Thoughts on Financial Feasibility

We already know that the project activity must not be financially feasible without the revenues from the certificate trade: Otherwise, it is not additional (the crucial criterion for certificate eligibility). As energy efficiency improvements will ALWAYS return their investment over time (provided a sufficient timescale, and that the equipment does not fall apart), we were wondering how much time we have to take into consideration to determine the financial feasibility of an activity.

I looked into the Project Design Document (PDD) of the OSRAM LIGHTBULB EXCHANGE  project. On page 13, you will find a very informative example of how to assess the financial feasibility of a project. I learned two things from that:

  1. The timeframe for the return of the investment is determined by the project duration / crediting period (which is either 7 years, renewable twice; or a single 10 years, see
  2. I had a general misconception of the whole financially-feasible thing. Now I understood the following, which is actually quite obvious: If we “donate” efficient equipment to somebody, it is HIM who gets the benefit of reduced energy bills,  NOT US. Hence, our investment WILL NEVER RETURN without the CDM crediting. The question number 1 (about the return on investment timeframe) is therefore completely irrelevant for us. It comes into play only when the beneficiary of the project himself carries out the project.
This entry was posted in Uncategorized and tagged , , . Bookmark the permalink.