Serres Jardins-Nature

Transcription

Verification report on a Greenhouse Gas Emissions (“GHG”)
reduction project – Biomass boilers used for greenhouse heat
generation at Serres Jardins-Nature
November 1, 2013
November 1, 2013
Raymond Chabot Grant Thornton LLP
Suite 2000
National Bank Tower
600 De La Gauchetière Street West
Montréal, Quebec H3B 4L8
Mr. François Bouchard
General Manager
200 Perron Boulevard East
New Richmond (Québec) G0C 2B0
Telephone: 514-878-2691
Fax: 514-878-2127
www.rcgt.com
Dear Sir:
Subject: Verification report on a Greenhouse Gas Emissions (“GHG”) reduction project –
Biomass boilers used for greenhouse heat generation at Serres Jardins-Nature
Enclosed herewith is our verification report on a GHG emissions reduction project performed at
200 Perron Boulevard East, New Richmond, (Québec), G0C 2B0.
The quantification report that is subject to our verification is included in Appendix 1.
Please do not hesitate to contact us for any additional information you may require.
Yours truly,
Chartered Professional Accountants
Lead Verifier
Christine Brosseau, CPA, CA
Partner
Roger Fournier CPA, CA
Member of Grant Thornton International Ltd
Verification Notice on the Declaration
of GHG Emissions Reductions
Raymond Chabot Grant Thornton LLP
Suite 2000
National Bank Tower
600 De La Gauchetière Street West
Montréal, Quebec H3B 4L8
Telephone: 514-878-2691
Fax: 514-878-2127
www.rcgt.com
General Manager
200 Perron Boulevard East
New Richmond (Québec) G0C 2B0
Dear Sir :
We have been engaged by Serres Jardins-Nature (SJN) to perform the verification of SJN’s GHG
emissions reduction project as an independent third party verifier.
We have verified the accompanying greenhouse gas (“GHG”) emissions reduction quantification report
entitled Greenhouse Gas Project Report Period 2007-2011 (the “quantification report”), of the biomass
boilers used for greenhouse heat generation at Serres Jardins-Nature. This quantification report dated
June 12, 2013 is included, along with the related GHG assertions, in Appendix 1 of our report which is
intended to be publicly posted on CSA’s GHG CleanProjectsTM Registry. The present report is the first
verification report issued for this project. However, at the request of CSA’s GHG CleanProjectsTM
Registry for additional information, this report replaces a previous report issued on July 10, 2013.
Responsibilities
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.
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
SJN
and
the
materiality
threshold
has
not
been
reached
or
exceeded.
Member of Grant Thornton International Ltd
2
Level of assurance
It was agreed with SJN’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.
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. Our engagement also included:
 Assessing physical and technological infrastructure, processes and control over data.
 Evaluating the appropriateness of quantification methods and reporting policies used and the
reasonableness of necessary estimates made by SJN.
 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
on its own premises.
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 review form was completed by all participants to
this assignment (see Appendix 2). We also ensured we had the skills, competencies and appropriate
training to perform this specific assignment.
The work was performed by ISO 14064-3 trained professionals. Training was provided by the Canadian
Standards Association. This is a Greenhouse heat generation from biomass project that the selected lead
verifier is competent to undertake since, on top of his professional training, he has performed many
similar projects.
The auditor assigned to this audit work was:
 Roger Fournier, CPA, CA, Lead Verifier
Mr. Fournier is an ISO 14064-3 trained professional. He has issued more than 80 GHG reduction
project verification reports. The majority of which are registered on the GHG CleanProjectsTM
Registry.
Mr. Fournier was responsible for the verification work and ensured the production of this report.
The verification team has reviewed and understands GHG CleanProjectsTM Registry’s registrations
requirements.
1 CPA
auditor, CA public accountancy permit no. A115050
3
Serres Jardins-Nature is a leader of organic tomatoes culture in greenhouses; and the most important
producer of organic tomatoes in Canada.
The emissions reduction project
The project is located at 200 Perron Boulevard East, New Richmond, QC, G0C 2B0 and the
geographical coordinates are Lat. 48o09’03.8’’N Long. 65o 50’09.37’’W. SJN’s project consists in the use
of biomass to fuel a boiler to provide heat for its needs. Before the project, SJN used both light-fuel and
biomass for its boilers to meet its energy needs for heat generation. The project has started on January 1,
2007 and the emissions reduction initiatives were completed on December 31, 2011.
The main GHG sources for the project are electricity, light oil and biomass consumption. The various
gases involved at SJN are carbon dioxide (CO2), methane (CH4), and nitrous oxide (N2O).
The expected life time of this project, as per page 8 of the attached quantification report entitled
Greenhouse Gas Project Report Period 2007-2011, is 10 years.
The project was under the responsibility of Mr. François Bouchard, General Manager, who is the signing
authority in this matter and the person responsible for the data collection and monitoring.
Serres Jardins-Nature has implemented a monitoring system that aims at insuring that all installed
elements of the project that contribute to GHG emissions reduction are in operation constantly and
consistently.
As indicated in paragraph 2.15 of the attached quantification report, it is the declared intention of Serres
Jardins-Nature to issue a GHG report every year until 2016.
The quantification report
The quantification report was prepared by L2I Financial Solutions, 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 Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) AM0036 version 3 – Fuel switch from fossil fuels to biomass in heat
generation equipment has been used by the quantifier only for the selection of the GHG sources, sinks and
reservoirs to be taken into account for the quantification.
The approach that was used for the quantification of the GHG emission reductions was to compare the
emissions in the baseline scenario (Used oil) with those in the project (Biomass). 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 chosen are based on the National Inventory Report 1990-2010, Greenhouse Gas
Sources and Sinks in Canada and the IPCC 2006, Guidelines for National Greenhouse gases Inventories .
The verification work
Planning
At the planning phase of this verification assignment, the following points were reviewed with SJN’s
representatives: Major processes of SJN’s operations, comprehension of the different operation stages
with the purpose of assessing the complexity of the operation, SJN’s internal control with the purpose of
assessing its risk mitigation capacity and finally, emission sources and GHG involved.
This preliminary review resulted in the assessment of the following risks:
4
 The inherent risk which is associated with the complexity of the project and the task being
performed;
 The control risk which concerns the risk that the GHG project controls will not be able to prevent
or detect a material discrepancy; and
 The detection risk which concerns the risk that the verifier will not detect a material discrepancy that
has not been detected or prevented by the GHG project controls.
As a result of the assessment of the inherent and control risks, a materiality level was defined, a
verification program was designed to mitigate the detection risk and a sampling plan was developed
accordingly.
Assessing performance materiality
Materiality is an amount that, if omitted or misstated, will influence the reader of the report in his
decision making. Performance materiality is defined in the Canadian Auditing Standards as an amount,
set by the auditor at less than materiality to reduce to an appropriately low level the probability that the
aggregate of uncorrected and undetected misstatements exceeds the materiality.
We have assessed a materiality level based on the above definitions, using Raymond Chabot Grant
Thornton’s performance materiality determination system. This system considers the following
information:
 User expectations;
 Prior year’s measures of materiality;
 Industry standards;
 The entity’s concept of materiality;
 Our assessment of detection risks;
 Other entity specific information.
We have assessed performance materiality at 5% of declared emission reductions.
The inherent risk and the control risk were assessed at an acceptable level for verification purposes.
The detection risk, considering the verification program that was designed, is assessed at an acceptable
level for verification purposes.
5
Sampling plan determination
Standard sampling and testing procedures were the following:
 Documentation review: Quantifier’s calculations, purchasing volume reports, delivery slips;
 Interviews with key personnel: François Bouchard, General manager;
 Cross-checking of Quantification report’s calculations: The project emissions are based on the
quantity of biomass used over the period of the project adjusted for different levels of humidity.
Total usage was calculated on the basis of the total tonnage purchased over the period. 35% of
purchases were traced to delivery slips and purchasing volume reports. Humidity levels were
compared to boilers specification sheet, to suppliers declarations and to Serres Jardins-Nature’s
humidity tests;
 Reconciliation of Quantification report to worksheets: 100%;
 Sampling of 25% of GHG emissions was decided at the beginning of the mandate; we had to
increase our sampling to 35% of GHG emissions after we received the supporting documents for
our 25% sampling because those documents were incomplete;
 Description of relevant information systems used for data collection and monitoring.
Conclusion of planning
No outstanding issues remained unresolved after the preliminary review.
.
Consequently, we could proceed with the verification work.
Execution
A draft of the quantification report was submitted to us on October 19, 2012. Our initial review of the
documentation was undertaken on November 12, 2012 and a verification plan was prepared. We then
toured SJN’s premises on November 27, 2012. In doing so, we interviewed Mr. François Bouchard. We
subsequently received the final quantification report datedhis quantification report dated June 12, 2013.
Information systems
Each monitoring system that may have an effect on the data used for emissions reduction calculations
has been identified. The staff responsible for data input and reporting of these systems was interviewed
and the control procedures were described and assessed. Where deemed necessary, spot checking was
used to ensure the controls had been operating properly throughout the verified period. All reports used
in the calculation were reconciled to the calculations.
Because of the relative simplicity of the data collection and monitoring systems, and because the limited
number of calculations that are necessary to establish the emission reductions, it was deemed more
efficient and more accurate to substantiate and reconcile a larger amount of data and calculations in
order to ensure completeness and accuracy of data and calculations.
Assessing quantification methodology
We have assessed the appropriateness of using the CDM AM 0036 Version 03; Fuel switch from fossil
fuels to biomass residues in heat generation equipment, as a methodology. This methodology has been
chosen only for the selection of the GHG sources, sinks and reservoirs to be taken into account for the
quantification. The quantifier used his own methodology for the calculations of GHG reductions. We
also assessed the appropriateness of this methodology. We agree with the methodologies used for this
project. Because the quantifier used his own methodology, it must be considered as a deviation to
ISO 14064-2.
6
Findings
Findings were listed, valued and compared to our established materiality levels. No findings or
aggregates of findings exceeded the materiality level. All other findings were revisited at the conclusion
of the verification to determine if they should be aggregated to generate a request for correction.
During the course of our verification, we obtained all the necessary cooperation and documents required
from SJN management.
Criteria
1. The attached quantification report is in conformance with the requirements and principles of
ISO 14064-2.
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 calculations supporting the GHG assertion are sufficiently accurate to be considered fair and
should not cause any material discrepancy.
6. There are no competing claims to the ownership of the GHG project and the resulting emission
reductions or removals.
7. The project start date is accurate and the lifetime estimation of the project is fairly stated.
8. The quantification report has a low degree of uncertainty and the materiality threshold has not been
reached or exceeded.
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 except for the quantification methodology as
explained in the section entitled ‘’Assessing Quantification Methodology’’.
2. The approach and methodology used for the quantification are appropriate.
3. The baseline scenario is appropriate.
4. Serres Jardins-Nature’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 Serres Jardins-Nature.
6. To our knowledge, there are no competing claims to the ownership of the GHG project and the
resulting emission reductions or removals.
7. The quantification report has a low degree of uncertainty and the materiality threshold has not been
reached or exceeded.
7
8. The GHG emission reductions presented in the quantification report entitled Greenhouse Gas
Project Report Period 2007-2011 of the biomass boilers used for greenhouse heat generation at
Serres Jardins-Nature, and his quantification report dated June 12, 2013 are, in all material respect,
fairly stated at 16,702 tCO2e and are additional to what would have occurred in the baseline scenario.
The following breakdown of those emission reductions by vintage year is fairly stated:
Year
CO2
CH4
N2O
Total
2007
3,705
19
25
3,749
2008
3,132
16
21
3,169
2009
3,172
16
21
3,209
2010
2,505
12
17
2,534
2011
3,993
21
27
4,041
Total
16,507
84
111
16,702
9. The project start date is accurate and the lifetime estimation of the project is fairly stated.
Restricted usage and confidentiality
This verification report is produced to be used by the management of Serres Jardins-Nature 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 Period 2007-2011 and dated his
quantification report dated June 12, 2013, 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.
Lead Verifier
Partner
Montréal, November 1, 2013
Appendix 1- Quantification report
Greenhouse Gas Project Report
Period 2007-2011
Project proponent:
Serres Jardins- Nature
200, Boul. Perron Est,
New Richmond, Gaspésie (Québec)
G0C 2B0
Prepared by:
L2I Financial Solutions
2015, Victoria Street, Suite 200
Saint-Lambert (Québec)
J4S 1H1
June 12, 2013
TABLE OF CONTENT
TABLE OF CONTENT .................................................................................................... ii
LIST OF TABLES ........................................................................................................... iii
ABBREVIATIONS .......................................................................................................... iv
SOMMAIRE EXÉCUTIF ................................................................................................ 5
1.
INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................ 6
2.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION............................................................................. 8
2.1.
Project title .......................................................................................................... 8
2.2.
Objectives ........................................................................................................... 8
2.3.
Project lifetime and crediting period................................................................... 8
2.4.
Type of GHG project .......................................................................................... 8
2.5.
Location .............................................................................................................. 8
2.6.
Conditions prior to project initiation................................................................... 8
2.7.
Description of how the project will achieve GHG emission reductions or
removal enhancements ....................................................................................... 8
2.8.
Project technologies, products, services and expected level of activity ............. 9
2.9.
Aggregate GHG emission reductions and removal enhancements likely to occur
from the GHG project......................................................................................... 9
2.10.
Identification of risks .......................................................................................... 9
2.11.
Roles and Responsibilities ................................................................................ 10
2.11.1.
2.11.2.
2.11.3.
2.11.4.
Project proponent and representative ...................................................... 10
Monitoring and data collection ............................................................... 10
Quantification and reporting responsible entity ...................................... 10
Authorized project contact ...................................................................... 11
2.12.
Project eligibility under the GHG program ...................................................... 11
2.13.
Environmental impact assessment .................................................................... 11
2.14.
Stakeholder consultations and mechanisms for on-going communication ....... 11
2.15.
Detailed chronological plan .............................................................................. 11
2.16.
Ownership ......................................................................................................... 11
3.
SELECTION OF THE BASELINE SCENARIO AND ASSESSMENT OF
ADDITIONALITY ......................................................................................................... 12
2007-2011 GHG Report
ii
4.
IDENTIFICATION AND SELECTION OF GHG SOURCES, SINKS
AND RESERVOIRS ....................................................................................................... 14
5.
QUANTIFICATION OF GHG EMISSIONS AND REMOVALS ............ 16
5.1.
Baseline GHG emissions/removals................................................................... 17
5.2.
Project GHG emissions/removals ..................................................................... 19
5.3.
Emission reductions .......................................................................................... 20
5.4.
Emission factors ................................................................................................ 20
6.
DATA MONITORING AND CONTROL ................................................... 21
6.1.
Data management and backups ......................................................................... 21
6.2.
Data controls and procedures ............................................................................ 21
7.
REPORTING AND VERIFICATION DETAILS....................................... 23
Appendix A ...................................................................................................................... 25
LIST OF TABLES
Table 2-1 Expected and Achieved Emission Reductions (t CO2e) .................................... 9
Table 3-1 Barrier Assessment ........................................................................................... 12
Table 4-1 SSR’s Baseline Scenario Inventory .................................................................. 14
Table 4-2 SSR’s Project Inventory ................................................................................... 15
Table 5-1 Emission factors summary ............................................................................... 20
Table 6-1 Monitored data.................................................................................................. 21
Table 7-1 Baseline scenario GHG emissions for 2007 to 2011 (t CO2e) ......................... 23
Table 7-2 Project scenario GHG emissions for 2007 to 2011 (t CO2e) ............................ 24
Table 7-3 GHG emission reductions for 2007 to 2011 (t CO2e) ...................................... 24
iii
ABBREVIATIONS
BS:
CDM:
CH4:
CO2:
CO2bio:
CO2e:
CSA:
EF:
EPA :
HDD:
GHG:
ISO:
IPCC:
kWh :
N2O:
PS:
SSR :
t:
VER :
Baseline Scenario (GHG Emission Source)
Clean Development Mechanism
Methane
Carbon dioxide
Biogenic carbon dioxide
Carbon dioxide equivalent (usually expressed in metric tons)
Canadian Standards Association
Emission Factor
Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA)
Heating degree day
Greenhouse gases
International Organization for Standardization
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change
Kilowatt hour
Nitrous oxide
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)
Serres Jardins-Nature est un leader de la culture biologique de tomates en serres et il est
le plus important producteur de tomates biologiques au Canada. Ces cultures se font en
terre et elles sont nourries avec des composts. Trois différentes variétés sont cultivées aux
Serres Jardins-Nature.
Avec le climat québécois, les serres ont besoin d’une source importante d’énergie pour
être chauffées et pour ce faire, Serres Jardins-Nature a choisi dès ses débuts des
alternatives vertes de chauffage. Dès la première année de production, Serres JardinsNature a opté pour la récupération de la chaleur résiduelle de la papetière voisine et d’un
chauffage d’appoint aux granules de bois. Suite à la fermeture de la papetière et suite à
l’augmentation de la superficie des serres, une nouvelle option de chauffage devait être
envisagée pour combler les besoins énergétiques, l’ajout d’une nouvelle chaudière à la
biomasse a donc été choisi. La biomasse nécessaire provient de résidus de bois de
différents fournisseurs. Le choix de cette option permet d’éviter l’utilisation de carburants
fossiles pour les besoins en chauffage des serres et ainsi d’éviter le grand volume de gaz à
effet de serre émis associé à cette technologie. L’utilisation de la biomasse permet donc
d’éviter l’émission d’un volume important de CO2.
Le projet et les réductions d’émission de GES seront enregistrés au GHG
CleanProjectsTM Registry. Ces réductions sont obtenues et leur quantification effectuée
suivant les principes et lignes directrices de la norme ISO 14064 tel que stipulé par le
GHG CleanProjectsTM Registry. La méthodologie “Fuel switch from fossil fuels to
biomass residues in heat generation equipment” 1 du CDM a été sélectionnée afin de
choisir les sources, puits et réservoirs de GES à inclure dans la quantification.
Les réductions d’émission pour les années 2007 à 2011 sont au nombre de :
Année
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
TOTAL
1
Réductions d’émission
(t CO2e)
3749
3169
3209
2534
4041
16702
Fuel switch from fossil fuels to biomass residues in heat generation equipment, (December 2009),
AM0036 - Version 03, Internet link:
http://cdm.unfccc.int/filestorage/C/U/O/CUOTDYZSL8EV3F0WR96MXKIJA271BQ/EB51_repan06_AM
0036_ver3.pdf?t=NzF8bWF6NjlrfDDt5wsyHBPStmYRNH81UTLG
1. INTRODUCTION
As a leader of organic tomatoes culture in greenhouses, Serres Jardins-Nature became the
most important producer of organic tomatoes in Canada. Those tomatoes, nourished by
compost, are grown in soil. Three different varieties are produced.
In Quebec due to the rigorous climate, greenhouses need to be heated. From the
beginning, Serres Jardins-Nature chose green alternatives to meet its needs for heating.
Since their first production year, Serres Jardins-Nature decided to recuperate the residual
heat of a paper mill and have a boiler fueled with wooden granules as an auxiliary heating
system. After the paper mill has been shut down and after the greenhouses area increased,
Serres Jardins-Nature opted for a biomass boiler for heat generation to meet its needs.
Wood waste is used as fuel and is provided by many suppliers of different wood
industries. Biomass emits way less than used oil that usually fueled boilers for
greenhouses in this area.
The CDM “Fuel switch from fossil fuels to biomass residues in heat generation
equipment”2 methodology has been chosen specifically for the selection of GHG sources,
sinks, and reservoirs to take into account for the quantification and for the calculation
methodology. Some differences from previously stated methodology have been
implemented and are discussed in section 4 and 5. The selection of the baseline scenario
and the assessment of additionality were discussed following the best practices and the
expertise of the quantification team. The selection of the most plausible baseline scenario
is done considering alternatives that would have really been implemented on-site. A
barrier analysis is performed and used to confirm the most plausible scenario and to give
argumentation for the additionality assessment.
This GHG report is presented in a format that meets the requirements of CSA
CleanProjectsTM 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.
2
6
 Consistency:
Chosen quantification methodology is appropriate for Serres Jardins-Nature’s specific
project. Established baseline scenario, as explained in section 3, is consistent with the
project level of activity related to heat generation for greenhouses.
 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 emissions reduction. 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.
 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.
7
2. PROJECT DESCRIPTION
2.1.
Project title
Biomass boilers used for greenhouse heat generation at Serres Jardins-Nature
2.2.
Objectives
The objective of this project is to lower the total amount of GHG emitted by using
biomass boilers fueled with wood waste to heat greenhouses instead of the common fossil
fuels boilers.
2.3.
Project lifetime and crediting period
Project started on January 1st 2007 and the ten-year crediting period extends until
December 31st 2016.
2.4.
Type of GHG project
Biomass energy activities are valid projects for the CSA CleanProjectsTM Registry.
2.5. Location
New Richmond, Gaspésie (Québec)
G0C 2B0
Latitude: 48° 9' 5.1408"N
Longitude: 65° 50' 35.091"W
2.6.
Conditions prior to project initiation
Before project initiation, Serres Jardins-Nature used the remaining energy contained in
hot water of the nearby Smurfit-Stone paper mill for heating purposes and had a
homemade modified boiler as auxiliary heating system. The paper mill closed in 2005
and Serres Jardins-Nature had to modify their existing boiler to supply all the energy for
heating purposes. In 2007, Serres Jardins-Nature expanded the greenhouse area and had
to find an additional heating system to meet their new needs. A biomass boiler was
chosen.
2.7.
Description of how the project will achieve GHG emission
reductions or removal enhancements
The use of biomass as a fuel generates way less GHG emissions than the use of fossil
fuels. Once combusted, biomass emits biogenic CO2. Biogenic CO2 emissions can be
defined as CO2 emissions from the combustion or decomposition of biological materials
other than fossil fuels. This type of biogenic CO2 is not accounted for as GHG emissions
for the quantification. By choosing biomass instead of the common used oil or any other
fossil fuels for boilers, Serres Jardins-Nature contributes to reduce GHG emissions.
8
2.8.
Project technologies, products, services and expected level of
activity
Besides the biomass boiler, a loader is used for on-site operations and the biomass is
transported from suppliers to Serres Jardins-Nature site. The loader is a 2003 John Deer
TC54H. Truck capacity varies with the moisture content of the matter: 15 tons of dry
matter to 33 tons of wet matter. The maximum overall truck capacity is 35 tons.
Since 2007, greenhouses area is still the same. From 2007 up to year 2011, production
may vary with no effect on achieved GHG emission reductions because the baseline
scenario is not based on a baseline year. One year is compared to itself with a different
technology (different fuel). For each year, emissions from the biomass boiler are
compared to emissions from a used oil boiler for the same heat generation needs.
2.9.
Aggregate GHG emission reductions and removal enhancements
likely to occur from the GHG project
This is the first GHG report for this project and GHG emission reductions are accounted
for years 2007 to 2011. A yearly GHG report will follow until 2016.
Table 2-1 Expected and Achieved Emission Reductions (t CO2e)
Year
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
2016
TOTAL
Expected Emission
Reductions
(t CO2e)
3 301
3 336
2 814
2 339
3 996
4 000
4 000
4 000
4 000
4 000
35 786
Achieved Emission
Reductions
(t CO2e)
3749
3169
3209
2534
4041
----------16702
2.10. Identification of risks
Wood waste relies on residues of different wood industries and the production is
influenced by the market demand. Fortunately, Quebec and other Canadian provinces
offer numerous different wood industries therefore wood waste supply is not an issue and
does not lead to an increase of those industries production.
There is a risk that the ten-year crediting period will be shortened if the common practice
becomes the use of biomass boilers for heating purposes, therefore there will be no GHG
project as it is presented and described in this document.
9
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.
2.11. Roles and Responsibilities
2.11.1. Project proponent and representative
General Manager
New Richmond, (Québec), G0C 2B0
(418) 392-2000 – 1 800 299-5479 #106
[email protected]
2.11.2. Monitoring and data collection
Serres Jardins-Nature is responsible for the project implementation and data monitoring.
Data are provided by Mr. François Bouchard.
General Manager
New Richmond, (Québec), G0C 2B0
(418) 392-2000 – 1 800 299-5479 #106
[email protected]
2.11.3. Quantification and reporting responsible entity
L2I Financial Solutions 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.
Joséanne Bélanger-Gravel works at L2I as a carbon credits advisor. She has a mechanical
engineering degree from Université de Sherbrooke and EPF-École d’ingénieurs de
Sceaux in France. She also is about to complete an engineering master degree in
renewable energies and a second one in environment with specialisation in sustainable
development. She is responsible for the quantification and the GHG report.
Joséanne Bélanger-Gravel
Carbon credits advisor
[email protected]
Mr. David Beaudoin works at L2I as director of environment and climate change services.
He holds a Bachelor's Degree in Biotechnological Engineering from the University of
10
Sherbrooke. During his career, Mr. Beaudoin has occupied several positions such as
Process Engineering Consultant, Project Manager in R&D and research assistant for
different environmental firms. He is the project team leader. He also performs reviews of
the monitored data and the GHG emission reductions calculation.
David Beaudoin, B.Ing.
Director, Environment & Climate change
[email protected]
450-923-9381 ext.31
2.11.4. Authorized project contact
Christine Lagacé is shareholder and vice-president of financial relations at L2I Financial
Solutions and has the signing authority for L2I. She is authorized by the project
proponent to perform requests and administrative tasks regarding the project registration.
Christine Lagacé, Adm.A.
Vice-president, Financial relations
[email protected]
2.12. Project eligibility under the GHG program
The project is eligible under the GHG CleanProjectsTM 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. François Bouchard, from general manager at Serres Jardins-Nature, is responsible for the
communications with the quantifier, the verifier and with all relevant stakeholders within the
company and outside the company.
2.15. Detailed chronological plan
Data monitoring for the project of the new biomass boiler started in 2007. The project ends in
2016. GHG emission reductions are reported in this report for year 2007 to 2011. A GHG
report will follow every year for the remaining of the 10-year crediting period, thus until
2016.
2.16. Ownership
The emissions reduction described in this report are a result of Serres Jardins-Nature
efforts to diminish their impact on the environment. By proceeding to a fuel switch in its
installation, the company prevents the emissions of GHG that would have otherwise been
11
produced if they would have only used fossil fuel. Serres Jardins-Nature is the rightful
owner of these reductions because it owns the equipment and installation and can provide
proof for biomass purchased as a fuel to heat the greenhouses, the main aspect of the
project.
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. Those alternatives were listed following a discussion
about their feasibility of implementation with the project proponent. Only the alternatives
that really could be implemented on-site are listed below, so three options are identified
as plausible scenarios to fuel boilers for greenhouses heat generation at Jardins Nature:
1. Light-fuel oil boiler
2. Used oil boiler (baseline scenario)
3. Biomass boiler (project scenario)
Two options are possible as the baseline scenario to heat greenhouses: (1) light-fuel oil
and (2) used oil boiler. The most common option used in Quebec for greenhouse heating
is option 1, light fuel oil boiler. Compared to used oil, light fuel oil price is expensive
therefore this option is not financially sustainable and this scenario wouldn’t have been
implemented at Jardins Nature. The only option that could have been implanted at Jardins
Nature is (2), a used oil boiler. Used oil boiler is a plausible scenario because used oil can
be provided in New Richmond, Gaspésie and sufficient volume are available. Even
though there is significant transportation distance, used oil is so affordable that it still
make a viable option. The biomass boiler (option 3) is the project scenario.
Table 3-1 Barrier Assessment
Potential
Barrier
Financial:
Capital
investment
Baseline Scenario
Project Scenario
Other Scenario
Used Oil Boiler
Biomass Boiler
Light fuel oil boiler
No barrier
No barrier
Financial:
Fuel cost
No barrier
Barrier
Significant Investment
required for additional
equipment and
infrastructure
No barrier
Technology
No barrier
Common
practice
Barrier
Not the most common
practice
Barrier
Additional equipment
and infrastructure
needed
Barrier
Not the most common
practice
Significant Barrier
No go due to high fuel
cost
No barrier
No barrier
12
The project scenario is additional because of significant technological and financial
barriers. Additional equipment and infrastructure are needed especially to haul and feed
biomass boilers and to store biomass3. For example, warehouse size and infrastructure
required for biomass storage is important and it is not needed for used oil boiler. Those
additional equipment and infrastructure generate a substantial capital investment. This
capital investment can be up to 4 times higher for biomass boiler implementation than it is for a
fuel oil boiler.4
3
Naturel Resources Canada, Les petites installations de chauffage à la biomasse : Guide de l’Acheteur
(2000). p. 17. Available at :
http://agroenergie.ca/pdf/Applications_commerciales/Guide_RNC_chauffage_biomasse.pdf
4
Idem 4. p.20 and 46
13
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 “Fuel switch from fossil fuels to biomass residues in heat generation
equipment”5 methodology has been chosen for the selection of GHG sources, sinks, and
reservoirs to take into account for the quantification. For sources to be included, CH4 and
N2O emission factors are known, therefore those emissions are accounted for in the
quantification and this is considered to be more accurate. The combustion of wood
biomass for heat generation is included in the baseline scenario as well as in the project
scenario. More explanation is available in the next section.
Fossil fuel combustion emits a large quantity CO2 and CH4 and N2O in smaller proportions.
Other GHG such as PFC, HFC and SF6 are not accounted for because they are not specific to
the combustion of fossil fuel, biomass and diesel. Excluded GHG types are not shown in
tables presenting the GHG emissions and reductions to ease the understanding.
Table 4-1 SSR’s Baseline Scenario Inventory
SSR - Baseline
Included /
excluded
BS1 - Fossil fuel
combustion in boilers for
heat generation
BS2 - Combustion wood
biomass for heat
generation
Included
Controlled
/ Related /
Affected
Controlled
Included
Controlled
BS3 - Uncontrolled burning
or decay of the biomass
residues
Excluded
Related
5
GHG
Explanation
CO2
CH4
N2O
CO2
CH4
N2O
A significant source of greenhouse
gases due to fuel combustion.
---
This emission source is assumed to be
negligible
compared
to
fuel
combustion. This is conservative.
This source is considered for the
project scenario, so it is accurate to
consider it.
14
Table 4-2 SSR’s Project Inventory
SSR - Project
Included /
excluded
GHG
Explanation
Included
Controlled
/ Related /
Affected
Controlled
PS1 - Combustion of wood
waste as biomass residues
for heat generation
CO2bio
CH4
N2O
PS2 - Off-site
transportation of wood
waste
Included
Related
CO2
CH4
N2O
A significant source of greenhouse
gases for the project due to
combustion. CO2 biogenic emissions
are not accounted for with the other
GHG emissions because wood waste
or biomass residues do not lead to
changes to carbon pools of the Land
Use, Land-Use Change and Forestry
sector as stated in the methodology.
Fossil fuel combustion is an
important source of greenhouse
gases.
PS3 - On-site fossil fuel
consumption
Included
Controlled
CO2
CH4
N2O
On-site fossil fuel consumption can
be a significant source of GHG
emissions.
PS4 - Biomass storage
Excluded
Related
---
This emission source is assumed to
be negligible compared to the
combustion for CH4 and N2O
emissions. CO2 emissions are not
accounted for because wood waste
or biomass residues do not lead to
changes to carbon pools of the Land
Use, Land-Use Change and Forestry
sector as stated in the methodology.
15
5. QUANTIFICATION
REMOVALS
OF
GHG
EMISSIONS
AND
The calculation methodology is based on the CDM “Fuel switch from fossil fuels to
biomass residues in heat generation equipment”6 methodology that has also been chosen
for SSR’s selection. As discussed in the previous section, CH4 and N2O emissions are
accounted for in the quantification and it is not requested in the methodology.
Another important change is in the calculations below, the efficiency of equipment for
biomass combustion is considered along with efficiency for the heat generation
equipment fired with fossil fuels. This is considered to be more accurate than not
considering biomass equipment efficiency as proposed in the referred methodology. Here
are more details about the differences between the referred methodology and the
calculation methodology applied.
For baseline emission calculation, as stated in the previous section, the source of
emissions from uncontrolled burning or decay of biomass residues are excluded, so no
calculation is needed. Also, the referred methodology proposed to find the heat generated
by biomass residues from the quantity of biomass residues used and the calorific value of
this biomass. In this project, the biomass boiler efficiency is accounted for, which
represents the real situation. The heat generated by biomass residues is calculated as
stated in the methodology; however an efficiency ratio is applied to consider that not all
of the heat is useful to the process and this tends to diminish the equivalent energy
needed for fossil fuel combustion. Therefore, this is more conservative because this
calculation methodology applied tends to consider the combustion of a smaller quantity
of fossil fuel, so less GHG emissions for the baseline scenario. Furthermore, to take
account for the use of biomass previous to the project start date, the calculation are done
as stated in the methodology, so the heat generated considered is the heat from the total
amount of biomass residues minus the heat equivalent to the amount of biomass residues
used before the project implementation. However, the quantification includes the
emissions of the combustion of biomass residues used before project implementation.
This is considered to be accurate considering the real situation where the biomass is
actually combusted. Considering efficiency of the biomass boiler (calculation
methodology implemented) decreases around 30% the reductions emissions from the
referred methodology. Considering the emissions from biomass combustion for the
baseline increases reductions of less than 0.07%. Overall, the calculation methodology is
more conservative than the one proposed in the selected methodology.
For project emissions, the same logic as the referred methodology is executed to find
emissions for biomass combustion and on-site diesel consumption, except in the
calculation applied the CO2, CH4 and N2O are considered. For transportation calculation,
it is a mix of both suggested ways of calculation that is performed because of the format
of data and parameters available. The number of trips and the average round trip distance
6
16
is used to find a total distance in km that is transferred into an amount of liters of diesel
consumed for transportation using the fuel economy of an average middle size truck.
Knowing the fuel consumption needed, emissions factor are directly applied to find GHG
emissions.
Finally, no leakage is considered, so emission reductions result from the subtraction of
project emissions from baseline emissions.
Calculation samples are available in Appendix A.
5.1.
Baseline GHG emissions/removals
BSTE = BS1E + BS2E
BSTE =
BS1E =
BS2E =
Baseline scenario total emissions resulting from the baseline scenario: use
of common boilers (metric tons CO2 eq);
Baseline scenario emissions resulting from the used oil combustion in
boilers (metric tons CO2 eq);
Baseline scenario emissions resulting from biomass combustion (metric
tons CO2 eq);
BS1E = [EFUO,CO2 + (EFUO,CH4 * GWPCH4) + (EFUO,N2O * GWPN2O)] * EoilBL / 1000
EFUO,CO2, EFUO,CH4, EFUO,N2O =
GWPCH4 =
GWPN2O =
EoilBL =
1000 =
GHG emission factors for used oil combustion (kg of
GHG/TJ);
Global Warning Potential of methane (21);
Global Warning Potential of nitrous oxide (310);
Used oil energy equivalent to project biomass
energy without energy from annual biomass use
before the project for the year ‘y’ (TJ);
1000 kg / ton;
EoilBL = Eoil,t – EoilBPJ,t
Eoil,t =
EoilBPJ =
Used oil energy equivalent to project biomass
energy for boilers for the year ‘y’ (TJ);
Used oil energy equivalent to energy from annual
average biomass use before the project (TJ);
Eoil,t = Eoil,u / EFFb,oil
EoilBPJ,t = EoilBPJ,u / EFFb,oil
Eoil,u =
Useful used oil energy for heating equivalent to
project biomass energy (TJ);
17
EoilBPJ,u =
Useful used oil energy for heating equivalent to
energy from annual average biomass use before the
project (TJ);
Used oil boiler efficiency (0.85)7
EFFb,oil =
Eoil,u = Ebio,u
EoilBPJ,u = EbioBPJ,u
Ebio,t =
EbioBPJ,t =
Useful biomass energy for heating for the project (TJ);
Useful biomass energy for heating for annual average biomass use before
the project (TJ);
Ebio,u = Ebio,t * EFFb,bio
EbioBPJ,u = EbioBPJ,t * EFFb,bio
Ebio,t =
EbioBPJ,t =
EFFb,bio =
Total biomass energy for the project (TJ);
Total biomass energy for annual average biomass use before the project
(TJ);
Boiler efficiency (0.70)8;
Ebio,t = WWM*HHVM / 1000
EbioBPJ,t = WWM*HHVM / 1000
WWM =
HHVM =
1000 =
Biomass wet weight at moisture content “M” (tons);
Biomass high heating value for matters at moisture content “M” (MJ/kg);
Unit conversion factor;
HHVM = HHVd*(1-M)
HHVd =
M=
High heating value for dry biomass – 0% moisture content (MJ/kg);
Biomass moisture content on a wet basis (%);
HHVd = HHV50 / (1-50%)
HHV50 =
50%=
High heating value for biomass at 50% of moisture content (MJ/kg);
Biomass moisture content associated with HHV50 on a wet basis (%);
BS2E = [EFWW50,CO2 + (EFWW50,CH4 * GWPCH4) + (EFWW50,N2O * GWPN2O)] * WW50BL / 1000
7
Natural Resources Canada, Help from RETScreen 4 software – Typical seasonal efficiencies of heating
systems (2012).
8
Goyette, J., Symposium Q-web – Valorisation de la biomasse forestière et des résidus de transformation,
(Avril 2008), p. 22, Internet Link : http://www.quebecwoodexport.com/biomasse/documents/Goyette.pdf
18
EFWW50,CO2, EFWW50,CH4, EFWW50,N2O =
GWPCH4 =
GWPN2O =
WW50BL =
GHG emission factors for wood fuel or wood
waste combustion (g of GHG/kg of biomass);
Biomass equivalent wet weight for matter at 50% of moisture content for the
1000 =
baseline scenario (TJ);
Conversion factor;
5.2.
Project GHG emissions/removals
PSTE = PS1E + PS2E + PS3E
PSTE =
PS1E =
PS2E =
PS3E=
Project scenario total emissions resulting from the project scenario: use of
biomass in boilers (metric tons CO2 eq);
Project scenario emissions resulting from the biomass (wood waste)
combustion in boilers (metric tons CO2 eq);
Project scenario emissions resulting from biomass transportation (metric
tons CO2 eq);
Project scenario emissions resulting from on-site fossil fuel consumption
(metric tons CO2 eq);
PS1E = [EFWW50,CO2 + (EFWW50,CH4 * GWPCH4) + (EFWW50,N2O * GWPN2O)] * WW50 / 1000
EFWW50,CO2, EFWW50,CH4, EFWW50,N2O =
GWPCH4 =
GWPN2O =
WW50 =
GHG emission factors for wood fuel or wood
waste combustion (g of GHG/kg of biomass);
Biomass equivalent wet weight for matter at
1000 =
50% of moisture content (TJ);
Conversion factor;
WW50 = DW / (1 - 50%)
DW =
50% =
Biomass equivalent dry weight – at 0% moisture content (tons);
Biomass moisture content associated with WW50 on a wet basis (%);
DW = WWM * (1 - M)
PS2E = [EFD,CO2 + (EFD,CH4 * GWPCH4) + (EED,N2O * GWPN2O)] * DQTy / 106
EFD,CO2, EFD,CH4, EFD,N2O = GHG emission factors for diesel combustion (g of GHG / L);
GWPCH4 =
GWPN2O =
DQTy =
106 =
Diesel quantity used for transportation for the year ‘y’ for a
supplier (liters);
106 g / ton;
19
DQTy = DTOT * FET
DTOT =
FET =
Total transportation distance for a supplier (km);
Fuel economy of the truck (L/km);
DTOT = DJN-S * 2 * Nrun
DJN-S =
2=
Nrun =
Transportation distance between Serres Jardins-Nature and supplier (km);
Round trip factor;
Number of runs for this supplier;
PS3E = [EFD,CO2 + (EFD,CH4 * GWPCH4) + (EED,N2O * GWPN2O)] * DQOy / 106
DQOy =
106 =
5.3.
Diesel quantity used for project on-site operations for the year ‘y’ (liters);
106 g / ton;
Emission reductions
TPERy = BSTE - PSTE
TPERy =
5.4.
Total Project Emission Reductions in year “y”
Emission factors
Table 5-1 Emission factors summary
Factor
EFUO
EFWW50
EFD
Gas
Value
Unit
CO2
73 300 kg/TJ
CH4
30 kg/TJ
N2O
4 kg/TJ
CO2bio
840 g/kg
CO2
0 g/kg
CH4
0.09 g/kg
N2O
0.02 g/kg
CO2
2663 g/L
CH4
0.14 g/L
N2O
0.082 g/L
Source
IPCC 2006, Guidelines for National
Greenhouse Gases Inventories, Vol.2, Ch.2,
p.2.17
National Inventory Report 1990-2010,
Greenhouse Gas Source and Sinks in Canada,
part 2, Table A8-26
National Inventory Report 1990-2010,
Greenhouse Gas Sources and Sinks in
Canada, Part 2, Table A8-11, p.199, HDDV,
moderate control
20
6. DATA MONITORING AND CONTROL
6.1.
Data management and backups
Data are compiled in excel files daily and are moved to Accomba, a management system
every month. Data are kept on a separated server which is managed by an expert external
firm. An employee from Serres Jardins-Nature brings back every night a backup on a
hardcopy and replaces the backup disk with a new one. The external firm verifies the
condition of the server every week.
6.2.
Data controls and procedures
Monthly financial statements can corroborate the validity of the data entered in excel files
and in Accomba management system. Every year, financial statements are verified by an
external firm to ensure the accuracy of the data kept over the year. If more procedures
and controls are done for a specific data or parameter, this information is included in the
table below under “description of measurement methods and procedures to be applied”
for the specific data or parameter.
Table 6-1 Monitored data
Data / Parameters
Data unit :
Description :
Source of data to be used :
Description of measurement
methods and procedures to be
applied :
Data / Parameters
Data unit :
Description :
applied :
Data / Parameters
Data unit :
Description :
applied :
WWM
Metric tons
Wet weight at moisture content M
Delivery orders
Data collection from delivery orders which include
weight, supplier and delivery date. Delivery orders
are signed by an employee from Jardins-Nature upon
delivery. Data are compiled in a log. Information is
verified with supplier invoices.
M
Percentage on a wet basis
Wet weight at moisture content M
On-site measurements
For 2007 to 2011, a conservative assumption is made
using 50% of moisture content. For 2012 and
onwards, on-site measurements will be done for each
supplier. Moisture content is evaluated from the
difference between the wet and dry weight.
Nrun
#
Numbers of run between Serres Jardins-Nature and
the biomass supplier
Delivery orders
Data collection from delivery orders which include
weight, supplier and delivery date. Delivery orders
are signed by an employee from Jardins Nature upon
21
Data / Parameters
Data unit :
Description :
applied :
Data / Parameters
Data unit :
Description :
applied :
delivery. Data are compiled in a log. Information is
verified with supplier invoices.
DJN-S
km
Distance between Serres Jardins-Nature and the
biomass supplier
Road distance to the supplier site
Road distance between the supplier and JardinsNature addresses calculated with an online map.
DQO
L
On-site diesel consumption
Supplier invoices
Data collection from bills.
22
7. REPORTING AND VERIFICATION DETAILS
The project plan and report is prepared in accordance with ISO 14064-2 standard and the
GHG CleanProjectsTM 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. L2I Solutions 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 CleanProjectsTM
Registry requirements. Emission reductions will be verified by an independent third party
to a reasonable level of assurance. Raymond-Chabot-Grant-Thornton will be the
verifying firm for this reporting period and will verify in conformance with ISO 14064-3.
Emission reductions are reported here for the year 2007-2011.
Table 7-1 Baseline scenario GHG emissions for 2007 to 2011 (t CO2e)
BS1
BS2
SousSousYear
CO2
CH4
N2O
total
CO2
CH4 N2O
total
CO2
2007 3741
32
63
3836
0
0
2
2 3741
2008 3153
27
53
3233
0
0
2
2 3153
2009 3195
27
54
3276
0
0
2
2 3195
2010 2544
21
43
2608
0
0
2
2 2544
2011 4057
34
68
4159
0
0
2
2 4057
TOTAL 16690
141
281 17112
0
0
10
10 16690
TOTAL
CH4
32
27
27
21
34
141
N2O TOTAL
65
3838
55
3235
56
3278
45
2610
70
4161
291 17122
23
Table 7-2 Project scenario GHG emissions for 2007 to 2011 (t CO2e)
PS1
PS2
SousSousYear
CO2 CH4
N2O
total
CO2
CH4 N2O
total CO2
2007
0
13
40
53
25
0
0
25
11
2008
0
11
34
45
10
0
0
10
11
2009
0
11
35
46
15
0
0
15
8
2010
0
9
28
37
33
0
0
33
6
2011
0
13
42
55
56
0
1
57
8
TOTAL
0
57
179
236
139
0
1
140
44
PS3
CH4
0
0
0
0
0
0
N2O
0
0
0
0
0
0
Table 7-3 GHG emission reductions for 2007 to 2011 (t CO2e)
TOTAL
CO2
CH4
N2O
TOTAL
Year
t CO2e t CO2e t CO2e t CO2e
2007
3705
19
25
3749
2008
3132
16
21
3169
2009
3172
16
21
3209
2010
2505
12
17
2534
2011
3993
21
27
4041
TOTAL
16507
84
111
16702
Jardins Nature
2007- 2011 GHG Report
24
TOTAL
Soustotal
11
11
8
6
8
44
CO2
36
21
23
39
64
183
CH4
13
11
11
9
13
57
N2O TOTAL
40
89
34
66
35
69
28
76
43
120
180
420
Appendix A
Calculation examples
These calculations are not round up or round down.
Baseline scenario calculation for 2007
= BS1E
+
BSTE
2007
3836,59 +
3836,59 =
=[
3836,59 =[
Before pj
Prject eq.
Supplier 1
Supplier 2
Supplier 3
Supplier 4
Supplier 5
Supplier 6
Supplier 7
Supplier 8
BS2E
3,72
BS1E
EFUO,CO2
+(
73 300,00 +(
EFUO,CH4
*
30,00 *
EoilBL
=
51,04 =
Eoil,t
EoilBPJ,t
EoilBPJ,t
=
3,97 =
EoilBPJ,u
Eoil,t
0,76
12,73
5,76
5,23
2,59
13,05
0,99
3,04
Jardins Nature
2007- 2011 GHG Report
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
55,01 -
EFFb,oil
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
EFFb,oil
0,65
10,82
4,90
4,45
2,20
11,09
0,84
2,59
EFUO,N2O
*
4,00 *
3,97
/
3,37 /
Eoil,u
GWPCH4 )+(
21 )+(
0,85
0,85
0,85
0,85
0,85
0,85
0,85
0,85
0,85
25
GWPN2O )] *
310 )] *
EoilBL
/
51,04 /
1000
1000
Supplier 9
TOTAL
10,85 =
55,01
9,22 /
Before pj
EoilBPJ,u =
3,37 =
EbioBPJ, u
3,37
Project eq.
Supplier 1
Supplier 2
Supplier 3
Supplier 4
Supplier 5
Supplier 6
Supplier 7
Supplier 8
Supplier 9
Eoil,u
Ebio, u
Before pj
EbioBPJ,u =
3,37 =
EbioBPJ,t
Project eq.
Supplier 1
Supplier 2
Supplier 3
Supplier 4
Supplier 5
Supplier 6
Supplier 7
Ebio,u
Ebio,t
0,65
10,82
4,90
4,45
2,20
11,09
0,84
2,59
9,22
0,65
10,82
4,90
4,45
2,20
11,09
0,84
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
0,85
0,65
10,82
4,90
4,45
2,20
11,09
0,84
2,59
9,22
*
4,82 *
EFFb, bio
70,00%
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
EFFb, bio
70,00%
70,00%
70,00%
70,00%
70,00%
70,00%
70,00%
0,93
15,46
7,00
6,35
3,14
15,84
1,20
26
Supplier 8
Supplier 9
Before pj
2,59 =
9,22 =
EbioBPJ,t =
3,70 *
13,17 *
WWM
*
460 *
HHVM
/
10,47 /
1000
1000
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
HHVM
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
1000
1000
1000
1000
1000
1000
1000
1000
1000
1000
4,82 =
Project eq.
Supplier 1
Supplier 2
Supplier 3
Supplier 4
Supplier 5
Supplier 6
Supplier 7
Supplier 8
Supplier 9
Ebio,t
0,93
15,46
7,00
6,35
3,14
15,84
1,20
3,70
13,17
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
WWM
Before pj
=
HHVM
10,47 =
HHVd
*(
20,94 *(
Project eq.
Supplier 1
Supplier 2
Supplier 3
Supplier 4
Supplier 5
Supplier 6
HHVM
10,47
10,47
10,47
10,47
10,47
10,47
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
HHVd
*(
*(
*(
*(
*(
*(
*(
70,00%
70,00%
89
1476
669
607
300
1513
115
353
1258
20,94
20,94
20,94
20,94
20,94
20,94
10,47
10,47
10,47
10,47
10,47
10,47
10,47
10,47
10,47
1 1 -
M
)
50% )
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
M
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
-
50%
50%
50%
50%
50%
50%
27
Supplier 7
Supplier 8
Supplier 9
10,47 =
10,47 =
10,47 =
Before PJ
HHVd
Project eq.
Supplier 1
Supplier 2
Supplier 3
Supplier 4
Supplier 5
Supplier 6
Supplier 7
Supplier 8
Supplier 9
HHVd
20,94 *(
20,94 *(
20,94 *(
1 1 1 -
50% )
50% )
50% )
1 1 -
50% )
50% )
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
50%
50%
50%
50%
50%
50%
50%
50%
50%
50%
=
20,94 =
HHV50
/(
10,47 /(
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
HHV50
/(
/(
/(
/(
/(
/(
/(
/(
/(
/(
20,94
20,94
20,94
20,94
20,94
20,94
20,94
20,94
20,94
BS2E
=[
3,72 =[
10,47
10,47
10,47
10,47
10,47
10,47
10,47
10,47
10,47
EFWW50,CO2 + ( EFWW50,CH4 *
0 +(
0,09 *
Project scenario calculation for 2007
= PS1E
PSTE
2007
86,73 =
PS1E
Supplier 1
=[
0,72 =[
-
+
51,61 +
PS2E
+
24,69 +
EFWW50,CO2 + ( EFWW50,CH4 *
0 +(
0,09 *
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
GWPCH4 ) + ( EFWW50,N2O *
21 ) + (
0,02 *
GWPN2O )] * WW50
/
310 )] *
460 /
1000
1000
PS3E
10,43
GWPCH4 ) + ( EFWW50,N2O *
21 ) + (
0,02 *
28
GWPN2O )] * WW50
/
310 )] *
88,60 /
1000
1000
Supplier 2
Supplier 3
Supplier 4
Supplier 5
Supplier 6
Supplier 7
Supplier 8
Supplier 9
11,94
5,41
4,91
2,43
12,24
0,93
2,86
10,18
PS1Ebio
Supplier 1
Supplier 2
Supplier 3
Supplier 4
Supplier 5
Supplier 6
Supplier 7
Supplier 8
Supplier 9
74,42
1239,98
561,61
509,51
252,20
1271,04
96,47
296,58
1056,86
WW50
Supplier 1
Supplier 2
Supplier 3
Supplier 4
Supplier 5
Supplier 6
Supplier 7
88,60
1476,17
668,58
606,56
300,24
1513,14
114,84
=[
=[
=[
=[
=[
=[
=[
=[
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
+(
+(
+(
+(
+(
+(
+(
+(
840
840
840
840
840
840
840
840
840
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
44,30
738,09
334,29
303,28
150,12
756,57
57,42
/(
/(
/(
/(
/(
/(
/(
/(
EFWW50,CO2bio
DW
0,09
0,09
0,09
0,09
0,09
0,09
0,09
0,09
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
21
21
21
21
21
21
21
21
88,60
1476,17
668,58
606,56
300,24
1513,14
114,84
353,07
1258,17
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
1000
1000
1000
1000
1000
1000
1000
1000
1000
1000
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
-
50%
50%
50%
50%
50%
50%
50%
50%
WW50
)+(
)+(
)+(
)+(
)+(
)+(
)+(
)+(
0,02
0,02
0,02
0,02
0,02
0,02
0,02
0,02
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
29
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
310
310
310
310
310
310
310
310
)] *
)] *
)] *
)] *
)] *
)] *
)] *
)] *
1476,17
668,58
606,56
300,24
1513,14
114,84
353,07
1258,17
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
1000
1000
1000
1000
1000
1000
1000
1000
Supplier 8
Supplier 9
353,07 =
1258,17 =
DW
Supplier 1
Supplier 2
Supplier 3
Supplier 4
Supplier 5
Supplier 6
Supplier 7
Supplier 8
Supplier 9
44,30
738,09
334,29
303,28
150,12
756,57
57,42
176,54
629,09
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=[
PS2E
176,54 /(
629,09 /(
WWM
89
1476
669
607
300
1513
115
353
1258
EFD,CO2
Supplier 1
3,66 =[
2663
Supplier 2
1,51 =[
2663
Supplier 3
1,24 =[
2663
Supplier 4
7,10 =[
2663
Supplier 5
4,13 =[
2663
Supplier 6
1,66 =[
2663
Supplier 7
1,19 =[
2663
1 1 -
*(
*(
*(
*(
*(
*(
*(
*(
*(
*(
+
(
+
(
+
(
+
(
+
(
+
(
+
(
+
(
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
EFD,CH4
50% )
50% )
-
M
*
GWPCH4
50%
50%
50%
50%
50%
50%
50%
50%
50%
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
) + ( EED,N2O
*
GWPN2O
)] * DQTy
/
1000000
0,14 *
21 ) + (
0,082 *
310 )] *
1359,36 /
1000000
0,14 *
21 ) + (
0,082 *
310 )] *
562,01 /
1000000
0,14 *
21 ) + (
0,082 *
310 )] *
461,24 /
1000000
0,14 *
21 ) + (
0,082 *
310 )] *
2636,59 /
1000000
0,14 *
21 ) + (
0,082 *
310 )] *
1534,00 /
1000000
0,14 *
21 ) + (
0,082 *
310 )] *
617,85 /
1000000
0,14 *
21 ) + (
0,082 *
310 )] *
440,38 /
1000000
30
Supplier 8
0,59 =[
Supplier 9
3,62 =[
DQTy
Supplier 1
Supplier 2
Supplier 3
Supplier 4
Supplier 5
Supplier 6
Supplier 7
Supplier 8
Supplier 9
1359,36
562,01
461,24
2636,59
1534,00
617,85
440,38
218,06
1344,16
DTOT
Supplier 1
Supplier 2
Supplier 3
Supplier 4
Supplier 5
Supplier 6
Supplier 7
Supplier 8
Supplier 9
5760,00
2381,40
1954,40
11172,00
6500,00
2618,00
1866,00
924,00
5695,60
PS3E
+
2663 (
+
2663 (
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
DTOT
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
DJN-S
=
[
5760,00
2381,40
1954,40
11172,00
6500,00
2618,00
1866,00
924,00
5695,60
960
24
70
266
250
24
93
39
49
EFD,CO2
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
21 ) + (
0,082 *
310 )] *
218,06 /
1000000
0,14 *
21 ) + (
0,082 *
310 )] *
1344,16 /
1000000
FET
0,236
0,236
0,236
0,236
0,236
0,236
0,236
0,236
0,236
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
+
(
0,14 *
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
EFD,CH4
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
Nrun
*
GWPCH4
3
49
14
21
13
55
10
12
58
) + ( EED,N2O
31
*
GWPN2O
)] * DQOy
/
1000000
2007
=
10,43 [
+
2663 (
0,14 *
21 ) + (
0,082 *
Project emission reductions calculation for 2007
=
3749,87 =
TPERy
2007
BSTE
3836,59 -
PSTE
86,73
32
310 )] *
3875 /
1000000
Appendix 2 – Conflict of interest review checklist
Conflict of interest review checklist
The verifier and the verification team must ensure that they are truly independent from the project,
project proponent(s), quantifier, and/or other agents related to the project. The verifier shall avoid any
actual or potential conflicts of interest with the project proponent and the intended users of the GHG
information.
Client name:
Report identification:
Verification report on a Greenhouse Gas Emissions (“GHG”) reduction
project – Verification report on a Greenhouse Gas Emissions (“GHG”)
(“
reduction project – Biomass boilers used for greenhouse heat generation at
Date of report:
November 1, 2013
Professional:
I confirm the following:
Yes
No
Details
Independence
I remained independent of the activity being verified,
and free from bias and conflict of interest.
I maintained objectivity
ity 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 conduc
conduct through trust,
integrity, confidentiality and discretion throughout the
verification process.
Fair presentation
I have reflected truthfully and accurately verification
activities, findings, conclusions
usions and reports.
I have reported significant obstacles encountered
during the verification process, as well as unresolved,
diverging opinions among verifiers, 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.
November 1, 2013
Signature
Date
Conflict of interest review checklist
The verifier and the verification team must ensure that they are truly independent from the project,
project proponent(s), quantifier, and/or other agents related to the project. The verifier shall avoid any
actual or potential conflicts of interest with the project proponent and the intended users of the GHG
information.
Client name:
Report identification:
Verification report on a Greenhouse Gas Emissions (“GHG”) reduction
project – Verification report on a Greenhouse Gas Emissions (“GHG”)
reduction project – Biomass boilers used for greenhouse heat generation at
Date of report:
November 1, 2013
Professional:
I confirm the following:
Yes
No
Details
Independence
I remained independent of the activity being verified,
and free from bias and conflict of interest.
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 opinions among verifiers, 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.
November 1, 2013
Signature
Date

Serres Jardins-Nature

Transcription

Similar documents

R.O. Writer

From Craft Production to Manufacturing – Landmark Panelized Homes

Project Description

Steam to Hot Water Conversion

Supplier`s Checklist - The Wine Management System

Transformational Leadership

Linda Tran Executive Summary

How to register your company with Bantrel`s Supplier/ Contractor

Climate Change - Ev-K2-CNR