A greenhouse gas inventory is an accounting of the amount of greenhouse gases emitted to or removed from the atmosphere over a specific period of time (e.g., one year).
A greenhouse gas inventory also provides information on the activities that cause emissions and removals, as well as background on the methods used to make the calculations.
Policy makers use greenhouse gas inventories to track emission trends, develop strategies and policies and assess progress.
Scientists use greenhouse gas inventories as inputs to atmospheric and economic models.
To track the national trend in emissions and removals since 1990, EPA develops the official U.S. greenhouse gas inventory each year.
The national greenhouse gas inventory is submitted to the United Nations in accordance with the Framework Convention on Climate Change.
The Rest @ The US Envireonmental Protection Agency
Showing posts with label E- GHG Definitions. Show all posts
Showing posts with label E- GHG Definitions. Show all posts
Tuesday, 15 September 2009
What is a Nonattainment Area in Air Quality Standards?
In United States environmental law, a non-attainment area is an area considered to have air quality worse than the National Ambient Air Quality Standards as defined in the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1970 (P.L. 91-604, Sec. 109).
Non attainment areas must have and implement a plan to meet the standard, or risk losing some forms of federal financial assistance.
An area may be a nonattainment area for one pollutant and an attainment area for others.
The Rest @ Wikipedia
While this may have nothing to do with Green House Gases yet, I suspect that in Nonattainment areas, thresholds for reporting ghg emissions may be modified in the future
-Editor
Non attainment areas must have and implement a plan to meet the standard, or risk losing some forms of federal financial assistance.
An area may be a nonattainment area for one pollutant and an attainment area for others.
The Rest @ Wikipedia
While this may have nothing to do with Green House Gases yet, I suspect that in Nonattainment areas, thresholds for reporting ghg emissions may be modified in the future
-Editor
Tuesday, 8 September 2009
What is a Continuous Emissions Measurement System (CEMS)?
CEM systems were historically used as a tool to monitor flue gas for oxygen, carbon monoxide, and carbon dioxide to provide information for combustion control in industrial settings[1]. They are currently used as a means to comply with air emission standards such as the United States Environmental Protection Agency's Acid Rain Program[2], , other federal emission programs, or state permitted emission standards. Facilities employ the use of CEMS to continuously collect, record, and report the required emissions data.
A small sample of flue gas is extracted, by means of a pump, into the CEM system via a sample probe. Facilities that combust fossil fuels often use a dilution-extractive probe to dilute the sample with clean, dry air to a ratio typically between 50:1 to 200:1, but usually 100:1. Dilution is used because pure flue gas can be hot, wet, and with some pollutants, sticky. Once diluted to the appropriate ratio, the sample is transported through a sample line (typically referred to as an umbilical) to a system of gas conditioners. The sample is then filtered to remove particulate matter and dried, usually with a chiller, to remove moisture. Once conditioned, the sample enters a manifold from which individual analyzers may extract a sample. Gas analyzers employ various techniques to accurately measure concentrations. Some commonly used techniques include: infrared and ultraviolet adsorption, chemiluminescence, fluorescence, and beta ray absorption. After analysis, the gas exits the analyzer to a common manifold to all analyzers where it is vented out of doors. A Data Acquisition and Handling System (DAHS) receives the signal output from each analyzer in order to collect and record emissions data.
Accuracy of the system is demonstrated by several ways. An internal quality assurance check is achieved by daily introduction of a certified concentration of gas to the sample probe. The analyzer reading must be accurate to a certain percentage. The percent accuracy can vary, but most fall between 2.5% and 5%. In power stations affected by the Acid Rain Program, annual (or bi-annual) certification of the system must be performed by an independent firm. The firm would have an independent CEM system temporarily in place to collect emissions data in parallel with the plant CEMS. This testing is referred to as a Relative Accuracy Test Audit.
The Rest @ Wikipedia
A small sample of flue gas is extracted, by means of a pump, into the CEM system via a sample probe. Facilities that combust fossil fuels often use a dilution-extractive probe to dilute the sample with clean, dry air to a ratio typically between 50:1 to 200:1, but usually 100:1. Dilution is used because pure flue gas can be hot, wet, and with some pollutants, sticky. Once diluted to the appropriate ratio, the sample is transported through a sample line (typically referred to as an umbilical) to a system of gas conditioners. The sample is then filtered to remove particulate matter and dried, usually with a chiller, to remove moisture. Once conditioned, the sample enters a manifold from which individual analyzers may extract a sample. Gas analyzers employ various techniques to accurately measure concentrations. Some commonly used techniques include: infrared and ultraviolet adsorption, chemiluminescence, fluorescence, and beta ray absorption. After analysis, the gas exits the analyzer to a common manifold to all analyzers where it is vented out of doors. A Data Acquisition and Handling System (DAHS) receives the signal output from each analyzer in order to collect and record emissions data.
Accuracy of the system is demonstrated by several ways. An internal quality assurance check is achieved by daily introduction of a certified concentration of gas to the sample probe. The analyzer reading must be accurate to a certain percentage. The percent accuracy can vary, but most fall between 2.5% and 5%. In power stations affected by the Acid Rain Program, annual (or bi-annual) certification of the system must be performed by an independent firm. The firm would have an independent CEM system temporarily in place to collect emissions data in parallel with the plant CEMS. This testing is referred to as a Relative Accuracy Test Audit.
The Rest @ Wikipedia
Thursday, 27 August 2009
What is a Fugitive Emmision?
I was thinking it's the methane escaping from guys invlolved in a jail break, but I was wrong.
According to Wikipeida, fugitive emissions are emissions of gases or vapors from pressurized equipment due to leaks and various other unintended or irregular releases of gases, mostly from industrial activities. As well as the economic cost of lost commodities, fugitive emissions contribute to air pollution and climate change. A detailed inventory of greenhouse gas emissions from upstream oil and gas activities in Canada for the year 2000 estimated that fugitive equipment leaks had a global warming potential equivalent to the release of 17 million metric tonnes of carbon dioxide, or 12 per cent of all greenhouse gases emitted by the sector.[1] Venting of natural gas, flaring, accidental releases and storage losses accounted for an additional 38 per cent.
Fugitive emissions present other risks and hazards. Emissions of volatile organic compounds such as benzene from oil refineries and chemical plants pose a long term health risk to workers and local communities. In situations where large amounts of flammable liquids and gases are contained under pressure, leaks also increase the risk of fire and explosion.
Leaks from pressurized process equipment generally occur through valves, pipe connections, mechanical seals, or related equipment. Fugitive emissions also occur at evaporative sources such as waste water treatment ponds and storage tanks. Because of the large number of potential leak sources at large facilities and the difficulties in detecting and repairing some leaks, fugitive emissions can be a significant proportion of total emissions. Even though the quantities of leaked gases may be small, leaks of gases that have serious health or environmental impacts can cause a significant problem.
To minimize and control leaks at process facilities operators carry out regular leak detection and repair activities. Routine inspections of process equipment with gas detectors can be used to identify leaks and estimate the leak rate in order to decide on appropriate corrective action. Proper routine maintenance of equipment reduces the likelihood of leaks.
Because of the technical difficulties and costs of detecting and quantifying actual fugitive emissions at a site or facility, and the variability and intermittent nature of emission flow rates, bottom-up estimates based on standard emission factors are generally used for annual reporting purposes.
New technologies are under development that could revolutionize the detection and monitoring of fugitive emissions. One technology, known as differential absorption light detection and ranging (DIAL), can be used to remotely measure concentration profiles of hydrocarbons in the atmosphere up to several hundred meters from a facility. DIAL has been used for refinery surveys in Europe for over 15 years. A pilot study carried out in 2005 using DIAL found that actual emissions at a refinery were fifteen times higher than those previously reported using the emission factor approach. The fugitive emissions were equivalent to 0.17% of the refinery throughput.[2]
Portable gas leak imaging cameras are also a new technology that can be used to improve leak detection and repair, leading to reduced fugitive emissions. The cameras use infrared imaging technology to produce video images in which invisible gases escaping from leak sources can be clearly identified.
The introduction to them is covered in Chapter 5.2 of TCR's General Reporting Protocol. There it is called
"The unintentional releases from production, processing, transmission, strage, and usef of fules and other substances" [...that are not vented on purpose and accounted for elsewhere] . ( I added that last part)
-Editor
According to Wikipeida, fugitive emissions are emissions of gases or vapors from pressurized equipment due to leaks and various other unintended or irregular releases of gases, mostly from industrial activities. As well as the economic cost of lost commodities, fugitive emissions contribute to air pollution and climate change. A detailed inventory of greenhouse gas emissions from upstream oil and gas activities in Canada for the year 2000 estimated that fugitive equipment leaks had a global warming potential equivalent to the release of 17 million metric tonnes of carbon dioxide, or 12 per cent of all greenhouse gases emitted by the sector.[1] Venting of natural gas, flaring, accidental releases and storage losses accounted for an additional 38 per cent.
Fugitive emissions present other risks and hazards. Emissions of volatile organic compounds such as benzene from oil refineries and chemical plants pose a long term health risk to workers and local communities. In situations where large amounts of flammable liquids and gases are contained under pressure, leaks also increase the risk of fire and explosion.
Leaks from pressurized process equipment generally occur through valves, pipe connections, mechanical seals, or related equipment. Fugitive emissions also occur at evaporative sources such as waste water treatment ponds and storage tanks. Because of the large number of potential leak sources at large facilities and the difficulties in detecting and repairing some leaks, fugitive emissions can be a significant proportion of total emissions. Even though the quantities of leaked gases may be small, leaks of gases that have serious health or environmental impacts can cause a significant problem.
To minimize and control leaks at process facilities operators carry out regular leak detection and repair activities. Routine inspections of process equipment with gas detectors can be used to identify leaks and estimate the leak rate in order to decide on appropriate corrective action. Proper routine maintenance of equipment reduces the likelihood of leaks.
Because of the technical difficulties and costs of detecting and quantifying actual fugitive emissions at a site or facility, and the variability and intermittent nature of emission flow rates, bottom-up estimates based on standard emission factors are generally used for annual reporting purposes.
New technologies are under development that could revolutionize the detection and monitoring of fugitive emissions. One technology, known as differential absorption light detection and ranging (DIAL), can be used to remotely measure concentration profiles of hydrocarbons in the atmosphere up to several hundred meters from a facility. DIAL has been used for refinery surveys in Europe for over 15 years. A pilot study carried out in 2005 using DIAL found that actual emissions at a refinery were fifteen times higher than those previously reported using the emission factor approach. The fugitive emissions were equivalent to 0.17% of the refinery throughput.[2]
Portable gas leak imaging cameras are also a new technology that can be used to improve leak detection and repair, leading to reduced fugitive emissions. The cameras use infrared imaging technology to produce video images in which invisible gases escaping from leak sources can be clearly identified.
The introduction to them is covered in Chapter 5.2 of TCR's General Reporting Protocol. There it is called
"The unintentional releases from production, processing, transmission, strage, and usef of fules and other substances" [...that are not vented on purpose and accounted for elsewhere] . ( I added that last part)
-Editor
Tuesday, 25 August 2009
What is Carbon Dioxide Equivalency?
Carbon dioxide equivalency is a quantity that describes, for a given mixture and amount of greenhouse gas, the amount of CO2 that would have the same global warming potential (GWP), when measured over a specified timescale (generally, 100 years).
Carbon dioxide equivalency thus reflects the time-integrated radiative forcing, rather than the instantaneous value described by CO2e.
The carbon dioxide equivalency for a gas is obtained by multiplying the mass and the GWP of the gas. The following units are commonly used:
By the UN climate change panel IPCC: billion metric tonnes of CO2 equivalent (GtCO2eq).
In industry: million metric tonnes of carbon dioxide equivalents (MMTCDE).
For vehicles: g of carbon dioxide equivalents / km (gCDE/km).
For example, the GWP for methane over 100 years is 25 and for nitrous oxide 298.
This means that emissions of 1 million metric tonnes of methane and nitrous oxide respectively is equivalent to emissions of 25 and 298 million metric tonnes of carbon dioxide.[1]
The Rest @ Wilkipedia
WOW, I DON'T GET IT PROFESSOR...
Ok, so you take methane, for example mammal emissions (The Real Natural Gas - yes me and you and the cows too) say, one pound of gas after your favorite spicy food, let it float up and around in the atmosphere for 100 years. While its up there, It will reflect the same amount of heat back onto the ground as a lawn mower that emmits 25 pounds of CO2, and IT floats around for 100 years.
Yes the ratio or factor is what is important
1 Methane = 25 CO2
1 Nitrus Oxide = 298 CO2
etc.
So..... All Green House Gases have a CO2 Equivalent, and therefore a Carbon footprint....Did I get this right professor?
-Editor
Carbon dioxide equivalency thus reflects the time-integrated radiative forcing, rather than the instantaneous value described by CO2e.
The carbon dioxide equivalency for a gas is obtained by multiplying the mass and the GWP of the gas. The following units are commonly used:
By the UN climate change panel IPCC: billion metric tonnes of CO2 equivalent (GtCO2eq).
In industry: million metric tonnes of carbon dioxide equivalents (MMTCDE).
For vehicles: g of carbon dioxide equivalents / km (gCDE/km).
For example, the GWP for methane over 100 years is 25 and for nitrous oxide 298.
This means that emissions of 1 million metric tonnes of methane and nitrous oxide respectively is equivalent to emissions of 25 and 298 million metric tonnes of carbon dioxide.[1]
The Rest @ Wilkipedia
WOW, I DON'T GET IT PROFESSOR...
Ok, so you take methane, for example mammal emissions (The Real Natural Gas - yes me and you and the cows too) say, one pound of gas after your favorite spicy food, let it float up and around in the atmosphere for 100 years. While its up there, It will reflect the same amount of heat back onto the ground as a lawn mower that emmits 25 pounds of CO2, and IT floats around for 100 years.
Yes the ratio or factor is what is important
1 Methane = 25 CO2
1 Nitrus Oxide = 298 CO2
etc.
So..... All Green House Gases have a CO2 Equivalent, and therefore a Carbon footprint....Did I get this right professor?
-Editor
Thursday, 20 August 2009
What is a A renewables portfolio standard (RPS) ?
A renewables portfolio standard (RPS) is a regulation that requires the increased production of energy from renewable energy sources, such as wind, solar, biomass, and geothermal. Another common name for the same concept is renewable electricity standard (RES).
The RPS mechanism generally places an obligation on electricity supply companies to produce a specified fraction of their electricity from renewable energy sources.
Those supporting the adoption of RPS mechanisms claim that market implementation will result in competition, efficiency and innovation that will deliver renewable energy at the lowest possible cost, allowing renewable energy to compete with cheaper fossil fuel energy sources.[1].
RPS-type mechanisms have been adopted in Britain, Italy and Belgium, as well as in 27 U.S. states and the District of Columbia.
Regulations vary from state to state, and there is no federal policy. Four of the 29 states have voluntary rather than mandatory goals. Together these 27 states account for more than 42 percent of the electricity sales in the United States.[2]
It is worth noting that RPS mechanisms have tended to be most successful in stimulating new renewable energy capacity in the United States where they have been used in combination with federal Production Tax Credits (PTC).
In periods, where PTC have been withdrawn the RPS alone has often proven to be insufficient stimulus to incentivise large volumes of capacity.[citation needed]
The Edison Electric Institute, a trade association for America’s investor-owned utilities, has taken a stand against a nationwide RPS, saying it would “raise consumers’ electricity prices and create inequities among states.”[3]
In 2009, the US Congress has been considering Federal level RPS requirements. The "American Clean Energy Leadership Act" reported out of committee in July by the Senate Committee on Energy ; Natural Resources includes a Renewable Electricity Standard that calls for 3% of U.S. electrical generation to come from non-hydro renewables by 2011-2013.[4]
The Rest @ Wikipedia
The RPS mechanism generally places an obligation on electricity supply companies to produce a specified fraction of their electricity from renewable energy sources.
- Certified renewable energy generators earn certificates for every unit of electricity they produce
- They can sell these along with their electricity to supply companies.
- Supply companies then pass the certificates to some form of regulatory body to demonstrate their compliance with their regulatory obligations.
Those supporting the adoption of RPS mechanisms claim that market implementation will result in competition, efficiency and innovation that will deliver renewable energy at the lowest possible cost, allowing renewable energy to compete with cheaper fossil fuel energy sources.[1].
RPS-type mechanisms have been adopted in Britain, Italy and Belgium, as well as in 27 U.S. states and the District of Columbia.
Regulations vary from state to state, and there is no federal policy. Four of the 29 states have voluntary rather than mandatory goals. Together these 27 states account for more than 42 percent of the electricity sales in the United States.[2]
It is worth noting that RPS mechanisms have tended to be most successful in stimulating new renewable energy capacity in the United States where they have been used in combination with federal Production Tax Credits (PTC).
In periods, where PTC have been withdrawn the RPS alone has often proven to be insufficient stimulus to incentivise large volumes of capacity.[citation needed]
The Edison Electric Institute, a trade association for America’s investor-owned utilities, has taken a stand against a nationwide RPS, saying it would “raise consumers’ electricity prices and create inequities among states.”[3]
In 2009, the US Congress has been considering Federal level RPS requirements. The "American Clean Energy Leadership Act" reported out of committee in July by the Senate Committee on Energy ; Natural Resources includes a Renewable Electricity Standard that calls for 3% of U.S. electrical generation to come from non-hydro renewables by 2011-2013.[4]
The Rest @ Wikipedia
Monday, 17 August 2009
The Climate Action Reserve is a National Offsets Program
The Climate Action Reserve is a national offsets program focused on ensuring environmental integrity of GHG emissions reduction projects to create and support financial and environmental value in the U.S. carbon market.
It does this by
It does this by
- Establishing high-quality standards for quantifying and verifying GHG emissions reduction projects,
- Overseeing independent third party verification bodies,
- Issuing carbon credits generated from such projects
- Tracking the credits over time on a transparent, publicly-accessible system.
Learn more about our program
The Climate Action Reserve’s GHG emissions reduction Project Protocols provide regulatory-quality guidelines for project development and the quantification of carbon offset credits, known as Climate Reserve Tonnes (CRT).
They are developed through a rigorous, transparent process that involves participation from stakeholders representing a variety of sectors, including industry, government, science, academic, public and environment. The protocols are widely regarded as among the highest quality standards for carbon reduction projects.
Learn more about Our Protocols
Adherence to the Climate Action Reserve’s standards ensures emissions reductions associated with projects are
It also assigns unique serial numbers to all generated carbon credits.
This prevents the possibility of double counting and assures buyers that when a CRT has been retired, it cannot be sold or transferred again and has created a real and permanent offset.
All project information is made publicly available through the Climate Action Reserve system.
Learn more about Our Projects
Industry reports indicate the market price for CRTs ranks in the top tier among carbon credits. CRTs can be traded in the voluntary carbon market or transferred into the Voluntary Carbon Standard’s unit of measurement, the Voluntary Carbon Unit (VCU).
Learn more about issued CRTs
The Rest @ The Climate Researve
The Climate Action Reserve’s GHG emissions reduction Project Protocols provide regulatory-quality guidelines for project development and the quantification of carbon offset credits, known as Climate Reserve Tonnes (CRT).
They are developed through a rigorous, transparent process that involves participation from stakeholders representing a variety of sectors, including industry, government, science, academic, public and environment. The protocols are widely regarded as among the highest quality standards for carbon reduction projects.
Learn more about Our Protocols
Adherence to the Climate Action Reserve’s standards ensures emissions reductions associated with projects are
- real
- permanent
- additional
It also assigns unique serial numbers to all generated carbon credits.
This prevents the possibility of double counting and assures buyers that when a CRT has been retired, it cannot be sold or transferred again and has created a real and permanent offset.
All project information is made publicly available through the Climate Action Reserve system.
Learn more about Our Projects
Industry reports indicate the market price for CRTs ranks in the top tier among carbon credits. CRTs can be traded in the voluntary carbon market or transferred into the Voluntary Carbon Standard’s unit of measurement, the Voluntary Carbon Unit (VCU).
Learn more about issued CRTs
The Rest @ The Climate Researve
Sunday, 16 August 2009
What Are Carbon Offsets?
A carbon offset is a financial instrument aimed at a reduction in greenhouse gas emissions.
Carbon offsets are measured in metric tons of carbon dioxide-equivalent (CO2e) and may represent six primary categories of greenhouse gases.
One carbon offset represents the reduction of one metric ton of carbon dioxide or its equivalent in other greenhouse gases.
There are two markets for carbon offsets.
Offsets are typically achieved through financial support of projects that reduce the emission of greenhouse gases in the short- or long-term.
Carbon offsetting has gained some appeal and momentum mainly among consumers in western countries who have become aware and concerned about the potentially negative environmental effects of energy-intensive lifestyles and economies.
The Kyoto Protocol has sanctioned offsets as a way for governments and private companies to earn carbon credits which can be traded on a marketplace.
The protocol established the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM), which validates and measures projects to ensure they produce authentic benefits and are genuinely "additional" activities that would not otherwise have been undertaken. Organizations that are unable to meet their emissions quota can offset their emissions by buying CDM-approved Certified Emissions Reductions.
Offsets may be cheaper or more convenient alternatives to reducing one's own fossil-fuel consumption. However, some critics object to carbon offsets, and question the benefits of certain types of offsets.[6]
The Rest @ Carbon Offsets
Carbon offsets are measured in metric tons of carbon dioxide-equivalent (CO2e) and may represent six primary categories of greenhouse gases.
One carbon offset represents the reduction of one metric ton of carbon dioxide or its equivalent in other greenhouse gases.
There are two markets for carbon offsets.
- In the larger compliance market, companies, governments, or other entities buy carbon offsets in order to comply with caps on the total amount of carbon dioxide they are allowed to emit. In 2006, about $5.5 billion of carbon offsets were purchased in the compliance market, representing about 1.6 billion metric tons of CO2e reductions.
- In the much smaller voluntary market, individuals, companies, or governments purchase carbon offsets to mitigate their own greenhouse gas emissions from transportation, electricity use, and other sources. For example, an individual might purchase carbon offsets to compensate for the greenhouse gas emissions caused by personal air travel. In 2008, about $705 million of carbon offsets were purchased in the voluntary market, representing about 123.4 million metric tons of CO2e reductions.
Offsets are typically achieved through financial support of projects that reduce the emission of greenhouse gases in the short- or long-term.
- The most common project type is renewable energy, such as wind farms, biomass energy, or hydroelectric dams.
- Others include energy efficiency projects, the destruction of industrial pollutants or agricultural byproducts, destruction of landfill methane, and forestry projects.
Carbon offsetting has gained some appeal and momentum mainly among consumers in western countries who have become aware and concerned about the potentially negative environmental effects of energy-intensive lifestyles and economies.
The Kyoto Protocol has sanctioned offsets as a way for governments and private companies to earn carbon credits which can be traded on a marketplace.
The protocol established the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM), which validates and measures projects to ensure they produce authentic benefits and are genuinely "additional" activities that would not otherwise have been undertaken. Organizations that are unable to meet their emissions quota can offset their emissions by buying CDM-approved Certified Emissions Reductions.
Offsets may be cheaper or more convenient alternatives to reducing one's own fossil-fuel consumption. However, some critics object to carbon offsets, and question the benefits of certain types of offsets.[6]
The Rest @ Carbon Offsets
What is a Carbon Sink? What is Sequestration
A carbon sink is a natural or manmade reservoir that accumulates and stores some carbon-containing chemical compound for an indefinite period.
The main natural sinks are:
The Rest @ Wikipedia
The main natural sinks are:
- Absorption of carbon dioxide by the oceans
- Photosynthesis by plants and algae
- Landfills
- Carbon capture and storage proposals
- CO2 sequestration or carbon sequestration.
The Rest @ Wikipedia
Tuesday, 11 August 2009
Carbon Credits and the Idea of Addionalty
The concept of additionality addresses the question of whether the project would have happened anyway, even in the absence of revenue from carbon credits.
Only carbon credits from projects that are "additional to" the business-as-usual scenario represent a net environmental benefit.
Carbon projects that yield strong financial returns:
even in the absence of revenue from carbon credits;
or that are compelled by regulations;
or that represent common practice in an industry
are usually not considered additional, although a full determination of additionality requires specialist review.
It is generally agreed that voluntary carbon offset projects must also prove additionality in order to ensure the legitimacy of the environmental stewardship claims resulting from the retirement of the carbon credit (offset).
According the World Resources Institute/World Business Council for Sustainable Development (WRI/WBCSD) : "GHG emission trading programs operate by capping the emissions of a fixed number of individual facilities or sources.
Under these programs, tradable 'offset credits' are issued for project-based GHG reductions that occur at sources not covered by the program.
Each offset credit allows facilities whose emissions are capped to emit more, in direct proportion to the GHG reductions represented by the credit.
The idea is to achieve a zero net increase in GHG emissions, because each ton of increased emissions is 'offset' by project-based GHG reductions.
The difficulty is that many projects that reduce GHG emissions (relative to historical levels) would happen regardless of the existence of a GHG program and without any concern for climate change mitigation.
If a project 'would have happened anyway,' then issuing offset credits for its GHG reductions will actually allow a positive net increase in GHG emissions, undermining the emissions target of the GHG program.
Additionality is thus critical to the success and integrity of GHG programs that recognize project-based GHG reductions."
The Rest @ Cleantech Update
Only carbon credits from projects that are "additional to" the business-as-usual scenario represent a net environmental benefit.
Carbon projects that yield strong financial returns:
even in the absence of revenue from carbon credits;
or that are compelled by regulations;
or that represent common practice in an industry
are usually not considered additional, although a full determination of additionality requires specialist review.
It is generally agreed that voluntary carbon offset projects must also prove additionality in order to ensure the legitimacy of the environmental stewardship claims resulting from the retirement of the carbon credit (offset).
According the World Resources Institute/World Business Council for Sustainable Development (WRI/WBCSD) : "GHG emission trading programs operate by capping the emissions of a fixed number of individual facilities or sources.
Under these programs, tradable 'offset credits' are issued for project-based GHG reductions that occur at sources not covered by the program.
Each offset credit allows facilities whose emissions are capped to emit more, in direct proportion to the GHG reductions represented by the credit.
The idea is to achieve a zero net increase in GHG emissions, because each ton of increased emissions is 'offset' by project-based GHG reductions.
The difficulty is that many projects that reduce GHG emissions (relative to historical levels) would happen regardless of the existence of a GHG program and without any concern for climate change mitigation.
If a project 'would have happened anyway,' then issuing offset credits for its GHG reductions will actually allow a positive net increase in GHG emissions, undermining the emissions target of the GHG program.
Additionality is thus critical to the success and integrity of GHG programs that recognize project-based GHG reductions."
The Rest @ Cleantech Update
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Subscribe
Posts
All Comments