PDF File - GEC

Methodologies using this tool are only applicable if all potential alternative scenarios to the proposed
project activity are available options to project participants. For example, it applies to project
activities that make modifications to an existing installation that is operated by project participants.
Moreover, this applies to the construction of new facilities if all alternative scenarios to the project
activity are available options to project participants, i.e. if all alternative scenarios could be
implemented by the project participants. For example, it may be applied to a cement manufacturer
that plans to construct a new cement plant and has access to all cement production technologies. The
EB revised the combined tool to expand its applicability to newly built facilities where the alternative
scenarios to the project activity are available options to project participants [EB28, Annex 14].
However, methodologies using this tool are not applicable to project activities where one or
more alternative scenarios to the proposed project activity are not available options to the
project participant. In these cases, a different procedure than provided here would be required to
demonstrate additionality and identify the baseline scenario.
The Meth Panel is considering whether to expanding this tool to cover all cases that would be
appropriate. In the meantime, methodologies that typically involve alternatives are not under
the control of project participants can continue to use, if desired, the additionality tool (provides
benchmark and other tools), and provide their own methods to develop and/or assess baseline
scenario.
Since the methodological procedure to identify the baseline scenario and demonstrate additionality
by the combined tool and by the additionality tool is the same, the step-wise approach is discussed
in Appendix 5.
3.2.5 Additionality [PDD section B.5]
Project participants should follow the prescription of the baseline methodology to be applied to the
project activity, in order to demonstrate additionality of the project activity. Project participants are
asked to explain and justify key assumptions and rationales used in demonstrating additionality, as
well as to provide relevant documentation of references. If the starting date of the project activity is
before the date of validation, project participants are asked to provide evidence that the incentive
from the CDM was seriously considered in the decision to proceed with the project activity. This
evidence shall be based on (preferably official, legal and/or other corporate) documentation that was
available at, or prior to, the start of the project activity. AMs often require the use of the additionality
tool 8 [EB39, Annex 10]. The additionality tool provides for a step-wise approach to demonstrate and
assess additionality (see Appendix 5).
3.2.6 Calculating emission reductions [PDD section B.6]
Baseline methodologies specify how emission reductions must be calculated in the PDD. In section
B.6.1. “Explanation of methodological choices”, project participants are required to state which
equations will be used in calculating emission reductions, as well as to explain and justify their
choices made among different options presented in the baseline methodology applied to the project
activity.
8 http://cdm.unfccc.int/methodologies/PAmethodologies/AdditionalityTools/Additionality_tool.pdf
47