1. Sampling approaches in monitoring and DOE work experience and expectations 8 th May 2011 Florian Zerzawy atmosfair gGmbH zerzawy@atmosfair.de www.atmosfair.de

2. 9th May 2011 | 2Project Developer Forum | UNFCCC PoA Workshop, Bonn Overview – Application of sampling in context of household PoAs – The current problem – related to insufficient guidance, applicability of sampling in practice (costs, time and skills) – Proposed solutions

3. 9th May 2011 | 3 Application of sampling in context of household PoAs – Consumption and usage on household level (both baseline and project emissions) e.g. woody biomass consumption, continuous usage of baseline appliances – Failure rates e.g. lifetime of equipment, usage rates of project technologies – Efficiency of project technologies e.g. efficiency of improved cook stoves – Leakage e.g. share of users that switched from renewable biomass to none renewable biomass Project Developer Forum | UNFCCC PoA Workshop, Bonn

4. 9th May 2011 | 4 Current Problems 1. Challenge to develop a sound sampling frame which is exercisable in a developing country context No household address system to draw sample Difficulty to perform random visits without being intrusive (access to households as none resident and without prior notification) Expert personal necessary to comply with scientific standards required under CDM may not be available in the host country or project area Project Developer Forum | UNFCCC PoA Workshop, Bonn

5. 9th May 2011 | 5 Current Problems 2.Existing guidelines do not provide enough certainty for PDs to be sure sampling approach will be accepted at all stages Challenge to design a sampling approach valid for up to 28 years (as specific as possible vs. as general as needed to remain flexible) Presumed conflict of interest if sampling is done by PDs but: outsourcing of sampling increases cost, complexity and often lack of skilled personal in the host country Uncertainty if sampling at time of (contact) data collection is possible (but: election polls) Project Developer Forum | UNFCCC PoA Workshop, Bonn

6. 9th May 2011 | 6 Current Problems 3. Due to missing guidance DOEs developed individual methods to check sampled parameters during validation and verification E.g. DOEs do not check the sampling approach but repeat the survey as they can not prove that sample was drawn randomly => double efforts, question of practicability during audits. Contradiction to standard CDM (e.g. DOEs do not measure electricity but check measuring procedures) Project Developer Forum | UNFCCC PoA Workshop, Bonn

7. 9th May 2011 | 7 Proposed solutions…. – Sampling design most important step (defined confidence and precision levels do not solve the problem if the design is wrong) (note: Draft best practice examples [SSC WG 30 Annex 13] also mainly focus on sample size calculations and do not give practical technology related examples for the sample design) – Clear guidance for DOEs how to check the sampled parameters (no double checking but auditing of sample design and execution of sampling) Project Developer Forum | UNFCCC PoA Workshop, Bonn

8. 9th May 2011 | 8 Proposed solutions…. – Best practice examples to be provided for the most common scenarios and problems e.g. sample drawing to be witnessed by local authorities (notary, DNA representative,…) – 90/10 confidence precision level to be sufficient for all household level PoAs. – All sampling/survey approaches already used in registered CDM PoAs or projects should be eligible for all further PoAs. Project Developer Forum | UNFCCC PoA Workshop, Bonn