THE GOLD STANDARD MICRO-SCALE SCHEME PROJECT DESIGN DOCUMENT

FORM - Version 2.2

CONTENTS

A. General description of the micro scale project activity

B. Application of an existing or new baseline and monitoring methodology

C. Duration of the project activity and crediting period

D. Stakeholders comments

Annexes

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

Annex 2: Information regarding Public Funding

1
SECTION A. General description of micro-scale project activity

A.1 Title of the micro-scale project activity:

>> Title

GS 1146 - Expanding access to LPG in Burkina Faso through microfranchised distribution

>> Date & version of the PDD

Version 1, submitted 03/15/2014: part A&D only

Version 2, submitted 9/28/2016

A.2. Project participants:

>>

Entrepreneurs du Monde, a French NGO based in Lyon, France, acts as the project owner and carbon
developer.

A.3 Description of the micro-scale project activity:

A.3.1. Location of the micro-scale project activity:

>>

A.3.1.1. Host Country:

>> Burkina Faso

A.3.1.2. Region/State/Province etc.:

>> Central Region, Kadiogo Province

A.3.1.3. City/Town/Community etc:

>>The project is taking place in the 7 departments of the Kadiogo Province:

- Komki-Ipala
- Komsilga
- Koubri
- Ouagadougou
- Pabr
- Saaba
- Tanghin-Dassouri

Other than Ouagadougou, there is no city as such in the Province and the relevant administrative
entities are the departments listed above.

2
 A.3.1.4. Details of physical location, including information allowing the
unique identification of this micro-scale project activity:

The project is situated within the physical boundaries detailed above. To ensure unique identification
of this microscale project activity each stove sold under this project will have a unique identification
number. The updated list of all the stove sold under the project will be provided in time for each yearly
verification.

A.3.2. Description including technology and/or measure of the micro-scale project activity:

In Burkina Faso, non-renewable solid biomass represents ninety-one (91) percent of the total energy
consumed yearly. Indeed, eighty-four (84) percent of households use wood and charcoal on a daily basis.
For that reason, there is a growing pressure on forests and the country currently looses 105,000 hectares
of forested land every year according to the Ministry in charge of environmental issues (Ministre de
lenvironnement et du dveloppement durable). High efficiency improved cookstoves and gas stoves
help fight deforestation by significantly reducing the demand for wood and charcoal, and thus contribute
to a global reduction in GHG emissions from biomass combustion.

To deal with this issue, the French NGO Entrepreneurs du Monde launched a new program called Nafa
Naana with the objective to facilitate access to cleaner, more modern and cheaper sources of energy for
all. Nafa Naana received some financial support from the Burkina Faso Ministry of Energy in the PASE
framework (Programme daccs aux Services Energtiques) between 2014 and 2015. Nafa Naana
works as a social micro-franchise that distributes more efficient, reliable and sustainable charcoal
and wood stoves, LGP stoves and solar lanterns.

Nafa Naana is developing its own distribution network with the objective of making those products easily
available to all. Financial services are offered to Nafa Naana clients either as group loans or individual
loans to help people with limited financial means access those products.

Finally, Nafa Naana is trying to increase the level of awareness in local populations about the described
issues and the advantages of those products through information sessions on fuel poverty and by
creating communication tools tailored to the local context. Due to the products delivered, its main target
is the women in rural areas, who are the immediate victims of the negative effects of traditional cooking
practices. The next step will very likely be the creation of a social enterprise in order to assure
the sustainability of its social mission: to distribute as many energy products as possible in Burkina Faso.

The project activity Expanding access to LPG in Burkina Faso through microfranchised distribution is
in phase with this approach since it aims to promote the use of LPG as a source of energy for cooking,
thus limiting the usage of wood and thus reducing emissions of greenhouse gas.

In addition to the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions and helping fight deforestation, this
project also offers the possibility to reduce the emissions of toxic fumes such as carbon monoxide
and PM 2.5 inside the homes of the beneficiary population. Indeed, the combustion of wood with
traditional stoves releases toxic fumes in the air. These toxic fumes are one of the main causes of
respiratory diseases among women and children. Finally, the use of LGP cookstoves, instead of
traditional ones, means that the end user is saving significant amounts of money because fuel
expenses per gram of food cooked are lower for LPG than for wood when the wood is purchased by the
user.
3
The characteristics of stoves promoted by this project is listed below:

Telia LPG Kit

Single-burner LPG stove for 6kg cylinders

Contains:
- Burner and regulator
- Metal stand to support pots
- Hooks to hold pot, stand and cylinder
together.
- 6 kg cylinder.

Measured average thermal efficiency: 55%1

Cylinder supplied by Sodigaz (imported).
Burner, stand and hooks supplied by local SMEs.

Price: USD 55

A.3.3 Estimated amount of emission reductions over the chosen crediting period:

The result from the first year is based on extensive field survey already conducted at the time of the
submission of the PDD for validation.

Given the growth of stove sale, the total number of VER issued by the project is expected to reach the
microscale cap by the second crediting year.

Crediting Year VER

June 1st 2015 May 31st 2016 5,287
June 1st 2016 May 31st 2017 10,000
June 1st 2017 May 31st 2018 10,000
June 1st 2018 May 31st 2019 10,000
June 1st 2019 May 31st 2020 10,000
June 1st 2020 May 31st 2021 10,000
June 1st 2021 May 31st 2022 10,000
June 1st 2022 May 31st 2023 10,000
June 1st 2023 May 31st 2024 10,000
June 1st 2024 May 31st 2025 10,000

1 See WBT conducted by IRSAT in project documentation.

4
 YEARLY AVERAGE 9,618

A.3.4. Public funding of the micro-scale project activity:

The project receives some public funding from the Monaco Cooperation Office, USAID and the
Government of Burkina Faso. VER issued by this project are not fungible with the EU compliance
market or any other carbon market. The funding is not given in exchange of any counterpart to the
governments of Burkina Faso, Monaco, or the United States of America. See ODA declaration form in
annex 2.

SECTION B. Application of an existing baseline and monitoring methodology or of a new

methodology submitted as part of this project activity

B.1. Title and reference of the existing or new baseline and monitoring methodology applied to
the micro-scale project activity:

>> This Project Design Document follows the Gold Standard VER Methodology entitled Technologies and
Practices to Displace Decentralized Thermal Energy Consumption version 2.0

B.2 Justification of the choice of the methodology and applicability:

Eligibility criteria related to the applied methodology:

5
1. The project boundary needs to be clearly The project geographic boundaries are
identified, and the technologies counted in clearly defined (the province of Kadiogo).
the project are not included in any other As of the date of submission no other carbon
voluntary market or CDM project activity project seeks carbon credits for a LPG stove
(i.e. no double counting takes place). In in this area.
some cases there maybe another similar To prevent double counting, a complete list
activity within the same target area. of stove sold and included into the project is
Project proponents must therefore have a maintained.
survey mechanism in place together with Each stove has a unique serial number.
appropriate mitigation measures so as to
prevent any possibility of double counting.
2. The technologies each have continuous WBT done on the stove shows that they have
useful energy outputs of less than 150kW a total power of less than 6kW per unit2.
per unit (defined as the total useful
energy delivered from start to end of
operation of a unit divided by time of
operation). For technologies or practices
that do not deliver thermal energy in the
project scenario but only displace thermal
energy supplied in the baseline scenario,
the 150kW threshold applies to the
displaced baseline technology.
3. Using the baseline technology as a backup Two mechanisms are put into place to
or auxiliary technology in parallel with the encourage the removal of the old
improved technology introduced by the technology:
project activity is permitted as long as a
mechanism is put into place to encourage - Awareness rising campaign: information
the removal of the old technology (e.g. sessions, flyers, radio (in February,
discounted price for the improved September and October 2015) and TV
technology) and the definitive discontinuity (July and August and September 2015)
of its use. The project documentation spots encourage the targeted
must provide a clear description of the population to discontinue the use of
approach chosen and the monitoring plan their traditional stove and to replace it
must allow for a good understanding of completely with a clean LPG stove.
the extent to which the baseline - An incentive of 250 FCFA (about US$
technology is still in use after the 0.5) is given to households that will
introduction of the improved technology. recycle their old stove when they
For example, whether the existing baseline purchase their LPG stove.
technology is not surrendered at the time
of the introduction of the improved
technology, or whether a new baseline
technology is acquired and put to use by
targeted end users during the project
crediting period see section III. The
success of the mechanism put into place
must therefore be monitored, and the
6
 approach must be adjusted if proven
unsuccessful3. If an old technology remains
in use in parallel with the improved
technology, the corresponding emissions
must be accounted for as part of the
project emissions see section II.5.
4. The project proponent must clearly The end users sign carbon waiver when they
communicate to all project participants the sign the sale receipt.
entity that is claiming ownership rights of All distributers have a paragraph in their
and selling the emission reductions contract mentioning the waiving of the
resulting from the project activity. For carbon rights.
technology producers and the retailers of
the improved technology or the renewable
fuel in use, this must be communicated
by contract or clear written assertions in
the transaction paperwork. If the claimants
are not the project technology end users,
the end users will need to be informed
and notified that they cannot claim for
emission reductions from the project4.
5. Project activities making use of a new Not Applicable
biomass feedstock in the project situation
(e.g. shift from non-renewable to green
charcoal, plant oil or renewable biomass
briquettes) must comply with relevant Gold
Standard specific requirements for biomass
related project activities, as defined in the
latest version of the Gold Standard rules5.
If the biomass feedstock is sourced from
a dedicated plantation, the criteria must
apply to both plantations established for
the project activity AND existing
plantations that were established in the
context of other activities but will supply
biomass feedstock.
Eligibility criteria related to the technology (Annex C v2.2)

2 See WBT report conducted by IRSAT in the project documentation (page 13).
3 The removal and continued non-use of three stone fires and other easily constructed traditional
devices is in many cases unlikely and impractical to monitor.
4 For example, leaflets distributed with the products alerting end-users to the waiving of their
carbon rights in exchange for pricing of the improved technology, which discounts its true cost (waiver
forms signed by end users are another example).
5 Gold Standard Toolkit, Annex C, and rule updates released prior to the time of first submission of
the project activity to the Gold Standard.

7
 End use fossil fuel switching
Activities involving fossil fuel switching shall only
be eligible for emission reductions related to end
use energy efficiency improvements. The
emission reductions related to the difference in
carbon content between a non
renewable fuel and a less carbon intensive non-
renewable fuel used for substitution shall NOT
be eligible.
This project promotes the use of LPG (a fossil fuel)
stove to displace firewood and charcoal stove.
LPG is less carbon intensive than firewood or
charcoal (its Emission Factors expressed in
tCO2e/TJ are lower than those of charcoal or
firewood).
LPG stoves also have a thermal efficiency also a
lot higher than the traditional firewood or
charcoal stove.

To meet this eligibility criterion, only the emission

reduction associated to gain in energy efficiency
will be accounted for in this project.

As a result, when LPG displace firewood, we will

use firewood emission factor to calculate
emission from LPG. When LPG displace charcoal
we will use the charcoal emission factor to
calculate the emissions from LPG.

Activities involving a large amount of small, This criterion is already included in the criteria
distributed heating, cooking or electricity required by the TPDDTEC methodology (see
generation devices using renewable energy criteria 4).
sources shall provide The Gold Standard
Foundation with a clear description of the
transfer of credits ownership all along the
investment chain, and with proof that end-users
are aware of and willing to give up their rights on
emission reductions. The transfer of credit
ownership must be discussed during local
stakeholder consultations for regular cycle
projects.

B.3. Description of the project boundary:

>> As defined in the applied methodology, project proponents must provide clear definitions of the project
boundary, target area and fuel production and collection area

The project is taking place in the 7 departments of the Kadiogo Province:

- Komki-Ipala
- Komsilga
- Koubri
- Ouagadougou
- Pabr
- Saaba
8
 - Tanghin-Dassouri

The fuel production and collection area is defined as all forest cover and land covered with trees available in
Burkina Faso. The 90% default value proposed by CDM Executive Board 67 is used for the fraction of non-
renewable biomass.
The following emission sources are included or excluded from the project boundary:

Source Gas Included? Justification/Explanation

CO2 Yes Important source of emissions

Cooking / curing, production of CH4 Yes Important source of emissions

Baseline

fuel, and transport of fuel

Significant for firewood and
NO2 Yes charcoal

Source Gas Included? Justification/Explanation

CO2 Yes Important source of emissions

Cooking / curing, production of CH4 Yes Important source of emissions

Project

fuel, and transport of fuel

Significant for firewood and
NO2 Yes charcoal

B.4. Description of the baseline and its development as per the chosen methodology:

In the project area, the baseline has been divided in two scenarios: the households who use exclusively firewood
for the cooking needs (referred here after as Baseline firewood users) and the households who use charcoal and
might also be using firewood (referred here after as Baseline charcoal users).
The distinction between the households who uses firewood and the ones who does not was dictated by the fact that
the use of charcoal leads to much higher greenhouse gas emissions than the use of firewood.
Fuel usage
Per definition the baseline firewood users burn only firewood, the charcoal users rely heavily on both charcoal and
firewood.

9
 Fuel use frequency Baseline Fuel use frequency Baseline
Firewood users Charcoal Users
100% 100%
% of household

% of household
80% 80%
60% 60%
40% 40%
20% 20%
0% 0%

Fuel type Fuel type

Every day At least once a week Every day At least once a week
Less than once a week Never Less than once a week Never

Seasonal variation
This graph shows the percentage of households who declared using more or less fuel than the average for each
month of the year.

Seasonal variation in fuel consumption

100%
% of household

50%
0%
-50%
-100%

month

Firewood Charcoal LPG median

The fuel consumption is higher during the cold season (November to February) and the rainy season
(July August). Fuel consumption is at its lowest during the month of March, April and October.

Socio economic indicators

We used the Progress out of Poverty Index (PPI) to assess how likely the household in each scenario
were to be below the national poverty line. For both scenarios the average likelihood was 29%.

Health indicators

The chart below shows the self-declared frequency of issues related to using dirty fuel for cooking.

10
 Health Impact Baseline Firewood Health Impact Baseline Charcoal
users Users
100% 100%
80% 80%
60% 60%
40% 40%
20% 20%
0% 0%

always often sometimes never always often sometimes never

The comparison between those two graphs shows that users of charcoal are slight less likely to
report eye irritations, headaches and cough related to the smoke produced by the stove.
Indoor cooking

Indoor cooking frequency Indoor cooking frequency

Baseline Firewood users Baseline Charcoal Users
8% 1% 3%
2%

never never
21%
sometime sometime
43% 53%
often often
always always
69%

The charcoal user tends to cook more often inside than the firewood users.

B.5. Description of how the anthropogenic emissions of GHG by sources are reduced below those
that would have occurred in the absence of the registered micro-scale project activity:

As per the Annex T, the project is deemed additional since it is located in a Least Developed Country.

B.6 Emission reductions:

B.6.1. Explanation of methodological options or description of new proposed approach:

11
Baseline and project scenarios
The baseline survey shows that the targeted households in the project area use either charcoal and/or firewood.
After the introduction of the LPG stove, the household use either LPG only or continue using charcoal and/or
firewood in addition to LPG.
The separate households into scenario based on their emissions, it is key consider the respective emissions of
each fuel.
Fuel firewood charcoal LPG
NCV (MJ/kg) 15.60 29.50 47.30
Default thermal efficiency6 15.28% 20.6% 55%
EF (kg CO2e/GJ) 112.00 498.40 63.10
EF non CO2 (kg CO2e/GJ) 37.25 162.05
NRB 0.90 0.90 1.00
EF tot (kg CO2/MJ) 138.05 610.61 63.10
Emission to produce 1 MJ of useful energy
903 2,960 116
(kgCO2/MJ of useful energy)
ratio to LPG 7.80 25.57 1.00

This table shows that to produce one unit of useful energy, using charcoal or firewood produce 25.6 and 7.8 times
more emissions than LPG respectively.
So the emissions from charcoal dwarf the emission from firewood which dwarf the emissions from LPG. As a result
we divide households in the following manner:

- Charcoal users : use charcoal and any other fuel

- Firewood users: use no charcoal but use firewood and potentially LPG
- LPG users: use only LPG (no charcoal or firewood)

Since LPG is introduced by the project, in the baseline scenarios there is no LPG use. In the project scenarios
there has to be LPG use, but based on their use of other fuel the household are classified in different scenarios.
The aim of the project is that the household completely switches to LPG but it is not always the case unfortunately,
so it is important to consider the residual use of the baseline fuels.
The table here under summarizes the fuels used in each scenario:

Scenario Firewood use Charcoal use LPG use

Baseline Firewood Yes No No
Baseline Charcoal Maybe Yes No
Project Firewood Yes No Yes
Project Charcoal Maybe Yes Yes
Project LPG No No Yes

The scenarios are associated as follow between the baseline and project

Baseline Scenario Project Scenario

Baseline Firewood Project Firewood
Baseline Charcoal Project Charcoal

6 See detailed calculation in the suppressed demand section below

12
 Baseline Charcoal Project LPG

Commercial use vs Domestic use

The project scenario shows that 18% of the households that purchased a LPG stove cook food for commercial
purpose (they are street food vendors), while 82% of the households cook for domestic purpose only.
Because of the very small scale of the project it was decided to focus our limited resources on the domestic
segment so that multiple scenarioss be established and then explored in depth with dedicated KPTs.
No KPT were done for the commercial stoves. Instead we propose to use a conservative assumption. To make
sure the results will be very conservative we used the domestic scenario yielding the less VER and used this
result for commercial users.
This is likely to be very conservative since commercial users prepare a lot more food than domestic users. Their
improved stove is used for longer period of time and is very likely to yield greater fuel reduction than in a domestic
context.

Suppressed Demand
The results of the baseline and project KPT show that there is a strong suppressed demand:

Cooking Energy Utilised for each scenario

1.20

1.00
MJ/person-meal

0.80

0.60

0.40

0.20

-
Baseline Firewood Baseline Charcoal Monitoring Firewood Monitoring Charcoal Monitoring LPG only

The cooking energy used in the baseline scenarios is a lot less than in the project scenarios. This shows that there
is a suppressed demand. This is also confirmed by the fact that the Baseline Firewood Users burn only 136 kg of
firewood per year per capita. This is a lot less than the 500 kg/year/capita recognized as a standard firewood
consumption in methodologies like Gold Standard Simplified Cookstove methodology that rely on suppressed
demand as well.
The measure of PPI shows the likelihood of each scenario of being under the national poverty line (higher results
mean the group is poorer).

13
 PPI: average chance of being below the national poverty line
35%

30%

25%

20%

15%

10%

5%

0%
Baseline firewood Baseline Charcoal Monitoring Firewood Monitoring Charcoal Monitoring LPG

This chart shows that the baseline users are twice more likely to be under the national poverty line than the project
scenarios. Poorer households are more likely to be in a suppressed demand situation.
For each baseline scenario, the cooking energy utilized will be adjusted to match the corresponding project
scenario. The adjustment will be done while keeping the proportion of each fuel and stove used unchanged only by
adjusting the fuel consumption level.
The cooking energy utilized is obtained by multiplying the specific fuel consumption (in kg/person-meal) by the fuel
NCV (from the latest IPCC guideline) and the stove thermal efficiency.
The stove thermal efficiency of the LPG stove, Three Stone Fire and Roumd stove has been determined during a
WBT conducted by an independent laboratory, the average thermal efficiency of all phase was used.
For the baseline charcoal stove, when no WBT tests results were available, we used the method developed in the
CDM AMS IIG methodology to assess the stove default thermal efficiency: if the stove has no grid of chimney, its
thermal efficiency is 10%, if the stove has a grid or a chimney its thermal efficiency is 20%.
The baseline survey provides us with the details of all the firewood and charcoal stove owned by the households.

Firewood stove Number of stove owned by household Thermal efficiency Source

Three Stone fire 1.36 13% WBT
Malgache stove 0.35 20% CDM AMS IIG
Roumd stove 0.17 22% WBT
Average 1.89 15.28%

Charcoal stove Number of stove owned by household Thermal efficiency Source

Malgache charocal 0.88 20% CDM AMS IIG
Roumd 0.35 22% WBT
Average 1.23 20.6%

Fuel consumption before the application of the suppressed demand:

14
 Firewood Charcoal LPG Person- Useful energy MJ
(kg/hh/day) (kg/hh/day) (kg/hh/day) meal/hh/day per person meal
Baseline Firewood 3.12 - - 10.50 0.71
Baseline Charcoal 0.84 0.96 - 10.06 0.78
Monitoring Firewood 2.73 - 0.27 12.39 1.08
Monitoring Charcoal 2.02 0.33 0.26 12.57 1.07
Monitoring LPG only - 0.00 0.36 8.84 1.04

Fuel consumption after the application of the suppressed demand:

Firewood Charcoal LPG Person- Useful energy MJ

(kg/hh/day) (kg/hh/day) (kg/hh/day) meal/hh/day per person meal
Baseline Firewood
(SD) 4.76 - - 10.50 1.08
Baseline Charcoal
(SD) 1.15 1.32 - 10.06 1.07
Monitoring Firewood 2.73 - 0.27 12.39 1.08
Monitoring Charcoal 2.02 0.33 0.26 12.57 1.07
Monitoring LPG only - 0.00 0.36 8.84 1.04

Emission Reduction

Emission reductions are verified and credited by comparing the emissions for a given project scenario to the
emissions for the applicable baseline scenario. Multiple project scenarios can be credited in comparison to different
baseline scenarios, and multiple project scenarios can be credited in comparison to the same baseline scenario, as
is applicable.
The initial emissions profile of each baseline scenario and project scenario is determined by the results of the
respective baseline studies and project studies. Over the project period the results are updated and adjusted
depending on results of the ongoing monitoring studies. Sections II.4 and II.5 of the methodology describe
requirements for the baseline studies and project studies required respectively for baseline and project scenarios,
and section III.1 of the methodology describes the requirements for ongoing monitoring studies.
The baseline fuel and the project fuel are different; hence emission reductions are calculated according to the
following formulae as prescribed by the selected methodology:

ERy=b,pNp,y*Up,y*(fNRB,b,y*ERb,p,CO2+ERb,p,y,non-CO2) - LEp,y (1)

Where:
b,p Sum over all relevant (baseline b/project p) couples

15
 Np,y Cumulative number of project technology-days included in the project database for project scenario
p against baseline scenario b in year y
Up,y Cumulative usage rate for technologies in project scenario p in year y, based on cumulative
adoption rate and drop off rate (fraction)
ERb,p,CO2 Specific CO2 emission savings for an individual technology of project p against an individual
technology of baseline b in year y, in tCO2/day, and as derived from the statistical analysis of the
data collected from the field tests. See equation (2) for calculation details.
ERb,p,y,non-CO2 Specific non-CO2 emission savings for an individual technology of project j against an
individual technology of baseline b in year y, converted in tCO2/year, and as derived from the
statistical analysis of the data collected from the field tests. See equation (3) for calculation details.
fNRB,b,y Fraction of biomass used in year y for baseline scenario b that can be established as non-
renewable biomass (drop this term from the equation when using a fossil fuel baseline scenario)
LEp,y Leakage for project scenario p in year y (tCO2e/yr)

,,,2 = , (, ,, ) ,2 (2)

Where:

, : Average number of people meal for scenario p in year y

, : Average fuel consumption of fuel in baseline scenario b in kg/people-meal

,, : Average fuel consumption of fuel in project scenario p in kg/people-meal

: Net Calorific Value of fuel in TJ/kg

,2 : Emission Factor of fuel in tCO2/TJ

,,,2 = , ,(, ,, ) [ , ] (3)

Where:

, : Emission factor in tons of gas per TJ. The considered gas in this project are CH4 and
N2o.

: Global Warming Potential of gas expressed in 100 years CO2 equivalent.

Leakage
The table below details the estimated risk level for each potential source of leakage identified in the methodology.

Potential source of leakage Risk Level Justification

16
1- The displaced baseline
technologies are reused outside
the project boundary in place of
lower emitting technology or in a
manner suggesting more usage
than would have occurred in the
absence of the project.
2- The non-renewable biomass or
fossil fuels saved under the
project activity are used by non-
project users who previously
used lower emitting energy
sources.
3- The project significantly impacts
the NRB fraction within an area
where other CDM or VER project
activities account for NRB
fraction in their baseline
scenario.
4- The project population
compensates for loss of the
space heating effect of inefficient
technology by adopting some
other form of heating or by
retaining some use of inefficient
technology7.
5- By virtue of promotion and
marketing of a new technology
with high efficiency, the project
stimulates substitution within
households who commonly used
a technology with relatively
lower emissions, in cases where
such a trend is not eligible as an
evolving baseline.
Very Low The displaced baseline technologies have a
rather short lifespan and are already widely
available in the greater Ouagadougou area.
The number of baseline stoves displaced by
the project is negligible compared to the
overall number of stoves available in the
greater Ouagadougou area (0.3% when the
project will be at its widest extent). See excel
file (leakage tab) for more details on the
calculations.
Very Low The amount of charcoal displaced by the
project is negligible compared to the overall
charcoal consumption in Ouagadougou
(0.53%). See the excel file (leakage tab) for
more details on the calculations.
The project will not affect the availability or
overall price of charcoal in the greater
Ouagadougou area.
Very Low The amount of biomass displaced by the
project is very limited compared to the overall
charcoal consumption of Ouagadougou
(0.53%). Its impact on the NRB fraction is
negligible. See excel file (leakage tab) for
more details on the calculations.
Very Low Ouagadougou climate is tropical and space
heating is not required even during the coldest
months of the year. See chart of temperature
in Ouagadougou in the excel file (leakage
tab).
Very Low The LPG is the cleanest technology available in
Ouagadougou (it is 25 times cleaner than
charcoal and 7 times cleaner than firewood).
The baseline survey shows that almost no one
use electricity as a cooking fuel.
17
Since every potential source of leakage is associated to a very low risk, leakages are deemed to be negligible and
will not be monitored.

Fixed/Evolving Baseline

A fixed baseline has been established and will be used throughout the crediting period.

NCV and EF factor in baseline and project scenario

NCV and EF are not measured in the field, the values used here are taken from the latest IPCC
guideline. For a given fuel, the same values will be used in the baseline and project scenarios.

B.6.2. Data and parameters that are available at validation:

Data / Parameter: EFfuel,CO2

Data unit: tCO2/TJ
Description: CO2emission factor arising from use of fuels in baseline scenario
Source of data used: IPCC 2006 Vol2 Chap1 Table 1.4
Value applied: EFfirewood,CO2= 112 tCO2/TJ ;
EFcharcoal,CO2 = 487.2 tCO2/TJ
EFLPG,CO2= 112 or 487.2 tCO2/TJ*
Justification of the For firewood, the IPCC 2006 (Vol 2, Chap 1, Table 1.4) data have been applied.
choice of data or For charcoal, in accordance with the methodology, the value has been
description of estimated by multiplying the firewood Emission Factor a default charcoal to
measurement firewood ratio of 4.35 kg of firewood/kg of charcoal (derived from FAO data8).
methods and
procedures actually
applied:
Any comment: *As per the eligibility criteria detailed in section B.2, switching from non-
renewable biomass to LPG is allowed only when considering the energy
efficiency improvement, not the change of carbon content. As a result, the
actual EF value of LPG is not used. Instead the EF values of firewood or charcoal
are used for LPG depending on which fuel is displaced.

Data / Parameter: EFfuel, nonCO2

Data unit: tCO2/TJ or tCO2/t_fuel
Description: Non-CO2 emission factor arising from use of fuels in baseline scenario

8See the Apendix 1 of : The role of Wood energy in Africa, Samir Amous, FAO. Consulted online
at: http://www.fao.org/docrep/x2740e/x2740e05.htm#P3854_103806

18
 Source of data used: IPCC 2006 Vol2 Chap 2 Table 2.9 and latest GWP of CH4 and N2O (WGI AR5
2013 Table 8A.1 p731)9
Value applied: EFfw,nonCO2= 34.0 tCO2/TJ ;
EFcharcoal,nonCO2 = 147.7 tCO2/TJ
EFLPG,nonCO2 = 34.0 or 147.7 tCO2/TJ
Justification of the For firewood the IPCC 2006 (Vol 2, Chap 2, Table 2.9) data have been applied
choice of data or and multiplied by latest GWP data (GWPCH4= 28 and GWP N2O= 265)
description of
measurement For charcoal, in accordance with the methodology, the value has been
methods and estimated by multiplying the firewood Emission Factor a default charcoal to
procedures actually firewood ratio of 4.35 kg of firewood/kg of charcoal (derived from FAO data).
applied:
Any comment: *As per the eligibility criteria detailed in section B.2, switching from non-
renewable biomass to LPG is allowed only when considering the energy
efficiency improvement, not the change of carbon content. As a result, the
actual EF value of LPG is not used. Instead the EF value of firewood or charcoal
are used for LPG depending on which fuel is displaced.

Data / Parameter: NCVfuel

Data unit: TJ/ton
Description: Net calorific value of the fuels used in the baseline
Source of data used: IPCC 2006 Vol 2, Chap 1, Table 1.2
Value applied: NCVfw = 0.0156 TJ/ton ;
NCVLPG = 0.0473 TJ/ton ;
NCVcharcoal = 0.029.5 TJ/ton
Justification of the These values are taken from IPCC Guidelines 2006 Vol 2, Chap 1, Table 1.2
choice of data or
description of
measurement
methods and
procedures actually
applied:
Any comment:

Data / Parameter: Pb,fuel

Data unit: kg/person-meal
Description: Quantity of fuel that is consumed in baseline scenario b for each fuel

9 See table 8.A.1 of: Myhre, G., D. Shindell, F.-M. Bron, W. Collins, J. Fuglestvedt, J. Huang, D. Koch,
J.-F. Lamarque, D. Lee, B. Mendoza, T. Nakajima, A. Robock, G. Stephens, T. Takemura and H. Zhang,
2013: Anthropogenic and Natural Radiative Forcing. In: Climate Change 2013: The Physical
Science Basis. Contribution of Working Group I to the Fifth Assessment Report of the
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change [Stocker, T.F., D. Qin, G.-K. Plattner, M. Tignor, S.K.
Allen, J. Boschung, A. Nauels, Y. Xia, V. Bex and P.M. Midgley (eds.)]. Cambridge University Press,
Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, NY, USA.
19
 Source of data to be Baseline FT
used: Scenario 1= firewood users; Scenario 2 = charcoal users
Value applied: P1,firewood= 0.45
P1,charcoal= 0.00
P1,LPG= 0.00
P2,firewood= 0.11
P2,charcoal= 0.13
P2,LPG= 0.00

Description of Fuel consumption were measured with a Kitchen Performance Test and were
measurement expressed in kg/person-meal
methods and
procedures to be
applied:
QA/QC procedures Systematic outlier identification procedures
to be applied: 90/30 precision check procedure
Any comment:

Data unit: fNRB

Description: Non-renewability status of woody biomass fuel in scenario i during year y
Source of data to be CDM EB 90. Approved by Burkina Faso DNA on March 29 2013
used:
Value applied: 90%
Description of Default CDM EB approved value
measurement
methods and
procedures to be
applied:
QA/QC procedures
to be applied:
Any comment: The NRB is used for all biomass (firewood, charcoal) used in both the baseline
and the project scenario

B.6.3 Ex-ante calculation of emission reductions:

Methodology

At the time of the PDD first submission for validation, all the survey related to the first crediting year
have been already completed. The approach used for the Ex-Ante emission calculation follows the
equation established for the Ex-Post calculation.

Summary of the results

The results of the survey are presented below along with the associated emission reduction calculation
and related statistical analysis.

20
 useful ER
firewood charcoal LPG energy ER non
per per per per CO2 CO2 CI
person person person person (tCO2e/ (tCO2e/ ER standard 90% mean
meal meal meal meal hh/day) hh/day) Uy Np,y total error spread 30%
Baseline
Firewood
(SD) 0.45 - - 1.08
Baseline
Charcoal
(SD) 0.11 0.13 - 1.07
Monitoring
Firewood 0.22 - 0.022 1.08 0.0036 0.00121 97% 125,501 543.43 153.36
Monitoring
Charcoal 0.16 0.03 0.020 1.07 0.0123 0.00399 97% 109,307 1,591.95 471
Monitoring
LPG only - 0.00 0.040 1.04 0.0103 0.00337 97% 222,663 2,731.31 226.75
Commercial 0.0036 0.0012 97% 97,162 420.72 153
Total 5,287.40 565.60 743 1,586

The statistical analysis shows that the 90% confidence interval is within +-30% of the mean emission
reduction. As a result, the difference in means between baseline emissions and project emissions
maybe used directly.

Summary of the survey conducted

The table below detailed the number type and time of different survey conducted.
Type of survey Date Sample Size
Baseline Survey March 2016 239
Usage Survey March 2016 323
Monitoring Survey Oct 2014 & April 2016 254
Baseline KPT April 2016 85
Project KPT Oct 2014 & April 2016 119

Usage rate and project scenario

The usage survey established a working rate of 97%. The monitoring survey showed the users of the
LPG stove are classified in the following scenarios:

Scenario % of users
Commercial 18%
LPG 40%
Charcoal 20%
Firewood 23%

Fuel usage

The charts below show the type of fuel used and their frequency for each of the three project
scenarios.

21
 Fuel use frequency Monitoring Firewood Users
100%
% of household

80%
60% Never
40% Less than once a week
20%
At least once a week
0%
Firewood Charcoal Kerosene LPG Electricity Every day
Fuel type

When households using firewood purchased the LPG stove it displaced their use of firewood but most
of the households continue to rely heavily on firewood. This situation represents 23% of the LPG stove
users.

Fuel use frequency Monitoring Charcoal Users

100%
% of household

80%
60% Never
40% Less than once a week
20%
At least once a week
0%
Firewood Charcoal Kerosene LPG Electricity Every day
Fuel type

Households using charcoal and firewood in the baseline situation continued to somewhat rely on these
fuel after they purchased the LPG stove. This situation represents 20% of the users

Fuel use frequency Monitoring LPG only users

100%
% of household

80%
60% Never
40% Less than once a week
20%
At least once a week
0%
Firewood Charcoal Kerosene LPG Electricity Every day
Fuel type

40% of the users switch completely to LPG and completely stopped using firewood or charcoal.

Health effect

The chart below shows the self-declared health effect of using dirty fuel for cooking.

22
 Health Impact Health Impact Health Impact LPG
Monitoring Firewood Monitoring Charcoal only users
Users Users 100%
100% 100% 80%
80% 80% 60%
60% 60% 40%
40% 40%
20% 20% 20%
0% 0% 0%

always often sometimes never always often sometimes never always often sometimes never

Not surprisingly the household using more firewood suffer the most from adverse health effects while
households that switched fully to LPG hardly mention any inconvenience.

Indoor vs Outdoor cooking

Indoor cooking Indoor cooking Indoor cooking

frequency Monitoring frequency Monitoring frequency Monitoring
Firewood Users Charcoal Users LPG users
7% 2% 1%
16%
23% 20%

34%
33% 48%

31%
37% 48%

never sometime often always never sometime often always never sometime often always

This set of charts shows that households who switch fully to LPG tend to cook a lot more often inside.
The difference with the baseline situation is quite striking.

B.6.4 Summary of the ex-ante estimation of emission reductions:

The equations provided in the methodology do not allow us to calculate separately baseline and
project emissions. Leakage are also considered negligible. The table below was simplified to reflect
this.

23
 Crediting Year VER

June 1st 2015 May 31st 2016 5,287

June 1st 2016 May 31st 2017 10,000
June 1st 2017 May 31st 2018 10,000
June 1st 2018 May 31st 2019 10,000
June 1st 2019 May 31st 2020 10,000
June 1st 2020 May 31st 2021 10,000
June 1st 2021 May 31st 2022 10,000
June 1st 2022 May 31st 2023 10,000
June 1st 2023 May 31st 2024 10,000
June 1st 2024 May 31st 2025 10,000
YEARLY AVERAGE 9,529
Based on projected sale and the result of the first year, it is expected that the 10,000 VER/year should
be reached during the second monitoring year.

B.7 Application of a monitoring methodology and description of the monitoring plan as per the
existing or new methodology applied to the micro-scale project activity:

B.7.1 Data and parameters monitored:

Data / Parameter: Pp,y

Data unit: kg/person-meal
Description: Quantity of fuel that is consumed in project scenario p during year y
Source of data to be Project FT, project FT updates
used:
Value of data applied Scenario 1: Firewood users; Scenario 2: Charcoal users; Scenario 3:
for the purpose of Monitoring LPG users only
calculating expected P1,1,firewood= 0.22
emission reductions P1,1,charcoal= 0.00
P1,1,LPG= 0.022

P1,2,firewood= 0.16
P1,2,charcoal= 0.03
P1,2,LPG= 0.020

P1,3,firewood= 0.00
P1,3,charcoal= 0.00
P1,3,LPG= 0.040

24
Monitoring Updated every two years
frequency:
Description of Fuel consumption will be measured with a Kitchen Performance Test and will
measurement be expressed in kg/person-meal
methods and
procedures to be
applied:
QA/QC procedures Systematic outlier identification procedures
to be applied: 90/30 precision check procedure
Any comment:

Data / Parameter: Up,y

Data unit: Percentage
Description: Usage rate in project scenario p during year y
Source of data to be Annual usage survey
used:
Value of data applied 97%
for the purpose of
calculating expected
emission reductions
Monitoring Annual
frequency:
Description of Usage rate will be weighted to make sure each age group of the stove are
measurement adequately represented.
methods and
procedures to be
applied:
QA/QC procedures Transparent data analysis and reporting
to be applied:
Any comment: A single usage parameter is weighted to be representative of the quantity of
project technologies of each age being credited in a given project scenario.

Data / Parameter: Np,b,y

Data unit: Project technologies credited (units*day)
Description: Cumulative number of project technology-days included in the project
database for project scenario p against baseline scenario b in year y
Source of data to be Total sales record
used:
Value of data applied Nbaseline charcoal, project charcoal,1= 109,307
for the purpose of Nbaseline firewood, project firewood,1= 125,501
calculating expected Nbaseline charcoal, project LPG only,1= 222,663
emission reductions Ncommercial,1= 97,162

Monitoring Continuous
frequency:

25
 Description of This value is based on the sale date of each individual stove. Stoves that were
measurement sold after the beginning of the crediting period are discounted proportionally to
methods and the time they were used during the crediting year.
procedures to be
applied:
QA/QC procedures Transparent data analysis and reporting
to be applied:
Any comment: The total sales record is divided based on project scenario to create the project
database

Data / Parameter: y
Data unit: fraction
Description: Discount factor for VER if sample size is too small
Source of data to be Baseline and monitoring Kitchen Performance Test
used:

Value of data applied 0

for the purpose of
calculating expected
emission reductions
Monitoring Every two years
frequency:
Description of This parameter is derived from the statistical analysis of the result. If the
measurement sample size is enough to meet the precision requirement of the methodology,
methods and then =0, otherwise this parameter will allow the calculation of the ER based
procedures to be on the lower bound of 90% one-sided interval.
applied:
QA/QC procedures Transparent data analysis and reporting
to be applied:
Any comment:

B.7.2 Description of the monitoring plan:

A total sales record and project database are maintained continuously. For each project scenario a
monitoring survey and usage survey is conducted annually while a leakage assessment is conducted
every two years to update monitoring parameters over time.

For each baseline scenario and project scenario the BFT and PFT is updated every two years,
respectively, except in cases of fixed baseline implying no need for a BFT.

A. TOTAL SALES RECORD

26
The project proponent must maintain an accurate and complete sales record. The record should be
backed up electronically. The required data are:

1. Date of sale
2. Geographic area of sale
3. Model/type of project technology sold
4. Quantity of project technologies sold
5. Name and telephone number (if available), and address:
a. Required for all bulk purchasers, i.e., retailers and industrial users
b. All end users except in cases where this is justified as not feasible. In such cases the number
of names/telephone numbers/addresses collected must be as many as commensurate with
representative sampling, i.e. the number of end user names and addresses (and phone
numbers where possible) within sales record shall be large enough so that surveys and tests
can be based on representative purely randomly selected samples. In all cases this should not
be less than 10 times the survey and field test sample sizes (including usage surveys for each
age of product), in order to ensure an adequate end user pool to which random sampling can
be applied.

6. Mode of use: domestic, commercial, other:

a. As many as commensurate with representative sampling

B. PROJECT DATABASE

The project database is derived from the total sales record (or dissemination record in case of non-
commercial distribution) with project technologies differentiated by different project scenarios. The
differentiation of the project database into sections is based on the results of the applicable
monitoring studies for each project scenario, in order that ER calculations can be conducted
appropriately section by section Technologies aged beyond their useful lifetime, as established in the
usage survey, are removed from the project database and no longer credited.

C. ONGOING MONITORING STUDIES

The following ongoing monitoring studies are conducted for each project scenario following
verification of the associated initial project studies. These monitoring studies investigate and define

27
parameters that could not be determined at the time of the initial project studies or that change with
time.

a) Monitoring Survey Completed annually, beginning 1 year after project registration

The monitoring survey investigates changes over time in a project scenario, and in a baseline
scenario in case of industrial applications (or renewal of crediting period), by surveying end
users with project technologies (and baseline technologies in case on industrial applications) on
an annual basis. It provides critical information on year-to-year trends in end user
characteristics such as technology use, fuel consumption and seasonal variations.

Monitoring Survey Representativeness:

End users from a given project scenario are selected using representative sampling techniques to
ensure adequate representation of users with technologies of different ages. Common sampling
approaches such as clustered random sampling are allowed and geographic distribution should be
factored into selection criteria. End users can be surveyed at any time(s) throughout the year with care
taken to collect information pertaining to seasonal variations in technology and fuel use patterns.

Monitoring Survey sample sizing and data collection:

The monitoring survey has the same sample sizing and data collection guidelines as the baseline survey
described in Section II.4 of the methodology, but for non-industrial applications, the monitoring survey
is only conducted with end users representative of the project scenario and currently using the project
technology (except for the case of a renewal of the crediting period which requires a re-assessment of
the baseline). Monitoring surveys can be conducted with usage survey participants that are currently
using the project technology.

b) Usage Survey Completed annually, or more frequently, and in all cases on time for any
request of issuance.

The usage survey provides a single usage parameter that is weighted based on drop off rates
that are representative of the age distribution for project technologies in the total sales record.

A usage parameter must be established to account for drop off rates as project technologies Age and
are replaced. Prior to a verification, a usage parameter is required that is weighted to be
representative of the quantity of project technologies of each age being credited in a given project
28
scenario. For example, if only technologies in the first year of use (age 0-1) are being credited, a usage
parameter must be established through a usage survey for technologies age 0-1. If an equal number of
technologies in the first year of use (age 0-1) and second year of use (age 1-2) are credited, a usage
parameter is required that is weighted to be equally representative of drop off rates for technologies
age 0-1 and age 1-2.

Survey sample sizing and data collection:

The minimum total sample size is 100, with at least 30 samples for project technologies of each age
being credited. The majority of interviews in a usage survey must be conducted in person and include
expert observation by the interviewer within the kitchen in question, while the remainder may be
conducted via telephone by the same interviewers on condition that in-kitchen observational
interviews are first concluded and analyzed such that typical circumstances are well understood by the
telephone interviewers.

The usage parameter must be applied when calculating the quantity of fuel consumed in Project
scenario p during year y (Bp,y). Unless proven otherwise, it should be assumed that any drop off in the
use of the project technology is replaced by fuel consumption in the applicable baseline scenario. The
usage survey will establish a useful lifetime for technologies after which they are removed from the
project database and no longer credited.

c) Project FT Update Completed every other year, or more frequently.

The PFT update is an extension of the project PFT and provides a fuel consumption assessment
representative of project technologies currently in use every two years. Hence the PPT update
accounts for changes in the project scenario over time as project technologies age and new customers
are added, also as new models and designs are introduced. It is legitimate to apply an Age Test instead
of a PFT, to project technologies which remain materially the same year after year.

d) Baseline FT Update This will not be updated; a fixed baseline is chosen.

e) Leakage Assessment

The risk of leakage has been assessed to be very low. As a result, no monitoring of leakage is needed.

f) Non-Renewable Biomass Assessment Update

29
The non-renewable biomass fraction is fixed based on the results of the NRB assessment. Over the
course of a project activity the project proponent may at any time choose to re-examine renewability
by conducting a new NRB assessment. In case of a renewal of the crediting period and as per Gold
Standard rules, the NRB fraction must be reassessed as any other baseline parameters and updated in
line with most recent data available.

h) continued usage of baseline stove

The monitoring report should highlight the percentage of household that are still using their baseline
stove and make sure emission arising from their use are taken into account.

B.8 Date of completion of the application of the existing or new baseline and monitoring
methodology and name of the responsible person(s)/entity(ies)

30
The methodology application was completed on September 2016. Olivier Lefebvre, founder of Climate Solutions
Consulting is the responsible person.

SECTION C. Duration of the project activity / crediting period

C.1 Duration of the project activity:

C.1.1. Starting date of the project activity:

>> 07/27/2012

C.1.2. Expected operational lifetime of the project activity:

>> 15 years 0 month

C.2 Choice of the crediting period and related information:

C.2.1. Renewable crediting period

C.2.1.1. Starting date of the first crediting period:

>> N/A

C.2.1.2. Length of the first crediting period:

>> N/A

C.2.2. Fixed crediting period:

C.2.2.1. Starting date:

>> 01/06/2015

C.2.2.2. Length:

>> 10 years

SECTION D. Stakeholders comments

31
D.1. Brief description how comments by local stakeholders have been invited and compiled:

>> Please describe the agenda of physical meeting, Non-technical summary, Invitation tracking table,
Text of invitations sent, any other consultation method used

The meeting took place on December 6th, 2011 at the meeting room Maison Blanche in
Ouagadougou. The agenda was:

08:00 Welcoming of participants

08:30 Introduction

08:40 Presentation of the project

09:00 Questions about the project

09:20 Explanations on sustainable development and blind sustainable development exercise

10:10 Presentation of sustainable development matrix

10:25 Coffee break

10:55 Discussion on monitoring sustainable development indicators

11:45 Presentation of monitoring plan

12:00 Conclusion and closure of the meeting

The non-technical summary was handed out in French and in the local dialect Mor, the French version
is provided in this report.

NON-TECHNICAL SUMMARY
Projet Une femme, un foyer, une fort - Rsum

Entrepreneurs du Monde est une association franaise qui a pour objectif damliorer les conditions de
vie et de rduire la pauvret par lappui aux initiatives conomiques. Depuis 2010, Entrepreneurs du
Monde mne le projet Une femme, un foyer, une fort qui consiste sensibiliser des femmes aux
bnfices des foyers amliors et des foyers gaz, et faciliter leur accs ces produits grce du crdit
ou de lpargne.

La technologie

Les foyers amliors consomment en moyenne 40% moins de bois quun foyer traditionnel et les foyers
gaz nen consomment pas du tout, ce qui permet de diminuer la coupe de bois et de lutter contre la
dforestation qui touche le Burkina Faso. Les foyers amliors sont produits localement par des artisans
forms par la GIZ / FAFASO1.

Les activits menes par Entrepreneurs du Monde

32
En 2010 et 2011, Entrepreneurs du Monde a favoris la diffusion des foyers amliors et gaz en
partenariat avec les institutions de microfinance Micro Start, AsIEnA et LSK, les zones artisanales et
ppinires dentreprises de Banfora et Tenkodogo et les Unions et Groupements de Productrices de
Karit du Houet.

En 2012, Entrepreneurs du Monde ajoutera un second canal de distribution avec des boutiquiers
burkinab. Entrepreneurs du Monde formera les boutiquiers et les quipera avec du matriel de
communication. Certains dentre eux bnficieront dun crdit spcifique pour installer une consigne de
gaz.

Rsultats et impacts du projet

En deux ans, Entrepreneurs du Monde aura permis la diffusion de prs de 6 000 foyers. Les bnfices
pour les utilisateurs, essentiellement des femmes, sont divers et considrables :

- Gains de temps (sur la cuisson des repas mais aussi sur le ramassage de bois)

- Meilleure sant (Rduction ou limination des missions dangereuses de fume)

- Economies importantes pouvant reprsenter jusqu 3 000 FCFA par mois.

Par ailleurs, le projet contribue lamlioration des conditions de vie des artisans par laugmentation de
leurs revenus. Enfin, lutilisation des foyers amliors et gaz rduisent la consommation de bois et
permettent dviter des missions de CO2, un gaz nuisible lenvironnement.

La finance carbone

Les missions de CO2 vites grce lutilisation de foyers amliors donnent droit des crdits
carbone, qui sont ensuite revendus sur le march dit volontaire . Les revenus issus de cette revente
devraient permettre de financer partiellement les activits mises en uvre au Burkina Faso dans le cadre
du projet Une Femme, Un Foyer, Une Fort . Entrepreneurs du Monde, en collaboration avec
Carbonium2, a commenc les dmarches denregistrement selon la mthodologie recommande par le
Gold Standard3. La consultation des parties prenantes fait partie du processus denregistrement.

1 La GIZ, bras technique de la Coopration allemande, mne depuis 2005 le projet FAFASO (Foyers amliors du Faso) qui consiste soutenir la production
et diffusion de foyers amliors Roumd au Burkina Faso.

2 Carbonium est une entreprise franaise qui soccupe de lenregistrement du projet pour le compte dEntrepreneurs du Monde

3 Le Gold Standard est lorganisme qui certifie que le projet peut gnrer des crdits carbone."

The invitations were advertised by multiple means: public posters, email and letters. This table gives
an overview of the invitation process:
Organisation Name Means of Date of Confirmation
invitation invitation received

Organizers

33
 Sud-Conseil Mohammed Mail 10/11/2011 23/11/2011
Ouedraogo

Entrepreneurs du Monde Armel Guenguere Mail 04/11/2011 21/11/2011

Entrepreneurs du Monde Modeste Soubeaga Mail 04/11/2011 04/11/2011

Entrepreneurs du Monde Laetitia Raginel Mail 04/11/2011 04/11/2011

Entrepreneurs du Monde Claire Le Ster Mail 04/11/2011 04/11/2011

Entrepreneurs du Monde Thibaut Mary Mail 04/11/2011 04/11/2011

A People directly affected by the project

Improved cookstoves or gas stoves Public Poster 16/11/2011 02/12/2011

users

Micro Start Phebe Ouedraogo Registered 15/11/2011 15/11/2011

letter

LSK Gilberte Zongo Registered 15/11/2011 17/11/2011

letter

AsiEnA Alfred Ilboudo Registered 15/11/2011 29/11/2011

letter

GIZ Andrea Reikat Registered 15/11/2011 28/11/2011

letter

Improved cookstoves producers Compaore Ousmane Registered 15/11/2011 28/11/2011

letter

EdM employee Benoit Som Mail 22/11/2011 22/11/2011

B Local or national officials

Ministry of Environment and Sya Coulibaly Registered 15/11/2011 28/11/2011

Sustainable Development - Water and letter
Forest Department

Ministery of Mines, Quarries and Mamadou Ouedraogo Registered 15/11/2011 05/12/2011

Energy Energy Department letter

Ministery of Mines, Quarries and Mme Diallo, Director Registered 15/11/2011 29/11/2011
Energy Renewable and traditional letter 28/11/2011
energies Department

City Council Ouagadougou - Ilboudo Karim, Registered 15/11/2011 05/12/2011

Environment and Local Development President letter 28/11/2011
Committee

C DNA official representative

CONEDD (National Commission for Tene Seni Registered 15/11/2011 02/11/2011

Environment and Sustainable letter
Development)

D NGO representatives

34
 newTree Alain Traor Registered 15/11/2011 21/11/2011
letter

newTree Kazeinga Gilbert 05/12/2011

SPONG Sylvestre Tiemtore Registered 15/11/2011 28/11/2011

letter

Fondation Nature et Vie Gildas Fousseni Registered 15/11/2011 22/11/2011

letter

Centre cologique Albert Schweitzer Soulama Yamako Registered 15/11/2011 29/11/2011

letter

E Gold Standard expert in the region

Gold Standard local expert Mail 28/11/2011 29/11/2011

F NGO Gold Standard supporters

Mercy Corps McIntosh Dorothy Mail 22/11/2011 No

REEEP Harvey Katrine Mail 22/11/2011 No

HELIO International O'Connor-Lajambe Mail 22/11/2011 No

Hlne

Greenpeace International Mail 22/11/2011 No

WWF International Roscher Bella Mail 22/11/2011 No

G Others (funders)

Poweo Foundation Marie-Nolle Mail 14/17/2011 17/11/2011

Reboulet

The text of invitation is reproduced below. In each case French and Mor versions have been used,
only the French version is reproduced here, please see the supporting documentation for other
versions.

Monsieur Modeste Soubeaga

Responsable Programme Burkina Faso

Entrepreneurs du Monde

Ouagadougou, le 11 novembre 2011

Objet : Invitation
35
Monsieur xxx,

Entrepreneurs du Monde mne depuis 2010 un projet de promotion et distribution de foyers

amliors et gaz au Burkina Faso, intitul Une femme, un foyer, une fort . Dans le cadre de
lenregistrement du projet au Gold Standard, Entrepreneurs du Monde organise une runion de
consultation des parties prenantes dont lobjectif est de prsenter le projet men et de donner
lopportunit aux diffrentes parties prenantes de discuter des impacts du projet.

En votre qualit de xxx, jai lhonneur de vous inviter, par la prsente, prendre part la runion
de consultation qui aura lieu Ouagadougou le mardi 6 dcembre. La runion se tiendra la Maison
Blanche (stade municipal, rue des photos Nikiema) de 8h 12h30.

Je vous prie de bien vouloir confirmer votre prsence au +226 71 73 50 28 ou ladresse mail
suivante : claire.lester@entrepreneursdumonde.org.

Tout en vous remerciant davance pour votre disponibilit, je vous prie dagrer lexpression de mes
salutations distingues.

Modeste SOUBEAGA

D.2. Summary of the comments received:

>> Please describe the outcome of the meeting, assessment of stakeholders comment, list of
participants.

The table below presents the list of all the stakeholders who attended the meeting

Code Organization Role in the project Name Sexe

Organizers

Entrepreneurs du Monde Sustainable Development Manager Armel Guenguere F

Entrepreneurs du Monde Head of Program Burkina Faso Modeste Soubeaga M

Entrepreneurs du Monde Head of Programs Africa Laetitia Raginel F

36
 Entrepreneurs du Monde Social Entrepreneurship Manager Claire Le Ster F

Entrepreneurs du Monde Training and Communication Manager Thibaut Mary M

A People directly affected by the project

Gas stove user Nabi Sangar Bintou F

Gas stove user Garan Mamouna F

Ouedraogo Savadogo
Gas stove user F
Kaditou

Gas stove user Pamitaba/Nana Zourata F

Micro Start Operational Manager Gnouma Lydie F

LSK Credit officer Gilberte Zongo F

AsiEnA Credit officer Alfred Ilboudo M

GIZ/FAFASO Technical Coordinator Andrea Reikat F

GIZ/FAFASO Expert Albert Kere M

Improved cookstive producer Compaore Ousmane M

Improved cookstove producer Ouedraogo Boureima M

Entrepreneurs du Monde Social Entrepreneurship Officer Benoit Som M

B Local or national officials

Ministery of Environment and

Sustainable Development - Water IFN2 (Second Inventaire Forestier National) Sya Coulibaly M
and Forest Department

Ministery of Mines, Quarries and Chef de service Energies Traditionnelles

Mamadou Ouedraogo M
Energy MCE

City Council Ouagadougou -

Commission of Environment and Prsident Commission Ilboudo Karim M
Local Development

C DNA official representative

SP/CONEDD Tene SENI F

D NGO representatives

newTree Charg de programme Alain Traor M

newTree Charg de projet MDP - F3PA Kazienga Gilbert M

SPONG Charg des projets Athanase F. Kabor M

Fondation Nature et Vie Kinda Fousseni M

Centre cologique Albert

Assistant technique Soulama Yamako M
Schweitzer

G Others

37
 Fondation Poweo Marie-Nolle Reboulet F

Below are some pictures of the meeting:

38
39
Summary of stakeholders comments:

Was the
comment
Comments received/Question
taken into Justification/Answer
raised
account
(Y/N)

For some years, I have been According to the most recent figures, 70 improved
looking at carbon credit to fund cookstoves projects are in the process of registration to
improved cookstoves projects. Gold Standard. As far as traceability of cookstoves is
Very few projects are registered concerned, a data base will be implemented to register
today. This always fails because some information about buyers (name, place) and all
of : cookstoves distributed will be marked out. This is a huge
- traceability of cookstoves work and we hope that all distribution intermediaries
Y
- it is asked that the will collaborate to this monitoring work. Of course,
previous stove is Entrepreneurs du Monde will give them all the tools
destructed needed to monitor sales.
Are there new developments According to us, it is not necessary that the old
suggesting that the registration cookstove is destructed because monitoring surveys
for improved cookstoves take into account the usage rate of each cookstove.
projects works better now? Therefore, if the family still uses traditional three-stone

40
 cookstoves, this will be taken into account when
estimating the usage rate of the improved cookstove
and in the related computation of carbon emission
reductions.

Intervention areas are illustrated in slide 3 of the

presentation. There are10:

- Ouagadougou and the Kadiogo Province

- Tenkodogo (cookstove distribution in
partnership with ZAPE de Tenkodogo)
- The South-West region, particularly in Dano,
Dissin and Koper
Could you define the area of
Y - Banfora (cookstove distribution in partnership
intervention of your project?
with ZAPE de Banfora)
- Bobo-Dioulasso (cookstove distribution in
partnership with UGPPK/H)
- Ddougou (cookstove distribution in partnership
with AsIEnA)
- Lo (cookstove distribution in partnership with
UGPPK/SZ)

The document Vision 2020 de laccs aux services

nergtiques modernes, projet MEPRED, Elaboration du
Livre Blanc national, Janvier 2008 gives the following
figures concerning the percentage of population owning
an improved cooktove or a gas stove (data 2006).
It is mentioned in the
presentation that less than 20% Gas stove 21%
of Burkinabe households cook Urban area
with an improved cookstove. Improved
Where does this figure come Y cookstove 17%
from? Do you hold precise
Gas stove 0,4%
information about the city of
Ouagadougou? Rural area Improved
cookstove 20%

Entrepreneurs du Monde does not hold recent data on

the equipment rate in the city of Ouagadougou.

How can you monitor the Wood consumption will be monitored through usage
households wood Y surveys conducted with improved and gas stoves
consumption ? beneficiaries. Presently, we are interviewing 200

10 Comprehensive list of the areas of intervention of the project at the time of the Local Stakeholder Consultation,
including areas to be included in the microscale project activity and other areas.
41

You presented various uses for
carbon credits. Is it possible to
consider a financial retribution
for players that contribute to
decreasing greenhouse gas
emissions? Not talking about
giving money to customers, one
part of carbon credits should be
given to associations or unions
that contribute to distributing
stoves in order to motivate them
more.
How do awareness sessions
happen in the field?
Does Entrepreneurs du Monde
implement trainings on safety
recommendations for gas users?
beneficiaries that will help us determine baseline
situations in rural and urban areas: Which stoves are
usually used by the population? What is the daily wood
consumption? Etc. Annual surveys will be conducted in
order to assess the wood savings achieved by
participating families thanks to the use of improved
cookstoves or gas stoves. Quantitative tests will also be
conducted in order to measure wood consumption per
household and per type of cookstoves. A random
representative sample will be selected. A team of
technicians will go in each household during three
consecutive days and measure the amount of wood used
before and after the stove purchase.
It is not planned to give carbon credits directly to unions,
microfinance institutions or partner organisations.
Nonetheless, revenues from carbon credit will be used
to develop services that will directly benefit these
institutions such as:
- Conception of training tools and documents in
order to raise awareness of their beneficiaries on
environment conservation and improved and gas
stoves.
Y
- Technical support in order to implement saving
and credit mechanisms.
Furthermore, unions, MFI and partner organisations will
ultimately benefit from other services like financial
advances or access to loan funds made available thanks
to carbon revenues. However, during the first months of
the project these services will not be funded by carbon
revenues because these revenues will not be secured at
this time.
Awareness sessions are conducted either directly by
Entrepreneurs du Monde or by educators from our
partner MFIs, associations or unions. A flipchart on
environmental conservation is used during awareness
sessions in order to show pictures on causes and
Y
consequences of desertification and some solutions
proposed to solve this issue. Improved cookstoves and
gas stoves are also presented during these sessions. It is
about presenting various types and models of improved
cookstoves and showing their usage and advantages.
Safety recommendations are presented during
Y awareness sessions on environment conservation and
LPG cookstoves usage. For example, we show them that,
42

There are a lot of different
improved cookstoves types in
Burkina Faso. What were your
choice criteria?
What is the target population
for each type of cookstove?
What are the requirements of
carbon finance?
You mentioned 5 340
cookstoves sold in the Save for a
stove project. Can you give the
detailed figures ?
Entrepreneurs du Monde has a
social role in the value chain
(mobilisation, transport) which
is funded by foundations. Are
there some mechanisms
implemented in order to
when they can hear a noise next to their stove (similar
to wind), this means that there is a gas leak and that the
bottle is open. We also use a matchbox to show them
how to switch on the gas stove. Other recommendations
are made such as never to leave the stove within the
reach of children.
Entrepreneurs du Monde doesnt have any technical
skills to create an improved cookstove. We therefore
decided to promote existing improved cookstoves
already sold in the national market. Our prospection in
2009 oriented our choice toward Roumde improved
Y
cookstoves, promoted by GIZ/FAFASO: locally
produced, already adopted by Burkinabe women,
Roumde cookstoves benefit from a certification from
IRSAT, a State organisation which certifies improved
cookstoves.
All the stoves promoted by Entrepreneurs du Monde are
presented during awareness sessions so that a person
can choose the cookstove that best fills its need and
Y
budget. Nonetheless, we can notice that 77% of
improved cookstoves are sold in rural area and 81% of
gas stove are sold in urban area.
Carbon finance requires a broad set of technical skills.
These are necessary to manage the surveys, quantitative
tests, non-renewability of biomass assessment, and
other data gathering tasks that must be conducted to
provide evidence of the GHG emission reductions
Y
generated by the project. Additionally, investing in
carbon finance will require a minimum amount of
working capital to fund the initial stages of the project
registration process while no carbon revenues has yet
been delivered.
In 2010, 983 gas stoves and 778 improved cookstoves
Y were sold. In 2011, 882 gas stoves and 2 697 improved
cookstoves were distributed.
Entrepreneurs du Monde doesnt work in the framework
of a project with a fixed deadline but has the objective
Y to make its activities sustainable. To do that, we worked
in 2011 on a social business model in which carbon
finance contributes to financial sustainability.
43
 supplement Entrepreneurs du
Monde in the long term?
You were talking about 30% CO2
savings. How do you calculate
this figure? What is the
methodology used in order to
calculate CO2 emissions
decreases? More precisely, how
do you calculate the non
renewable biomass rate?
How can you prove that the
project satisfies both economic
and environmental additionality
criteria, taking into account that
a Burkinabe family can use LPG
without support from the
project?
You talked about the reasons
why improved cookstoves are
not available and you
mentioned some actions that
Entrepreneurs du Monde do in
order to reduce these barriers.
Are these actions appropriate as
regard price barrier, more
precisely in rural area?
Do you think about counting
cookstoves already distributed
30% is an indicative figure. Some tests realised in lab by
IRSAT (Research Institute in Applied Sciences and
Technologies) demonstrated a 40% reduction in wood
consumption on average. We talk about 30% because
we consider that the fuel consumption reduction
potential of a stove isnt always maximized by users.
Emissions reductions will be calculated thanks to
quantitative tests. A random representative sample (at
least 70 households in each group) will be selected. A
team of technicians will go in each household during
three consecutive days and measure the amount of
Y wood used before and after the stove purchase. The
emissions reductions generated will be deduced for each
type of stove. Final result will be conservative.
The calculation of the non-renewable biomass rate is
presented in the PDD. It was calculated with the MDP
methodology approved by the United Nations AMS-II
and with a quantitative approach based on a survey of
the existing literature. Some documents from the
European Commission, CIRAD and FAO were also used.
The two approaches give similar results; the more
conservative one was selected.
The methodology UNFCCC Tool for demonstration and
assessment of additionality (Version 5.2) was used to
demonstrate additionality. Technological and
investment barriers were highlighted. Someone can
Y
indeed use a gas stove without the project but we
estimate that the project is promoting improved
cookstoves and gas stoves and enables a larger number
of people to get one.
Mechanisms developed to lower price barriers include
loans, saving and various payment schemes. Microcredit
is particularly pertinent for the acquisition of a gas stove
when families used to buy wood (mainly in urban area).
Indeed, savings achieved on wood expenditures tend to
Y
make the investment painless. The mechanisms are also
implemented in rural areas where they help remove
some financial barriers. We notice that more than 50%
of cookstoves distributed in the project are sold in rural
areas.
Y We will decide if we take into account stoves already
distributed later on in the registration process. It is
44
 before Gold Standard possible to consider that the first phase is a pilot stage
registration? that enables to better develop the project afterwards.

Could you precise geographical

At the time of this discussion, we consider registering
boundaries of the registered
the project for the whole Burkina Faso11. The fact that
project? Indeed, for the
some areas might have already benefited from
registration, you have to Y
improved cookstoves will be taken into account in the
consider a neutral area where
qualitative survey. In this case, emissions reduction
improved cookstoves are not
estimates will be lowered.
available yet.

What is the lifetime of the

project and how do you plan
long-term sustainability? Too
often, project sustainability is
Y
considered at the end of the
project while you should
consider this aspect from the
very beginning.
This question was already answered (see above):
Entrepreneurs du Monde doesnt work in the
framework of a project with a fixed deadline but has the
objective to make its activities sustainable. To do that,
we worked in 2011 on a social business model in which
carbon finance contributes to financial sustainability.

The discussion about the monitoring of sustainable development indicators did not yield any concrete
idea for the monitoring. But some questions about the indicators themselves were included in the
table above.

D.3. Report on how due account was taken of any comments received and on measures taken to
address concerns raised:

>> Please discuss how the stakeholders comments have been addressed and include the changes to the
design of the programme based on their feedback.

Most of the comments from the stakeholder were justified and taken into account. The points raised
during the meeting were already considered by the project. So the meeting did not yield any formal
change in the design of the project.

D.4. Report on the Continuous input / grievance mechanism:

>>

Discuss the Continuous input / grievance mechanism expression method and details, as discussed with
local stakeholders.

11The location of the microscale project activity has since then been narrowed down to Ouagadougou and the Kadiogo
Region.
45
 Method Chosen (include all known details e.g. location of book,
Justification
phone, number, identity of mediator)

EdM office is
Continuous Hard copies of the stakeholder consultation report are available
located in a
Input / at Entrepreneurs du Mondes headquarters in Ouagadougou and
central
Grievance an input/grievance book can be used to submit comments to
location in
Expression Entrepreneurs du Mondes project coordinator.
Ouagadougou.

Telephone use
Telephone is widespread
(+226) 25 48 88 07
access in Burkina
Faso.

The initial consultation report is available online on

Entrepreneurs du Mondes website and West Africa blog:
Email is going
http://www.entrepreneursdumonde.org/downloads/EdM-
to be the
StakeholderConsultationReport0612112.pdf
easiest way to
Internet/email Or communicate
access problems for
http://westafrica.entrepreneursdumonde.org/2012/01/feedback- people who
on-local-stakeholder.html have access to
internet.
Further comments can be sent to:

Sayouba GUIRA, Nafa Naana Director

sayouba.guira@entrepreneursdumonde.org

Nominated
Independent
Not needed
Mediator
(optional)

During the meeting the various ways of communication were presented to the participants, no specific
issue was raised about them.

If any issues are identified during the crediting period through any of the Methods above, a mitigation
measure will be put in place and will be added to the monitoring plan.

D.5. Report on stakeholder consultation feedback round:

46
A stakeholder feedback round was conducted over a period of two months after the stakeholder
consultation meeting.

During this period, the report was made publicly available on Entrepreneurs du Monde and
Carboniums webiste and the web link was sent to all the stakeholders who were invited by email.

Hard copies of the report were printed and made available at the EdM office during the length of the
feedback round for stakeholders who didnt have an easy access to internet.

At the end of the feedback round, any comments received were integrated into this report.

47
 Annex 1

CONTACT INFORMATION ON PARTICIPANTS IN THE PROJECT ACTIVITY

Organization: Entrepreneurs du monde

Street/P.O.Box: 4 alle du Textile

Building:

City: Vaulx-en-Velin

State/Region: Rhne-Alpes

Postfix/ZIP: 69 120

Country: France

Telephone: +33 (0)4 37 24 76 50

FAX:

E-Mail: thomas.thivillon@entrepreneursdumonde.org

URL: http://www.entrepreneursdumonde.org/

Represented by: Thomas Thivillon

Title: Head of energy programs

Salutation: Mr.

Last Name: Thivillon

Middle Name:

First Name: Thomas

Department: Energy

Mobile:

Direct FAX:

Direct tel: Tel. +33 (0)6 10 48 24 98

Personal E-Mail: thomas.thivillon@entrepreneursdumonde.org

48
Annex 2 - Information regarding Public Funding

49