Background
Small-scale Productive Access to Renewable Kilowatt-hours (SPARK) quantifies emission reductions from activities providing first-time or expanded access to distributed renewable energy services for under-served households, communities, institutions and enterprises at micro and small scale.
Key Features
- Three modules cover electricity access, mechanical energy and thermal energy beyond cooking, individually or in combination.
- Suppressed-demand accounting supports essential services up to a minimum-service ceiling. Above that ceiling, crediting requires demonstrable displacement of an existing energy source.
- The methodology brings eight small-scale CDM methodologies (AMS-I.A., I.B., I.C., I.F., I.J., I.L., III.BB. and III.BL) and three legacy Gold Standard suppressed-demand methodologies (Micro-scale Electrification, Processing of Agricultural Products, and Low GHG Food Preservation) into a unified, Paris-aligned framework.
Following technical review, Gold Standard is inviting feedback on the proposed requirements, including the two baseline approaches.
Gold Standard invites feedback from stakeholders:
Gold Standard welcomes feedback on all aspects of SPARK, including the specific questions below. Please support your responses with evidence, practical examples or proposed alternatives where possible.
a. Suppressed-demand baseline: Which proposed approach is better supported in energy-access settings: the survey-based benchmark (Option A) or the reference-technology approach (Option B)? What evidence supports the assumed baseline fuels and equipment?
b. Benchmark construction: Is the proposed best-performing 20% benchmark appropriate and practical to determine through the required surveys? What evidence should support a conservative fallback where comparable-user data are insufficient?
c. Basic energy needs: How should minimum-service levels be established for pumping, milling, drying, schools and health facilities? Could standard service levels replace project-specific assessments, and what evidence would support them?
d. Micro-scale positive list: Which technologies and delivery models can be justified as automatically additional? What financial, market or barrier evidence supports their inclusion, accounting for subsidies and user payments?
e. Monitoring delivered services: Are the proposed metering, group-allocation and sampling options workable for mechanical and thermal services? What practical alternatives can verify useful energy delivered and reconcile it with generation?