Introduction to GHG Project Quantification
Case Study #1
Mountainview District Heating Project
for
December 21, 2007
Table of Contents 1 Introduction............................................................................................................. 4 2 General Requirements............................................................................................. 4 2.1 Project Description.................................................................................................. 5 2.1.1 Project title, purpose and objectives ....................................................................... 5 2.1.2 Location of project.................................................................................................. 5 2.1.3 Conditions prior to project initiation....................................................................... 6 2.1.4 Project strategy to reduce emissions ....................................................................... 6 2.1.5 Project technologies, products, services and the expected level of activity ........... 7 2.1.6 GHG emission reductions from project .................................................................. 7 2.1.7 Risks that may substantially affect the project’s GHG emission reductions .......... 7 2.1.8 Project proponents and relevant stakeholders......................................................... 7 2.1.9 Summary environmental impact assessment .......................................................... 8 2.1.10 Stakeholder Consultations ...................................................................................... 8 2.1.11 Chronological Plan.................................................................................................. 8 3 Identifying GHG Sources, Sinks and Reservoirs Relevant for the Project............. 9 3.1 Selection and establishment of criteria and procedures.......................................... 9 3.2 Procedure for identifying SSRs .............................................................................. 9 3.3 Application of procedures..................................................................................... 10 4 Determining the Baseline Scenario....................................................................... 14 4.1 Selection and establishment of criteria and procedures........................................ 14 4.2 Application of the procedure and justification of baseline scenario..................... 14 5 Identifying Sources, Sinks and Reservoirs for the Baseline Scenario .................. 15 5.1 Criteria and procedures ......................................................................................... 16 5.2 Application of procedures..................................................................................... 16 5.3 Determining the baseline electricity grid procedure............................................. 20 6 Selecting Relevant GHG Sources, Sinks and Reservoirs for Monitoring or
Estimation of GHG Emissions and Removals ...................................................... 21 6.1 Criteria and procedures for relevance of SSRs ..................................................... 21 6.2 Application of criteria and procedures.................................................................. 23 7 Quantifying GHG Emissions for the Project ........................................................ 27 7.1 General Quantification Methodology ................................................................... 27 7.1.1 Production of DES components............................................................................ 28 7.1.2 Manufacturing of CHP system components ......................................................... 28 7.1.3 Transportation of CHP system to project site ....................................................... 29 7.1.4 Commissioning of CHP system............................................................................ 29 7.1.5 Propane production and transportation ................................................................. 30 7.1.6 Electricity production and distribution ................................................................. 31 7.1.7 CEP Boiler ............................................................................................................ 32 7.1.8 Decommissioning of CHP system ........................................................................ 34 8 Quantifying GHG Emissions from the Baseline................................................... 34 8.1 General Quantification Methodology ................................................................... 34 8.1.1 Propane production and transportation ................................................................. 34 8.1.2 Steam plant and Building Heating ........................................................................ 35
8.1.3 Landfill and Beehive burner ................................................................................. 35 9 Quantifying GHG Emission Reductions............................................................... 36 10 Monitoring the GHG project................................................................................. 37 11 References............................................................................................................. 41
1 Introduction A substantial amount of energy is consumed in space and water heating in buildings (residential, commercial, and industrial), resulting in large amounts of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. In Canada alone, GHG emissions from residential energy consumption for these purposes account for over 43 mega tonnes (Mt) of emissions, and commercial and institutional energy consumption (which includes emissions from public administration – i.e., federal, provincial, and municipal facilities) contributed almost 38 Mt of emissions. One way to reduce these emissions is to leverage the efficiency gains associated with the use of a district energy system, or DES. In a DES, energy is produced in a central location, generally in a highly specialised (and hence highly efficient) production process, and then is supplied to multiple buildings. This negates the need for multiple smaller, less efficient heat sources in each building. Further GHG reductions can be achieved if the DES is fuelled by renewable sources (e.g., wind, hydro, or solar) or from sources that would otherwise be considered waste (e.g., heat from the incineration of municipal solid waste, or the residual heat of an industrial process). The following case study demonstrates the GHG emission reductions achieved through the installation of a DES, fuelled by waste biomass, in a municipality. The project is located in a small municipality in the province of British Columbia, Canada. In this town, space and hot water heating is generally provided by propane delivered to the town by train. The town also has a lumber mill which generates a substantial amount of wood residue that is considered waste and is either landfilled or simply burned. By reducing propane consumption and utilising the wood residue as a resource, a DES that uses waste biomass as a fuel source can achieve a substantial reduction in GHG emissions in this context.1 2 General Requirements The project proponent is not subscribed to any GHG policy or program(s), standards or legislations, so there are no specific program requirements to which this project must adhere. The following good practice guidance has therefore been used in the identification of GHG sources, sinks and reservoirs (SSRs); in the identification of the baseline scenario; and in the quantification of emissions and emission reductions, monitoring and reporting of the project:
ISO 14064-2:2006 Specification with guidance at the project level for quantification, monitoring and reporting of greenhouse gas emission reductions or removal enhancements (2006);
WRI/WBCSD GHG Protocol for Projects (December 2005); Canada's Greenhouse Gas Inventory, 1990-2004, Environment Canada (April 2006); and
1 The term DES encompasses any system that produces energy and distributes it to multiple users, generally within a fairly geographically constrained area (i.e., within a complex of buildings, or within a single municipality or neighbourhood). DES is therefore sometimes used to describe systems that produce heat energy only, as well as systems that produce both heat and electrical energy. Systems that produce both heat and electrical energy, however, are more specifically referred to as combined heat and power (or CHP) systems. For the purposes of this case study, the term DES refers strictly to heat-only district systems.
Government of Canada, TEAM Program, SMART Protocols (2006)2 The ISO 14064-2:2006 standard and the WRI/WBCSD GHG Protocol for Projects (December 2005) are used as good practice guidance for identifying sources, sinks, and reservoirs (SSRs) for the project and baseline. They also served as good practice guidance for quantifying, monitoring and reporting GHG emissions and emission reductions. In identifying SSRs, a seven step procedure based on streamlined life cycle assessment (LCA) techniques, was applied. 2.1 Project Description 2.1.1 Project title, purpose and objectives Project Title Mountainview District Energy System Project The project is being undertaken to assess and quantify the emission reductions achieved from the installation of biomass-fuelled DES that will serve several municipal and residential buildings in the town of Mountainview. The greenhouse gases to be quantified include CH4, CO2 and N2O. We wish to quantify and verify GHG emission reductions associated with producing heat energy at a central energy plant (CEP) for the Mountainview District Energy System Project. The verified emission reductions will then be sold as GHG emission reductions by the lumber mill producing the wood waste to purchasers wishing to offset their GHG emissions or meet voluntary GHG reduction targets. The company wishes to verify the GHG emission reductions on a yearly basis before the sale of the offsets to ensure the quality of the credits, thereby maximizing their value. The verification will be done in accordance with ISO 14064-3:20063 by a mutually agreed upon verification organization. 2.1.2 Location of project The project is located in the City of Mountainview, in the province of British Columbia (BC), Canada. Mountainview is a municipality of approximately 8,500 people located in central BC, in a heavily forested region of the Western Cordillera mountain ranges. The system’s CEP is located on the site of the town’s lumber mill, and the plant provides medium temperature hot water for space and hot water heating at the municipal aquatic centre (which includes a pool and a recreational centre), a secondary school, the municipal arena, the municipal court house, and a private residence. The CEP will also generate saturated steam to be used onsite in the lumber mill’s dry kilns. The area required for the Central Energy Plant is approximately thirty by thirty meters or 1000 sq. meters (one quarter of an acre). This area provides for the plant, fuel storage, and boundary access. A single building houses the heat generation system and fuel storage system. The
2 TEAM is a Government of Canada Program. More information on the SMART can be access at the following link www.team.gc.ca 3 The ISO 14064-3:2006 Specification with guidance for the validation and verification of greenhouse gas assertions standard provides requirements to perform validation and verification of GHG projects
distribution piping system involves approximately 1,600 trench meters of pre-insulated supply and return pipes (two pipes in a trench), with four branch connections to existing buildings and one branch stub for a future building connection. There will be five Energy Transfer Stations (ETS), one at each of the buildings served by the system. 2.1.3 Conditions prior to project initiation Prior to project initiation, the buildings served by the system generated space and hot water heating through conventional propane fuelled residential or commercial heating systems. The propane was delivered to the town by train, and trucked to the buildings where it was stored in tanks. At the lumber mill (site of the CEP), steam was generated for the dry kiln through combustion of propane, which was delivered and stored as described above. The wood residues from the milling processes at the site were considered waste, with a small amount being landfilled (mostly to provide cover for the municipal landfill as required) and the majority being burned onsite in a in a silo burner (also known as a “beehive” burner due to its distinctive shape). Changes to Provincial environmental regulations required the phasing out of the beehive burners due to concerns over air emissions (especially particulate matter) caused by the inefficient combustion of the wood residues in the burners, which employed an open-flame process with few, if any, emissions controls. Changes to the out-dated heating plants of the arena, the secondary school, and the residence were either required immediately or in the near term, and the aquatic centre was a new construction that was designed from the outset to be heated by the DES. 2.1.4 Project strategy to reduce emissions The main way in which reductions are decreased by the project is through the displacement of propane fuel use. Propane is burned in older, less efficient heaters in each of the buildings served by the system, as well as by the mill to produce steam for the kiln. There are also upstream emissions associated with the production and delivery of propane that will be displaced by the use of the waste fuel in the immediate area in which it is produced. Emissions of carbon dioxide, along with other pollutants (especially particulate matter), will also be reduced by displacing the combustion of wood residues in the beehive burner. While the volume of wood combusted will actually increase to fuel the DES, this will be offset by the decreased volume of propane consumed for space heating and for the production of kiln steam. Another area of emissions reductions will be achieved through the reduction of landfill gas (LFG) production. When organic waste decomposes in a landfill, under anaerobic conditions, LFG is produced. This gas is composed of approximately 50% methane (CH4). This phenomenon is the principle source of GHG related to landfilling of the wood residues. Combustion of the wood residues in the highly efficient CEP avoids the production of large amounts of methane, which has a global warming potential 21 times that of CO2.
2.1.5 Project technologies, products, services and the expected level of activity
The project will consist of the following major design components:
The Central Energy Plant; The Distribution piping network (buried pipe); and The Customer building connections
The biomass combustion technology used at the CEP is a proven technology used in several other applications in industry. This project is, however, the first example in the country of the application of a small scale biomass technology for a thermal heating system supplying heat to multiple community customers. The CEP has a propane back-up system that can be used to guarantee the supply of energy to customers in periods of limited wood waste fuel supply or malfunction of the feeder equipment. The forms of energy consumed by the customers are steam and hot water. It was decided to use thermal oil as an intermediary energy transport mechanism (between the biomass combustor and the steam/hot water production system). This allows hot water (for space heating) to be produced at the CEP using a heat exchanger, but allows the steam to be produced outside the CEP, in this case inside the mill where engineers certified in high pressure boiler operation are already on staff. This enables the owner of the CEP to minimize operating costs relating to plant staffing requirements, as its configuration allows the CEP to operate legally with only one engineer under the provincial Engineers Act. Heat exchangers, sized appropriately for the expected loads, are installed in each of the customer buildings. 2.1.6 GHG emission reductions from project GHG emissions for the project will be quantified starting January 1, 2006 (the first full year of project operation). The project is expected to generate emissions reductions of 6,271 tonnes CO2-equivalents for the 2006 calendar year. Subsequent years’ reductions will be quantified on a yearly basis. 2.1.7 Risks that may substantially affect the project’s GHG
emission reductions The main risks that may affect the GHG emission reductions estimated for this project include:
Malfunction of the project equipment; Loss of fuel source due to mill closure (for economic reasons); and Resource depletion due to forest fire, over-harvesting, or climate/ecological changes
(e.g., mountain pine beetle) 2.1.8 Project proponents and relevant stakeholders Project Proponents
Mountainview Community Energy Association 2089 Reel dive Mountainview, BC, Canada City of Mountainview 2530 Mountain Street Mountainview, BC, Canada The Mountainview Community Energy Corporation (MCEC) is wholly owned by the City of Mountainview. Project Stakeholders Lumber Corporation (lumber mill and credit owner) 37 Mill Street Mountainview, BC, Canada Mr. and Mrs. Johnson (owners of the residence on the system) 15 Main Street Mountainview, BC, Canada 2.1.9 Summary environmental impact assessment The environmental impact assessment required by the BC Environment Ministry was performed by XYZ Consultants. The study was performed to assess the impact the project will have on air, water, scenery and natural habitat. Results of the study reveal that Mountainview District Energy System Project meets all the mandatory requirements. A detailed report is provided upon request. 2.1.10 Stakeholder Consultations The City of Mountainview held a public consultation meeting with interested citizens and no objections were raised from participants. The city council then approved unanimously the decision to implement the Mountainview District Energy System Project. 2.1.11 Chronological Plan The project consists of three major stages:
1) System Construction MCEC engaged a contractor to construct the Central Energy Plant. Construction began in October 2004 and was completed on March 31, 2005. Commissioning the plant took place for May 31, 2005 and start-up happened on June 1st, 2005. Installation of the hot water distribution piping and the building connections commenced in October 2004 and was completed to the five current users in March 2005.
2) Project Operation & Monitoring
Monitoring of the project to determine the GHG emissions reductions that are the subject of this document, as well as particulate matter and other air contaminant emissions reductions that are reported separately to fulfill regulatory requirements, began in July 2005.
3) Project Expansion Expansion of the distribution system to supply new customers is expected to occur in 2007 and 2008. Potential new customers include the city’s existing hospital and a new downhill ski resort being constructed just outside the town’s boundary.
Table 1: Project Activity Timeline
Task Date Status Engineering design 2003-2004 CompleteCity of Mountainview approval February 2004 CompleteInstallation of DES March 2005 CompleteStart of Operation June 2005 On-goingDesign of GHG quantification documentation November 2005 CompleteReview of operation and monitoring procedure and collected data
Every three months from project start date
On-going
GHG report on yearly emission reductions Every year in February On-goingVerification of emission reduction quantified in GHG report
Every year in mid-March On-going
Sale of GHG emission reductions to buyer Every year by March 31st On-going 3 Identifying GHG Sources, Sinks and Reservoirs Relevant
for the Project 3.1 Selection and establishment of criteria and procedures In identifying the SSRs relevant for the project, streamlined life cycle assessment process based on ISO 14040 was established and applied. The procedure is a systematic approach based on the GHG quantification principles of completeness, transparency and relevance. 3.2 Procedure for identifying SSRs The following seven step procedure was applied in identifying the relevant SSRs:
1) Identify (potential) SSRs for the system that are controlled or owned by the project proponent. Focus on the primary project activities (i.e. the direct SSR or SSRs that aim to provide the main effect(s) on GHGs).
2) Identify (potential) SSRs that are physically related to the direct project. Trace products, materials and energy inputs/outputs upstream to origins in natural resources and downstream along life-cycle.
3) Identify (potential) SSRs that are economically affected by the project. Consider the economic and social consequences of the project (compared to the baseline), look for activities, market affects, and social changes that result from or are associated with the project activity.
4) For each identified SSR determine parameters required to estimate or measure GHGs. This includes materials and energy inputs/outputs, and information on activities, products and services for the SSR.
5) Select SSR scale by aggregating or disaggregating identified potential SSRs. The number of SSRs defined and the degree of detail required is a function of the analysis at hand. This is guided by availability of data, management of data collection, and assurance of accurate GHG quantification. As a rule of thumb, more detailed (disaggregated) SSRs are appropriate where it is known that the project system differs from the baseline system, where more specific quantification is necessary, or where data are readily available. Aggregated SSRs are sufficient where the project and baseline systems are identical.
6) Determine the function(s) (products, goods and services) provided by the system of SSRs. The whole system of SSRs may perform one or more functions, plus individual SSRs may have specific functions.
7) Confirm that all SSRs are identified; that each is classified appropriately as owned, related or affected; that all GHG inputs and outputs for each SSR are identified; and that the sequence of SSRs for the system is correct. Repeat previous steps as necessary.
3.3 Application of procedures By following the above steps, a diagram shown in Figure 1 was generated to show all the SSRs associated with the system. The SSRs that are controlled or directly owned by the project are those elements whose operations are under the direct influence of the project proponent and they are often found on the project site. The related SSRs have material or energy flows into, out of, or within the project. These SSRs are generally found upstream or downstream from the project and also include activities involved with the design, construction and decommissioning of the project. The SSRs were classified as onsite SSRs during project operation, upstream SSRs during project operation, downstream SSRs during project operation, upstream SSRs before project and downstream SSRs after project. A summary of the identified SSRs is provided in Table 2.
Figure 1: Relevant SSRs for the GHG Project
CEP Boiler SSR1
Building SSR2
Municipal Sewage
Treatment Plant SSR9
Extraction, refining & Transportation of raw
material SSR10
Manufacturing of DES Components
SSR11
Transportation of DES Components
SSR12
Commissioning of DES
System SSR13
Production and Distribution of
Propane SSR4
Electricity Generation and Distribution
SSR3
Municipal Water Treatment and
Pumping SSR5
Electricit
Water
Propane
Tree Harvesting & Transportation
SSR7
Lumber Milling SSR8
Lumber
Waste Biomass
Diesel Production and
Distribution SSR6
Diesel
Decommissioning of DES System SSR14
Controlled
Related SSR
Input / Output
Table 2: Identified Relevant Project SSRs
SSR Identifier
SSR Name Controlled, Related or Affected
SSR Description
SSR1 CEP boiler Controlled Emissions from boilers result from the combustion of biomass
SSR2 Building electrical load Controlled No direct emissions generated SSR3 Electricity production
and distribution Related GHG emissions are generated from
upstream electricity production and distribution. A regional emission factor representing all emissions from upstream processes for electricity generation and distribution will be applied.
SSR4 Production and transportation of propane for back-up system
Related GHG emissions are generated from upstream propane production and transportation. A national emission factor representing all emissions from upstream processes for propane production and distribution will be applied.
SSR5 Municipal water pumping and treatment
Related Emissions from energy use associated with bringing potable water to the project site
SSR6 Diesel Production and Distribution
Related GHG emissions are generated from upstream diesel production and distribution. A national emission factor representing all emissions from upstream processes for diesel production and distribution will be applied.
SSR7 Tree Harvesting & Transportation
Related GHG emissions are generated from energy consumption in the harvesting and transportation of trees
SSR8 Lumber Milling Related GHG emissions are generated from energy consumption in the harvesting milling of trees to lumber
SSR9 Municipal water treatment and pumping
Related Emissions from energy use associated with bringing potable water to the project site
SSR10 Extraction, refining & transportation of raw materials
Related Includes upstream activities involved in the production of the DES a components such as the extraction and treatment of raw materials needed for these components. GHG emissions are generated during these activities
SSR11 Manufacturing of DES Components
Related The manufacturing of the DES components is energy intensive and
generates GHG emissions. SSR12 Transportation of DES
components to project site
Related GHG emissions are generated during the transportation of the project components to the project site
SSR13 Commissioning of DES
Related Commissioning activities involve the use of equipment that generate GHG emissions from the combustion of fuel
SSR14 Decommissioning DES Related Decommissioning activities involve the use of equipment that generate GHG emissions from the combustion of fuel
4 Determining the Baseline Scenario 4.1 Selection and establishment of criteria and procedures The baseline is the most appropriate and best estimate of GHG emissions that would occur in the absence of the project. The identified relevant good practice guidance for identifying the baseline scenario is the WRI/WBCSD GHG Protocol for Projects (2005). Two approaches are specified in the GHG protocol for identifying/determining the baseline:
Project specific approach, which uses a procedure and information based on the specific circumstances of the project
Performance standard approach, which identifies existing or planned processes/physical units to establish a benchmark with spatial and temporal boundaries relevant to the proposed project.
The selected procedure and criteria is the project specific approach. To identify potential baseline candidates using the project specific approach, the GHG protocol outlines the following steps:
1) Define the product or service provided by the project activity 2) Identify possible types of baseline candidates 3) Define and justify the geographic area and the temporal range used to identify baseline
candidates 4) Define and justify any other criteria used to identify baseline candidates 5) Identify a final list of baseline candidates 6) Identify baseline candidates that are representative of common practice
4.2 Application of the procedure and justification of baseline
scenario Based on the above procedure, two baseline scenarios are identified:
1) The proposed project as baseline; 2) Business as usual scenario (existing practices prior to project initiation), which, in this
case, means no DES and the buildings continue to rely on propane boilers to provide space and hot water heating, as well as steam for the mill’s kiln.
To determine and justify the baseline scenario, the GHG protocol suggests that a comparative assessment of barriers be performed. With this method, additionality will also be demonstrated. The following barriers were identified for the barriers test:
Financial Technology availability Infrastructure Data and resource availability
An overview of the barriers test is shown in Table 3.
Table 3: Comparative Assessment of Barriers
Baseline candidates Barrier Project (DES) Business as Usual
Financial Higher costs are associated with the implementation of this new system
No barrier
Technology availability There are some technical uncertainties & risks associated with the DES
No barrier
Infrastructure New infrastructure is required for the DES
No barrier
Data & resource availability No barrier No barrier Based on the above comparative assessment of barriers, since the business as usual scenario has no or the least amount of barriers to overcome, it becomes the selected baseline scenario for the project. 5 Identifying Sources, Sinks and Reservoirs for the Baseline
Scenario
5.1 Criteria and procedures In identifying the SSRs associated with the grid baseline, the same seven step procedure employed in identifying the SSRs for the project was applied to the baseline. 5.2 Application of procedures The same procedure as that applied for identifying GHG SSRs for the project was applied for the baseline scenario. The identified SSRs for the baseline scenario can be seen in Figure 2
Figure 2: Identified Relevant Baseline SSRs
Extraction, refining & Transportation of raw
material SSR13
Manufacturing of Landfill Components
SSR14
Transportation of Landfill Components
SSR15
Commissioning of Landfill SSR16
Manufacturing of Beehive Burner
Components
Transportation of Beehive Burner
SSR21
Commissioning of Beehive Burner
SSR22
Manufacturing of Building Heating
Components SSR17
Transportation of Building Heating
Components SSR18
Commissioning of Building Heating
Systems SSR19
Manufacturing of Steam Plant Components
Transportation of Steam Plant Components
SSR24
Commissioning of Steam Plant
SSR25
Diesel
Production and Distribution of
Propane SSR3
Electricity Generation and Distribution
SSR2
Municipal Water Treatment and
Pumping SSR4
Electricit
Water
Propane
Diesel Production and
Distribution SSR5
Tree Harvesting & Transportation
SSR6
Lumber Milling SSR7
Lumber
Waste Biomass
Municipal Sewage
Treatment Plant SSR12
Building Heating Systems
SSR1
Decommissioning of Building
Heating Systems SSR26
Decommissioning of Steam Plant
SSR27
Landfill SSR8
Beehive Burner SSR9
Decommissioning of Beehive
Burner SSR11
Controlled
Related SSR
Input / Output
Decommissioning of Landfill
SSR10
Table 4: Identified Baseline SSRs
SSR Identifier
SSR Name Controlled, Related or Affected
SSR Description
SSR1 Building Heating Systems
Related Emissions from multiple boilers in each building’s heating system result from the combustion of propane
SSR2 Electricity production and distribution
Related GHG emissions are generated from upstream electricity production and distribution. A regional emission factor representing all emissions from upstream processes for electricity generation and distribution will be applied.
SSR3 Production and transportation of propane for back-up system
Related GHG emissions are generated from upstream propane production and transportation. A national emission factor representing all emissions from upstream processes for propane production and distribution will be applied.
SSR4 Municipal water pumping and treatment
Related Emissions from energy use associated with bringing potable water to multiple buildings
SSR5 Diesel Production and Distribution
Related GHG emissions are generated from upstream diesel production and distribution. A national emission factor representing all emissions from upstream processes for diesel production and distribution will be applied.
SSR6 Tree Harvesting & Transportation
Related GHG emissions are generated from energy consumption in the harvesting and transportation of trees
SSR7 Lumber Milling Related GHG emissions are generated from energy consumption in the harvesting milling of trees to lumber
SSR8 Landfill Related Emissions from landfill (landfill gas) are generated by the anaerobic decomposition of organic wastes in landfill
SSR9 Beehive Burner Related Emissions from the combustion of waste biomass in an open flame silo burner
SSR10 Decommissioning of Landfill
Related Decommissioning activities involve the use of equipment that generate GHG emissions from the combustion of fuel
SSR11 Decommissioning of Related Decommissioning activities involve the
Beehive Burner
use of equipment that generate GHG emissions from the combustion of fuel
SSR12 Municipal Sewage Treatment Plant
Related Emissions from energy use associated with treating waste water and from biological treatment processes that generate methane
SSR13 Extraction, refining & transportation of raw materials
Related Includes upstream activities involved in the production of the DES a components such as the extraction and treatment of raw materials needed for these components. GHG emissions are generated during these activities
SSR14 Manufacturing of Landfill Components
Related The manufacturing of components is energy intensive and generates GHG emissions.
SSR15 Transportation of Landfill Components to Landfill site
Related GHG emissions are generated during the transportation of the manufactured components to the landfill site
SSR16 Commissioning of Landfill
Related Commissioning activities involve the use of equipment that generate GHG emissions from the combustion of fuel
SSR17 Manufacturing of Building Heating System Components
Related The manufacturing of components is energy intensive and generates GHG emissions.
SSR18 Transportation of Building Heating System Components
Related GHG emissions are generated during the transportation of the manufactured components to the landfill site
SSR19 Commissioning of Building Heating Systems
Related Commissioning activities involve the use of equipment that generate GHG emissions from the combustion of fuel
SSR20 Manufacturing of Beehive Burner Components
Related The manufacturing of components is energy intensive and generates GHG emissions.
SSR21 Transportation of Beehive Burner Components
Related GHG emissions are generated during the transportation of the manufactured components to the landfill site
SSR222 Commissioning of Beehive Burner
Related Commissioning activities involve the use of equipment that generate GHG emissions from the combustion of fuel
SSR23 Manufacturing of Steam Plant Components
Related The manufacturing of components is energy intensive and generates GHG emissions.
SSR24 Transportation of Steam Plant
Related GHG emissions are generated during the transportation of the manufactured
Components components to the landfill site SSR26 Commissioning of
Steam Plant Related Commissioning activities involve the use
of equipment that generate GHG emissions from the combustion of fuel
SSR26 Decommissioning of Building Heating Systems
Related Decommissioning activities involve the use of equipment that generate GHG emissions from the combustion of fuel
SSR27 Decommissioning of Steam Plant
Related Decommissioning activities involve the use of equipment that generate GHG emissions from the combustion of fuel
5.3 Determining the baseline electricity grid procedure The Government of Canada, TEAM Program, SMART Protocol for Grid Baselines provides guidance and requirements for selecting a procedure for quantifying the GHG emissions for a baseline scenario. Based on the procedure provided by the TEAM SMART Protocol, an emission factor representing the provincial average operating margin was selected for quantifying GHG emissions due to electricity production and distribution in the baseline.
6 Selecting Relevant GHG Sources, Sinks and Reservoirs for Monitoring or Estimation of GHG Emissions and Removals
6.1 Criteria and procedures for relevance of SSRs Good practice guidance for the selection of relevant GHG SSRs for monitoring or estimating is very limited. Therefore the following procedure was developed and is justified based on the GHG quantification principles specified in ISO 14064-2 (relevance, conservativeness). The procedure, illustrated in Figure 3, was applied to assess in sequence each identified SSR for the project and the selected baseline scenario to determine whether the GHG SSRs will be monitored or estimated. In cases where a SSR is selected for estimation rather than monitoring the rational for that decision is be justified. In addition to the procedure followed, where GHG emissions and removals from the SSRs could not monitored cost-effectively and data availability was extremely limited, certain SSRs were eliminated entirely from quantification where it could be shown that this was in keeping with the principle of conservativeness. This approach allows the quantification to be faster and cheaper without compromising the credibility of the quantification of GHG emission reductions. .
Figure 3: Procedure for Selecting SSRs Relevant to Quantification or Estimation
No
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
No
Is the SSR new or changed from
the baseline scenario to the
project?
Is the SSR needed to
determine the level of activity of another SSR?
SSR is not relevant to the quantification of GHG
emission or removal therefore it can be excluded unless the
SSR is considered high risk to the GHG assertion, in which case the project proponent
shall assess the SSR for relevance during the project
period.
Is data available or can the SSR be monitored cost-
effectively? (i.e., benefit > cost)
The project proponent shall quantify the GHG emissions and removals from monitored SSRs
The project proponent shall estimate GHG emissions and removals from the SSRs that
cannot be monitored cost-effectively.
SSR is relevant to the quantification.
6.2 Application of criteria and procedures Table 5 and Table 7 list all SSRs selected for quantification for the project and baseline respectively following the procedure outlined in Figure 3. In addition to the procedure followed, certain SSRs were eliminated from quantification. The rationale for such exclusions is included in the tables. Table 5: Selection of Relevant Project SSRs for Estimation/Monitoring
SSR Identifier
SSR Name Monitored or Estimated
Justification for Monitoring or Exclusion
SSR1 CEP boiler Monitored n/a SSR2 Building electrical load Monitored n/a SSR3 Electricity production and
distribution Estimated Estimated based on electricity
consumption (which is monitored) and an emission factor
SSR4 Production and transportation of propane for back-up system
Estimated Estimated based on propane consumption (which is monitored) and an emission factor
SSR5 Municipal water pumping and treatment
Not relevant Does not change from baseline to project
SSR6 Diesel Production and Distribution
Not relevant Does not change from baseline to project
SSR7 Tree Harvesting & Transportation
Not relevant Does not change from baseline to project
SSR8 Lumber Milling Not relevant Does not change from baseline to project
SSR9 Municipal sewage treatment plant
Not relevant Does not change from baseline to project
SSR10 Extraction, refining & transportation of raw materials
Estimated
SSR11 Manufacturing of DES Components
Estimated
SSR12 Transportation of DES components to project site
Estimated
SSR13 Commissioning of DES Estimated SSR14 Decommissioning DES Estimated
Cannot be monitored cost effectively, however will be estimated using a conservative estimate of the GHG emissions intensity and amount of material needed will be based on professional engineering judgment
Table 6: Selection of Relevant Baseline SSRs for Estimation/Monitoring
SSR Identifier
SSR Name Monitored or Estimated
Justification for Monitoring or Exclusion
SSR1 Building Heating Systems Not relevant Cannot be monitored cost effectively. Since this is a baseline
SSR Identifier
SSR Name Monitored or Estimated
Justification for Monitoring or Exclusion
SSR, excluding it from quantification is in line with the conservativeness principle. Therefore, this SSR is excluded from quantification.
SSR2 Electricity production and distribution
Not relevant No historical electricity use data exists for electricity use by the propane-fired space and water heating systems of the customer buildings (though it is likely not substantial). Since this is a baseline SSR, excluding it from quantification is in line with the conservativeness principle. Therefore, this SSR is excluded from quantification.
SSR3 Production and transportation of propane
Estimated Estimated based on historical propane consumption and emission factor
SSR4 Municipal water pumping and treatment
Not relevant Does not change from baseline to project
SSR5 Diesel Production and Distribution
Not relevant Does not change from baseline to project
SSR6 Tree Harvesting & Transportation
Not relevant Does not change from baseline to project
SSR7 Lumber Milling Not relevant Does not change from baseline to project
SSR8 Landfill Estimated Will be estimated based on historical data and monitored project data
SSR9 Beehive Burner Estimated Will be estimated based on historical data and monitored project data
SSR10 Decommissioning of Landfill
Not relevant
SSR11 Decommissioning of Beehive Burner
Not relevant
Cannot be monitored cost effectively. Since these are baseline SSR’s, excluding them from quantification is in line with the conservativeness principle. Therefore, these SSR’s are eliminated from the quantification.
SSR Identifier
SSR Name Monitored or Estimated
Justification for Monitoring or Exclusion
SSR12 Municipal Sewage Treatment Plant
Not relevant Does not change from baseline to project
SSR13 Extraction, refining & transportation of raw materials
Not relevant
SSR14 Manufacturing of Landfill Components
Not relevant
SSR15 Transportation of Landfill Components to Landfill site
Not relevant
SSR16 Commissioning of Landfill Not relevant SSR17 Manufacturing of Building
Heating System ComponentsNot relevant
SSR18 Transportation of Building Heating System Components
Not relevant
SSR19 Commissioning of Building Heating Systems
Not relevant
SSR20 Manufacturing of Beehive Burner Components
Not relevant
SSR21 Transportation of Beehive Burner Components
Not relevant
SSR222 Commissioning of Beehive Burner
Not relevant
SSR23 Manufacturing of Steam Plant Components
Not relevant
SSR24 Transportation of Steam Plant Components
Not relevant
SSR26 Commissioning of Steam Plant
Not relevant
SSR26 Decommissioning of Building Heating Systems
Not relevant
SSR27 Decommissioning of Steam Plant
Not relevant
Cannot be monitored cost effectively. Since these are baseline SSR’s, excluding them from quantification is in line with the conservativeness principle. Therefore, these SSR’s are eliminated from the quantification.
7 Quantifying GHG Emissions for the Project 7.1 General Quantification Methodology The general method applied for estimating GHG emissions from identified sources involved taking the product between an emission factor for specific activities associated with the GHG emitting source and an activity level associated with the GHG emitting source:
ii ALxEFE = Equation 1 Where:
iE =Emissions of greenhouse gas i (CO2, CH4 and N2O) AL = Activity level associated with SSR (e.g., kWh of electricity, hours of operation)
iEF = Emission factor for the specific activity associated with the SSR (e.g., x tonnes CO2e/kWh electricity consumed). Activity levels were either directly measured (e.g., kWh electricity consumed) or estimated based on professional engineering judgment (e.g., tonnes of steel used to construct the CEP). The emission factors utilized in the calculations were derived or obtained from well recognized published sources (e.g., Environment Canada). Emissions were calculated for each greenhouse gas emitted and a total CO2e amount was estimated by taking the sum of the individual greenhouse gas emissions and their global warming potentials:
iieCO xGWPEE =2 Equation 2
Where:
eCOE2 = Total CO2e emissions
iGWP = Global warming potential of greenhouse gas i presented in Table 6 Table 7: Global Warming Potentials (GWPs)
Types of GHG Emissions GWP CO2 1 CH4 21 N2O 310
7.1.1 Production of DES components To estimate emissions generated from the extraction and treatment of the raw materials needed for the DES, the type and quantity of all materials was required. Since data on the quantity of materials was not readily available, estimation of the amount of each material was based on professional engineering judgment. GHG emissions from upstream production operations were estimated by:
iiDESofproductionMEFE ×=∑ Equation 3
Where EFi is the emission factor associated with the production of material i (steel, copper, rubber, etc.) and Mi is the amount of material i used to construct the DES. Emission factors and estimated activity levels are presented in Table 8. Those emissions are calculated separately. Table 8: Material production emission factors
Material Activity level (t material)
Emission factor (t CO2e/t material)
Steel 7.2 3.2 Aluminum 0.06 12.7 Plastics 0.05 1.93 Sample Calculation: From Table 8, the E-Solutions DES requires 7.2 tonnes of steel, 0.06 tonnes aluminum and 0.05 tonnes plastic. Using the emission factors presented in Table 8 and Equation 3:
eCOtE
plastictplastict
eCOt
iumalutiumaluteCOtsteelt
steelteCOtE
DESofproduction
DESofproduction
2
2
22
9.23
05.093.1
min06.0min
7.122.72.3
=
⎟⎟⎠
⎞⎜⎜⎝
⎛×+
⎟⎟⎠
⎞⎜⎜⎝
⎛×+⎟⎟
⎠
⎞⎜⎜⎝
⎛×=
Since the project has an expected life span of 30 years, production emissions will be prorated over that period by dividing total emissions by thirty at the emissions reductions calculation stage. 7.1.2 Manufacturing of CHP system components
Emissions from the manufacturing of the DES are calculated based on the value of the DES and an emission factor for the manufacturing sector. The value of the DES is documented in purchase order forms and the emission factor is referenced from CIEEDAC4. For the Mountainview DES, its value is $300,000 CAD and the emission factor is 0.000465 t CO2e/$. Sample Calculation based on Equation 1
eCOtE
eCOtE
DESofingmanufactur
DESofingmanufactur
2
2
42.139
000,300$$
000465.0
=
×=
Since the project has an expected life span of 30 years, manufacturing emissions will be prorated over that period by dividing total emissions by thirty at the emissions reductions calculation stage. 7.1.3 Transportation of CHP system to project site The required activity level for estimating transportation emissions is the total distance traveled to the project site and the weight of the CHP system components. The emission factor used for calculating emissions is the 100 g/tonne.km quoted in the Transportation Options Paper (1999, Government of Canada). Sample Calculation based on Equation 1 and the mass of DES system equal to 7.3 tonnes
tonnesEkmtonne
gkmtonnesE
tionTransporta
tionTransporta
58.0
1008003.7
=
××=
Since the project has an expected life span of 30 years, transportation emissions will be prorated over that period by dividing total emissions by thirty at the emissions reductions calculation stage. 7.1.4 Commissioning of CHP system To estimate GHG emissions from commissioning of the CHP system, data on the total mass of concrete delivered to the project site, the steel works and the mechanical/electrical engineering works are required. This information can be obtained from receipts for materials delivered for the site and through manufacturers’ specifications. The general formula used to equate GHG emissions from commissioning activities is:
4
∑∑
×
+×=
ii
iiSystemDESingcommission
MEFWorksgEngineerinElectricalMechanical
MEFstructurePlatformE
/
/
Emission factors are referenced from LCA published data and industry associations. Activity levels and emission factors are presented in Table 9 and Table 10 below. Table 9: Activity Levels and GHG Emission Factors from Civil Engineering Work
Civil Engineering Works Quantity of concrete t material 61.2 Emission per unit of concrete t CO2/t 0.5 Emissions t CO2 30.6 Quantity of steel t material 1 Emission per unit of steel t CO2/t 3.2 Emissions t CO2 3.2 Table 10: Activity Levels and GHG Emission Factors from Mechanical and Electrical Engineering Work
Mechanical and Electrical Engineering Works Quantity of steel t material 1 Emission per unit of steel t CO2/t 3.2 Emissions t CO2 3.2 Quantity of copper t material 0.5 Emission per unit of copper t CO2/t 7.45 Emissions t CO2 3.725 Quantity of aluminum t material 0.1 Emission per unit of aluminum t CO2/t 12.7 Emissions t CO2 1.27 Quantity of plastics t material 0.05 Emission per unit of plastic t CO2/t 1.93 Emissions t CO2 0.0965 Since the project has an expected life span of 30 years, commissioning emissions will be prorated over that period by dividing total emissions by thirty at the emissions reductions calculation stage. 7.1.5 Propane production and transportation Activity levels for the upstream propane production and transportation are litres of propane consumed by the DES in the project. The emission factor obtained from Environment Canada’s
GHG Verification Centre is 0.391 t CO2e/1000 L. The monthly activity levels (L propane consumed) for the DES are presented in Table 11. Table 11: Back-up Propane consumption (L) at the CEP (2006)
Month Fuel flow consumed at CEP January 0 February 0 March 0 April 0 May 105 June 0 July 0
August 0 September 0
October 0 November 0 December 0
Total 105 Note that propane is only a back-up fuel for the project. The only propane consumed during the year corresponds to one eight day inability to burn wood waste in the CEP boiler due to a malfunction of the feeder auger in May. From Table 11, the total propane consumed by the boiler and CHP system in the year is 105 litres. Therefore from based on Equation 1 the GHG emissions associated with this SSR are: Sample Calculation
etCOE
ekgCOEm
ekgCOLE
transpconsopane
transpconsopane
transpconsopane
2&Pr
2&Pr
32
&Pr
165.0
65.160
530.1105
=
=
×=
7.1.6 Electricity production and distribution
The 2005 BC provincial average electricity emissions intensity of 0.027 kg CO2e/kWh was utilized in the calculation of GHG emissions from electricity production and distribution. The energy use of the DES is monitored by one meter at the CEP, so the consumption of the various loads within the system (lighting/outlets, office air conditioning, pumps, etc.) would require estimation. However, given that all the loads on the meter are required to run the system, this aggregate value is acceptable. The monthly activity levels (kWh electricity consumed) for the DES are presented in Table 12. Table 12: Electricity consumption (kWh) at the CEP (2006)
Month Electricity consumption of
DES January 142 February 138 March 125 April 110 May 103 June 109 July 107
August 114 September 126
October 133 November 139 December 140
Total 1,486 Sample Calculation From Table 12, the total electricity consumed by the DES in the year is 1486 kWh. Therefore based on Equation 1 the following calculations can is performed:
etCOE
ekgCOEkWh
ekgCOkWhE
distprodyElectricit
distprodyElectricit
distprodyElectricit
2
2
2&
040.0
63.39
027.01486
&
&
=
=
×=
7.1.7 CEP Boiler Activity levels for the CEP boiler are the monthly volumes of biomass waste combusted in the burner. The emission factor utilised is 925 kg CO2e/t fuel combusted. This emission factor is
based on the manufacturer’s performance claim for the technology, which was independently verified by a third party. The monthly activity levels (tonnes of biomass consumed) for the DES are presented in Table 13 Table 13: Tonnes of biomass consumed at the CEP
Month Tonnes of Biomass Consumed
January 650 February 640 March 585 April 555 May 530 June 490 July 455
August 440 September 450
October 500 November 560 December 620
Total 6,475 Sample Calculation From Table 13, the total biomass consumed by the DES in the year is 6,475 tonnes. Therefore based on Equation 1 the GHG emissions are calculated as follows:
etCOE
ekgCOEt
ekgCOtE
boilerCEP
boilerCEP
boilerCEP
2
2
2
37.5989
5989375
9256475
=
=
×=
In addition to the emissions from the combustion of biomass, the CEP boiler emitted GHG due to the consumption of propane back up fuel. The activity level for this is the total propane consumed from Table 11 (105 litres), and the emission factor obtained from Environment Canada is 1534 g CO2e/L. The GHG emissions are calculated following equation 1.
7.1.8 Decommissioning of CHP system Due to lack of reliable data on the decommissioning of the DES, an estimate was made by assuming that GHG emissions from decommissioning activities will be equal to the GHG emissions from commissioning of the CHP system. 8 Quantifying GHG Emissions from the Baseline 8.1 General Quantification Methodology The same quantification approach will be followed as previously outlined in the quantification of the GHG emission from the project. 8.1.1 Propane production and transportation GHG emissions from the production and transportation of propane in the baseline can be calculated using an activity level equal to the sum of propane consumption for the steam plant and for heating the building. The activity level (L of propane consumed) for one year are presented in Table 14. Table 14: Litres of propane consumed by boiler in the baseline
Month Propane Consumed January 503 February 490 March 481 April 475 May 455 June 441 July 435
August 413 September 424
October 424 November 473 December 492
Total 5,507 Sample Calculation The total propane consumed in the baseline scenario amounts to 5,507 L. The emission factor for propane production and transport is 0.391 t CO2e/1000L. Therefore, based on Equation 1:
etCOELetCOLE
nconsumptioopane
transpprodopane
2
2
&Pr
15.21000
391.05507
Pr=
×=
8.1.2 Steam plant and Building Heating GHG emissions from the steam plant and building heating due to the combustion of propane are quantified as an aggregate value, where the activity level is the total propane consumed (from Table 14, above). This is because there is only one accepted emission factor for propane consumption from stationary combustion (1534 g CO2e/L) and it therefore does not distinguish between steam generation and building space heating. Therefore, using the total propane consumed in the baseline scenario (5,507 L) and the emission factor for propane combustion (1534 g CO2e/L), the emissions from the steam plant and building heating in the baseline are calculated in the same manner as the emissions from the CEP in the project scenario. 8.1.3 Landfill and Beehive burner The total volume of wood waste in the baseline scenario is equal to that of the project scenario (6,475 tonnes). Very little historical data exists for how much wood waste was landfilled and how much was burned, though it is known that these two activities were the only uses of the wood waste. It is also known that the vast majority of the wood waste was burned in the beehive burner, with landfilling only occurring on infrequent occasions when cover was required for the municipal landfill. Based on interviews with mill staff and municipal officials, conservative estimates of 1000 tonnes landfilled and 5,475 tonnes combusted are being used. For the open combustion of biomass, an emission factor of 2236 g CO2e/kg was obtained from Environment Canada. Therefore, based on Equation 1 the following formula is used:
etCOE
egCOEkg
egCOt
kgtE
burnerBeehive
burnerBeehive
burnerBeehive
2
2
2
12,242
01224210000
223610005475
=
=
××=
Emissions from landfills due to the anaerobic decomposition of organic materials are a function of several factors. To estimate the landfill gas emissions, a simplified version of the method used to calculate methane generation from a landfill in the absence of a waste diversion project activity was adapted from the CDM (methodology AM0025). This method involves utilising the following factors to quantify a methane emission:
A discount value to correct for the model-uncertainties (�=default 0.9); The fraction of methane in the landfill gas (F, assumed to be 50%); The fraction of degradable organic carbon (DOC) dissimilated to landfill gas (DOCF,
conservative default of 0.5 used);
The Methane Correction Factor (MCF) to correct for landfill type (conservative default of 0.4 used);
The volume of organic waste (VBiomass, 1000 tonnes in this case); The per cent of DOC by weight in the waste (DOCJ, 30% default); and The decay rate for wood waste (kj, 0.023 default).
Using these factors in the following equation we can calculate the GHG emissions associated with this SSR: ELandfill(methane) = � x 16/12 x F x DOCf x MCF x VBiomass x DOCj x (1-e-kj) e-kj ELandfill(methane) = 0.7999 t CH4 ELandfill =16.80 t CO2e 9 Quantifying GHG Emission Reductions Total GHG emission reductions are obtained by taking the difference between total emissions from the project and total emissions from the baseline. A summary of total GHG emissions and emission reductions for the project and baseline is presented in Table 13 below.
Table 15: Summary of CO2e emissions and emission reductions from the project
SSR Name Baseline
Emissions (t CO2e)
Project Emission (t CO2e)
Emission Reduction (Baseline -
Project) CEP boiler 0 5,989.5 (B) -5,989.5 (B)Electricity production and distribution 0 0.04 -0.04Production and transportation of propane 2.2 0.04 2.2Extraction, refining & transportation of raw materials 0 0.8 -0.8Manufacturing of DES Components 0 4.7 -4.7Transportation of DES components to project site 0 0.02 -0.02Commissioning of DES 0 1.4 -1.4Decommissioning DES 0 1.4 -1.4Steam plant & Building heating 8447.7 0 8447.7Landfill 16.8 0 16.8Beehive Burner 12,242.1 (B) 0 12,242.1 (B)TOTAL: Does not include biogenic carbon (B) 8466.7 8.4 8,458.3
Need an explanation about biogenic carbon being quantified but excluded from GHG emission reduction calculations 10 Monitoring the GHG project A monitoring plan was developed following good practice guidance for CHP projects provided in US EPA ETV protocols, and by the Government Canada, TEAM Program GHG SMART Protocols. Table 16 summarizes the monitoring procedures.
Table 16: Summary of Monitoring Plan
SSR Name Data Parameter Directly
Monitored / Estimated
Data Unit Sources Monitoring Frequency
Measuring Instrument / Methodology
Accuracy
CEP boiler Biomass consumption Monitored t Feed rate of automatic stoker and operation time
High
Emission factor for biomass consumption
Documented kg CO2e/m3
Environment Canada
High
Back-up propane consumption
Monitored L Hourly Metered High
Emission factor for propane consumption
Documented kg CO2e/m3
Environment Canada
High
Electricity production and distribution
kWh electricity consumed
Monitored kWh Hourly Power meter High
Alberta average provincial emissions intensity
Documented kg CO2e/ kWh
Environment Canada
High
Production and transportation of propane
Natural gas consumption
Monitored m3 Hourly Gas flow meter High
Emission factor for natural gas combustion
Documented kg CO2e/m3
Environment Canada
High
Extraction, refining & transportation of raw materials
Tonnes of material needed (steel, copper, plastic)
Estimated t Manufacturer Specifications
Once Low
SSR Name Data Parameter Directly
Monitored / Estimated
Data Unit Sources Monitoring Frequency
Measuring Instrument / Methodology
Accuracy
Emission factor for production of each material
Documented t CO2e / mass of material
LCA Published data
Medium
Manufacturing of DES Components
Value of DES system Documented $ Purchase orders/receipts
Once Medium
Emission factor for manufacturing
Documented t CO2e/$ CIEEDAC Medium
Transportation of DES components to project site
Distance traveled from production site to manufacturing facility
Estimated km Professional Engineering Judgment
Once Medium
Emission factor for transportation
Documented kg CO2e / km traveled
Environment Canada National GHG inventory
High
Commissioning of DES
Mass of materials Estimated t materials Purchase orders and receipts
Once Medium
Emission factor for commissioning
Documented t CO2e / mass of material
LCA Published Data TEAM SMART Protocol
High
Decommissioning DES
GHG emissions from decommissioning
Estimated it to be equal to commissioning GHG emissions
Once Low
Steam plant & Building heating
Natural gas consumption
Monitored m3 Utility invoices Monthly Gas flow meter High
Emission factor for Documented kg Environment High
SSR Name Data Parameter Directly
Monitored / Estimated
Data Unit Sources Monitoring Frequency
Measuring Instrument / Methodology
Accuracy
natural gas combustion CO2e/m3 Canada Landfill Fraction of methane in
the landfill gas Estimated % IPCC Low
Fraction of degradable organic (DOC) carbon dissimilated to landfill gas
Estimated % IPCC Low
Methane Correction Factor
Estimated % IPCC Low
Volume of organic waste landfilled
Monitored t Municipal landfill records
Once Weigh scales records
Medium
Per cent of degradable organic (DOC) by weight in the waste
Estimated % IPCC Low
The decay rate for wood waste
Estimated t / year IPCC Low
Beehive Burner Tonnes of biomass combusted
Monitored t Lumber mill records
Once Medium
Emission factor for open biomass burning
Documented t CO2e / t biomass
Environment Canada
Medium
11 References APME. (1997). PVC – bulk polymerized LCA Report. Available from www.apme.org Clean Development Mechanism (2005). Approved Baseline Methodology AM0025. http://cdm.unfccc.int/EB/021/eb21repan15.pdf Environment Canada (2006). Landfill Gas Capture and Combustion Quantification Protocol. Available from www.ec.gc.ca/pdb/ghg Environment Canada (2006). Canada’s Greenhouse Gas Inventory 1990 – 2004, Greenhouse Gas Division. Available from www.ec.gc.ca/pdb/ghg Natural Resources Canada (2005), Draft Quantification Protocol for Landfill Gas Capture and Combustion. NREL (2004). US Life Cycle Inventory Database, 2004 data for galvanized steel. Available from www.nrel.gov/lci U.S. EPA (2002). Solid Waste Management and Greenhouse Gases; A Life Cycle Assessment of Emissions & Sinks. Available from www.epa.gov World Resources Institute (2005). The GHG Protocol for Projects. Available from: www.ghgprotocol.org World Resources Institute (2006). Calculation Tools, Available from www.ghgprotocol.org