These FAQs refer to the Gold Standard methodology METERED & MEASURED ENERGY COOKING DEVICES (MECD)For transitioning existing activities for to MECD 2.0, please refer to the: PAA VALIDATION AND VERIFICATION REQUIREMENTS – METHODOLOGIES UPDATE
SECTIONS
- How should existing projects transition to the MECD methodology?
- For projects that are scheduled for design certification in 2026 but have already completed a Controlled Cooking Test (CCT) prior to the release of MECD 2.0, how will Gold Standard treat any non-compliance of the earlier CCT with the new methodology — particularly with respect to sample size requirements? Will a fresh CCT be required, or will provisions be made to recognize the previously conducted test under transitional arrangements?
- How are baseline consumption caps (Parameter MECD 12) calculated?
- What methodology default values are available under MECD 1.2 for MECD 1 (baseline fuel consumption per person per year) and MECD 7 (specific energy consumption per person per event) for a large-scale project?
- MECD 7.4.1.3 says "90/10 precision target shall apply to the overall aggregated parameter ratio (???,????), derived from the complete CCT campaign design across all paired observations, not individually per meal type or stove iteration". Does 'meal type' and 'standard meal' under parameter MECD 5 are the same or should be considered different?
- How is a ‘standard meal’ defined in the methodology?
- How should the minimum sample size of 50 be applied during the CCT? Does the requirement mean that 50 meals must be teste, or 50 tests for each dish that may be cooked?
- Can you provide information on sampling procedures for MECD PA Aligned version?
- What are the current advancements in digital MRV in clean cooking? Can projects get involved in the application of these dMRV solutions?
- As per the requirement of MECD, each cookstove would need IOT sensor. Are there provisions for countries / contexts where this may not be feasible?
- Which specific IEC, OIML, or ISO standard is required for IoT-based measurement devices using time-at-power-setting sampling in residential cooking appliances?
Transition
How should existing projects transition to the MECD methodology?
Project developers should refer to the Validation & Verification Requirements for Paris Alignment. This document outlines how developers should transition from the old to new methodology and also includes a simplified transition pathway for existing activities.
For projects that are scheduled for design certification in 2026 but have already completed a Controlled Cooking Test (CCT) prior to the release of MECD 2.0, how will Gold Standard treat any non-compliance of the earlier CCT with the new methodology — particularly with respect to sample size requirements? Will a fresh CCT be required, or will provisions be made to recognize the previously conducted test under transitional arrangements?
If you have already conducted a CCT but it falls short of the 50-sample minimum or the 90/10 precision target, you are not forced to discard the campaign completely. You have two pathways to address the non-compliance:
a) If the 90/10 precision target is not achieved, the methodology mandates that you apply the conservative bound of the 90% confidence interval (e.g., the Lower Bound for baseline parameters) to your existing data.
b) To bridge the gap and satisfy the minimum sample size of 50, you are permitted to conduct supplementary (partial) testing to top up your existing dataset to N=50 and attempt to meet the 90/10 precision target.
Technology Eligibility
Is battery based e-cooking or hybrid cooking allowed under MECD?
Battery-supported e-cooking falls directly under MECD if 100% of the energy consumed is continuously metered. If a biomass technology simply uses an auxiliary electronic component (like a battery-powered draft fan) but the primary thermal output/fuel consumption is not metered, it falls under RECH.
Baseline
How are baseline consumption caps (Parameter MECD 12) calculated?
The values were calculated by converting capped annual fuel consumption values into energy units using standard NCV figures , and in some cases applying default stove efficiency assumptions specified in the revised Gold Standard methodologies.
What methodology default values are available under MECD 1.2 for MECD 1 (baseline fuel consumption per person per year) and MECD 7 (specific energy consumption per person per event) for a large-scale project?
The default values (if applicable to your scenario) are available under the the parameters themselves MECD 1 and MECD 7.
Control Cooking Tests (CCTs)
MECD 7.4.1.3 says "90/10 precision target shall apply to the overall aggregated parameter ratio (???,????), derived from the complete CCT campaign design across all paired observations, not individually per meal type or stove iteration". Does 'meal type' and 'standard meal' under parameter MECD 5 are the same or should be considered different?
They are related but handled collectively. The CCT campaign must utilize a "standard meal" that is representative of local cooking practices. If a developer tests multiple meal types to build that representative profile, the 90/10 statistical precision target applies to the overall aggregated parameter ratio derived from the complete CCT campaign design across all paired observations, rather than forcing each individual meal type or specific stove iteration to independently meet the 90/10 rule
How is a ‘standard meal’ defined in the methodology?
A standard meal does not need to be restricted to a single dish. The methodology
explicitly defines a cooking event as a task that fulfils a discrete need, "such as
cooking a meal (which may include multiple dishes)". The primary requirement
is that the standard meal used during the CCT is “representative of the local
cooking practices, ingredients, and portion sizes”. Therefore, if a typical
household meal comprises multiple dishes (e.g. rice + stew), your standard meal
test may include those dishes to accurately reflect real-world cooking behaviour,
if applicable to local practices.
How should the minimum sample size of 50 be applied during the CCT? Does the requirement mean that 50 meals must be teste, or 50 tests for each dish that may be cooked?
You do not need to conduct 50 tests for each individual sub-dish. MECD V2.0 states that the minimum 50-sample requirement and the 90/10 precision target apply to the “overall aggregated parameter derived from the complete CCT campaign design (paired observations across all tested meals), not individually per meal type or specific stove iteration”.
a) The minimum 50-sample requirement applies to the complete CCT campaign used to derive the aggregated SC ratio.
b) If the standard meal consists of multiple sub-dishes prepared as one meal or cooking session, the sub-dishes should not be counted separately toward the 50-sample minimum. E.g. 10 standard meal tests with 5 sub-dishes would normally count as 10 paired standard meal observations, not 50 samples.
MRV
Can you provide information on sampling procedures for MECD PA Aligned version?
Under MECD V2.0, sampling for activity energy consumption is generally not allowed; 100% continuous metering (CTEC) is required.
However, 100% CTEC does not strictly require physical hardware meters. Projects can use comprehensive digital fuel sales records (e.g., Pay-As-You-Go for pellets, LPG, or ethanol) to track 100% of consumption. To qualify, the fuel delivery system must be exclusive to the activity technology, incorporate verifiable safeguards against fuel diversion, and link purchase records to specific users via a relational database. A major advantage of this approach is that pure digital fuel sales systems are exempt from physical meter Maximum Permissible Error (MPE) penalty adjustments.
Also, there is a pre-2030 "Alternative Continuous Monitoring Approach" exemption for LDCs or areas with prohibitive data barriers. If this is used, developers must monitor a revolving representative sample of at least 5% of the active fleet (or large enough to meet 90/10 precision), and at least 20% of that monitored cohort must be randomly rotated out and replaced annually to prevent bias. Sampling is also permitted for laboratory/field testing (CCT/WBT) to determine specific consumption or efficiency, provided it meets the 90/10 precision target and a minimum of 50 samples.
What are the current advancements in digital MRV in clean cooking? Can projects get involved in the application of these dMRV solutions?
Tool 07 (D-SMART) can be used to support digital MRV. It allows developers to replace manual KPTs with digital KPTs (dKPTs) using digital data-logging scales, and to replace manual recall surveys with Continuous Stove Monitors (CSMs). Projects that adopt continuous dMRV are explicitly rewarded by being fully exempted from the staggered Hawthorne Effect (observer bias) penalty, meaning their Heind multiplier remains at 1.0.
As per the requirement of MECD, each cookstove would need IOT sensor. Are there provisions for countries / contexts where this may not be feasible?
MECD V2.0 acknowledges this barrier and provides two key flexibilities:
- The Revolving Sample Exemption: As mentioned, activities in LDCs or areas with data barriers can use a minimum 5% revolving sample instead of 100% metering until December 31, 2030.
- Pure Digital Fuel Sales Exemption: Projects utilizing comprehensive "Pay-As-You-Go" or digital fuel sales records (e.g., for pellets, LPG, or ethanol) that track 100% of the fuel delivered to the end-user do not need physical hardware meters on the stoves themselves, provided the database is robust and safeguards prevent fuel diversion.
Which specific IEC, OIML, or ISO standard is required for IoT-based measurement devices using time-at-power-setting sampling in residential cooking appliances?
in the absence of a directly applicable IEC, OIML, or ISO standard for IoT based time-at-power-setting sampling devices in cooking appliances, the project developer shall demonstrate compliance with the following requirements to satisfy Section 8.4.1 (Meter Accuracy) and Section 14.4 (QA/QC):
- Calibration: The measurement device (including embedded firmware and sensors) must be calibrated, and the project developer shall provide calibration certificates from an experienced third party or manufacturer certificates valid for the measurement period.
- Accuracy specification and MPE : The project developer must document the measurement accuracy of the device (including time measurement resolution, power-setting detection accuracy, and any sources of measurement uncertainty) and demonstrate that this accuracy is fit for purpose for the quantification of emission reductions under the methodology. The study on the difference between direct measurement and IoT-based time-at-power-setting sampling devices must be conducted to establish the system's MPE.
- Validation by VVB: The suitability of the measurement approach and the adequacy of the device's accuracy and calibration documentation shall be subject to validation and verification by the appointed VVB, who will assess whether the device meets the methodology's intent of reliable and conservative energy consumption measurement. If the VVB confirms the established MPE of this system exceeds 2.5%, the total metered consumption must be mathematically adjusted upwards by the MPE percentage to ensure conservativeness.
For any remaining questions, please contact us at help@goldstandard.org.
Was this article helpful?
That’s Great!
Thank you for your feedback
Sorry! We couldn't be helpful
Thank you for your feedback
Feedback sent
We appreciate your effort and will try to fix the article