane Southey (MSc)

C4 EcoSolutions (Pty) Ltd., Cape Town, South Africa

Value applied: 0.95


choice of data or

description of

measurement methods


Assessment carried out by third party according to

Improved Cook


36

Non-CO2 emission factor arising from production of alternative fuel

N/A

N/A

The Baseline Kitchen Surveys identified that no alternative fuels were used by


bio,prod,non-co2

tCO2/t_biomass

Non-CO2 emission factor arising from production of wood

IPCC defaults or project-relevant measurement reports

As revealed in the baseline Kitchen Surveys (annex 3) fuel is harvested and

transported manually (walking and/or by donkey cart)

household and so does not result in any transport related

emissions.

af,prod,non-co2

tCO2/t_fuel


N/A

N/A

The baseline Kitchen Surveys identified that no alternative fuels were used by


nrb,bl,y

Fraction

Non-renewability status of woody biomass fuel in year in baseline scenario

Report compiled by Anthony Mills (PhD) and Diane Southey (MSc)


0.95

Assessment carried out by third party according to GS m

Improved Cook-Stoves and Kitchen Regimes v.02.

Version 03

emission factor arising from production of alternative fuel

that no alternative fuels were used by

emission factor arising from production of wood-fuel

relevant measurement reports

Kitchen Surveys (annex 3) fuel is harvested and

(walking and/or by donkey cart) by each individual

related production CO2


Kitchen Surveys identified that no alternative fuels were used by

renewability status of woody biomass fuel in year in baseline scenario



GS methodology for



applied :

Any comment:

Data / Parameter: Xre,bl,y

Data unit: Fraction

Description: Woody biomass combustion avoided due to

baseline

Source of data used: Baseline

Value applied: 0


choice of data or

description of

measurement methods


applied :

No renewable fuel use by project beneficiaries was identified by the

kitchen surveys, monitoring kitchen surveys will be used to identify any change

in this situation.

Any comment:

Data / Parameter: Xaf,bl,y

Data unit: Fraction

Description: Woody biomass combustion avoided d

Source of data used: Baseline Kitchen Surveys

Value applied: 0


choice of data or

description of

measurement methods


applied :


kitch

in this situation.

Any comment:

Data / Parameter: EFaf,prod,non

Data unit: tCO

Description: Non


Value applied: N/A


choice of data or

description of

measurement methods


applied :

The


Any comment:

Data / Parameter: AFbl,i,y

Data unit: t_fuel/unit

Description: The mass of alternative fuel i combusted in the baseline year

Source of data used: Baseline Kitchen Surveys


37

re,bl,y

Fraction

Woody biomass combustion avoided due to renewable energy

baseline year (i.e. solar cookers, agricultural residues, etc)

Baseline Kitchen Survey



in this situation.

af,bl,y

Fraction

Woody biomass combustion avoided due to alternative fuels

Baseline Kitchen Surveys



in this situation.

af,prod,non-co2

tCO2/t_fuel


N/A

N/A

The baseline Kitchen Surveys identified that no alternative fuels were used by


bl,i,y

t_fuel/unit-year

The mass of alternative fuel i combusted in the baseline year

Baseline Kitchen Surveys

Version 03

renewable energy fuels form in

(i.e. solar cookers, agricultural residues, etc)

No renewable fuel use by project beneficiaries was identified by the baseline


ue to alternative fuels in baseline


en surveys, monitoring kitchen surveys will be used to identify any change


Kitchen Surveys identified that no alternative fuels were used by

The mass of alternative fuel i combusted in the baseline year



Value applied: 0


choice of data or

description of

measurement methods


applied :


kitchen surveys, monitoring kitchen surveys will be used to identify a

in this situation.

Any comment:

B.6.3 Ex-ante calculation of emission reductions:

All the calculations performed in this section are

excel info sheet sent with this document.

As described in section B.6.1. the following equation has been used to calculate emissions.




( )yy 7LE ×−

As discussed in section B.4 and the attached report

average fuel saving per stove per

to calculate the ex-ante emissions reductions per stove


38


kitchen surveys, monitoring kitchen surveys will be used to identify a

in this situation.

ante calculation of emission reductions:

All the calculations performed in this section are further developed and available

excel info sheet sent with this document.


2,CObioy EF×

4,CHbio

O7bio 2, ) y7× )

and the attached report, the results of the KPT were analysed to provide th

average fuel saving per stove per year to the lower bound of 90% confidence interval. This was then used

ante emissions reductions per stove-year.

kg/HH/day

Firewood Comsumption 3-stone stove 7.38


Therefore, t/HH/year

Firewood Consumption 3-stone stove 2.69


Version 03



available in the supplementary


he results of the KPT were analysed to provide the

year to the lower bound of 90% confidence interval. This was then used



Leakage has been assessed as

following a stoves construction

Hence:

033,5101793.01 ×=LE

9151 =LE

001793.02 ×=LE

02 =LE

0...4,3 =nLE

The anticipated number of stoves to be constructed is:

033,511 =7

02 =7

=nER (0.81 x 0.95 x 1.7472

+0.81 x 0.0983

+0.81 x 0.01934) x N

– (LEy x Ny)

=nER 1.44 x Ny

– (LEy x Ny)

See supplementary excel file for details.

B.6.4 Summary of the ex

Year

Estimation of

2010

2011

2012

2013

2014

2015

2016

2017

Total (tCO2e)


39

s one-off source identified that will be written off in

following a stoves construction, following this zero leakage is anticipated.

033

The anticipated number of stoves to be constructed is:

) x Ny

See supplementary excel file for details.

Summary of the ex-ante estimation of emission reductions:

PE -

Estimation of

project

activity

emissions

(tCO2e)

BE -

Estimation of

baseline

emissions

(tCO2e)

LE -

Estimation of

leakage

(tCO2e)

- - 3

- - 912

- - 0

- - 0

- - 0

- - 0

- - 0

- - 0

- - 912

Version 03

off source identified that will be written off in the first crediting year

ante estimation of emission reductions:

ER -

Estimation of

overall

emission

reductions

(tCO2e)

N/A

23,578

73,833

73,833

73,833

73,833

73,833

73,833

466,576



ote 1: Baseline and project emissions

was only applied to the mean difference (savings). For this reason and to avoid confusion the PE & BE

columns have been left blank and only overall ER projected here.

ote 2:The leakage generated by the construction

subtracted from the overall emission reductions for the first crediting year (2011)

B.7 Application of a monitoring methodology and description of the monitoring plan:

B.7.1 Data and parameters

Data / Parameter: Xnrb,pj,y

Data unit: Fraction

Description: Non

Source of data used: Report compiled by Anthony Mills (PhD) and Diane Southey (MSc)

C4 EcoSolutions

Value of data: 0.95

Description of

measurement methods

and procedures to be

applied:

As deemed valid in the methodology v2.

QA/QC procedures to

be applied:

Study commissioned to an independent third party.

Any comment: Subject to bi

Data / Parameter: Xre,pj,y

Data unit: Fraction

Description: Woody biomass combustion avoided due to renewable energy form in year y in

project

Source of data to be

used:

Monitoring Kitchen Survey

Value of data -

Description of

measurement methods


applied:

No renewable fuel use by project beneficiaries was identified by the initial


in this situation.

QA/QC procedures to

be applied:

Kitchen Surveying will be overseen by an independent third party.

Any comment: Monitoring surveys will be carried out quarterly, as per the methodology.

Data / Parameter: Xaf,pj,y

Data unit: Fraction

Description: Woody biomass


used:

Monitoring Kitchen Surveys


40

Baseline and project emissions were not adjusted to lower bound of 90% confidence interval, this


columns have been left blank and only overall ER projected here.

The leakage generated by the construction of pilot stoves in 2010 has been registered and


Application of a monitoring methodology and description of the monitoring plan:

Data and parameters monitored:

nrb,pj,y

Fraction

Non-renewability of woody biomass fuel in year y in project scenario



0.95

As deemed valid in the methodology v2.

Study commissioned to an independent third party.

Subject to biennial monitoring

re,pj,y

Fraction

Woody biomass combustion avoided due to renewable energy form in year y in

project

Monitoring Kitchen Survey



in this situation.


Monitoring surveys will be carried out quarterly, as per the methodology.

af,pj,y

Fraction

Woody biomass combustion avoided due to alternative fuels in year y in project


Version 03

bound of 90% confidence interval, this


of pilot stoves in 2010 has been registered and


Application of a monitoring methodology and description of the monitoring plan:

renewability of woody biomass fuel in year y in project scenario


(Pty) Ltd., Cape Town, South Africa

Woody biomass combustion avoided due to renewable energy form in year y in





combustion avoided due to alternative fuels in year y in project



Value of data -

Description of

measurement methods


applied:

No renewable fuel use by project beneficiaries was


in this situation.

QA/QC procedures to

be applied:


Any comment: Monitoring survey

Data / Parameter: Leakage

Data unit: t_CO

Description: Potential GHG emissions outside project boundary caused by project activity


used:

Study

Value of data L1=

Description of

measurement methods


applied:

Kitchen Surveys supported by desk

QA/QC procedures to

be applied:

Kitchen surveys are use

Any comment: Value stated is to be applied in year one only, no further leakage is

however

Data / Parameter: (Bbl,y

Data unit: t_biomass/

Description: (Mass of woody biomass combusted in the

biomass combusted in the project in year y)


used:

Kitchen Performance Tests

Value of data 0.81

Description of

measurement methods


applied:

Kitchen Surveys and Kitchen

QA/QC procedures to

be applied:

3rd party study and report

Any comment: Carried out biennially

Data / Parameter: AFpj,i,y

Data unit: t_fuel/unit

Description: Mass of alternative fuel i


used:


Value of data -

Description of

measurement methods




in this situation.


41



in this situation.



Leakage

t_CO2e per year

Potential GHG emissions outside project boundary caused by project activity

Study

=912, L2=0, L3,4,…n=0

Kitchen Surveys supported by desk-based research

Kitchen surveys are used

Value stated is to be applied in year one only, no further leakage is

however this will be reviewed biennially.

bl,y – Bpj,y)

t_biomass/stove/year

Mass of woody biomass combusted in the baseline in year y

biomass combusted in the project in year y)

Kitchen Performance Tests

0.81

Kitchen Surveys and Kitchen Performance tests as described in section B.4


Carried out biennially

pj,i,y

t_fuel/unit-year

Mass of alternative fuel i combusted in the project in year y




in this situation.

Version 03

identified by the initial



s will be carried out quarterly, as per the methodology.

Potential GHG emissions outside project boundary caused by project activity

Value stated is to be applied in year one only, no further leakage is anticipated,

baseline in year y – Mass of woody

Performance tests as described in section B.4

combusted in the project in year y





applied:

QA/QC procedures to

be applied:


Any comment: Monitoring surveys will be carried out quar

Data / Parameter: Usage in year y

Data unit: Fraction

Description: Percentage of stoves of age x remaining in use in year y


used:

Our own survey

Value of data -

Description of

measurement methods


applied:

Usage

QA/QC procedures to

be applied:


Any comment:

Data / Parameter: Age

Data unit: Fraction

Description: Adjustment to values of B


used:

Aging stove KPT

Value of data -

Description of

measurement methods


applied:

Aging stove KPT will be carried out as per expert third party direction.

QA/QC procedures to

be applied:

3rd

party direction and assessment of study.

Any comment: Carried out biennially

Data / Parameter: New Stove

Data unit: Fraction

Description: Adjustment to values of


used:

New

Value of data -

Description of

measurement methods


applied:

New stove KPT will be carried out as directed by expert third party.

QA/QC procedures to

be applied:

3rd


Any comment: At launch of new model and not less than biennially

B.7.2 Description of the monitoring plan:


42



Usage in year y

Fraction

Percentage of stoves of age x remaining in use in year y

Our own survey

Usage surveys carried out biennially.


Age

Fraction

Adjustment to values of Bpj,,y and AFpj,i,y for stoves of age x

Aging stove KPT



Carried out biennially

New Stove

Fraction

Adjustment to values of (Bbl,y – Bpj,,y) and AFpj,i,y for new stove models

New stove KPT



t launch of new model and not less than biennially

Description of the monitoring plan:

Version 03


terly, as per the methodology.

Percentage of stoves of age x remaining in use in year y

for stoves of age x


for new stove models




The project proponents will supervise and assist stove contractors in generating the appropriate records

during the construction phase of the project.

The monitoring tasks continually undertaken are:

1. Maintenance of pilot & Total

Accurate distribution records will be kept and stored both elec

builders will create paper record

transferred to a computer system belo

stored in the local office (Kenya).

• Stove serial number

• Stove Model

• Project region

• Builder’s name

• Name of builder’s trainer

• Stove building date

• Resident’s name

• Resident address (where possible)

• Resident phone number (where possible)

• Mode of use (domestic in all cases)

• Type of fuel used

• Pilot stove (Y/N)

• GPS Coordinates

• Carbon rights handover signed (

2. Maintenance of a Detailed Customer Database (DCD)

A detailed customer database will be kept, containing the results of

Kitchen Performance Tests (K

the results of monitoring KS’s

Monitoring KS’s will be carried out for 25 randomly selected

every quarter according to the methodology rules

and no further stoves built, hous

construction period and from the whole

beneficiaries added to the database anymore after the construction period

The monitoring KS’s will provide information regarding the ongoing relevance of K

changes, usage drop-off & aging stove performance drop

KPT’s will be carried out every two years to assess performance of aging stoves and to ensure emissions

reductions claims made in monitoring reports remain accurate. KS’s w

a max 50% by telephone.

Data collected during a KS contains the

• General information -

• Household socio-demographic information


43


during the construction phase of the project.

monitoring tasks continually undertaken are:

Total Distribution Record (TDR)

records will be kept and stored both electronically and in paper format. The stove

records (of type shown below) for each stove

transferred to a computer system belonging to the project proponents and the original documentation

stored in the local office (Kenya).

e of builder’s trainer

Resident address (where possible)

Resident phone number (where possible)

Mode of use (domestic in all cases)

Carbon rights handover signed (Y/N)

Detailed Customer Database (DCD)

A detailed customer database will be kept, containing the results of all Kitchen Surveys (KS’s)

Tests (KPT’s). Initially the baseline KS & KPT data will

onitoring KS’s & monitoring KPT’s will be added.

Monitoring KS’s will be carried out for 25 randomly selected beneficiaries

according to the methodology rules. As the stoves will be constructed over a short period

and no further stoves built, households will be selected from the TDR for the previous quarter during the

construction period and from the whole TDR for later monitoring KS’s as will not be new project

the database anymore after the construction period.

will provide information regarding the ongoing relevance of K

off & aging stove performance drop-off) and sustainable development indicators.

T’s will be carried out every two years to assess performance of aging stoves and to ensure emissions

reductions claims made in monitoring reports remain accurate. KS’s will be carried out face to face, with

Data collected during a KS contains the following type of data:

- Name, address, telephone number etc

demographic information

Version 03


tronically and in paper format. The stove

stove built; these will then be

nging to the project proponents and the original documentation

Kitchen Surveys (KS’s) and

will be entered; following this

from the TDR, per cluster,

onstructed over a short period

the TDR for the previous quarter during the

as will not be new project

will provide information regarding the ongoing relevance of KPT results (cluster

off) and sustainable development indicators.

T’s will be carried out every two years to assess performance of aging stoves and to ensure emissions

ill be carried out face to face, with



• Cooking behaviour, fuel

• Sources of fuel, prices or labour input (person

3. Updating of Project Database

A project database will be created, which divides the

most recently defined clusters, derived from the

also be recorded here relating to cluster changes

reductions calculations will be documented here also

4. Calculation of emissions reductions

Emissions reductions will be calculated

results of the Monitoring KS’s and K

RB, leakage, usage, age, new stove models.

Periodic monitoring tasks

• NRB fraction assessed b

• Leakage estimates (identified in the PDD and possible new sources) will be surveyed every two

years

• Drop-off in usages rates

random sampling as in the

• An aging stove KPT to assess performance of ageing stoves

assess any changes in performance of the project stoves

• A baseline monitoring K

parameters measured by the K

• New stove KPT will be carried out for new models

• Assessment of wider social and economic impact

development of the project will be made ever

supported a desktop research, field work in the local area and all the information/documentation

produced during the monitoring period as described above.

•

Quality assurance

• Throughout the duration of

reinforce data gathering and

Measurement equipment (scales)

• Sets of digital hanging scales accurate to at least 50g will be used, ideally with Kenya Bureau of

standards certification. Where equipment is acquired outside of Kenya it will be taken to the

Kenya Bureau of Standards for calibration and certification.

• Scales will then be checked annually by KBS and either re

no longer accurate.

• A unique marking will be placed on each scale and records of certification/failure maintained to

ensure only certified scales are in use.

• All staff using scales will be adequately trained in accurate use of the equipment.

All data recorded will be stored by the project proponents for a minimum of two years after the end of the

crediting period or the last issuance of VERs, whichever occurs later.


44

Cooking behaviour, fuel type & mix

Sources of fuel, prices or labour input (person-hours, distances)

Project Database

A project database will be created, which divides the project beneficiaries into groups according to the

most recently defined clusters, derived from the TDR. The conclusions drawn from KS’s and K

recorded here relating to cluster changes and changes in emissions reductions (if any).

reductions calculations will be documented here also.

Calculation of emissions reductions

Emissions reductions will be calculated (according to new cluster adjustments if necessary)

results of the Monitoring KS’s and KPT’s, using updated values for biomass savings (

RB, leakage, usage, age, new stove models.

NRB fraction assessed by literature review every two years

Leakage estimates (identified in the PDD and possible new sources) will be surveyed every two

off in usages rates by beneficiaries in the first year will be surveyed every two year

random sampling as in the KS

T to assess performance of ageing stoves will be carried out every two years

assess any changes in performance of the project stoves

A baseline monitoring KPT will be carried out every two years IF: The KS reveals that baseline

parameters measured by the KPT’s may have changed significantly.

T will be carried out for new models if launched.

ider social and economic impact and contribution to local sustainable

development of the project will be made every two years. This will be assessed through a study


produced during the monitoring period as described above.

Throughout the duration of the project an independent third party consultant

data gathering and monitoring tasks.

Measurement equipment (scales)

Sets of digital hanging scales accurate to at least 50g will be used, ideally with Kenya Bureau of

s certification. Where equipment is acquired outside of Kenya it will be taken to the

Kenya Bureau of Standards for calibration and certification.

Scales will then be checked annually by KBS and either re-certified or discarded and replaced if

A unique marking will be placed on each scale and records of certification/failure maintained to

ensure only certified scales are in use.

All staff using scales will be adequately trained in accurate use of the equipment.

e stored by the project proponents for a minimum of two years after the end of the

crediting period or the last issuance of VERs, whichever occurs later.

Version 03

into groups according to the

. The conclusions drawn from KS’s and KPT’s will

changes in emissions reductions (if any). Emission

(according to new cluster adjustments if necessary) using the

biomass savings (Bbl,y – Bpj,y),

Leakage estimates (identified in the PDD and possible new sources) will be surveyed every two

will be surveyed every two years,

ill be carried out every two years to

T will be carried out every two years IF: The KS reveals that baseline

and contribution to local sustainable

This will be assessed through a study


consultant will be engaged to

Sets of digital hanging scales accurate to at least 50g will be used, ideally with Kenya Bureau of

s certification. Where equipment is acquired outside of Kenya it will be taken to the

certified or discarded and replaced if

A unique marking will be placed on each scale and records of certification/failure maintained to

All staff using scales will be adequately trained in accurate use of the equipment.

e stored by the project proponents for a minimum of two years after the end of the



The diagram below shows the organisational responsibilities for t

flow of monitoring information.

B.8 Date of completion of the application of the baseline and monitoring methodology and the

name of the responsible person(s)/entity(ies)

The application of the methodology

19/11/2010.

The application was carried out by co2balance UK Ltd.

co2balance (Ke)

Stove contractor(s)

Stove builders

Data gathering

Auditing

Data collation


45

The diagram below shows the organisational responsibilities for the monitoring plan, arrows show

of monitoring information.

Date of completion of the application of the baseline and monitoring methodology and the

person(s)/entity(ies)

methodology to the project activity to report the baseline

The application was carried out by co2balance UK Ltd. (the project proponent)

(Project proponent)

co2balance UK Ltd.

1 Discovery House

Cook Way

Bindon Rd.

Taunton TA2 6BJ

+44 (0) 1823 332233

[email protected]

(Independent consultant)

Jonathan Rouse

HED Consulting

Independent

consultant

Manufacturers

co2balance (UK)

Key

Data collation,

conversion to

electronic and

archiving of originals

Data collation

electronic archiving.

Completion of

monitoring reports

Survey team

Version 03

he monitoring plan, arrows show the

Date of completion of the application of the baseline and monitoring methodology and the

to report the baseline was completed on the

(the project proponent), with support from HED.

Independent

consultant

Data collation &

tronic archiving.

Completion of

monitoring reports

Survey team



SECTIO C. Duration of the

C.1 Duration of the project activity

>>

C.1.1. Starting date of the project activity

The initial investment commitment

of 149 stoves. The schedule of this construction (as per section B.4) was

then the rest of stoves (non-pilot stoves

DoE for this commitment as shown in the

is July 2010 as this is the date

In accordance with the Gold Standard Requireme

starting date of the crediting period has been set to 01/12

to be constructed soon after this

C.1.2. Expected operational lifetime of the project

The initial operational lifespan of the improved stoves is expected to be 7 years

review will be carried out to assess the feasibility of refurbishment in order to achieve another 7 years

months of operational life.

C.2 Choice of the crediting period

The project will use a 7 year renewable crediting period.

C.2.1. Renewable crediting period

C.2.1.1.

01/12/2010

C.2.1.2.

7 years 0 months

44 Version 2.1 effective June 2009


46

+44 (0) 207 193 4314

[email protected]

Duration of the project activity / crediting period

project activity:

Starting date of the project activity:

nvestment commitment for project construction was made in April

stoves. The schedule of this construction (as per section B.4) was 149

pilot stoves) will be built early in 2011. Evidence

as shown in the constructor agreement. The starting date

is the date that pilot stoves were first distributed.

In accordance with the Gold Standard Requirements44

, section V, requirement

ing period has been set to 01/12/2010 as the rest of stoves (non

ed soon after this.

operational lifetime of the project activity:

The initial operational lifespan of the improved stoves is expected to be 7 years

review will be carried out to assess the feasibility of refurbishment in order to achieve another 7 years

crediting period and related information:

The project will use a 7 year renewable crediting period.

Renewable crediting period

Starting date of the first crediting period:

Length of the first crediting period:

Version 2.1 effective June 2009

Version 03

April 2010 for the construction

149 pilot stoves July 2010 and

vidence has been provided to the

he starting date of the project activity

, section V, requirements V.a.2.1 & V.a.2.4, the

as the rest of stoves (non-pilot stoves) are

The initial operational lifespan of the improved stoves is expected to be 7 years 0 months, following this a

review will be carried out to assess the feasibility of refurbishment in order to achieve another 7 years 0



C.2.2. Fixed crediting period

C.2.2.1.

Not Applicable.

C.2.2.2.

Not Applicable.

SECTIO D. Environmental impacts

>>

D.1. If required by the host Par

of the project activity:

The Designated National Authority of the host party has provided confirmation that the project does not

require an Environmental Impact Assessment to be carried out.

this document.

D.2. If environmental impacts are considered significant by the project participants or the

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

Not Applicable.

SECTIO E. Stakeholders’

>>

E.1. Brief description how comments by local

The co-operation and understanding of local stakeholders is a key to the success fo

with this in mind a face to face stakeholder meeting was at the

Aberdares, 27th of April 2010 at 11am.

Local stakeholders were identified by local women’s groups and church groups who invited stakeholders

by word of mouth, relevant NGOs and the Gold Standard were invited by email and a public invitation

was placed in The Daily Nation

provided with a brief summary of the project

When inviting organisations and individuals to attend the stakeholder meeting, best efforts were made to

expand the selection in order to avoid missing out any organisations or individuals that could have a key

interest in the activity. A small group of d

affected they were by the traditional cooking methods and its consequences, their capacity to help

participate and their motivation to make the project work. The main priority was to make certai

was not only the visible, voluble and easy to access that were invited.


47

Fixed crediting period:

Starting date:

Length:

Environmental impacts

host Party, documentation on the analysis of the environmental impacts


require an Environmental Impact Assessment to be carried out. Please see letter provided together with

If environmental impacts are considered significant by the project participants or the

, please provide conclusions and all references to support documentation of an environmental

impact assessment undertaken in accordance with the procedures as required by the

Stakeholders’ comments

escription how comments by local stakeholders have been invited and compiled:

operation and understanding of local stakeholders is a key to the success fo

face to face stakeholder meeting was at the Rhino Ark, Kinale, Forest Road Office

Aberdares, 27th of April 2010 at 11am.



Daily Nation Newspaper. All stakeholders receiving a personal invitation were

summary of the project as well.



interest in the activity. A small group of diverse participants were chosen by their location, need, how


participate and their motivation to make the project work. The main priority was to make certai

was not only the visible, voluble and easy to access that were invited.

Version 03

documentation on the analysis of the environmental impacts


letter provided together with

If environmental impacts are considered significant by the project participants or the host

, 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:

have been invited and compiled:

operation and understanding of local stakeholders is a key to the success for the project activity,

Ark, Kinale, Forest Road Office



lders receiving a personal invitation were



iverse participants were chosen by their location, need, how


participate and their motivation to make the project work. The main priority was to make certain that it



The meeting was attended by

Bushra Razack (BR), Project ManagerSean Fraser (SF), Project Manager Jonathon Baker (JB), Project Development Engineer Solace Amboga (SA), Project Support OfficerJ.N. Githui (JG)- Rhino Ark representative / Field OfficerFelix Mgangi (FM) – Head Warden Aberdares National PAdam Mwangi (AM) – Rhino Ark Scientist Samuel Kariuki (SK)– Vice Chairman, Community RepresentativeJohnson Kagiru (J.K)– Acting Chairman, Community RepresentativeJoseph Kongo (JK)– Community RepresentativeSteve Kianya (SK)– Eco Concern Nay H Cohon (NC)– Eco Concern RepresentativeRepresentatives from local women’s groups, community volunteers, farmers and local households

The stakeholder meeting was attended by 91 people

(53%) and men (47%) present.

Stakeholders were encouraged to actively participate in the meeting, aiding in creating a sustainable

development matrix and discussing how the sustainable development indicators identified could be

monitored. At the end of the m

E.2. Summary of the comments received:

Shown below is a selection of comments representative of those received at the end of the meeting.

Original evaluation forms (in original language) are located in Annex 2 of the Stakeholder Report:

Name

What is your impression of the meeting?

What do you like about the project?

What do you not like about the project?

Signature

Name




Signature

Name


48

by the following representatives and individuals:

Project Manager – co2balance Kenya Project Manager – co2balance Kenya Project Development Engineer – co2balance Kenya Project Support Officer – co2balance Kenya

Rhino Ark representative / Field Officer Head Warden Aberdares National Park Rhino Ark Scientist Vice Chairman, Community Representative Acting Chairman, Community Representative

Community Representative Eco Concern Representative Eco Concern Representative

Representatives from local women’s groups, community volunteers, farmers and local households

holder meeting was attended by 91 people. We were impressed by the

present.



monitored. At the end of the meeting all stakeholders were invited to fill out a feedback form.

Summary of the comments received:



Mary Muthoni

What is your impression of the meeting? I liked everything

What do you like about the project? The idea of the stove, it is cheap, effi

less firewood, reduced CO2, and soot.

What do you not like about the project? None

See Annex 2 (Sheet number 2)

Peter Kariuki Naikumi

What is your impression of the meeting? The meeting has helped me realize about new

technology

The stove project should continue as it will benefit

my community

What do you like about the project? I liked the stove project because it will help my

community

Will impact positively on afforestation and less

firewood

ike about the project? N/A


D.K Chege

Version 03

Representatives from local women’s groups, community volunteers, farmers and local households

. We were impressed by the even number of women



eeting all stakeholders were invited to fill out a feedback form.



The idea of the stove, it is cheap, efficient and uses

less firewood, reduced CO2, and soot.


The meeting has helped me realize about new stove

The stove project should continue as it will benefit

I liked the stove project because it will help my

Will impact positively on afforestation and less







Signature

Name




Signature

The overall consensus was that the meeting was successful and informative. Participants felt that they

were made fully aware of the project and its objectives, and that their questions were answered.

The representation of these comments is shown in the c

From the 69 feedback sheets the project likes were most frequent for the following:

� Employment and Economic Benefits

� Environmental Benefits

� Health Benefits

� Firewood/fuel Reduction

� Community Development

� Cooking time reduction


49

What is your impression of the meeting? The problem that we are feeling would be dealt

with

What do you like about the project? Economical

Healthier

c) Conserve the Environment

.

What do you not like about the project? N/A


Vic Njagi Kiritu

What is your impression of the meeting? Ok good

What do you like about the project? Everything mentioned especially wood saving,

smoke reduction

What do you not like about the project? Nothing to dislike, want to see what happens




The representation of these comments is shown in the chart below.


Employment and Economic Benefits

Environmental Benefits

Firewood/fuel Reduction

Community Development

Cooking time reduction

Version 03

The problem that we are feeling would be dealt

Environment


Everything mentioned especially wood saving,

Nothing to dislike, want to see what happens







5% of respondents expressed dislikes of the project and these were related to the stove being too small,

this is not a dislike of the project per se and if concerns are more widespread, these will be picked up by

the kitchen surveys.

95% of the feedback forms stated that they had no dislikes/not applicable or was left blank.

Many stakeholders highlighted the benefits of the project as it relates to health. Some of these were

• Feedback form 10: Less carbon dioxide, reduced bronchi

less firewood, meaning less time to fetch and more rest

• Feedback form 17: Good health to women and children. Cutting down of trees is less.

• Feedback form 26: It's healthy. Less smoky. I'll have more time to do my duties.

• Feedback form 33: Reduce firewood, smoke, time for school, environmental conservation, health

improvement and new science and technology.

E.3. Report on how due account was taken of any comments received:

No stakeholder comments needed to be taken into account leadin

the project.

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

Employment

and Economic

benefits

Environmental

Benefits

Number of Likes


50



forms stated that they had no dislikes/not applicable or was left blank.


Feedback form 10: Less carbon dioxide, reduced bronchi-health related issues.

less firewood, meaning less time to fetch and more rest

Feedback form 17: Good health to women and children. Cutting down of trees is less.

Feedback form 26: It's healthy. Less smoky. I'll have more time to do my duties.

33: Reduce firewood, smoke, time for school, environmental conservation, health

improvement and new science and technology.

Report on how due account was taken of any comments received:

No stakeholder comments needed to be taken into account leading to no modification

Stakeholder feedback - Project likes

Environmental Health Benef its Firew ood/Fuel

Reduction

Community

Development

Cooking Time

Reduction

Activity

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

Percentage Likes (%)

Version 03



forms stated that they had no dislikes/not applicable or was left blank.


health related issues. Rocket stove uses

Feedback form 17: Good health to women and children. Cutting down of trees is less.

Feedback form 26: It's healthy. Less smoky. I'll have more time to do my duties.

33: Reduce firewood, smoke, time for school, environmental conservation, health

g to no modifications of any aspects of

Percentage Likes (%)

Number of Likes

Percentage Likes



CO TACT I FORMATIO O PARTICIPA TS I THE

Organization: co2balance

Street/P.O.Box: Cook Way

Building: 1 Discovery House

City: Taunton

State/Region: Somerset

Postfix/ZIP: TA2 6BJ

Country: UK

Telephone: +44 (0)1823 33 22 33

FAX: +44 (0)1823

E-Mail: [email protected]

URL: www.co2balance.com

Represented by: Matt Thomas

Title: Mr

Salutation:

Last Name: Thomas

Middle Name:

First Name: Matt

Department: Projects

Mobile:

Direct FAX:

Direct tel:

Personal E-Mail: [email protected]


51

Annex 1

CO TACT I FORMATIO O PARTICIPA TS I THE PROJECT ACTIVITY

co2balance

Cook Way

1 Discovery House

Taunton

Somerset

TA2 6BJ

+44 (0)1823 33 22 33

+44 (0)1823 33 67 76

[email protected]

www.co2balance.com

Matt Thomas

Thomas

Matt

Projects

[email protected]

Version 03

PROJECT ACTIVITY



I FORMATIO REGARDI G PUBLIC FU DI G

Please refer to the Passport document to see proof letter.


52

Annex 2


Please refer to the Passport document to see proof letter.

Version 03




See supplementary files for the RB study.

See supplementary files for baseline report.


53

Annex 3

BASELI E I FORMATIO

See supplementary files for the RB study.

See supplementary files for baseline report.

Version 03



Leakage

Source f: Transportation and construction of stoves

An estimate of the CO2 emissions generated in the construction of the stoves has been assessed for

leakage purposes, the results found this form of leakage to be minimal. For the sake of remaining

conservative however, this assessment has been included in the calculation of emissions reductions

achieved.

Emissions from material production

The materials used to construct each stove

identified in the available literature for the embodied carbon of materials.

Stove Composition Quantity

(units/stove)

Fired bricks

Liner

Metal Plate

Cement

Sand

Total Productemissions per stove

Emissions associated with material production

Emissions from material transportation:

Bricks and liners clay is extracted from Mombasa and manufactured in the same site. This is

approximately 700km from the

truck to storage point. Then a

kilometres to the furthest point in the project boundary

also been accounted for:

Mode

Journey distance (km)

Materials transported per stove (tonnes)

EF (kgCO2/tkm)

Transport emissions (kgCO2/stove)

Total Transport emissions per stove (kgCO2/stove)

Emissions associated with transportation were therefore estimated to be

45 As defined by the stove construction manual provided to contract

46 Data sources as in excel calculation sheet provided, leakage section.


54

Transportation and construction of stoves

emissions generated in the construction of the stoves has been assessed for


ever, this assessment has been included in the calculation of emissions reductions

material production:

The materials used to construct each stove45

are detailed below, along with CO

literature for the embodied carbon of materials.

Quantity (units/stove) Units

Quantity per stove

(kg) EF (kgCOmaterial)

45 # 29.43 0.160

1 # 3.2 0.160

1 # 1.5 1.700

0.2 bag 10 0.830

0.3 barrows 10 0.005

Total Production emissions per stove 54.13 -

iated with material production were therefore estimated to be 16.12

transportation:

and liners clay is extracted from Mombasa and manufactured in the same site. This is

the project area and materials are transported to site via

truck to storage point. Then a pickup truck delivers them to the local communities

kilometres to the furthest point in the project boundary. The emissions generated by this transpo

Pickup truck Heavy Duty Truck

50

Materials transported per stove (tonnes) 0.0541

0.0380

Transport emissions (kgCO2/stove) 0.1028

Total Transport emissions per stove (kgCO2/stove) 1.8127

Emissions associated with transportation were therefore estimated to be 1.8127

As defined by the stove construction manual provided to contractors by the project proponent.

Data sources as in excel calculation sheet provided, leakage section.

Version 03

emissions generated in the construction of the stoves has been assessed for


ever, this assessment has been included in the calculation of emissions reductions

are detailed below, along with CO2 emission factors46

EF (kgCO2/kg

Emissions (kgCO2/stove)

0.160 4.71

0.160 0.51

1.700 2.55

0.830 8.30

0.005 0.05

16.12

to be 16.12 kgCO2/stove.

and liners clay is extracted from Mombasa and manufactured in the same site. This is

project area and materials are transported to site via (10 tonne to 48 tonne)

pickup truck delivers them to the local communities doing up to 50 more

. The emissions generated by this transport have

Heavy Duty Truck

700

0.03413

0.07157

1.7099

1.8127

1.8127 kgCO2/stove.

ors by the project proponent.



Total leakage emissions (construction and transportation):

The total leakage associated with transportation and construction has been assessed to be

0.0179tCO2/stove , for the whole life span of the stove.


55

Total leakage emissions (construction and transportation):


, for the whole life span of the stove.

Version 03




Annex 4

See Passport document.


56

MO ITORI G I FORMATIO

- - - - -

Version 03