Centre de Santé et de Services sociaux du Nord de Lanaudière

Transcription

Centre de Santé et de Services
sociaux du Nord de Lanaudière
Verification report on a Greenhouse Gas Emissions (‘’GHG’’)
reduction project – Implementation of energy efficiency
measures, fuel switching and geothermal energy
October 9th, 2014
October 9, 2014
Mr. Mathieu Desmarais
Building Advisor
1000, boulevard Sainte-Anne
Saint-Charles-Borromée, Québec J6E 6J2
Dear Sir:
Subject: Verification report on a greenhouse gas emissions (“GHG”) reduction project
Please find enclosed our verification report on a GHG emissions reduction project performed at Centre
Hospitalier Régional de Lanaudière (CHRDL), 1000, boulevard Sainte-Anne, Saint-Charles-Borromée,
Québec J6E 6J2, Centre d’hébergement St-Eusèbe (CSE), 585 boul. Manseau, Joliette, Québec, J6E 3E5 and
at Centre d’hébergement St-Antoine-de-Padoue (CH St-Antoine-de-Padoue), 521 rue St-Antoine, St-Lin-desLaurentides, Québec, J0R 1C0.
The quantification report that is subject to our verification is included in Appendix 2.
Please do not hesitate to contact us for any additional information you may require.
Yours truly,
Roger Fournier CPA, CA
GHG Lead Verifier
Service de vérification Carbon Quantum Inc
76 Morley, Greenfield Park, Québec, J4V 2Y9
Tél:514-891-6799;
[email protected]; www.carbonquantum.com
Draft Report
Building Advisor
Saint-Charles-Borromée, Québec J6E 6J2
Dear Sir:
We have been engaged by Centre de Santé et de Services sociaux du Nord de Lanaudière (CSSSNL)
to perform the verification of a GHG Emissions Reduction project at Centre Hospitalier Régional de
Lanaudière (CHRDL), Centre d’hébergement St-Eusèbe (CSE) and at Centre d’hébergement St-Antoine-dePadoue (CH St-Antoine-de-Padoue) as an independent third party verifier.
We have verified the accompanying greenhouse gas (“GHG”) emissions reduction quantification report
entitled “Greenhouse Gas Project Report – Energy Efficiency projects at CSSS Nord de Lanaudière – January 1st, 2012 to
June 30th, 2014’’ (the “quantification report”). This quantification report dated October 7th, 2014 is included in
Appendix 2 of our report which is intended to be posted on CSA’s GHG CleanProject TM registry.
Management is responsible for the relevance, consistency, transparency, conservativeness, completeness,
accuracy and method of presentation of the quantification report. This responsibility includes the design,
implementation and maintenance of internal controls relevant to the preparation of a GHG emissions
reduction quantification report that is free from material misstatements. Our responsibility is to express an
opinion based on our verification.
CSSS Nord de Lanaudière
The CSSS Nord de Lanaudière (CSSSNL) provides several services to the community and is responsible of
the organization, coordination and offers of health services and social services for nearly 30 institutions in his
territory.
Tél:514-891-6799;
The emissions reduction project
The project is located at Centre Hospitalier Régional de Lanaudière (CHRDL), 1000, boulevard Sainte-Anne,
Saint-Charles-Borromée, Québec, J6E 6J2, Latitude 46O 02’ 18.0’’ N and Longitude 73O 27’ 19.8’’ W , Centre
d’hébergement St-Eusèbe (CSE), 585 boul. Manseau, Joliette, Québec, J6E 3E5, Latitude 46O 01’ 23.6’’ N and
Longitude 73O 26’ 30.4’’ W, and at Centre d’hébergement St-Antoine-de-Padoue (CH St-Antoine-de-Padoue),
521 rue St-Antoine, St-Lin-des- Laurentides, Québec, J0R 1C0 Latitude 45O 51’ 13.7’’ N and Longitude 73O 45’
13.6’’ W
The project achieves GHG emissions reduction since it makes possible to consume less energy with the new
and more efficient equipment added at CH St-Antoine-de-Padoue, CHRDL and CSE buildings. There is also
a fuel switch at CHRDL and CSE where a geothermal system has been installed.
The project contributes to GHG emissions reduction since it makes possible to consume less energy and use
cleaner energy and also avoids the release of a large quantity of greenhouse gases (produced by the
consumption of fossil fuels) in the atmosphere. These energy efficiency and fuel switch measures are
additional to a baseline scenario which is the status quo situation, meaning that Centre de Santé et de Services
sociaux du Nord de Lanaudière would not have made any modifications at their buildings.
The baseline scenario and the project scenario deliver the same type and level of product service (i.e. they are
functionally equivalent) in a sense that they both meet the energetic needs and provide sufficient heat to
assure comfort and decent life quality inside the buildings.
The project start date is January 1st, 2012 and as per page 3 of the attached quantification report the project
will be valid until it ceases to respect the principle of additionality or until the new equipment used in the
measures have reached the end of their useful life. This is the first verification report to be issued for this
project. As per the attached quantification report at page 7, it is the intention of the client to update annually
over the next few years its GHG project
The main GHG source for the project is the consumption of natural gas, electricity and heavy fuel oil. The
various gases involved at Centre de Santé et de Services sociaux du Nord de Lanaudière are carbon dioxide
(CO2), methane (CH4), and nitrous oxide (N2O).
The project was under the responsibility of Mr. Mathieu Desmarais who is the signing authority in this matter
and the person responsible for the data collection and monitoring.
Tél:514-891-6799;
The quantification report
The quantification report was prepared by National Ecocredit, in accordance with ISO 14064-2 “Specification
with guidance at the project level for quantification, monitoring and reporting of greenhouse gas emission reductions or removal
enhancement (2006)”.
The quantification is done in accordance with the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) methodology
proposed by the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCC) titled: AMS-II.E.
version 10 – Energy efficiency and fuel switching measures for buildings. This methodology is appropriate because it
includes any energy efficiency and fuel switch measures implemented in buildings and this corresponds to the
projects implemented by Centre de Santé et Services sociaux du Nord de Lanaudière.
Although the quantification method consists essentially of multiplying appropriate emission factors to the
total consumption of different types of energy (natural gas, electricity and heavy fuel oil), the quantifier has
added two more elements to his quantification by taking into account the impact of the changes in the
buildings dimensions and the weather conditions. Therefore, energy consumptions are ‘’standardized’’ by the
means of buildings dimensions and heating degree days (HDD) ratios.
The approach that was used for the quantification of the GHG emissions reduction was one of comparing the
GHG emissions generated by various sources of emissions included in the baseline scenario, being the natural
gas, electricity and heavy fuel oil consumption with those resulting from the project scenario, being also the
emissions generated by the natural gas, electricity and heavy fuel oil consumption. The quantifier determined
the GHG emissions for every source of energy by using appropriate emission factors multiplied by the
consumption of every GHG source
The emission factors have been chosen from the National Inventory Report 1990-2012, Greenhouse Gas Sources
and Sinks in Canada.
Tél:514-891-6799;
The verification team
Before undertaking this assignment we ensured there were no conflicts of interest that could impair our ability
to express an opinion and the conflict of interest form was completed is included in Appendix 1 to this report.
We also ensured we had the skills, competencies and appropriate training to perform this specific assignment.
The Verifier assigned to this audit work was:
Roger Fournier CPA, CA, Lead verifier
Roger Fournier has received the CSA ISO 14064-3 training and has been involved in others similar projects.
Over the last seven years, Mr. Fournier has been involved in the audit of more than 80 projects and most of
them as a Lead Verifier.
The verification work
Standards:
Our verification was conducted under ISO 14064-3 International Standard, entitled: Specification with guidance for
the validation and verification of greenhouse gas assertions (2006). This standard requires that we plan and perform the
verification to obtain either a reasonable assurance or a limited assurance about whether the emission
reductions declaration that is contained in the attached quantification report is fairly stated, is free of material
misstatements, is an appropriate representation of the data and GHG information of Centre de Santé et de
Services sociaux du Nord de Lanaudière and the materiality threshold has not been reached or exceeded
Scope:
A reasonable assurance engagement with respect to a GHG statement involves performing procedures to
obtain evidence about the quantification of emissions, and about the other information disclosed as part of
the statement. Our verification procedures were selected based on professional judgment, including the
assessment of the risks of material misstatement in the GHG statement. In making those risk assessments, we
considered internal control relevant to the entity’s preparation of the GHG statement.
Tél:514-891-6799;
Our engagement also included:

Assessing processes and control over data.

Evaluating the appropriateness of quantification methods and reporting policies used and the
reasonableness of necessary estimates made by Centre de Santé et de Services sociaux du Nord de
Lanaudière.

Identifying GHG sources sinks and reservoirs, types of GHG involved and time periods when emissions
occurred.

Establishing quantitative materiality thresholds and assessing compliance of results to these thresholds.

Ensuring ownership of the project by observing that all reductions are obtained directly by the client.
Level of assurance:
It was agreed with Centre de Santé et de Services sociaux du Nord de Lanaudière’s representatives that a
reasonable assurance level of opinion would be issued and we planned and executed our work accordingly.
Consequently, our verification included those procedures we considered necessary in the circumstances to
obtain a reasonable basis for our opinion.
Planning:
At the planning phase of this verification assignment, we assessed the quantification report in order to
understand the major processes of Centre de Santé et de Services sociaux du Nord de Lanaudière’s
operations, the different production or operation stages with the purpose of assessing the complexity of the
operation. We then made a first assessment of the inherent risk.
We also got information on Centre de Santé et de Services sociaux du Nord de Lanaudière’s internal control
with the purpose of assessing our first evaluation of control risk and detection risk for this assignment. We
also assessed the emission sources and GHG involved.
A verification plan and sampling plan have been prepared and designed to mitigate the detection risk
Our verification plan establishes, among others, the terms of the engagement, level of assurance, objectives,
criteria, scope and materiality threshold. Various other steps are also described in our verification plan as the
first documents necessary for the conduct of the audit. These documents allow us to corroborate various
elements of different monitoring systems. The audit plan also includes discussions with various stakeholders
at CSSSNL (eg: Mr. Mathieu Desmarais) to ensure that different controls are in place.
Tél:514-891-6799;
2
Assessing Materiality:
Materiality is an amount that, if omitted or misstated, will influence the reader of the report in his decision
making. Materiality is defined by the lead verifier in accordance with the agreed level of assurance. This
materiality is also based on professional judgment and risk assessment.
The materiality for this project is 5% of declared emission reductions
The inherent risk, control risk and detection risk were assessed at an acceptable level for verification purposes.
Sampling Plan:
Our sampling plan included the verification of total natural gas consumption (which was more than 90% of
the greenhouse gas emissions) for the years 2012 and 2013 and up to June 2014. This verification was done by
reviewing the natural gas invoices. During our verification, our sampling plan was not modified.
Execution:
A draft of the quantification report was submitted to us on August 19, 2014. Our initial review of the
documentation was undertaken on August 19, 2014 and a verification plan was prepared. We then toured
Centre de Santé et de Services sociaux’s premises on September 9, 2014. In doing so we interviewed Mr.
Mathieu Desmarais.
This visit allowed us, among others, to reassess our audit risks, to get a good comprehension of the different
productions stages and also to confirm the emission sources and GHG involved. The final quantification
report is dated October 7th, 2014.
We have identified each monitoring system that may have an effect on the data used for emissions reduction
calculations. During the course of our audit, we have received all requested information from the staff
responsible for data input and reporting out of these systems (Mr. Mathieu Desmarais) and the control
procedures were described and assessed. All reports used in the calculation were reconciled to the
calculations.
We have assessed, among others the appropriateness of using the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM)
methodology titled: AMS-III.E. Version 10 – Energy efficiency and fuel switching measures for buildings as a reference
to build the quantification and we agree with it. We also assessed the appropriateness of using the National
Inventory Report 1990-2012 for emissions factors and we agree with it.
The materiality level, which has been established at 5% of the declared emissions reductions has not been
exceeded. All findings were listed, valued and compared to the established materiality level.
Tél:514-891-6799;
Criteria:
1. The attached quantification report is in conformance with the requirements and principles of ISO 140642
2. The approach and methodology used for the quantification are appropriate.
3. The baseline scenario is appropriate
4. The supporting data are subject to sufficient controls to be considered fair and accurate and should not
cause any material discrepancy
5. The calculation supporting the GHG assertion are sufficiently accurate to be considered fair and accurate
and should not cause any material discrepancy
6. The quantification report has a low degree of uncertainty and the materiality threshold has not been
reached or exceeded
7. There are no competing claims to the ownership of the GHG project and the resulting emission
reductions or removals
8. The project start date is accurate and the lifetime of the project is well stated
Reasonable assurance opinion
Our verification was conducted under ISO 14064-3 International Standard, entitled: Specification with guidance for
the validation and verification of greenhouse gas assertions (2006).
In our opinion:
1.
The quantification report is prepared in accordance with ISO 14064-2 standard: Specification with guidance at
the project level for quantification, monitoring and reporting of greenhouse gas emission reductions or removal enhancements
(2006), and the principles of relevance, completeness, consistency, accuracy, transparency and
conservativeness have been respected.
2.
The approach and methodologies used for the quantification are appropriate.
3.
The baseline scenario is appropriate.
Tél:514-891-6799;
4.
The client’s data controls management system is appropriate.
5.
The quantification report and the GHG assertion are free of material misstatements and are an
appropriate representation of the data and GHG information of Client.
6.
The quantification report has a low degree of uncertainty and the materiality threshold has not been
reached or exceeded.
7.
To our knowledge, there are no competing claims to the ownership of the GHG project and the
resulting emission reductions or removals
8.
The GHG emission reductions presented in the quantification report entitled “Greenhouse Gas Project
Report – Energy Efficiency projects at CSSS Nord de Lanaudière – January 1st, 2012 to June 30th, 2014’’ and dated
October 7th, 2014 are, in all material respect, fairly stated at 1010 tCO2e for the period from January 1st,
2012 to December 31st, 2012, 2413 tCO2e for the period from January 1st, 2013 to December 31st, 2013
and 5679 tCO2e for the period from January 1st, 2014 to June 30th, 2014 and are additional to what would
have occurred in the baseline scenario. The following breakdown of those emission reductions for the
years 2012 and 2013 and up to June 30th, 2014 is fairly stated (in units of CO2e):
Year
CO2
CH4
N2O
Total
2012
1016
(6)
0
1010
2013
2413
(6)
6
2413
January
5660
st,
1
2014
to
June
th
30 , 2014
(5)
24
5679
Note: Other GHG such as PFC, HFC and SF6 are not accounted for because they are not specific to
Natural gas and electricity consumptions
Tél:514-891-6799;
Restricted usage and confidentiality
This verification report is produced to be used by the management of Centre de Santé et de Services sociaux
du Nord de Lanaudière and parties interested in the above described GHG emissions reduction project.
Reliance on the conclusions of this verification report for any other usage may not be suitable.
The quantification report entitled ‘’ Greenhouse Gas Project Report – Energy Efficiency projects at CSSS Nord de
Lanaudière – January 1st, 2012 to June 30th, 2014 and dated October 7th, 2014 is an integral part of this
verification report and should in no circumstances be separated from it.
This verification report and the supporting work files are kept confidential and are available to the client on
request and will not be disclosed to anyone else unless compelled by law. They will be safeguarded for
10 years after which period they will be safely destroyed.
Roger Fournier, CPA, CA
Lead Verifier
Greenfield Park, October 9th, 2014
Tél:514-891-6799;
Appendix 1
Conflict of Interest Review
Client Name : Centre de Santé et de Services sociaux du Nord de Lanaudière
Report Identification: Verification Report on a GHG Reduction project – ‘’Fuel efficiency measures and fuel switching’’
Date of report: October 9th, 2014
Professional: Roger Fournier CPA, CA, Lead Verifier
I confirm the following:
Independence
I remained independent of the activity being verified, and free from bias and conflict of interest and I maintained objectivity
throughout the verification to ensure that the findings and conclusions will be based on objective evidence generated during the
verification
Ethical conduct
I have demonstrated ethical conduct through trust, integrity, confidentiality and discretion throughout the verification process
Fair presentation
I have reflected truthfully and accurately verification activities, findings, conclusions and reports.
I have reported significant obstacles encountered during the verification process, as well as unresolved, diverging opinion with the
responsible party and the client
Due professional care
I have exercised due professional care and judgment in accordance with the importance of the task performed and the confidence
placed by clients and intended users.
I have the necessary skills and competences to undertake the verification
-------------------------------------
October 9th, 2014
-----------------------------
Tél:514-891-6799;
APPENDIX 2
Tél:514-891-6799;
Greenhouse Gas Project Report
Energy Efficiency Projects at CSSS Nord de Lanaudière
January 1st 2012 to June 30th, 2014
Project proponent:
Centre de Santé et de Services sociaux
du Nord de Lanaudière
Saint-Charles-Borromée (Québec)
J6E 6J2
Prepared by:
National Ecocredit
1100, René-Lévesque West Bvd, Suite 1310
Montréal (Québec)
H3B 4N4
October 7th, 2014
TABLE OF CONTENT
TABLE OF CONTENT .................................................................................................... ii
LIST OF TABLES ........................................................................................................... iii
ABBREVIATIONS .......................................................................................................... iv
SOMMAIRE EXÉCUTIF ................................................................................................ 5
1.
INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................ 1
2.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION............................................................................. 3
2.1.
Project Title ......................................................................................................... 3
2.2.
Objectives ........................................................................................................... 3
2.3.
Project Lifetime .................................................................................................. 3
2.4.
Type of GHG Project .......................................................................................... 3
2.5.
Location .............................................................................................................. 3
2.6.
Conditions prior to Project Initiation .................................................................. 4
2.7.
Description of How the Project Will Achieve GHG Emission Reductions or
Removal Enhancements ..................................................................................... 4
2.8.
Project Technologies, Products, Services and Expected Level of Activity ........ 4
2.9.
Aggregate GHG Emission Reductions and Removal Enhancements likely to
Occur from the GHG Project.............................................................................. 5
2.10.
Identification of Risks ......................................................................................... 5
2.11.
Roles and Responsibilities .................................................................................. 6
2.11.1.
2.11.2.
2.11.3.
2.11.4.
Project Proponent and Representative....................................................... 6
Monitoring and Data Collection ................................................................ 6
Quantification and Reporting Responsible Entity ..................................... 6
Authorized Project Contact ....................................................................... 7
2.12.
Project Eligibility under the GHG Program ........................................................ 7
2.13.
Environmental Impact Assessment ..................................................................... 7
2.14.
Stakeholder Consultations and Mechanisms for On-going Communication ...... 7
2.15.
Detailed Chronological Plan ............................................................................... 7
2.16.
Ownership ........................................................................................................... 8
3.
SELECTION OF THE BASELINE SCENARIO AND ASSESSMENT OF
ADDITIONALITY ........................................................................................................... 9
4.
IDENTIFICATION AND SELECTION OF GHG SOURCES, SINKS
AND RESERVOIRS ....................................................................................................... 10
2012-2014 GHG Report
ii
5.
QUANTIFICATION OF GHG EMISSIONS AND REMOVALS ............ 12
5.1.
Baseline GHG emissions/removals................................................................... 15
5.2.
Project GHG emissions/removals ..................................................................... 16
5.3.
Emission reductions .......................................................................................... 16
6.
DATA MONITORING AND CONTROL ................................................... 17
6.1.
Fixed parameters ............................................................................................... 17
6.2.
Data and parameters requiring follow-up ......................................................... 18
7.
REPORTING AND VERIFICATION DETAILS....................................... 20
APPENDIX I: CSSSNL’s buildings .............................................................................. 24
APPENDIX II: Calculation examples for 2012 ............................................................ 25
APPENDIX III: Collected data ..................................................................................... 26
LIST OF TABLES
Table 2-1: GHG Emission Reductions Forecast ................................................................. 5
Table 2-2: Chronological Plan ............................................................................................ 8
Table 3-1: Barrier Assessment ............................................................................................ 9
Table 4-1: SSR Inventory ................................................................................................. 11
Table 5-1Commercial/Institutional Energy use ................................................................ 13
Table 7-1: Baseline Scenario GHG Emissions 2012-2014 by Sources (t CO2e) .............. 21
Table 7-2: Baseline Scenario GHG Emissions 2012-2014 by Buildings (t CO2e) ........... 21
Table 7-3: Project Scenario GHG Emissions 2012-2014 by Sources (t CO2e) ................ 22
Table 7-4: Project Scenario GHG Emissions 2012-2014 by Buildings (t CO2e) ............. 22
Table 7-5: GHG Emission Reductions 2012-2014 by Sources (t CO2e) .......................... 23
Table 7-6: GHG Emission Reductions 2012-2014 by Buildings (t CO2e) ....................... 23
Table 0-1 : Collected data for CHRDL building .............................................................. 26
Table 0-2 : Collected data for CSE building ..................................................................... 26
Table 0-3 : Collected data for CH St-Antoine-de-Padoue building .................................. 26
iii
ABBREVIATIONS
BS:
CDM:
CO2:
CH4:
N2O:
CO2e:
CSA:
EF:
EPA :
HDD:
GHG:
GES:
ISO:
IPCC:
kWh:
PS:
SSR:
t:
VER:
Baseline Scenario (GHG Emission Source)
Clean Development Mechanism
Carbon dioxide
Methane
Nitrous oxide
Carbon dioxide equivalent (usually expressed in metric tons)
Canadian Standards Association
Emission Factor
Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA)
Heating degree day
Greenhouse gases
Gaz à effet de serre
International Organization for Standardization
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change
Kilowatt hour
Project Scenario (GHG emission source)
Source, Sink and Reservoir
Ton (metric)
Verified Emission Reduction
iv
SOMMAIRE EXÉCUTIF
(Please note that the remainder of the document is in English)
Le Centre de Santé et de Services Sociaux (CSSS) du Nord de Lanaudière a depuis
quelques années mis en place des projets permettant une réduction d’émission de gaz à
effet de serre. La principale mesure est l’implantation de la géothermie et d’un réseau
basse température de chauffage pour ses deux plus grands bâtiments. La chaleur captée
dans le sol est réinjectée dans le système central de chauffage ce qui diminue la
consommation de l’hôpital en énergie fossile.
Cette source d’énergie renouvelable va contribuer au bilan positif en termes de réductions
d’émission de GES de l’hôpital.
Le projet et les réductions d’émissions de GES seront enregistrés au Registre des GES
ÉcoProjets®. Ces réductions sont obtenues et leur quantification effectuée suivant les
principes et lignes directrices de la norme ISO 14064-2 tel que stipulé par le Registre des
GES ÉcoProjets®. La méthodologie employée à la quantification provient du CDM dont
le titre est “Energy efficient and fuel switching measures for buildings”.
Voici donc les réductions d’émission de GES obtenues au cours des cinq dernières
années :
Année
2012
2013
2014
(jusqu’au 30 juin)
TOTAL
Réductions
(tCO2e)
1010
2413
5679
9102
v
1. INTRODUCTION
The CSSS Nord de Lanaudière (CSSSNL) provides several services to the community.
The CSSS is responsible of the organization, coordination and offers of health services
and social services in its territory.
The CSSS Nord de Lanaudière has shown willingness to reduce its carbon footprint.
More specifically, concrete actions have been taken to lower the building’s energy
consumption. Mostly related the heating system, the projects allow significant
greenhouse gas emission reductions.
Several energy measures have been implemented on the five buildings of CSSSNL. Three
of those buildings present some significant emissions reductions and are taken into
account in this report.
This GHG report is presented in a format that meets the requirements of the CSA’s GHG
CleanProjects® Registry and the ISO 14064-2 guidelines and principles:
 Relevance
All relevant GHG sources are meticulously selected and presented in section 4. A precise
methodology is used along with project specific parameters values.
 Completeness
A complete assessment of GHG sources is made and all GHG types are considered in the
applied quantification methodology. Complete information regarding project
implementation, activities and GHG quantification is given through this GHG report.
 Consistency
Chosen quantification methodology is appropriate for CSSSNL’s specific projects.
Established baseline scenario, as explained in section 3, is consistent with the project
level of activity related to the heating needs of the buildings.
 Accuracy
Calculation uncertainties are kept as small as possible.
 Transparency
Project related information is transparently communicated through this document so that
the intended user knows what the important data are, how they are collected and how the
project actually leads to GHG emission reductions. Data monitoring and GHG emission
reductions calculation are clearly detailed in order to provide the reader sufficient
information to allow the user to confidently make decisions.
1
 Conservativeness
GHG emission reductions are not overestimated. When accuracy is jeopardized because
of assumptions, conservative choices are made to make sure that GHG reductions are not
overestimated.
This report will be made available for public consultation. It is intended to serve as a
transparent reference document to support the prospection of potential verified emission
reductions (VER) buyers.
2
2. PROJECT DESCRIPTION
2.1.
Project Title
Energy Efficiency Projects at Centre de Santé et services sociaux du Nord de Lanaudière.
2.2.
Objectives
The objective of this project is to lower the total amount of GHG emitted at the various
buildings of CSSSNL from an innovative heat recovery system.
2.3.
Project Lifetime
The implementation of the first measures started in 2011 and was completed in the same
year; therefore the project start date is January 1st 2012. In theory, the project ends when
the equipment used for the project has reached the end of its useful life or when the
principle of additionality ceases to be respected. It is reasonable to assume that these
conditions will be respected for a minimum of 10 years. The grouped project has a
claiming period starting on January 1st 2012 and should end December 31st 2021.
2.4.
Type of GHG Project
The project falls under the category “Energy consumption reduction “. The project
activities are mainly the implementation of geothermal energy and various energy
efficiency measures. These include but are not limited to: modulation of stove-hood
filters, efficiency review of HVCA systems, implementation of condensing boilers, and
more efficient steam boilers.
2.5.
Location
The CSSSNL has various buildings on the North of Lanaudière region. Addresses of
these five buildings are provided in Appendix I. However, main project activities occur in
three of these buildings, taken into account in this report.
Centre Hospitalier Régional de Lanaudière (CHRDL)
J6E 6J2
Latitude: 46°02'18.0"N
Longitude: 73°27'19.8"W
Centre d'hébergement St-Eusèbe (CSE)
585 boul. Manseau,
Joliette (Québec)
J6E 3E5
3
Centre d'hébergement St-Antoine-de-Padoue (CH Saint-Antoine-de-Padoue)
521 rue St-Antoine,
St-Lin-Laurentides (Québec)
J0R 1C0
2.6.
Conditions prior to Project Initiation
Before 2012, all of these building were heated by electricity, natural gas and heating oil.
2.7.
Description of How the Project Will Achieve GHG Emission
Reductions or Removal Enhancements
The GHG emission reductions result from implementation of geothermal energy and
several energy efficiency measures. These reduce the overall demand for external energy
to meet the same building needs. The beneficial outcome is a lower consumption of fossil
fuel.
2.8.
Project Technologies, Products, Services and Expected Level of
Activity
Project technologies installed in the various buildings are listed below 1 . The year of
installation is noticed.
Geothermal energy
and low temperature
heating system
Installation of
Condensing boilers
Stove-hood filters
modulation
HVAC systems
improvement
Roof space insulation
improvement
Installation of an
efficient steam boiler
New ventilation
systems
Heating systems
improvement
CH Région de
Lanaudière
CH
Saint-Eusèbe
CH Saint-Antoinede-Padoue
2012
2011
-
2012
2011
-
2012
2011
2012
2012
2011
2012
2012
-
-
2013
-
-
2012
-
-
-
-
2012
1
Rapport de faisabilité détaillée présentée par Enegere, May 6 th 2011.
4
2.9.
Aggregate GHG Emission Reductions and
Enhancements likely to Occur from the GHG Project
Removal
Table 2-1: GHG Emission Reductions Forecast
Year
2012
2013
2014
(until June 30th)
2015
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
2021
TOTAL
Expected Emission
reductions
Achieved Emission reductions
3100
4600
1010
2413
4600
5679
4600
4600
4600
4600
4600
4600
4600
44500
9102
Due to SPEDE program2, National Ecocredit cannot guaranty the availability of carbon
credits from 2015.
2.10. Identification of Risks
National Ecocredit is confident that the emissions reductions presented in the previous
section are representative of the actual emissions reductions. This emission reductions
report was written according to ISO 14064-2 Specifications Requirements for
quantification, monitoring and reporting of greenhouse gas emission reductions and
removal enhancements assertions. In order to minimize risks, the methodology and GHG
emission factors were selected based on their completeness and their international
recognition.
One risk is that the project, for one reason or another, had ceased to respect the principle
of additionality over its course. As a result, the project would cease to be eligible under
the CSA’s GHG CleanProjects® Registry. To ensure that the principle of additionality
was respected throughout the project, the following was checked:
- The measures responsible for emissions reductions do not become common
practice or mandatory via new regulation
Emission reductions are not only the results of technological improvements. They are
also closely related to management methods. Should the energy efficiency measures not
be accompanied by management methods applied with the same rigor year after year, the
emissions reductions could be influenced negatively.
2
SEPDE : Système de plafonnement et d’échange de droits d’émission de gaz à effet de serre du Québec
http://www.mddelcc.gouv.qc.ca/changements/carbone/Systeme-plafonnement-droits-GES.htm
5
2.11. Roles and Responsibilities
2.11.1. Project Proponent and Representative
Centre de Santé et de Services Sociaux du Nord de Lanaudière (CSSSNL)
Conseiller en bâtiment
J6E 6J2
Tel: 450-759-8222 poste 4465
[email protected]
2.11.2. Monitoring and Data Collection
CSSSNL is responsible for project implementation and data monitoring. Data are
provided by Mr. Mathieu Desmarais.
Conseiller en bâtiment
Tel: 450-759-8222 poste 4465
[email protected]
2.11.3. Quantification and Reporting Responsible Entity
National Ecocredit is a firm specialized in non-traditional corporate financing. An
expertise has been developed in the quantification of GHG emissions. Services are
offered for GHG inventory, GHG emissions reduction project implementation, GHG
markets advising, regulatory requirements and much more.
Camille Orthlieb works at National Ecocredit as a carbon credits advisor. She has an
environmental engineering Master degree from Ecole Polytechnique Fédérale de
Lausanne, Switzerland. Before joining National Ecocredit, she worked from 2012 to 2013
with an engineering company, specialized on building energy efficiency.
Camille Orthlieb
Carbon credits advisor
National Ecocredit
[email protected]
514 871 5335 ext. 305
6
2.11.4. Authorized Project Contact
Karine Desjardins has the signing authority for National Ecocredit. She is authorized by
the project proponent to perform requests and administrative tasks regarding the project
registration.
Karine Desjardins
VP-Sales, Marketing and Structured Transactions
National Ecocredit
[email protected]
514 871 5335
2.12. Project Eligibility under the GHG Program
The project is eligible under the GHG CleanProjects® Registry. It is implemented
following the ISO 14064-2 guidelines and principles, is not attempted to be registered
under another GHG program and does not create any other environmental credit.
2.13. Environmental Impact Assessment
The nature of the project does not involve a required environmental impact assessment as
the impact on the environment is limited to the GHG emissions.
2.14. Stakeholder Consultations
Communication
and
Mechanisms
for
On-going
Mr. Mathieu Desmarais, Buildings advisor, is responsible for the communications with
the quantifier, the verifier and with all relevant stakeholders within the organisation and
outside the organisation. Over the course of the project no stakeholder communication
has generated results warranting a mention in this report.
2.15. Detailed Chronological Plan
First project activities were implemented in 2011 at Centre d'hébergement St-Eusèbe.
Project activities on the other buildings were implemented in 2012.
But the crediting period started in 2012 because project activities at CH St-Eusèbe do not
generate emissions reduction before 2012.
Monitored data is reported in this report since 2010 and will be ongoing for all the
duration of the project lifetime. In this report, GHG emission reductions are reported for
the period January 1st 2012 to June 30th 2014. GHG emission reductions will be reported
on a yearly basis for the remaining years of the project lifetime.
7
Table 2-2: Chronological Plan
Before GHG
Project Start
Date
During GHG
Project
Date
2010
Steps in Process
Start of data monitoring
2011-2012
Implementation of the first GHG project-related
measures
Project start date
1st GHG report covering the period January 2012June 2014
January 1st 2012
2014
Yearly basis
until 2021
GHG report on a yearly basis for the remaining
year of the project lifetime.
2.16. Ownership
CSSSNL has contracted and paid National Écocrédit for this quantification work,
therefore this GHG report is its property. CSSSNL is the rightful owner of the emission
reductions because the organisation is the instigator for the energy efficiency projects
related to this GHG reduction project, has paid for all measures implemented as part of
this project and is the owner of the building in which it was implemented.
8
3. SELECTION OF THE BASELINE SCENARIO AND
ASSESSMENT OF ADDITIONALITY
The baseline scenario is selected among alternative scenarios representing what would
have happened without the project. The alternative scenario that is most likely to occur is
selected as the baseline scenario. In this case, the project is voluntary. It aims to lower the
energy consumption and the GHG emissions. The scenario that is most likely to occur in
the absence of this project is that the equipment in place prior to the project activities
continues to be operated (status quo) and the associated GHG emissions for energy
consumption remain at the same level. An equipment change or retrofit is not required by
law and to maintain the status quo remains the least expensive and effort demanding
scenario.
The emission reductions achieved by the project are additional to what would have
occurred in the absence of the GHG project since it is voluntary and faces significant
investment barriers. Its implementation is highly motivated by the GHG emission
reductions potential.
Below is a summary of the barrier assessment that was performed to justify the choice of
the baseline scenario and the additionality of the project.
Table 3-1: Barrier Assessment
Potential Barrier
Law and regulation
Financial
Technology
Project Scenario
Baseline Scenario
Efficiency measures
No barrier
Status quo
No barrier
Significant investments
Existing barrier
Requires adaptation to new
technological environment
Existing barrier
Maintenance cost only
No barrier
No barrier
The baseline scenario is therefore determined as the use of heating equipment that was in
place prior to project initiation. Baseline energy consumption per unit of activity level
(m2 of heated area) is set as the years preceding the project start date. The baseline
scenario and the project scenario deliver the same level of services; both respond to the
building’s energy needs.
9
4. IDENTIFICATION AND SELECTION
SOURCES, SINKS AND RESERVOIRS
OF
GHG
The SSRs for the baseline and the project scenario are identified in the table below and it
is stated whether they are included or excluded from the quantification and whether they
are controlled, related, or affected SSR. The CDM “Energy efficiency and fuel switching
measures for buildings”3 methodology has been selected to evaluate the GHG sources,
sinks and reservoirs. According to this methodology, the energy baseline consists of the
energy use of the existing equipment that is replaced in the case of retrofit measures and
of the facility that would otherwise be built in the case of a new facility. Because the
hospital has implemented multiple activities which are not explicitly covered by the
methodology, the SSRs are also identified according to the expertise of the quantification
team.
GHG reductions are from the decrease use of fossil fuel to meet the energy needs for
heating. Fuel combustion represents the most important sources of GHG emissions
involved in this GHG emission reduction project. CO2, CH4 and N2O are three types of
GHG commonly resulting from combustion, CO2 usually being a more abundant product
of the reaction. No sources of PFC, HFC and SF6 have been identified in relation to the
GHG project. They therefore are excluded from the quantification to ease the
understanding. Although the methodology does not require specifically the quantification
of all of the three gases related to this project (CO2, CH4 and N2O), these were included
in the calculation for a more complete emissions' profile and to be in accordance with the
registry requirements which requires to present emissions by GHG types.
The SSR Inventory is presented in a table on the next page.
3
Energy efficiency and fuel switching measures for buildings, version 10.0, November 2007. Internet link:
http://cdm.unfccc.int/methodologies/DB/9QDGY435JDVTB8HN3VMI61K9XBWY30
10
Table 4-1: SSR Inventory
Source
Baseline Fuel extraction,
processing and
transport
Project
Incl/Excl?
Explanation
Type ?
Excluded This emission source is assumed to be negligible
Related
compared to the combustion.
Emissions from
electricity
production
Included
Controlled
Fossil fuel
combustion
Included An important source of greenhouse gases. Fossil
Controlled fuel covers natural gas and heavy fuel oil.
Fuel extraction,
processing and
transport
Excluded
Related
Emissions from
electricity
production
Included Electricity consumption stays significant before and
Controlled after the project.
Fossil fuel
combustion
Included An important source of greenhouse gases. Fossil
Controlled fuel covers natural gas and heavy fuel oil.
Electricity consumption stays significant before and
after the project.
This emission source is assumed to be negligible
compared to the combustion.
11
5. QUANTIFICATION
REMOVALS
OF
GHG
EMISSIONS
AND
The clean development mechanism’s (CDM) approved methodology "Energy efficiency
and fuel switching measures for buildings”4 was selected as the most appropriate one for
quantifying emissions reduction for this project. This category comprises any energy
efficiency and fuel switching measure implemented at a single building, such as a
commercial, institutional or residential building, or group of similar buildings, such as a
school, district or university. Examples include technical energy efficiency measures
(such as efficient appliances, better insulation and optimal arrangement of equipment)
and fuel switching measures (such as switching from oil to gas). The technologies may
replace existing equipment or be installed in new facilities. This category is applicable to
project activities where it is possible to directly measure and record the energy use within
the project boundary (e.g. electricity and/or fossil fuel consumption).
The quantification method consists essentially of multiplying appropriate emission
factors to the total consumption of different types of energy production with natural gas,
heavy fuel oil and hydroelectricity. However, the energy consumption is closely related
to the heating needs and therefore to the weather conditions of a given year particularly in
temperate regions like the province of Quebec. For accuracy purposes, the energy
consumption data used for the quantification were weather normalized with the heating
degree days method (HDD). Heating degree days method assesses recent energy
performance by comparing recent consumption with a past-performance-based estimate
of expected consumption. This process is used to identify excess consumption (or
overspent), and to quantify the savings from improvements in energy efficiency. Heating
Degrees Days are from Canada Environment.
The weather station used is l’Assomption
Nearer stations as Saint Jacques, Ste Beatrix and Joliette Ville have been evaluated but
they present some lacks of data.
4
Energy efficiency and fuel switching measures for buildings, version 10.0, November 2007. Internet link:
http://cdm.unfccc.int/methodologies/DB/9QDGY435JDVTB8HN3VMI61K9XBWY30
12
To determine the portion of energy that must be standardized with the AQME data, the
following table was used:
Table 5-1Commercial/Institutional Energy use5
End-use
Space heating
Water heating
Auxiliary equipment
Auxiliary motors
Lighting
Space cooling
Street lighting
Total
PJ
507,7
95,3
208,6
98,5
130,4
54,4
7,4
1102,3
%
46,06
8,65
18,92
8,94
11,83
4,94
0,67
Electricity consumption normalization
It can be estimated from the above table that approximately 60% of energy consumption
is attributed to heating. Here is the formula depending on the proportion of energy
demand for heating in commercial/institutional buildings used to perform the
normalization of the electricity:
Cn = Cr * [0.4 + 0.6 * (HDDref/HDDy)]
Where:
Cn :
Cr:
HDDy:
HDDref:
Normalized consumption of the year;
Actual consumption of the year;
Degree days of the year;
Degree days reference: 30 years standards (1981-2010)
The factor 0.4 and 0.6 used in the formula represents proportion attributed to heating.
This means that 40% of the electricity consumed is not related to heating and the
remaining 60% is standardized with the HDD method.
Oil and Natural gas consumptions normalization
The total quantity of natural gas and oil is normalized; we estimate that the quantities of
these fuels were consumed only for heating. Here is the formula for the normalization of
the natural gas or oil consumption:
Cn = Cr * (HDDref/HDDy)
5
http://oee.nrcan.gc.ca/organisme/statistiques/bnce/apd/showTable.cfm?type=HB&sector=com&juris=00&r
n=1&page=6&CFID=30966815&CFTOKEN=2d7806814ee250ec-C5EE5E1A-A125-7808AC5539AA80184624#sources
13
Another element which might greatly influence the energy consumption is the size of the
buildings. Changes in buildings dimensions must be monitored and the impact on the
energy demand must be assessed. Once normalized for weather impact, the consumption
is then multiplied by the ratio of the buildings’ areas in baseline year to buildings’ areas
in the year for which emissions are quantified.
No energy or piece of equipment is transferred from or to another activity not related to
this GHG project, no leakage is considered.
Calculation examples are available in appendix I.
14
5.1.
Baseline GHG emissions/removals
BEy = BEng, y + BEoil, y + BEelec, y
BEy =
Baseline Emissions in year “y” (t CO2e)
BEng, y =
Baseline emissions associated with natural gas combustion in year “y” (t
CO2e)
BEoil, y =
Baseline emissions associated with oil combustion in year “y” (t CO2e)
BEelec, y =
Baseline emissions associated with electricity consumption in year “y” (t
CO2e)
BEng, y = (EFngCO2 + EFngCH4 * GWPCH4 + EFngN20 * GWPN20) * BQNng, y / 106
BEoil, y = (EFoilCO2 + EFoilCH4 * GWPCH4 + EFoilN20 * GWPN20) * BQNoil, y / 106
BEelec, y = (EFelecCO2 + EFelecCH4 * GWPCH4 + EFelecN20 * GWPN20) * BQNelec, y / 106
EFngCO2, EFngCH4, EFngN20 = GHG Emission factors for natural gas (g / m3)
EFoilCO2, EFoilCH4, EFoilN20 = GHG Emission factors for oil (g / L)
GWPCH4 =
Global Warming Potential of methane
GWPN20 =
Global Warming Potential of nitrous oxide
BQNng, y =
Normalized quantity of natural gas consumed for the baseline scenario in
year “y” (m3)
BQNoil, y =
Normalized quantity of oil consumed for the baseline scenario in year “y”
(L)
BQNelec, y = Normalized quantity of electricity consumed for the baseline scenario in
year “y” (kWh)
BQNng, y = Cng, y * (0.4 + 0.6 * HDDy / HDDref ) * Ay/Aref
BQNoil, y = Coil, y * (0.4 + 0.6 * HDDy / HDDref ) * Ay/Aref
BQNelec, y = Celec, y (0.4 + 0.6 * HDDy / HDDref) * Ay/Aref
Cng, bsy =
Quantity of natural gas consumed in year “y” (m3)
Coil, bsy =
Quantity of oil consumed in year “y” (L)
Celec, bsy =
Quantity of electricity consumed in year “y” (kWh)
HDDref =
Average Heating Degree Days for the last 30 years (1981-2010)
HDDy =
Heating Degree Days for the year y
Aref =
Building’s area in baseline year
Ay =
Buildings’ areas in the year for which emissions are quantified
In order to be conservative, baseline emissions are rounded down.
15
5.2.
Project GHG emissions/removals
PEy = PEng, y + PEoil, y+ PEele, y
PEy =
Project scenario emissions in year “y” (t CO2e)
PEng,y =
Project scenario emissions associated with natural gas consumption in
year “y” (t CO2e)
PEoil,y =
Project scenario emissions associated with oil consumption in year “y”
(t CO2e)
PEele,y =
Project scenario emissions associated with electricity consumption in year
“y” (t CO2e)
PEng, y = (EFngCO2 + EFngCH4 * GWPCH4 + EFngN20 * GWPN20) * PQng, y / 106
PEoil, y = (EFoilCO2 + EFoilCH4 * GWPCH4 + EFoilN20 * GWPN20) * PQoil, y / 106
PEele, y = (EFele, CO2 + EFele, CH4 * GWPCH4 + EFele, N20 * GWPN20) * PQele,y / 106
EFngCO2, EFngCH4, EFngN20 = GHG Emission factors for natural gas (g / m3)
EFoilCO2, EFoilCH4, EFoilN20 = GHG Emission factors for oil (g / L)
EFele,CO2, EFele,CH4, EFele,N20 = GHG Emission factors for electricity (g / kWh)
GWPCH4 =
Global Warming Potential of methane
GWPN20 =
Global Warming Potential of nitrous oxide
PQng, y =
Project natural gas consumption in year “y” (m3)
PQoil, y =
Project oil consumption in year “y” (L)
PQele,y =
Project electricity consumption in year “y” (kWh)
In order to be conservative, project emissions are rounded up.
5.3.
Emission reductions
ERy = BEy - PEy
ERy =
Emission reductions in year “y” (t CO2e)
In order to be conservative, total emissions reductions are rounded down.
16
6. DATA MONITORING AND CONTROL
6.1.
Parameter
Description :
Value:
Unit:
Explanation:
Source:
Parameter
Description :
Value:
Unit:
Explanation:
Source:
Parameter
Description :
Value:
Unit:
Explanation:
Source:
Parameter
Description :
Value:
Unit:
Explanation:
Source:
Fixed parameters
EFng, CO2, EFng, CH4, EFng, N20
GHG emission factors associated with natural gas consumption
CO2 :1878 , CH4 : 0.037, N2O : 0.035
g /m3
CO2 : Emission factor for the province of Quebec, developed based on data
from chemical analysis of representative natural gas samples and an
assumed fuel combustion efficiency of 99.5%
CH4 and N20 : Emission factors for residential, construction,
commercial/institutional and agriculture, based on technologies typically
used in Canada.
National Inventory Report 1990-2012, Greenhouse Gas Sources and Sinks in
Canada, Part 2, Tables A8-1 and A8-2
EFoil, CO2, EFoil, CH4, EFoil, N20
CO2 emission factors associated with heavy fuel oil consumption
CO2 :3124 , CH4 : 0.057, N2O : 0.064
g/L
Emission factors for Forestry, Construction, Public Administration and
Commercial/Institutional, based on technologies typically used in Canada.
National Inventory Report 1990-2012, Greenhouse Gas Sources and Sinks in
Canada, Part 2, Tables A8-4
EFele, CO2, EFele, CH4, EFele, N20
GHG emission factors associated with electricity consumption
CO2 :2.9, CH4 : 0.0005, N2O : 0.0001
g /kWh
Electricity generation and GHG emission details for Quebec, greenhouse gas
intensity
National Inventory Report 1990-2012, Greenhouse Gas Source and Sinks in
Canada, Part 3, Table A13-6
GWPCH4, GWPN20
Global Warming Potential
CH4 : 25, N2O : 298
“Starting with the reporting of 2013 data, the facility greenhouse gas
reporting will be using the GWPs from the Fourth Assessment Report.”
(source below)
https://www.ec.gc.ca/ges-ghg/default.asp?lang=En&n=CAD07259-1#fnb2
17
6.2.
Data and parameters requiring follow-up
All data are communicated by Mr. Mathieu Desmarais. Data control system and
procedures are very limited since they mostly come from the energy suppliers data
acquisition and storage system. These external systems are deemed sufficiently safe and
reliable and allow for transparent communication of the relevant data. These are easily
verifiable. Therefore, no limited access data storage system or control procedures are
implemented.
Data values are inputs in the quantification model and are therefore critical for accuracy
of the GHG reductions estimation. Both calculations and data values are internally
reviewed by the quantification team from National Ecocredit. Reported data are the
responsibility of CSSSNL at final stage.
The different type of data collected for the quantification are reported in the tables below
along with the data source used and the procedures applied for use for the quantification.
Data
Description
Unit
Source of data to
be used
QA/QC
procedures to be
applied
Data
Description
Unit
Source of data
to be used
QA/QC
procedures to
be applied
PQng, y
Natural gas consumption in year “y”
m3
Natural gas supplier invoices. Collection from energy bills.
A gas flow meter continuously measures the inflow. Integrated data over a
certain period is reported on natural gas invoices. Data are collected
directly from energy bills. Supplier invoices are judged sufficiently accurate.
Paper copies of the invoices are stored and kept at the hospital for future
verification. The person responsible for sharing data with the quantification
team sends either a excel spreadsheet with the relevant data or the bills
directly. These data are stored electronically at National Écocrédit.
PQoil, y
Oil consumption in year “y”
L
Oil supplier invoices. Collection from energy bills.
Supplier invoices are judged sufficiently accurate. Paper copies of the
invoices are stored and kept at the hospital for future verification. The
person responsible for sharing data with the quantification team sends
either a excel spreadsheet with the relevant data. These data are stored
electronically at National Écocrédit.
18
Data
Description
Unit
Source of data
to be used
QA/QC
procedures to
be applied
PQele, y
Electricity consumption in year “y”
kWh
Hydro-Québec energy bills per building
Parameter
Description
HDDy
Heating degree-day in year “y”. It serves as a representation of the need for
heating of a given year.
°D
http://climate.weather.gc.ca/prods_servs/cdn_climate_summary_e.html
Unit
Source of data
to be used
QA/QC
procedures to
be applied
Electricity meter monitors the power usage. The meter is read on a monthly
basis and invoices reflect the usage of that period.
Data are collected directly from energy bills. Supplier invoices are judged
sufficiently accurate. Paper copies of the invoices are stored and kept at the
hospital for future verification. The person responsible for sharing data with
the quantification team sends either a excel spreadsheet with the relevant
data. These data are stored electronically at National Écocrédit.
The data comes directly from Environment Canada and is considered the
most accurate available.
19
7. REPORTING AND VERIFICATION DETAILS
The project plan and report is prepared in accordance with ISO 14064-2 standard and the
GHG CleanProjects® Registry program requirements. The methodology that is used, the
choice of region specific emission factors and a rigorous monitoring plan allow for a
reasonably low level of uncertainty. National Ecocredit is confident that the emission
reductions are not overestimated and that the numbers of emission reductions that are
reported here are real and reflect the actual impacts of the project.
The GHG report is prepared in accordance with ISO 14064-2 and GHG CleanProjects®
Registry requirements. Emission reductions are verified by an independent third party to
a reasonable level of assurance. The verification firm for this reporting period has
proceeded in conformance with ISO 14064-3. Emission reductions are reported here for
the period January 1st, 2012 – June 30th, 2014.
20
Baseline emissions are rounded down to the nearest unit.
Table 7-1: Baseline Scenario GHG Emissions 2012-2014 by Sources (t CO2e)
Electricity
Natural gas
Heavy fuel oil
Year
CO2
CH4 N2O
CO2
CH4 N2O
CO2
CH4
N2O
2012
48
0
0
6898
2
39
106
0
0
2013
51
0
0
7538
3
40
116
0
0
2014
57
0
0
8629
3
46
134
0
0
th
(until June 30 )
Total
156
0
0
23065
8
125
356
0
0
Table 7-2: Baseline Scenario GHG Emissions 2012-2014 by Buildings (t CO2e)
CHRDL
CSE
Year
CO2
CH4 N2O Subtotal CO2
CH4 N2O Subtotal
2012
2013
2014
th
(until June 30 )
Total
TOTAL
7093
7748
8869
23710
CH St-Antoine-de-Padoue
CO2 CH4 N2O Subtotal
Total
6387
6977
2
3
36
37
6425
7017
411
449
0
0
2
2
413
451
254
279
0
0
1
1
255
280
7093
7748
8033
3
43
8079
486
0
2
488
301
0
1
302
8869
21397
8
116
21521
1346
0
6
1352
834
0
3
837
23710
21
Project emissions are rounded up to the nearest unit.
Table 7-3: Project Scenario GHG Emissions 2012-2014 by Sources (t CO2e)
Electricity
Natural gas
Heavy fuel oil
Year
CO2
CH4
N2O
CO2
CH4
N2O
CO2 CH4 N2O
2012
60
3
3
5976
5
36
0
0
0
2013
63
3
3
4989
5
29
240
1
2
2014
th
(until June 30 )
35
3
3
2646
4
16
479
1
3
Total
158
9
9
13611
14
81
719
2
5
Table 7-4: Project Scenario GHG Emissions 2012-2014 by Buildings (t CO2e)
CHRDL
CSE
Year
CO2
CH4 N2O Subtotal
CO2
CH4 N2O Subtotal
2012
5596
4
34
5634
148
2
2
152
2013
4844
5
29
4878
175
2
2
179
2014
th
2852
4
18
2874
142
2
2
146
(until June 30 )
Total
13292
13
81
13386
465
6
6
477
TOTAL
6083
5335
3190
14608
Total
292
273
2
2
3
3
297
278
6083
5335
166
731
2
6
2
8
170
745
3190
14608
22
Table 7-5: GHG Emission Reductions 2012-2014 by Sources (t CO2e)
Electricity
Natural gas
Year
CO2
CH4
N2O
CO2
CH4
N2O
2012
-12
-3
-3
922
-3
3
2013
2014
th
(until June 30 )
Total
Heavy fuel oil
CO2
CH4
N2O
106
0
0
1010
-12
-3
-3
2549
-2
11
-124
-1
-2
2413
22
-3
-3
5983
-1
30
-345
-1
-3
5679
-2
-9
-9
9454
-6
44
-363
-2
-5
9102
Table 7-6: GHG Emission Reductions 2012-2014 by Buildings (t CO2e)
CHRDL
CSE
Year
CO2
CH4 N2O Subtotal
CO2
CH4 N2O
2012
791
-2
2
791
263
-2
0
2013
2133
-2
8
2139
274
-2
0
2014
5181
-1
25
5205
344
-2
0
th
(until June 30 )
Total
TOTAL
8105
-5
35
8135
881
-6
0
Subtotal
261
272
-38
-2
-2
-42
6
-2
-2
2
Total
1010
2413
342
135
-2
-1
132
5679
875
103
-6
-5
92
9102
23
APPENDIX I: CSSSNL’s buildings
Buildings taken into account in the quantification
Centre Hospitalier Régional de Lanaudière (CHRDL)
Adresse: 1000 boul. Ste-Anne, St-Charles-Borromée
46°02'18.6"N 73°27'20.8"W
Centre d'hébergement St-Eusèbe
Adresse: 585 boul. Manseau, Joliette
46°01'23.6"N 73°26'30.4"W
Centre d'hébergement St-Antoine-de-Padoue
Adresse: 521 rue St-Antoine, St-Lin-Laurentides
45°51'13.7"N 73°45'13.6"W
Other buildings where some energy efficiency measures have been made.
Some emission reductions, but not enough to take into account in the quantification.
Centre d'hébergement St-Jacques
Adresse: 30 rue Ste-Anne, St-Jacques
45°57'01.8"N 73°34'13.7"W
CHSLD/CLSC Piedmont
Adresse: 895 route Louis-Cyr, St-Jean-de-Matha
46°13'29.1"N 73°31'35.0"W
24
APPENDIX II: Calculation examples for 2012
Some values are rounded for simplicity and visibility in this section and it may slightly
alter the results.
Baseline emissions6
BEy
= BEng, y
+ BEoil, y
+ BEelec, y
6425
44
6275
106
BEelec, y = (EFelecCO2 + EFelecCH4 * GWPCH4 + EFelecN20 * GWPN20) *BQNelec, y /10^6
44,00
2,9
0,0005
21
0,0001
310 15306425,7
BEng, y
= (EFngCO2 + EFngCH4 * GWPCH4
6275,00
1878
0,037
21
BEoil, y
= (EFoilCO2
106,00
3124
+ EFngN20 * GWPN20) * BQNng, y /10^6
0,035
310 3321193,79
+ EFoilCH4 * GWPCH4 + EFoilN20 * GWPN20) * BQNoil, y /10^6
0,057
21
0,064
310 34194,6678
BQNelec, y = Celec, y
(0.4 + 0.6
15306425,7 16 420 955 (0.4 + 0.6
* HDDy
/ HDDref)
* Ay
/Aref
4254,20
4836,2
82 821
82 436
BQNng, y
= Cng, y
* HDDy
/ HDDref
* Ay
/Aref
3321193,79
3 758 002
4254,20
4836,2
82821
82436
BQNoil, y
= Coil, y
* HDDy
/ HDDref
* Ay
/Aref
34194,6678
38 692
4254,20
4836,2
82821
82436
Project emissions7
PEy
= PEng, y
+ PEoil, y
+ PEele, y
5634
54
5580
0
= (EFele,
+ EFele,
*
+ EFele,
*
PEele, y CO2
CH4
GWPCH4
N20
GWPN20) * PQele,y /10^6
54,00
2,9
0,0005
25
0,0001
298 17 628 155
PEng, y = (EFngCO2 + EFngCH4 * GWPCH4 + EFngN20 * GWPN20) * PQng, y /10^6
5580,00
1878
0,037
25
0,035
298 2 951 686
PEoil, y = (EFoilCO2 + EFoilCH4 * GWPCH4 + EFoilN20 *GWPN20) * PQoil, y
/10^6
0,00
3124
0,057
25
0,064
298
0
Emissions reductions
ERy
= Bey
791
- Pey
6425
5634
6
In the calculation, emissions are calculated independently for each gas and rounded down
In the calculation, emissions are calculated independently for each gas and rounded down
7
25
APPENDIX III: Collected data
Table 0-1 : Collected data for CHRDL building
PQele, y
PQng, y
Year “y”
Electricity consumption Natural gas consumption
(kWh)
(m3)
2011
16 420 955
3 753 663
2012
17 628 155
2 951 686
2013
18 811 742
2 422 216
2014
10 033 316
1 172 542
th
(until June 30 )
Table 0-2 : Collected data for CSE building
PQele, y
PQng, y
Year “y”
(kWh)
(m3)
2010
995042
248071
2011
1023092
224467
2012
1531640
75954
2013
1596688
90240
2014
th
702240
73562
(until June 30 )
Table 0-3 : Collected data for CH St-Antoine-de-Padoue building
PQele, y
PQng, y
Year “y”
(kWh)
(m3)
2011
1 067 287
152 959
2012
944 471
153 610
2013
983 034
143 613
2014
th
480 936
87 256
(until June 30 )
PQoil, y
Oil consumption
(L)
38 692
0
76 643
153 161
PQoil, y
Oil consumption
(L)
0
0
0
0
0
PQoil, y
Oil consumption
(L)
0
0
0
0
26

Centre de Santé et de Services sociaux du Nord de Lanaudière

Transcription

Similar documents

Employment... in your neighbourhood!

rhizomatous tall fescue - Greenhorizons Sod Farms

BLJC 2011 Sustainability Report Final_3

Family Physician

Alexander Palmestål Portfolio 2016 alexanderpalmestal.com

Centrale de chauffage de Chicoutimi SENC

960529 Walther Faltsysteme UM WA 15 JR en.cdr

Commission scolaire Marguerite-Bourgeoys

With the Orchestre symphonique de Québec Conducted by Airat

Pierre-Le Gardeur Hospital PDF 1MB

the complete Quebec experience!

Commission Scolaire Marguerite

Centrale de chauffage de Chicoutimi S.E.N.C.