PCS TR 004 Wind Methodology_v1.0

Document Control

Document identification

• Document code: PCS-TR-004

• Title: Wind Power Methodology

• Scope: Defines applicability conditions, project boundary rules, baseline determination and baseline emissions calculation, additionality requirements, monitoring requirements, leakage treatment, and net emission reduction calculation procedures for PCS projects generating electricity from wind power and claiming emission reductions through displacement of electricity generation.

Version history and change log

Table DC-1. Revision history

Version	Date	Status	Summary of changes	Prepared by	Approved by
v1.0	TBD	Draft	Release for public consultation	PCS	TBD

Superseded versions

No superseded versions for v1.0.

Governance note on versioning and archiving

Only the latest approved version of this Methodology shall be used. Superseded versions shall be archived and retained for traceability and audit purposes. Printed or downloaded copies are uncontrolled; stakeholders must refer to the PCS-published version as the authoritative current version.

Chapter 1 - Purpose

1.1 Purpose

This methodology establishes the activity-specific requirements for quantifying emission reductions from wind electricity generation under the Planetary Carbon Standard (PCS). It defines how PCS requirements are applied to wind power projects, including applicability conditions, baseline determination requirements, monitoring requirements, and calculation boundaries.

1.2 Relationship to other PCS documents

PCS applies a structured documentation system in which standards define overarching requirements, methodologies define activity-specific application of those requirements, tools provide standardised calculation or assessment approaches referenced by methodologies, templates prescribe the required format for submissions and reporting, and procedures govern review, decision-making, and lifecycle administration.

Table 1-1. PCS document hierarchy and order of precedence

Order	Document category
1	PCS Framework and Standards
2	PCS Methodologies
3	PCS Methodological Tools
4	PCS Operational Procedures and Manuals
5	PCS Templates and Forms

In the event of any inconsistency among PCS documents, the higher-order document prevails.

1.3 Binding nature

Requirements expressed using “shall” are mandatory. This methodology shall be applied as written and shall not be used to reinterpret or weaken PCS requirements established in higher-order documents.

Where this methodology references a methodological tool, the tool shall be applied as specified. Where this methodology requires use of PCS templates and forms, those templates and forms shall be used without substitution unless an explicit exception is granted through the PCS deviation process.

1.4 Deviations

Deviations are exceptional. A deviation, if approved, applies only to the specific project and circumstances described in the approval and does not create precedent or amend this methodology.

1.5 Version control and applicability

This methodology is subject to controlled versioning. The applicable version is the version in force at the time of project submission unless transition provisions specify otherwise. Revisions to this methodology follow PCS governance procedures, and a revised version does not apply until it enters into force.

Chapter 2 - Scope and Applicability

2.1 Scope

This methodology applies to projects that generate electricity using wind resources and demonstrate measurable displacement of electricity generation that would otherwise occur in the absence of the project. The scope is limited to emission reductions from electricity generation and delivery. The methodology does not credit removals, sequestration, avoided deforestation, or any non-electricity claims.

2.2 Eligible project types

A project is eligible under this methodology where the project activity consists of installation and operation of a wind power plant and the electricity generated is delivered to an eligible electricity system as defined in this chapter.

Eligible project types include the following, provided all applicability conditions are met:

2.2.1 New wind power plants

A new wind power plant that generates electricity and exports electricity to a grid, or supplies electricity to a defined captive system, is eligible.

2.2.2 Capacity additions and phased expansions

An expansion is eligible where the additional installed capacity and associated electricity generation can be clearly separated from the pre-existing installation for baseline setting and monitoring. Separation shall be demonstrated through metering architecture, commissioning records, and generation accounting that prevents double counting between phases.

2.2.3 Repowering

Repowering is eligible only where the project proponent demonstrates, in a conservative manner, that the activity results in additional electricity generation beyond what would occur under a credible baseline for continued operation of the existing installation. Repowering claims shall not be based on assumed performance degradation without evidence.

2.3 Applicable delivery configurations

This methodology recognises distinct delivery configurations. Applicability depends on the configuration and the project’s ability to meet the evidence and monitoring requirements in this chapter.

Table 2-1. Applicability by delivery configuration

Configuration	Applicability under this methodology	Minimum conditions that shall be met
Grid-connected export	Applicable	Net electricity exported shall be metered; the connected grid/system shall be clearly identified; the applicable baseline emission factor approach shall be justified and consistently applied.
Captive/on-site displacement (fossil generation)	Applicable	The baseline generation source(s) shall be identified and evidenced; displacement shall be demonstrated through metered delivery and operating records; project boundary shall include relevant baseline sources and project auxiliary consumption.
Mixed grid export and captive supply	Applicable	Electricity quantities shall be separately accounted for each delivery route; double counting shall be prevented; baseline emission factor(s) shall be applied consistently to each route.
Electricity used primarily for fuel production (e.g., hydrogen/e-fuels)	Not applicable	Not eligible under this methodology unless PCS issues a dedicated methodology covering the pathway.
Hybrid systems with integrated dispatch (wind + solar + diesel/other)	Not applicable	Use the applicable hybrid methodology where attribution rules are explicit and enforceable.

2.4 Exclusions and non-applicable cases

This methodology shall not be applied to any of the following cases:

1. Projects where electricity generation or delivery cannot be reliably metered and audited.

2. Projects where the baseline scenario is not credible or cannot be conservatively established.

3. Projects where claimed reductions rely primarily on policy impacts, grid upgrades, or market effects not directly attributable to the project’s metered electricity delivery.

4. Projects where storage, demand response, or other controls materially alter delivery patterns and the project proponent cannot demonstrate conservative accounting of the net displacement effect.

5. Projects that seek crediting for upstream manufacturing emissions, construction emissions, or other lifecycle impacts, unless PCS explicitly adopts a lifecycle crediting framework for this activity type.

2.5 Applicability conditions

A project shall be considered applicable only where all conditions below are satisfied.

2.5.1 Demonstrable displacement

The project shall demonstrate that the wind electricity generated results in displacement of electricity generation that would otherwise occur. Displacement shall be quantified using a baseline emission factor and an approach consistent with the baseline scenario defined under this methodology.

2.5.2 Boundary consistency

The project proponent shall define the project boundary and the baseline boundary in a manner that is consistent and complete for quantification purposes. Any differences shall be explicitly justified and shall not result in over-crediting.

2.5.3 Exclusive claims and double counting prevention

The project proponent shall demonstrate the right to claim the emission reductions and shall prevent double counting of the same electricity attributes or emission reductions across instruments, programs, or claims.

2.5.4 Regulatory compliance

The project shall be in compliance with applicable laws and permitting requirements, and shall maintain compliance throughout the crediting period.

2.6 Geographic applicability

This methodology is globally applicable, subject to the availability of credible and verifiable data required to implement the baseline and monitoring requirements, including grid/system identification, emission factor derivation or sourcing, and metered electricity quantities.

2.7 Data and monitoring feasibility

Applicability is conditional on monitoring feasibility. At minimum, the project shall be capable of producing auditable records for:

1. Net electricity generated and net electricity exported/supplied, with clear metering points and loss treatment;

2. Plant auxiliary consumption treatment and how it is accounted for in net delivery;

3. Operational records needed to support the baseline and demonstrate the delivery configuration (including commissioning dates, outages, and major operational changes);

4. Data required to apply the baseline emission factor approach selected for the project.

If these data cannot be produced with a defensible QA/QC system, the methodology shall be deemed not applicable.

2.8 Treatment of curtailment and constraints

Where curtailment occurs, the project proponent shall document curtailment causes, duration, and metered impacts. Curtailment shall not be used to inflate baseline assumptions or to justify emission factors or displacement claims that are not conservative. Any special treatment of curtailment shall be explicitly defined in the baseline and monitoring chapters of this methodology and shall be consistently applied.

2.9 Interaction with storage

Where electricity storage is installed and materially affects the timing or quantity of electricity delivered, the project shall apply an accounting approach that remains conservative and prevents double counting of delivered electricity. If the project cannot demonstrate conservative attribution of displacement, the methodology shall not be applied.

Chapter 3 - Conditions for Eligibility

3.1 General eligibility requirement

A project shall be eligible under this methodology only where it is demonstrably within scope, meets all applicability conditions, and can be validated and verified in accordance with PCS requirements. The project shall not proceed to registration where the methodology is not fully applicable or where required evidence cannot be produced in a verifiable form.

3.2 Project activity eligibility

The project activity shall consist of installation and operation of wind turbines and associated balance-of-plant equipment that generates electricity from wind resources. The project shall define a single project activity boundary for the wind facility and associated electrical infrastructure required to deliver electricity to the identified delivery configuration(s).

The project shall identify whether it is a new facility, an expansion, or a repowering activity. Where the project involves expansion or repowering, the project proponent shall demonstrate separability of the activity for quantification and shall prevent double counting of generation and reductions relative to pre-existing installations.

3.3 Legal compliance and permits

The project shall comply with all applicable host-country laws and regulations. The project proponent shall demonstrate that all material permits and approvals required for construction, grid interconnection, land access, and operation have been obtained and are valid at the time of registration, and that conditions attached to such approvals are being met.

Where approvals are conditional or phased, the project proponent shall demonstrate that the conditions relevant to the credited activity and the monitoring system are satisfied prior to the start of the crediting period.

3.4 Right to claim emission reductions and avoidance of double counting

The project proponent shall demonstrate legal authority and contractual rights to claim the emission reductions resulting from the project activity. This shall include clear treatment of ownership where power purchase agreements, wheeling arrangements, joint ventures, concession agreements, or asset transfers exist.

The project shall not claim emission reductions that are already claimed or used for compliance, offsetting, or voluntary claims under another program, instrument, or mechanism unless an explicit and verifiable non-overlap arrangement exists and is consistent with PCS requirements on double counting.

Where the host-country or relevant authorities require authorization or corresponding adjustments for international use claims, the project proponent shall demonstrate alignment with the applicable PCS authorization requirements for the type of credit sought.

3.5 Start date and prior consideration

The project shall define a clear project start date. The project proponent shall demonstrate that the decision to implement the project was not made independent of the expectation of carbon revenue where such demonstration is required by PCS rules. Evidence shall be contemporaneous and auditable.

3.6 Baseline eligibility and boundary consistency

The project shall identify a credible baseline scenario consistent with this methodology. The baseline scenario shall reflect realistic and plausible electricity generation that would occur in the absence of the project activity and shall not be defined in a manner that inflates emission reductions.

The project boundary and baseline boundary shall be consistent for all included emission sources and sinks relevant to quantification. Where a difference in boundaries is proposed, the project proponent shall explicitly justify the difference and demonstrate that it does not increase credited reductions beyond what is conservative and defensible.

3.7 Additionality eligibility

The project shall demonstrate additionality in accordance with PCS requirements and the additionality provisions of this methodology. The project shall not be eligible where the project activity is legally mandated, is required to meet an existing obligation, or is otherwise non-additional under PCS rules.

Where common practice considerations apply, the project proponent shall demonstrate that the project is not common practice in the applicable context or shall provide a conservative justification consistent with PCS additionality requirements.

3.8 Monitoring system eligibility

A project shall be eligible only where it has a monitoring system capable of producing complete and auditable records for all parameters required by this methodology.

At minimum, the monitoring system shall be capable of producing verifiable records of net electricity generated and net electricity delivered by configuration, including metering architecture, calibration and maintenance records, and an auditable data trail from raw meter readings to reported values.

Where a grid emission factor is applied, the project proponent shall demonstrate access to the data needed to apply the selected emission factor approach consistently for each monitoring period and to document any updates required under this methodology.

If the monitoring system is not capable of meeting these requirements at validation, the project shall not be eligible for registration under this methodology.

3.9 Treatment of material changes

The project proponent shall disclose any material change to the project design, delivery configuration, ownership, metering arrangement, or operational control that may affect applicability, baseline, additionality, or monitoring requirements.

Where a material change occurs, the project proponent shall apply the PCS procedures for post-registration changes and shall obtain approval where required prior to claiming credits for the affected period. Failure to disclose or address material changes may result in ineligibility for issuance for the relevant monitoring periods.

3.10 Specific exclusion triggers

A project shall be deemed not eligible under this methodology where any of the following conditions apply:

1. Net electricity delivery attributable to the project activity cannot be demonstrated through auditable metering and records.

2. The baseline scenario cannot be credibly established or requires assumptions that materially increase credited reductions without evidence.

3. The project seeks crediting for hybrid dispatch effects that cannot be conservatively attributed to wind generation under this methodology.

4. The project relies on unverified claims of displacement, curtailment impacts, or electricity attribute ownership.

3.11 Eligibility evidence requirements

Eligibility shall be supported by documentary evidence sufficient for validation and verification. The project proponent shall maintain records in a form that allows independent assessment by the VVB and review by PCS as required.

Table 3-1. Minimum eligibility evidence (non-exhaustive)

Eligibility area	Minimum evidence to be provided
Project description and configuration	Technical description, single line diagrams, equipment lists, commissioning records
Legal compliance	Permits/licenses, approvals, land rights, grid interconnection agreements
Right to claim and non-overlap	Contracts (PPA/wheeling/JV), ownership statements, non-overlap declarations, attribute ownership clauses
Start date / prior consideration (if required)	Board approvals, investment decision documents, financing term sheets, contemporaneous communications
Baseline and boundary	Baseline scenario description, boundary diagrams, justification of inclusions/exclusions
Additionality	Regulatory analysis, investment/barrier analysis, common practice assessment
Monitoring feasibility	Meter specifications, metering points diagram, calibration plan/records, data management procedures

Chapter 4 - Project Boundary

4.1 Boundary principle

The project boundary shall include all emission sources and electricity flows that are necessary to quantify, in a complete and conservative manner, the net emission reductions attributable to the wind project. The boundary shall be defined such that baseline and project scenarios are comparable and that exclusions do not result in over-crediting.

The project proponent shall describe the boundary in terms of physical components, electricity delivery configuration(s), and included greenhouse gas sources. The boundary description shall be supported by a site layout and a single-line electrical diagram that clearly identifies generation, auxiliary consumption, metering points, export points, and any backup generation.

4.2 Boundary components

The physical boundary shall include, at minimum, the wind turbines, internal collection system, substation(s), transformers, and the electrical infrastructure required to deliver electricity to the defined point(s) of delivery. Where the project supplies electricity to more than one delivery configuration, the boundary shall clearly identify each delivery route and the corresponding metering points.

Auxiliary systems that consume electricity for operation of the wind facility, including but not limited to control systems, lighting, heating/cooling, communications, and substation auxiliaries, shall be included for accounting purposes to the extent that they affect net electricity delivered.

4.3 Greenhouse gases included

This methodology quantifies emission reductions through displaced electricity generation. The principal greenhouse gas considered is carbon dioxide (CO₂) associated with baseline electricity generation. Methane (CH₄) and nitrous oxide (N₂O) emissions from baseline electricity generation shall be included where the emission factor applied under this methodology includes these gases; otherwise, the methodology shall apply the emission factor as defined under the baseline chapter.

Project emissions are typically negligible for wind generation; however, any project-related fossil fuel combustion within the project boundary that supplies electricity to the same delivery configuration claimed for displacement shall be included where it occurs.

Upstream lifecycle emissions (manufacture, construction, transport of equipment) are not included under this methodology unless PCS adopts an explicit lifecycle accounting requirement for this activity type.

4.4 Boundary by delivery configuration

The boundary shall be defined according to the delivery configuration as follows.

4.4.1 Grid-connected export

For grid-connected projects, the electricity flow relevant for quantification is the net electricity exported from the project to the grid at the defined point of interconnection or other defined delivery point, as specified in the monitoring chapter. The boundary shall include all equipment and electricity flows up to the export meter used for quantification.

Where gross generation is metered at turbine level and export is metered at the interconnection point, the project proponent shall demonstrate how internal losses and auxiliary consumption are treated to ensure that net electricity exported is not overstated.

4.4.2 Captive/on-site displacement

For captive supply projects, the electricity flow relevant for quantification is the net electricity delivered to the defined captive system or load(s). The boundary shall include the delivery infrastructure to the point at which electricity is measured as delivered to the captive system. The baseline boundary shall include the baseline generation source(s) that would have supplied the same captive system in the absence of the project.

Where the captive system is supplied by both wind electricity and other sources, the project proponent shall demonstrate separable accounting of wind-delivered electricity and shall prevent double counting of the same delivered electricity.

4.4.3 Mixed grid export and captive supply

Where both grid export and captive supply occur, the project shall define separate delivery routes and metering arrangements such that electricity quantities attributable to each route are clearly determined. The boundary shall be defined to prevent double counting between routes and to ensure consistent treatment of auxiliary consumption and losses.

4.5 Treatment of auxiliary consumption and losses

Auxiliary consumption and electrical losses shall be treated in a manner that is consistent with the metering configuration and conservative with respect to net electricity delivered.

Where a net export meter exists at the point of delivery and is used for quantification, auxiliary consumption and internal losses are inherently reflected in the measured net electricity delivered. In such cases, the project shall use net metered delivery as the basis for quantification.

Where only gross generation is metered and net delivery is not directly measured, the project shall quantify auxiliary consumption and losses using measured data where feasible. Any estimation approach shall be conservative and shall not result in higher net delivered electricity than would be demonstrated by a net export meter.

Transformer losses and line losses between turbine generation meters and delivery meters shall be accounted for implicitly through use of the delivery meter where such a meter exists. Where delivery is not directly metered, losses shall be quantified or conservatively deducted.

4.6 Backup generation and fossil electricity within the boundary

If fossil fuel-based generation is used within the project boundary to supply electricity to the same delivery configuration for which emission reductions are claimed, emissions from such generation shall be included as project emissions and deducted in the net emission reduction calculation.

Where backup generation exists but is not used to supply the credited delivery configuration, the project proponent shall demonstrate, through operational records and metering where applicable, that the backup generation does not contribute to the electricity quantities claimed for displacement. If this cannot be demonstrated, the project shall include the backup generation within the project boundary and account for its emissions conservatively.

4.7 Boundary exclusions

The following are excluded from the boundary under this methodology, unless explicitly required elsewhere in PCS:

a) Emissions associated with manufacturing, construction, and decommissioning of wind equipment. b) Indirect market effects, policy impacts, or systemic grid effects not directly attributable to the project’s metered electricity delivery. c) Emissions from activities not causally linked to the wind electricity delivery routes defined under this methodology.

Exclusions shall be justified in the project documentation, and the justification shall demonstrate that the exclusion does not result in over-crediting.

4.8 Boundary table

Table 4-1. Boundary sources and inclusion status (wind electricity generation)

Source / sink / flow	Included in baseline scenario	Included in project scenario	Inclusion rationale
Electricity delivered (net) to grid at point of interconnection	Yes	Yes	Basis for displacement and crediting quantity.
Electricity delivered (net) to defined captive load(s)	Yes	Yes	Basis for displacement where captive configuration is used.
Baseline electricity generation supplying the same delivery configuration (grid mix or fossil captive generator)	Yes	No	Represents emissions that would occur without the project.
Wind turbine electricity generation	No	Yes	Physical project activity producing electricity.
Auxiliary electricity consumption of wind facility	Reflected in net delivery or accounted for	Reflected in net delivery or accounted for	Ensures net delivery is not overstated.
Transformer and internal line losses up to delivery meter	Reflected in delivery measurement or deducted	Reflected in delivery measurement or deducted	Prevents overstatement of net delivery.
Fossil backup generation supplying credited delivery route (if any)	No	Yes	Project emissions must be included where they affect credited electricity.
Upstream lifecycle emissions (manufacture/construction)	No	No	Not included under this methodology.
Indirect market/policy effects	No	No	Not attributable in a measurable, verifiable manner.

4.9 Documentation requirements

The project proponent shall provide boundary documentation sufficient for validation and verification, including:

1. Site map and equipment layout identifying all relevant boundary components.

2. Single-line electrical diagram identifying generation meters, auxiliary consumption, export/delivery meters, and delivery routes.

3. Description of delivery configuration(s) and points of delivery used for quantification.

4. Description of any backup generation and evidence of its operational role relative to credited delivery.

Failure to demonstrate an unambiguous, conservative boundary definition and auditable electricity flows shall render the project ineligible for issuance for the affected periods.

Chapter 5 - Baseline Scenario and Baseline Emissions

5.1 Baseline principle

The baseline scenario shall represent the plausible electricity generation that would occur in the absence of the wind project and shall be defined in a transparent, conservative, and verifiable manner. Baseline assumptions shall not be selected or structured to inflate emission reductions.

The baseline scenario shall be consistent with the defined delivery configuration(s) and the project boundary set out in Chapter 4. The baseline boundary shall include the emission sources that would generate the same electricity service provided by the project, and the baseline approach shall be applied consistently across the crediting period unless an update is required under this chapter.

5.2 Identification of the baseline scenario

The project proponent shall identify the baseline scenario using the following procedure.

1

Identify the electricity system and delivery route

The project shall identify the electricity system to which the project delivers electricity, distinguishing between: (i) grid-connected export; (ii) captive/on-site displacement; or (iii) mixed delivery. The electricity system shall be uniquely defined and evidenced through grid interconnection documentation, wheeling agreements (where applicable), and the metering configuration used for quantification.

2

Determine the most plausible baseline supply

The baseline scenario shall be the most plausible source of electricity that would supply the same electricity service without the project, determined as follows:

• For grid-connected export, the baseline scenario shall be electricity supplied by the connected grid.

• For captive/on-site displacement, the baseline scenario shall be electricity supplied by the existing or planned baseline generation source(s) that would supply the captive system, or grid electricity where that is the credible alternative supply.

• For mixed delivery, the baseline scenario shall be identified separately for each delivery route and shall be consistent with the route-specific electricity system definition.

The baseline scenario shall be justified using evidence. Where multiple plausible baseline supplies exist, the project proponent shall select the baseline that is most realistic and shall apply conservative assumptions where uncertainty remains.

5.3 Baseline emissions factor approach

Baseline emissions shall be calculated by applying an emission factor to the quantity of net electricity delivered under each delivery route. The project proponent shall apply one of the emission factor approaches below, based on delivery configuration and data availability.

5.3.1 Grid-connected projects: grid emission factor

For grid-connected export, baseline emissions shall be quantified using a grid emission factor applicable to the defined grid/system and the monitoring period. The grid emission factor shall be selected and applied consistently. The project proponent shall demonstrate the source, derivation method, and applicability of the grid emission factor, including any assumptions and default values used.

Where multiple credible grid emission factors are available, the project proponent shall apply the approach that best represents marginal displacement for the electricity system while remaining conservative. If marginal displacement cannot be credibly determined, the project proponent shall apply a conservative grid emission factor that does not overstate baseline emissions.

5.3.2 Captive/on-site displacement projects: baseline generation emission factor

For captive/on-site displacement, baseline emissions shall be calculated using an emission factor derived from the baseline generation source(s). The emission factor shall be based on measured fuel consumption and electricity generation data where available. Where measured data are not available, the project proponent shall apply conservative defaults supported by credible sources and justified for the technology and operating conditions.

If the captive system would otherwise be supplied by grid electricity, the grid emission factor approach in Section 5.3.1 shall be applied for the electricity displaced.

5.3.3 Mixed delivery projects

For mixed delivery projects, baseline emissions shall be calculated separately for each delivery route using the relevant emission factor approach. The project proponent shall prevent double counting of electricity quantities between routes and shall apply the correct emission factor to each route-specific electricity quantity.

5.4 Baseline emissions calculation

Baseline emissions for each monitoring period shall be calculated as the product of net electricity delivered and the applicable baseline emission factor.

Table 5-1. Baseline emissions equations

Baseline type	Baseline emissions for monitoring period
Grid-connected export
Captive displacement (fossil)
Mixed delivery

Where:

BE_t is baseline emissions in monitoring period (tCO₂e).

EG_PJ,t is net electricity delivered in monitoring period (MWh).

EF_GRID,t is grid emission factor applicable to monitoring period (tCO₂e/MWh).

EF_CAPT,t is baseline captive generation emission factor applicable to monitoring period (tCO₂e/MWh).

EG_PJ,t,r is net electricity delivered through route in monitoring period (MWh).

EF_r,t is the baseline emission factor applicable to route in monitoring period (tCO₂e/MWh).

5.5 Baseline validity and updating

Baseline parameters and emission factors shall remain valid only where they continue to represent the defined electricity system and baseline supply. The project proponent shall update the baseline emission factor where required by PCS rules, where the underlying data source updates emission factors, or where material changes occur that affect baseline representativeness.

At minimum, the project proponent shall assess baseline representativeness at each verification and shall update the baseline emission factor where continued use would materially overstate baseline emissions.

5.6 Treatment of curtailment in baseline determination

Curtailment shall not be used to inflate the baseline. Where curtailment occurs, baseline emissions shall be calculated using net electricity actually delivered and measured for the monitoring period. Any proposal to account for “avoided curtailment” or hypothetical delivery shall not be permitted under this methodology unless explicitly defined and approved under PCS.

5.7 Documentation requirements

The project proponent shall document baseline scenario identification and baseline emission factor selection with sufficient evidence for validation and verification. Documentation shall include the electricity system definition, delivery configuration(s), grid identification and interconnection evidence, data sources used for emission factors, and any assumptions applied.

Chapter 6 - Additionality

6.1 Requirement

The project activity shall be additional. The project proponent shall demonstrate that, in the absence of PCS carbon credit revenues, the project would not have occurred as implemented, or would not have been implemented at the same scale and timing, and that the emission reductions are beyond those that would occur under the baseline scenario.

Additionality shall be assessed at validation. Where PCS requires reassessment at renewal or where material changes occur that affect the additionality basis, additionality shall be reassessed in accordance with PCS procedures.

6.2 Regulatory surplus test

The project shall not be eligible where the project activity, or the achieved emission reductions, are required by law, regulation, permit condition, legally binding renewable obligations, mandated utility procurement, or enforceable compliance targets applicable to the project proponent or the project facility.

The project proponent shall identify all applicable regulations and policy instruments relevant to wind power development and electricity supply in the applicable jurisdiction and shall demonstrate that implementation of the project is not mandated.

Where incentives exist that support wind deployment, the existence of incentives does not in itself disqualify the project; however, the project proponent shall demonstrate that the project is not implemented to satisfy a binding obligation and that the project’s implementation decision is not fully explained by regulatory compliance.

6.3 Investment analysis or barrier analysis

The project proponent shall demonstrate additionality using either an investment analysis or a barrier analysis. The selected approach shall be justified and supported by auditable evidence.

6.3.1 Investment analysis

Where investment analysis is applied, the project proponent shall demonstrate that the project is not financially attractive without carbon revenues, or that carbon revenues are decisive in achieving an investment threshold required by decision-makers.

The investment analysis shall be based on project-specific data and shall reflect conditions and information available at the time the investment decision was taken. Key assumptions shall be transparent and supported by evidence. Sensitivity analysis shall be conducted on material parameters, and the approach selected shall be conservative such that the analysis does not overstate the role of carbon revenue.

Where power purchase agreements, tariff arrangements, or contracted prices exist, the analysis shall reflect those contractual terms. Where merchant revenues are assumed, the assumptions shall be conservative and supported by credible market evidence.

6.3.2 Barrier analysis

Where barrier analysis is applied, the project proponent shall demonstrate the presence of at least one credible barrier that would prevent implementation of the project in the absence of carbon revenues and that the project activity overcomes the identified barrier(s).

Acceptable barriers include, where evidenced, constraints such as limited access to finance, high cost of capital, technology or supply chain limitations, grid interconnection constraints, institutional barriers, or other implementation obstacles that are material for the project. The project proponent shall demonstrate a clear causal link between the barrier and the implementation decision and shall demonstrate how carbon revenues materially support overcoming the barrier.

Barrier claims that are generic, sector-wide, or not supported by project-specific evidence shall not be accepted.

6.4 Common practice assessment

The project proponent shall assess whether the project activity is common practice in the applicable context. The applicable context shall be defined consistently, taking into account relevant geographic, market, and regulatory boundaries.

If the project activity is common practice, the project shall not be eligible unless the project proponent demonstrates, with evidence, that the project differs materially from common practice in a manner that affects its likelihood of implementation and that the difference is not driven by regulatory obligations.

The common practice assessment shall not rely on selective comparisons and shall present sufficient data to allow validation of the conclusion.

6.5 Prior consideration and timing integrity

Where required by PCS rules, the project proponent shall demonstrate prior consideration of carbon finance. Evidence shall be contemporaneous and shall be sufficient to show that carbon revenue was considered during the decision-making process prior to implementation.

Where the project is already implemented, operational, or financially closed prior to entering PCS, the project proponent shall demonstrate eligibility under PCS rules applicable to start date and prior consideration. Absence of credible contemporaneous evidence shall render the project ineligible.

6.6 Additionality failure conditions

A project shall be deemed not additional where any of the following conditions apply:

1. The project is implemented to comply with a binding legal requirement or enforceable obligation.

2. The project is demonstrably financially attractive without carbon revenues and the project proponent cannot show carbon revenue is decisive.

3. Claimed barriers are not project-specific or are not supported by verifiable evidence.

4. The project activity is common practice and no credible differentiation is demonstrated.

5. Timing and prior consideration requirements applicable under PCS are not met.

6.7 Documentation requirements

The project proponent shall provide documentation sufficient for validation, including the regulatory surplus assessment, the selected additionality demonstration method (investment or barrier), common practice evidence and analysis, and any prior consideration evidence required by PCS rules. All documentation shall be traceable, dated, and auditable.

Chapter 7 - Project Emissions and/or Removals

7.1 Principle

Project emissions shall include all GHG emissions within the project boundary that are attributable to the project scenario and that are relevant to the quantification of net emission reductions under this methodology. For wind power projects, project emissions are generally limited to emissions associated with fossil fuel-based electricity generation that supplies the credited delivery configuration and any other direct fossil fuel combustion within the boundary that cannot be demonstrated to be unrelated to the credited electricity delivery.

This methodology does not quantify removals. No removals shall be claimed under PCS-TR-004.

7.2 Sources of project emissions

The project proponent shall assess the presence of the following potential project emission sources and shall include them where they occur.

7.2.1 Fossil backup or auxiliary generation supplying credited electricity

Where electricity delivered under this methodology is supplied in part by fossil fuel-based generators operating within the project boundary, emissions from such generation shall be quantified as project emissions and deducted from baseline emissions when calculating net reductions.

This includes any diesel generators, gas turbines, or other fossil units that supply electricity to the same grid export route or captive system for which displacement is claimed, where the project proponent cannot demonstrate that the generation is outside the credited delivery.

7.2.2 Direct fossil fuel combustion within the project boundary

Where fossil fuels are combusted within the project boundary for purposes that are integral to electricity delivery and cannot be excluded without risking over-crediting, emissions shall be accounted as project emissions. Fossil fuel use that is demonstrably unrelated to electricity delivery and is not part of the credited activity may be excluded only where the project proponent provides sufficient evidence to justify exclusion and where exclusion does not increase credited reductions.

7.3 Treatment of auxiliary electricity consumption

Auxiliary electricity consumption of the wind facility is not treated as a separate emission source under this chapter where net electricity delivered is directly measured at the delivery meter and used for quantification. In such cases, auxiliary consumption and internal losses are reflected in the measured net electricity delivered and are therefore already accounted for through the electricity quantity used in baseline emissions calculations.

Where only gross generation is measured and net delivery is derived, auxiliary consumption shall be accounted for to ensure net electricity delivered is not overstated. The accounting approach shall be consistent with the metering configuration and shall be conservative.

7.4 Quantification of project emissions

Project emissions for each monitoring period shall be calculated for each included emission source.

7.4.1 Project emissions from fossil electricity generation

Project emissions from fossil electricity generation within the project boundary shall be calculated using one of the following approaches, selected based on data availability.

1. Fuel-based approach, using measured fuel consumption and appropriate fuel emission factors.

2. Electricity-based approach, using measured electricity generated by the fossil unit and an emission factor for that unit.

The selected approach shall be justified and shall be applied consistently for the monitoring period. Where both fuel and electricity data are available, the fuel-based approach shall be used unless the project proponent demonstrates that an alternative approach is more accurate and does not reduce conservativeness.

Table 7-1. Project emission equations (fossil generation within boundary)

Case	Project emissions for monitoring period
Fuel-based quantification	PEt = Σi(FCi,t x EFFUEL,i)
Electricity-based quantification	PEt = Σi(EGFOSSIL,j,t x EFUNIT,j)

Where:

PE_t is project emissions in monitoring period (tCO₂e).

FC_i,t is fuel consumption of fuel (i) in monitoring period (mass or volume, as applicable).

EF_FUEL,i is emission factor for fuel (tCO₂e per unit fuel), including CO₂ and, where applicable, CH₄ and N₂O.

EG_FOSSIL,j,t is electricity generated by fossil unit (j) supplying the credited delivery configuration in monitoring period (MWh).

EF_UNIT,j is emission factor for fossil unit (tCO₂e/MWh).

All emission factors used shall be justified, sourced from credible references, and conservatively selected where uncertainty exists.

7.5 Excluded project emissions

Upstream emissions from manufacturing, construction, transport, installation, and decommissioning of wind turbines and associated infrastructure are excluded from quantification under this methodology.

Emissions associated with personnel travel, office activities, and other indirect activities are excluded unless PCS establishes explicit requirements to include such sources for this activity type.

7.6 Documentation requirements

The project proponent shall document the assessment of project emission sources, the inclusion or exclusion rationale, the monitoring and calculation approach used, the data sources for fuel consumption or fossil generation, and the emission factors applied. Documentation shall be sufficient for validation and verification and shall be supported by auditable records.

Chapter 8 - Leakage

8.1 Principle

Leakage is defined as an increase in GHG emissions that occurs outside the project boundary and is attributable to the implementation of the project activity. Leakage shall be assessed for the applicable delivery configuration and shall be included in the net emission reduction calculation where it is measurable, attributable, and material.

Leakage shall not be used as a discretionary adjustment. Where leakage is included, the approach shall be transparent, conservative, and supported by evidence.

8.2 Leakage assessment for wind projects

For wind electricity generation projects, significant and quantifiable leakage is generally unlikely because the project activity displaces electricity generation rather than shifting emitting activities to another location. However, the project proponent shall assess whether any of the leakage sources listed in this chapter occur and shall apply the relevant treatment.

8.3 Potential leakage sources and treatment

8.3.1 Displacement of electricity generation outside the defined electricity system

Where the project proponent claims displacement within a defined electricity system, emissions impacts outside that system shall not be credited. The electricity system definition established in Chapter 5 shall be maintained consistently. If electricity is delivered to a different system than defined, or if system boundaries are redefined in a way that increases credited reductions, the project shall update the baseline approach and shall not use system changes to increase credited emission reductions.

8.3.2 Fossil generation shifting in captive systems

For captive/on-site displacement configurations, leakage may occur if the baseline fossil generator is relocated or its operation increases elsewhere as a consequence of the project activity. If the project proponent has control over the baseline generator assets or can reasonably obtain information on their disposition and operation, the project proponent shall assess whether relocation and increased operation occurs and whether it is attributable to the project activity.

Where such leakage is demonstrated and is material, leakage emissions shall be quantified conservatively using available operational data or conservative defaults.

8.3.3 Material activity shifting related to project operation

If project implementation causes a demonstrable shift of emitting activities outside the project boundary that is attributable to the project activity and is material, such leakage shall be assessed and quantified. Generic assertions of activity shifting without evidence shall not be accepted.

8.4 Quantification of leakage

Leakage emissions shall be quantified only where the leakage source is attributable, measurable, and material. Where quantified, leakage emissions for monitoring period shall be calculated and deducted from the emission reductions.

Table 8-1. Leakage accounting

Parameter	Requirement
Leakage identification	The project proponent shall identify any relevant leakage sources as per Section 8.3.
Materiality	The project proponent shall justify whether identified leakage is material for the project.
Quantification	Where material, leakage shall be quantified using measured data where feasible; otherwise conservative defaults shall be applied.
Deduction	Quantified leakage emissions shall be deducted in the net emission reduction calculation.

If leakage cannot be quantified due to lack of data, the project proponent shall apply a conservative approach that does not result in over-crediting, including the option of applying a conservative discount where PCS allows such treatment for the relevant leakage type.

8.5 Documentation requirements

The project proponent shall document the leakage assessment, including the rationale for inclusion or exclusion of leakage sources, data used, assumptions applied, materiality justification, and any calculations performed. Evidence shall be sufficient to allow validation and verification of the leakage conclusion.

Chapter 9 - Net GHG Impact and Crediting

9.1 Principle

Emission reductions credited under this methodology shall be calculated for each monitoring period as the net difference between baseline emissions and the sum of project emissions and leakage emissions, consistent with the boundary and baseline requirements in Chapters 4 and 5.

Crediting shall be based on monitored and verifiable data. No crediting shall be issued for reductions that are not supported by auditable records.

9.2 Net emission reductions

Net emission reductions for monitoring period shall be calculated as follows.

Table 9-1. Net emission reduction equation

Parameter	Equation
Net emission reductions	ER_t = BE_t - PE_t - LE_t

Where:

ER_t is emission reductions in monitoring period (tCO₂e). BE_t is baseline emissions in monitoring period (tCO₂e), determined in Chapter 5. PE_t is project emissions in monitoring period (tCO₂e), determined in Chapter 7. LE_t is leakage emissions in monitoring period (tCO₂e), determined in Chapter 8.

Emission reductions shall not be claimed for periods in which ER_t ≤ 0. Where ER_t is negative, it shall be reported and shall not be carried forward to offset positive emission reductions in other monitoring periods.

9.3 Creditable emission reductions and issuance

Creditable emission reductions shall equal verified emission reductions after application of any PCS-required adjustments, conservativeness provisions, or other deductions applicable to the project, including those arising from uncertainty treatment, monitoring non-conformities, or approved deviations.

Issuance shall occur only after successful verification and PCS review in accordance with PCS procedures. The project proponent shall ensure that all parameters and calculations used for the monitoring period are traceable to source records and can be independently reproduced.

9.4 Rounding and units

All electricity quantities shall be expressed in MWh. Emissions and emission reductions shall be expressed in tCO₂e.

Rounding shall be applied conservatively. Where rounding is required, values shall be rounded down to the nearest whole unit at the stage of credit issuance. Intermediate calculations shall retain sufficient decimal precision to avoid systematic inflation of results.

9.5 Crediting period and renewal

The crediting period length, renewal rules, and any limits on total crediting duration shall be applied in accordance with PCS requirements. The project proponent shall apply the baseline update and additionality reassessment requirements applicable at crediting period renewal.

9.6 Aggregation and multiple delivery routes

Where the project has multiple delivery routes, emission reductions shall be calculated separately per route where different baseline emission factors apply, and shall then be summed to derive total emission reductions for the monitoring period. The project shall demonstrate that electricity quantities are not double counted between routes.

9.7 Documentation requirements

For each monitoring period, the project proponent shall provide a complete calculation record that includes baseline emissions, project emissions, leakage emissions, net emission reductions, and any deductions or adjustments applied. The record shall include sufficient supporting documentation to allow validation of the calculation approach and verification of the reported values.

Chapter 10 - Monitoring Requirements

10.1 Objective

The objective of monitoring under this methodology is to produce complete, accurate, and auditable data sufficient to quantify baseline emissions, project emissions, leakage (where applicable), and net emission reductions for each monitoring period. Monitoring shall enable independent verification of reported results.

Monitoring shall be implemented as a system. The system shall include metering hardware, data collection and storage procedures, QA/QC controls, calibration and maintenance arrangements, and record retention practices.

10.2 Monitoring period

The project proponent shall define monitoring periods in accordance with PCS requirements. For each monitoring period, the project shall compile monitored data and supporting evidence that cover the full period without gaps. Where data gaps occur, the project proponent shall apply conservative gap-filling rules as set out in this chapter.

10.3 Parameters to be monitored

The project proponent shall monitor the parameters in Table 10-1, as applicable to the project’s delivery configuration and boundary. Where a parameter is not applicable, the project proponent shall justify non-applicability and demonstrate that exclusion does not result in over-crediting.

Parameter	Description	Unit	Monitoring frequency	Data source / method	QA/QC requirements
EG_PJ,t	Net electricity delivered for the monitoring period at the defined delivery meter(s)	MWh	Continuous; aggregated per monitoring period	Calibrated electricity meter(s) at point(s) of delivery	Meter calibration per manufacturer/standards; tamper controls; audit trail from raw reads to reported totals
EG_PJ,t,r	Net electricity delivered per delivery route (r) (where multiple routes exist)	MWh	Continuous; aggregated per monitoring period	Route-specific meters or allocation system	Demonstrate no double counting; consistency checks across meters
Meter ID and location	Identification of each meter used for quantification and its physical location	N/A	At commissioning; update upon change	Meter register; single-line diagram	Changes controlled; versioned diagrams; approval of material changes
Calibration records	Calibration and accuracy verification evidence for meters	N/A	As required by standard and at least annually unless stricter rules apply	Calibration certificates, lab reports, seal records	Traceability to accredited calibration where feasible; non-conformities corrected
Data management log	Procedures and logs for data collection, storage, and processing	N/A	Continuous; reviewed per monitoring period	SCADA/EMS logs; data export files; processing scripts	Access control; change log; checksum or equivalent integrity controls where feasible
Curtailment records (if applicable)	Evidence of curtailment periods and reasons	N/A	Event-based; summarised per monitoring period	Grid operator notices; SCADA flags; dispatch instructions	Cross-check against generation/export data; consistency checks
Fossil backup generation data (if applicable)	Electricity generated by backup unit(s) supplying credited delivery route, or fuel use for such units	MWh / fuel units	Continuous where operating; aggregated per period	Backup generator meters; fuel logs; invoices	Reconciliation of fuel stock, purchase, and consumption; meter calibration
Fuel emission factors (if applicable)	Emission factors for fuels used in included fossil combustion	tCO₂e/unit	Per monitoring period; update when source updates	Official factors or credible published sources	Conservative selection; documentation of source and validity

10.4 Metering requirements

Net electricity delivered used for quantification shall be measured using revenue-grade or equivalent meters suitable for the electricity system and installation context. Metering points shall be defined unambiguously and shall correspond to the delivery configuration used for baseline determination.

Where multiple meters exist (turbine meters, collection system meters, export meters), the project shall specify which meter(s) govern quantification. The selection shall prevent overstatement of net delivery and shall ensure that auxiliary consumption and internal losses are treated correctly.

Where a net export/delivery meter exists at the point of delivery and is used for quantification, the project shall use that meter as the primary quantification source unless an alternative arrangement is justified and does not increase credited reductions.

10.5 Data quality and QA/QC

Monitoring data shall be subject to QA/QC controls sufficient to ensure accuracy and integrity. At minimum, the project shall implement the following controls.

1. A documented data collection procedure that identifies responsibilities, data flows, and change controls.

2. A documented data processing procedure showing how raw meter readings are aggregated into monitoring period totals and how any corrections are applied.

3. Internal consistency checks, including reconciliation between related meters where available, plausibility checks against expected wind output ranges, and identification of outliers.

4. Access controls for monitoring systems and datasets, with an audit trail for data edits, recalculations, and version updates.

5. Calibration and maintenance controls, including retention of calibration certificates and evidence of corrective action when meters fall outside specified accuracy.

10.6 Data gaps and conservative treatment

Where monitored data are missing, corrupted, or otherwise unavailable, the project proponent shall apply a conservative approach to gap-filling that does not increase credited reductions.

Gap-filling shall be based on the best available evidence, such as redundant meters, SCADA records, or grid operator settlement data. Where no reliable substitute data exist, the project shall treat missing electricity delivery data as zero for the affected interval, or shall apply another conservative method approved under PCS procedures.

The project proponent shall document all data gaps, their causes, the period affected, the method used for treatment, and the impact on emission reduction results.

10.7 Record retention and accessibility

The project proponent shall retain monitoring records and supporting evidence for a period consistent with PCS requirements, and in any case sufficient to allow validation and verification across the crediting period and any subsequent audit.

Records shall be stored in a manner that prevents loss and unauthorised modification and shall be made available to the Validation and Verification Body (VVB) and PCS for review upon request.

10.8 Monitoring of baseline emission factors

Where baseline emissions are calculated using grid emission factors or baseline captive emission factors, the project proponent shall maintain documentation for each monitoring period showing the emission factor used, its source, its applicability, and any updates applied under the baseline chapter.

Where emission factors are updated by the issuing authority or data source, the project proponent shall apply updates in accordance with the baseline chapter and shall not cherry-pick factors to increase reductions.

10.9 Monitoring report content

For each monitoring period, the project proponent shall prepare a monitoring report that includes, at minimum:

1. Monitoring period definition and operational summary.

2. Metering configuration, including any changes since the previous period.

3. Net electricity delivered data and supporting evidence.

4. Project emissions and leakage data where applicable.

5. Application of baseline emission factors and any updates.

6. Identification and treatment of data gaps and non-conformities.

7. Full calculation of net emission reductions.

Chapter 11 - Uncertainty and Conservativeness

11.1 Principle

Uncertainty shall be managed to protect environmental integrity. Where uncertainty affects the quantification of emission reductions, the project proponent shall apply conservative approaches that avoid over-crediting.

Uncertainty treatment shall be transparent, documented, and verifiable. Assumptions shall not be used to increase emission reductions where data are weak or unavailable.

11.2 Sources of uncertainty

The project proponent shall identify material sources of uncertainty relevant to this methodology, including, as applicable:

1. Measurement uncertainty in electricity metering and data aggregation.

2. Uncertainty in baseline emission factors, including grid emission factors and captive generator emission factors.

3. Uncertainty arising from data gaps, estimation, substitution of data, or changes in monitoring systems.

4. Uncertainty in allocation where multiple delivery routes exist.

The project proponent shall focus uncertainty management on parameters with material influence on emission reductions, particularly net electricity delivered and the baseline emission factor.

11.3 Measurement uncertainty and meter accuracy

Electricity metering equipment used for quantification shall meet applicable accuracy standards for the installation context. The project proponent shall maintain calibration and accuracy verification records and shall demonstrate that meters are functioning within specified tolerances.

Where meter accuracy is degraded, calibration is overdue, tamper evidence exists, or data integrity cannot be demonstrated, the project proponent shall apply conservative treatment to the affected data. Conservative treatment shall not result in higher net electricity delivered than would be supported by compliant metering.

11.4 Uncertainty in baseline emission factors

Baseline emission factor uncertainty shall be addressed through conservative selection, consistent application, and timely updating.

For grid-connected projects, the project proponent shall use the emission factor approach required by this methodology and shall not select an emission factor solely because it yields higher emission reductions. Where multiple factors exist, the project shall apply the factor that best represents the defined electricity system and does not increase credited reductions due to methodological selection.

For captive displacement projects, where baseline unit efficiency or emission intensity is uncertain, the project proponent shall apply conservative assumptions that do not overstate baseline emissions. Where measured fuel and generation data exist, they shall be used.

11.5 Data gaps and estimation

Where data gaps occur, uncertainty increases. The project proponent shall apply conservative gap-filling rules as specified in Chapter 10.

Where estimation is unavoidable, estimates shall be based on the most direct evidence available and shall be selected such that they do not increase credited emission reductions relative to plausible alternatives. Any estimation method that materially increases emission reductions shall require explicit justification and may be rejected at verification.

11.6 Conservative adjustments and deductions

Where uncertainty cannot be adequately reduced through improved monitoring, credible data sources, or defensible estimation, the project proponent shall apply conservative deductions to emission reductions for the affected monitoring period.

Conservative deductions shall be justified, documented, and applied consistently. Deductions may be applied to electricity delivered, emission factors, or final emission reductions, provided the approach is transparent and results in under-crediting rather than over-crediting.

11.7 Treatment of material changes

Material changes in metering configuration, data systems, delivery configuration, or baseline emission factor sources can introduce uncertainty. The project proponent shall document such changes and shall demonstrate continuity and comparability of data across monitoring periods.

Where continuity cannot be demonstrated, the project proponent shall apply conservative treatment to the affected period and shall follow PCS procedures for post-registration changes where required.

11.8 Documentation requirements

The project proponent shall maintain documentation sufficient for validation and verification, including:

1. Identification of material uncertainty sources.

2. Meter specifications, calibration records, and evidence of metering integrity.

3. Evidence supporting baseline emission factors used and their updates.

4. Records of data gaps, estimation methods, and conservative treatments applied.

5. Justification and calculation of any conservative deductions applied.

Chapter 12 - Validation and Verification Guidance

12.1 Objective

This chapter defines the minimum validation and verification checks that shall be applied by the Validation and Verification Body (VVB) to determine whether the project is eligible, correctly applies this methodology, and has quantified emission reductions in a complete and conservative manner.

Where the VVB identifies non-conformities that materially affect applicability, baseline integrity, additionality, monitoring integrity, or quantification results, the VVB shall not issue a positive opinion for registration or issuance unless the non-conformities are corrected and corrective evidence is provided.

12.2 Validation scope (ex ante)

At validation, the VVB shall confirm that the project meets the eligibility and applicability conditions and that the project design and monitoring system can implement this methodology as written.

12.2.1 Applicability and eligibility checks

The VVB shall confirm that the project activity and delivery configuration fall within the scope of this methodology. The VVB shall assess whether any exclusion triggers apply and shall confirm that the project boundary is clearly defined and supported by engineering documentation.

The VVB shall confirm that legal compliance and permitting evidence is complete and credible, that the project proponent has the right to claim emission reductions, and that arrangements do not create double counting risk.

12.2.2 Baseline scenario and emission factor checks

The VVB shall assess whether the baseline scenario identified is plausible and conservative and consistent with the delivery configuration. The VVB shall confirm that the electricity system definition is clear and evidenced and that the emission factor approach selected is applicable and not selected to maximise emission reductions.

The VVB shall assess whether baseline parameters and update triggers are clearly defined and whether the project has the capability to apply baseline updates consistently during monitoring.

12.2.3 Additionality checks

The VVB shall assess the additionality demonstration for completeness and credibility. The VVB shall confirm that the project is not legally mandated and that the investment or barrier analysis is based on project-specific evidence, reflects the decision time context, and applies conservative assumptions.

The VVB shall assess the common practice assessment and determine whether the conclusion is supported by sufficient data and an appropriate definition of the applicable context.

Where prior consideration requirements apply, the VVB shall assess whether evidence is contemporaneous and demonstrates consideration of carbon revenues prior to implementation.

12.2.4 Monitoring system and data integrity checks

The VVB shall assess whether the monitoring plan and system are adequate to measure net electricity delivered, apply the baseline emission factor approach, and quantify project emissions and leakage where applicable.

The VVB shall confirm that metering points are unambiguous, that calibration and QA/QC procedures are defined, and that data management arrangements provide an auditable data trail from raw meter readings to reported values.

Where the project includes multiple delivery routes, the VVB shall assess whether allocation rules prevent double counting and whether route-specific data can be verified.

12.3 Verification scope (ex post)

At verification, the VVB shall confirm that monitoring data and calculations for each monitoring period are complete, accurate, and traceable, and that the project remains eligible under this methodology.

12.3.1 Monitoring data and evidence checks

The VVB shall verify net electricity delivered for the monitoring period using primary meter records, settlement statements where applicable, and supporting operational logs. The VVB shall reconcile reported totals against raw data and shall assess whether any data gaps occurred and whether gap-filling was applied conservatively.

The VVB shall review calibration records and assess whether metering equipment accuracy and integrity were maintained. Where calibration was overdue, meters malfunctioned, or tamper risk exists, the VVB shall require conservative treatment and shall assess the impact on results.

12.3.2 Baseline emission factor application checks

The VVB shall confirm that the baseline emission factor applied corresponds to the defined electricity system and monitoring period and that any updates required under this methodology have been applied.

The VVB shall assess whether the project proponent has applied emission factors consistently and has not cherry-picked sources or values to increase credited emission reductions.

12.3.3 Project emissions and leakage checks

Where project emissions apply, the VVB shall verify fuel consumption data, generator operating records, and emission factors used. Where leakage is applicable and quantified, the VVB shall verify attribution, materiality assessment, data sources, assumptions, and calculations.

Where leakage is determined to be present and material but has not been accounted for, the VVB shall require corrective accounting or conservative deductions.

12.3.4 Quantification and calculation checks

The VVB shall reproduce the emission reduction calculations for the monitoring period using verified input data and shall confirm that the correct equations and units have been applied.

The VVB shall confirm that emission reductions are not claimed for periods where net reductions are zero or negative and that rounding and issuance quantities are conservatively applied.

12.4 Non-conformities and corrective actions

The VVB shall classify non-conformities based on materiality. Material non-conformities shall be corrected before a positive validation opinion or verification statement is issued.

Where corrections require changes to project documentation, monitoring procedures, or calculation approaches, the VVB shall verify the revised materials and shall confirm that the revision does not introduce over-crediting.

12.5 Common failure conditions under this methodology

The following conditions shall be treated as material unless the project proponent demonstrates otherwise:

1. Unclear electricity system definition or delivery configuration.

2. Use of an emission factor not applicable to the defined system or monitoring period.

3. Metering configuration that cannot demonstrate net electricity delivered.

4. Incomplete calibration records or inadequate QA/QC controls affecting key parameters.

5. Unsubstantiated baseline scenario assumptions.

6. Additionality evidence that is not contemporaneous or not project-specific.

7. Failure to disclose or address material changes affecting applicability, baseline, or monitoring.

8. Double counting risk due to unclear ownership or overlapping claims.

12.6 Documentation requirements

The project proponent shall provide the VVB and PCS with all documents and datasets necessary to perform the checks in this chapter. Evidence shall be organised, traceable, and sufficient to support replication of results and independent assessment.

Chapter 13 - References

13.1 General requirement

The project proponent shall use credible, publicly available, and verifiable sources for all default values, emission factors, and technical assumptions applied under this methodology. References shall be sufficiently specific to allow independent replication, including the title, issuing entity, version number (or publication date), and relevant sections or datasets.

Where multiple credible sources exist for a parameter, the project proponent shall justify the selection and shall apply conservative choices where uncertainty exists.

13.2 Minimum reference categories

The following reference categories shall be used where applicable:

1. PCS documents, including the relevant PCS standards, this methodology, any referenced PCS methodological tools, and the applicable PCS templates and forms.

2. Host country laws and regulations relevant to electricity generation, grid interconnection, permitting, renewable obligations, and environmental compliance.

3. Official grid emission factor publications or officially recognised electricity system emissions datasets applicable to the defined grid/system.

4. National or international fuel emission factors and combustion guidelines where fossil backup generation is included.

5. Technical standards for electricity metering, calibration, and accuracy requirements applicable in the host jurisdiction or the electricity market context.

6. Any other authoritative sources required to justify baseline scenario determination, data hierarchy, and conservative assumptions.

13.3 Citation and recordkeeping requirements

All sources used shall be cited in the project documentation and retained as part of the project record. Where a data source is updated periodically (such as grid emission factor datasets), the project proponent shall retain the specific version used for each monitoring period and shall demonstrate consistency with the baseline update requirements.

Annex A — Parameters and Default Values

A.1 General

This annex specifies the minimum parameters required to implement this methodology. Project proponents shall use measured data where required. Default values may be used only where explicitly allowed and shall be justified as applicable and conservative.

Parameter	Description	Unit	Applicable to	Data source / method	Monitoring frequency	Default value allowed
EGPJ,t	Net electricity delivered for monitoring period (t) at the defined delivery meter(s)	MWh	All projects	Revenue-grade or equivalent meter(s) at point(s) of delivery; settlement records where available	Continuous; aggregated per monitoring period	No
EGPJ,t,r	Net electricity delivered via delivery route (r) in period (t)	MWh	Multi-route projects	Route-specific meters or auditable allocation based on metered flows	Continuous; aggregated per monitoring period	No
EFGRID,t	Grid emission factor for the defined grid/system applicable to period (t)	tCO₂e/MWh	Grid-connected	Official grid EF publication or authoritative dataset applicable to the grid/system and period	At least per monitoring period; updated when source updates	Yes, only where PCS recognises the source as default
EFCAPT,t	Baseline captive generation emission factor applicable to period (t)	tCO₂e/MWh	Captive displacement	Derived from measured fuel consumption and generation where available; otherwise conservative defaults justified	At least per monitoring period	Limited; only if measured data unavailable and conservative defaults are justified
PEt	Project emissions for period (t)	tCO₂e	All projects (if applicable)	Calculated per Chapter 7	Per monitoring period	No
LEt	Leakage emissions for period (t)	tCO₂e	Projects with identified leakage	Calculated per Chapter 8	Per monitoring period	No
FCi,t	Fuel consumption of fuel (i) during period (t) for included fossil generation	fuel unit	Projects with fossil generation in boundary	Fuel logs, invoices, tank records, flow meters	Continuous/event-based; aggregated per period	No
EFFUEL,i	Emission factor for fuel (i)	tCO₂e/fuel unit	Projects with fuel-based PE	Official factors or authoritative references	When factor updates or annually, whichever is sooner	Yes, if authoritative published factors are used
EGFOSSIL,j,t	Electricity generated by fossil unit (j) supplying the credited delivery route in period (t)	MWh	Projects with fossil generation in boundary	Unit meter(s), settlement records	Continuous; aggregated per period	No
EFUNIT,j	Emission factor for fossil unit (j)	tCO₂e/MWh	Projects using electricity-based PE	Unit-specific factor supported by evidence; conservative where uncertain	When factor updates or at verification	Limited; only with conservative justification
Meter calibration status	Confirmation that primary meters are calibrated and within tolerance	N/A	All projects	Calibration certificates and maintenance logs	At least annually (or per standard)	No

A.2 Data hierarchy

Where multiple data sources exist for the same parameter, the project proponent shall apply the following hierarchy unless a lower tier is shown to be more accurate and equally conservative.

Tier	Parameter type	Preferred source
1	Electricity delivery	Revenue-grade delivery meter at point of interconnection / delivery; market settlement data
2	Electricity delivery	Redundant meter(s) with demonstrated equivalence and integrity controls
3	Electricity delivery	SCADA-derived values only where validated against compliant meters and conservatively treated
1	Grid emission factor	Official grid EF dataset applicable to the defined grid/system and period
2	Grid emission factor	Independent authoritative dataset accepted by PCS, with justification
3	Grid emission factor	Conservative proxy approach only where higher tiers are unavailable and PCS permits

Annex B — Worked Example

B.1 Example purpose and limitations

This worked example is illustrative. It demonstrates the calculation logic and reporting format. Project proponents shall use project-specific monitored data and applicable emission factors.

B.2 Example inputs (grid-connected project)

Assume a grid-connected wind farm with a compliant net export meter at the point of interconnection.

Table B-1. Example inputs for monitoring period

Item	Value	Notes
Net electricity exported EGPJ,t	120,000 MWh	From delivery meter totals for the monitoring period
Grid emission factor EFGRID, t	0.600 tCO₂e/MWh	Example value only; must be sourced and applicable to the grid/system and period
Project emissions PEt	0 tCO₂e	No fossil backup supplying credited export in this example
Leakage emissions LEt	0 tCO₂e	No measurable leakage identified in this example

B.3 Baseline emissions

Baseline emissions are calculated as:

B.4 Net emission reductions

Net emission reductions are calculated as:

B.5 Issuance quantity and rounding

If PCS issuance requires whole tCO₂e units, the issuance quantity for the period is 72,000 PCCs (rounded down where relevant). No credits are issued for negative or zero results.

B.6 Example with project emissions (backup generator supplies credited delivery)

Assume the same project had a diesel generator supplying the credited delivery route during outages, quantified as PE = 1,250 tCO₂e for the monitoring period, with no leakage.

ER_t = 72,000 - 1,250 - 0 = 70,750 tCO_2e

Issuance quantity becomes 70,750 PCCs for the period (72,000 - 1,250 = 70,750), subject to any other PCS deductions not illustrated here.

Annex C — Monitoring Data Sheet

C.1 Monitoring log requirements

The project proponent shall maintain a monitoring log that allows independent reproduction of the monitoring period totals and their linkage to raw records. The monitoring log shall be maintained for each monitoring period and retained with supporting evidence.

Table C-1. Monitoring data sheet (minimum fields)

Field	Description	Unit / format	Required
Monitoring period ID	Unique identifier	Text	Yes
Period start date/time	Start of monitoring period	YYYY-MM-DD hh:mm	Yes
Period end date/time	End of monitoring period	YYYY-MM-DD hh:mm	Yes
Delivery configuration	Grid / Captive / Mixed	Text	Yes
Meter ID (primary)	Unique meter identifier used for quantification	Text	Yes
Meter location	Point of delivery / interconnection	Text	Yes
Meter type and class	Revenue-grade/equivalent; accuracy class	Text	Yes
Calibration due date	Next calibration deadline	YYYY-MM-DD	Yes
Calibration certificate ref.	Reference number/link	Text	Yes
Net electricity delivered	Period total net delivered electricity	MWh	Yes
Route identifier	If mixed delivery, route label	Text	Conditional
Net electricity delivered per route	Route total	MWh	Conditional
Curtailment occurrence	Yes/No	Text	Yes
Curtailment evidence ref.	Grid notice/SCADA flag ref.	Text	Conditional
Fossil backup used for credited delivery	Yes/No	Text	Yes
Backup generator ID	Identifier	Text	Conditional
Backup electricity generated	Electricity supplied to credited route	MWh	Conditional
Fuel type	Diesel/gas/etc.	Text	Conditional
Fuel consumed	Period fuel consumption	Unit as metered	Conditional
Fuel EF source	Publication/dataset and version	Text	Conditional
Calculated	Project emissions for the period	tCO₂e	Conditional
Leakage identified	Yes/No	Text	Yes
Leakage description	Description of leakage source	Text	Conditional
Calculated LEt	Leakage emissions for the period	tCO₂e	Conditional
Grid EF used EFGRID,t	Emission factor applied	tCO₂e/MWh	Conditional
Grid EF source/version	Dataset name, version/date	Text	Conditional
Calculated BEt	Baseline emissions	tCO₂e	Yes
Calculated ERt	Net emission reductions	tCO₂e	Yes
Data gaps present	Yes/No	Text	Yes
Gap treatment description	Method and conservative treatment	Text	Conditional
Prepared by / date	Responsible person and date	Text / YYYY-MM-DD	Yes
Internal review by / date	Reviewer and date	Text / YYYY-MM-DD	Yes

Definitions and Acronyms

D.1 Definitions

For the purposes of this methodology, the following definitions apply.

• Additionality: the demonstration that the project activity results in emission reductions that would not have occurred in the absence of the project and the incentive from carbon crediting.

• Auxiliary electricity consumption: electricity consumed to operate the wind facility and its associated systems, including turbines’ internal consumption, control systems, lighting, communications, substation auxiliaries, heating/cooling, and other operational loads.

• Baseline emissions (BE_t): the GHG emissions that would occur in monitoring period t in the absence of the project activity, associated with the generation of the electricity displaced by the project.

• Baseline emission factor: the emission intensity applied to the displaced electricity generation in the baseline scenario, expressed in tCO₂e per MWh.

• Baseline scenario: the most plausible electricity supply that would serve the same electricity service in the absence of the project activity, determined in accordance with Chapter 5.

• Captive electricity system: a defined electricity supply and consumption arrangement in which electricity is delivered to and used by a specific facility or set of loads, and where displacement is assessed against an identified baseline electricity source (e.g., on-site fossil generation or grid import).

• Commissioning date: the date on which the wind plant, or a defined project phase, is first capable of commercial operation and delivery of electricity as evidenced by commissioning certificates and/or grid operator acceptance.

• Curtailment: a reduction in electricity output or export below what could have been generated, due to grid constraints, dispatch instructions, system security requirements, or other external limitations, evidenced by operational and/or grid operator records.

• Delivery configuration: the physical and contractual arrangement by which project electricity is delivered, including grid export, captive supply, or mixed delivery, as defined and evidenced for quantification under this methodology.

• Electricity system: the grid or defined captive supply system to which the project delivers electricity and against which displacement is assessed.

• Emission reductions (ER_t): the net GHG emission reductions in monitoring period t, calculated as baseline emissions minus project emissions and leakage emissions, in accordance with Chapter 9.

• Grid emission factor (EF_GRID,t): the emission intensity of electricity generation for the defined grid/system applicable to monitoring period t, expressed in tCO₂e per MWh, and applied to quantify baseline emissions for grid-connected delivery.

• Leakage (LE_t): an increase in GHG emissions occurring outside the project boundary that is attributable to the project activity and is measurable, attributable, and material under this methodology.

• Material change: a change in project design, delivery configuration, ownership/control, metering configuration, boundary definition, or operational conditions that may affect applicability, baseline, additionality, monitoring, or quantification under this methodology.

• Metering point: a physical location where electricity is measured by a defined meter used for quantification, including generation meters, internal meters, and delivery/export meters.

• Monitoring period: the time interval for which monitored data are aggregated and emission reductions are quantified and verified for issuance purposes.

• Net electricity delivered (EG_PJ,t): the net quantity of electricity measured as delivered through the defined delivery meter(s) for monitoring period t, expressed in MWh, and used as the basis for baseline emissions calculations under this methodology.

• Point of delivery: the agreed location at which electricity delivery is measured for quantification purposes under this methodology (e.g., point of interconnection export meter, or captive delivery meter), as defined in the monitoring system.

• Project boundary: the physical and operational boundary that includes relevant components and emission sources necessary to quantify emission reductions in a complete and conservative manner under this methodology.

• Project emissions (PE_t): GHG emissions occurring within the project boundary in monitoring period t that are attributable to the project scenario and relevant to the quantification of net emission reductions, including fossil backup generation supplying the credited delivery configuration where applicable.

• Repowering: replacement or refurbishment of wind turbines and/or major components of an existing wind facility with the objective of extending operating life and/or increasing electricity generation.

• Route (r): a defined electricity delivery pathway used for accounting where multiple delivery configurations exist (e.g., grid export route and captive supply route), each supported by metering or auditable allocation.

• Revenue-grade meter: an electricity meter suitable for commercial settlement or equivalent accuracy and integrity requirements in the applicable electricity market or jurisdiction.

• Validation and verification: independent assessment activities performed to confirm eligibility, methodological correctness, data integrity, and quantified emission reductions for registration and issuance under PCS.

D.2 Acronyms

Table D-1. Acronyms

Acronym	Meaning
BE	Baseline Emissions
EF	Emission Factor
EG	Electricity Delivered / Exported (as used in equations)
ER	Emission Reductions
GHG	Greenhouse Gas
LE	Leakage Emissions
MWh	Megawatt-hour
PE	Project Emissions
PCS	Planetary Carbon Standard
PCC	Planetary Carbon Credit
QA/QC	Quality Assurance / Quality Control
SCADA	Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition
VVB	Validation and Verification Body