Draft revision to the approved consolidated baseline methodology ACM0010

Transcription

1 Draft revision to the approved consolidated baseline methodolog ACM0010 Consolidated baseline methodolog for GHG emission reductions from manure management sstems I. SOURCE, DEFINITIONS AND APPLICABILITY Sources This consolidated baseline methodolog is based on elements from the following methodologies: AM0006: GHG emission reductions from manure management sstems, based on the CDM-PDD Methane capture and combustion of swine manure treatment for Peralillo whose baseline stud, monitoring and verification plan and project design document were prepared b Agricola Super Limitada. For more information regarding the proposal and its consideration b the Executive Board please refer to case NM0022: Methane capture and combustion of swine manure treatment for Peralillo on < AM0016: Greenhouse gas mitigation from improved Animal Waste Management Sstems in confined animal feeding operations, whose baseline stud, monitoring and verification plan and project design document were prepared b AgCert Canada Co. on behalf of Granja Becker, L.B.Pork, Inc. and AgCert Canada Co. For more information regarding the proposal and its consideration b the Executive Board please refer to case NM0034-rev2: Granja Becker GHG Mitigation Project on < For more information regarding the proposals and their consideration b the Executive Board please refer to: Case NM0022: Methane capture and combustion of swine manure treatment for Peralillo ; Case NM0034-rev2: Granja Becker GHG Mitigation Project. on < The This methodolog also refers to the latest approved versions of the following tools: 1 Tool to determine project emissions from flaring gases containing Methane Project emissions from flaring ; Tool to calculate baseline, project and/or leakage emissions from electricit consumption ; Tool to calculate project or leakage CO 2 emissions from fossil fuel combustion ; Tool for demonstration assessment and of additionalit ; Tool to calculate the emission factor for an electricit sstem ; Assessment of the validit of the original/current baseline and to update of the baseline at the renewal of the crediting period ; Combined tool to identif the baseline scenario and demonstrate additionalit ; Project and leakage emissions from anaerobic digesters ; Tool to determine the baseline efficienc of thermal or electric energ generation sstems ; Tool to determine the mass flow of a greenhouse gas in a gaseous stream. 1 Please refer to < 1/54

2 For more information on the proposals and their consideration b the Executive Board as well as on approved methodological tools please refer to: < For more information regarding the proposed new methodologies and the tools as well as their consideration b the Executive Board (hereinafter referred to as the Board) of the clean development mechanism (CDM) please refer to < Selected approach from paragraph 48 of the CDM modalities and procedures Emissions from a technolog that represents an economicall attractive course of action, taking into account barriers to investment Applicabilit This methodolog is applicable generall to manure management on livestock farms where the existing anaerobic manure treatment sstem, within the project boundar, is replaced b one or a combination of more than one animal waste management sstems (AWMSs) that result in less GHG emissions compared to the existing sstem. This methodolog is applicable to manure management projects under with the following conditions: Farms where livestock populations, comprising of cattle, buffalo, swine, sheep, goats, and/or poultr, is managed under confined conditions; Farms where manure is not discharged into natural water resources (e.g. rivers or estuaries); In case of anaerobic lagoons treatments sstems, the depth of the lagoons used for manure management under the baseline scenario should be at least 1m; 2 The annual average temperature in at the site where the anaerobic manure treatment facilit in the baseline existed is higher than 5 C; In the baseline case, the minimum retention time of manure waste in the anaerobic treatment sstem is greater than 1 month; The AWMS(s)/process in the project case results in should ensure that no leakage of manure waste into ground water takes place, e.g. the lagoon should have a non-permeable laer at the lagoon bottom. This baseline methodolog shall be used in conjunction with the approved monitoring methodolog ACM0010 (Consolidated baseline methodolog for GHG emission reductions from manure management sstems). In addition, the applicabilit conditions included in the tools referred to above appl. II. BASELINE METHODOLOGY PROCEDURE Identification of the baseline scenario and demonstration of additionalit Identif the baseline scenario and demonstrate additionalit using the Combined tool to identif the baseline scenario and demonstrate additionalit, following the requirements below. The methodolog determines the baseline scenario through the following steps: Step 1: Define alternative scenarios to the proposed CDM project activit; 2 In particular, loading in the waste water streams has to be high enough to assure that the lagoon develops an anaerobic bottom laer and that algal oxgen production can be ruled out. 2/54

3 Step 2: Step 3: Step 4: Barriers analsis; Investment analsis; Baseline revision at renewal of crediting period. Step 1: Define alternative scenarios to the proposed CDM project activit (1) Identif realistic and credible alternative scenarios that are available either to the project participants or to other potential project developers 3 for managing the manure. These alternative scenarios should include: AA: It is not clear wh do we have footnote 3 in this methodolog as all alternatives are under the control of the PPs (since the farm is owned b the PP in all cases). None of the alternatives can be implemented in parallel b the PPs and therefore the combined tool is applicable The proposed project activit not being registered as a CDM project activit; All other plausible and credible alternatives to the project activit scenario, including the common practices in the relevant sector. In appling Step 1 of the tool, baseline alternatives for managing the manure, shall take into consideration, inter alia, the complete set of possible manure management sstems listed in the 2006 IPCC Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas Inventories (Volume 4, Chapter 10, Table 10.17) should be taken into account. In drawing up a list of possible scenarios, possible combinations of different Animal Waste Management Sstems (AWMS) should shall be taken into account. In addition to the alternative baseline scenarios identified for managing the manure, alternative scenarios for the use of gas generated from an anaerobic digester (biogas) shall also be identified if this is an aspect of the project activit: For electricit generation, alternative(s) shall include, inter alia: (a) E1: Electricit generation from biogas, undertaken without being registered as CDM project activit; (b) E2: Electricit generation in existing or new renewable based captive power plant(s); (c) E3: Electricit generation in existing and/or new grid-connected power plant; (d) E4: Electricit generation in an off-grid fossil fuel fired captive power plant; (e) E5: Electricit generation in existing and/or new grid-connected power plant and fossil fuel fired captive power plant(s). Baseline emissions due to electricit generation can be accounted for onl if the baseline scenario is E3, E4 and E5. For heat generation, alternative(s) shall include, inter alia: (a) H1: Heat generation from biogas undertaken without being registered as CDM project activit; 3 For example, a coal-fired power station or hdropower ma not be an alternative for an independent power producer investing in wind energ or for a sugar factor owner investing in a co-generation, but ma be an alternative for a public utilit. As a result, the proposed project ma be able to avoid emissions that would have occurred from the coal-fired power station that would have been built (or built earlier) b the utilit in the absence of the CDM. Therefore, there ma be cases where the baseline scenario includes an alternative that is not accessible to the project participant. However, there are also cases where all the alternatives are accessible to the project participant: for instance, this ma be the case for projects flaring landfill gas, improving boilers, etc. 3/54

4 (b) H2: Heat generation in existing or new fossil fuel fired cogeneration plant(s); (c) H3: Heat generation in existing or new renewable based cogeneration plant(s); (d) H4: Heat generation in existing or new on-site or off-site fossil fuel based boiler(s) or air heater(s); (e) H5: Heat generation in existing or new on-site or off-site renewable energ based boiler(s) or air heater(s); (f) H6: An other source, such as district heat; and (g) H7: Other heat generation technologies (e.g. heat pumps or solar energ). Baseline emissions due to heat generation can be accounted for onl if the baseline scenario is H4. If applicable, continuation of the current situation (no project activit or other alternatives undertaken). Eliminate alternatives that are not in compliance with all applicable legal and regulator requirements. Appl Sub-step 1b of the latest version of the Tool for demonstration assessment and of additionalit. For the purpose of identifing alternative scenarios that are common practice, provide an analsis of other manure management practices implemented previousl or currentl underwa. Projects are considered similar if the are in the same countr/region, are of a similar scale, and take place in a comparable environment with respect to regulator framework, investment climate, access to technolog, access to financing, etc. Other CDM project activities are not to be included in this analsis. Provide documented evidence. On the basis of that analsis, identif and include all alternative scenarios that are common practice. Step 2: Barrier analsis Establish a complete list of barriers that would prevent alternative scenarios to occur in the absence of the CDM. Such barriers ma include: Investment barriers, inter alia: o o Debt funding is not available for this tpe of innovative activities; Neither access to international capital markets due to real or perceived risks associated with domestic or foreign direct investment in the countr where the project activit is to be implemented. Technological barriers, inter alia: o o Skilled and/or properl trained labour to operate and maintain the technolog is not available and no education/training institution in the host countr provides the needed skill, leading to equipment disrepair and malfunctioning; Lack of infrastructure for implementation of the technolog. Barriers due to prevailing practice, inter alia: o The alternative is the first of its kind : No alternative of this tpe is currentl operational in the host countr or region. Since the proposed project activit not being registered as a CDM project activit shall be one of the considered alternatives, an barrier that ma prevent the project activit to occur shall be included in that list. Provide transparent and documented evidence, and offer conservative interpretations of this documented evidence, as to how it demonstrates the existence and significance of the identified barriers. 4/54

5 Anecdotal evidence can be included, but alone is not sufficient proof of barriers. The tpe of evidence to be provided ma include: (a) Relevant legislation, regulator information or industr norms; (b) Relevant (sectoral) studies or surves (e.g. market surves, technolog studies, etc) undertaken b universities, research institutions, industr associations, companies, bilateral/multilateral institutions, etc; (c) Relevant statistical data from national or international statistics; (d) Documentation of relevant market data (e.g. market prices, tariffs, rules); (e) Written documentation from the compan or institution developing or implementing the CDM project activit or the CDM project developer, such as minutes from Board meetings, correspondence, feasibilit studies, financial or budgetar information, etc; (f) Documents prepared b the project developer, contractors or project partners in the context of the proposed project activit or similar previous project implementations; (g) Written documentation of independent expert judgments from industr, educational institutions (e.g. universities, technical schools, training centers), industr associations and others. Assess for all barriers identified which scenario alternatives would be prohibited from being implemented b the barrier and eliminate those alternatives from further consideration. If there is onl one scenario alternative that is not prevented b an barrier, and (i) If this alternative is not the proposed project activit not being registered as a CDM project activit, then this scenario alternative is the most plausible baseline scenario; (ii) If this alternative is the proposed project activit not being registered as a CDM project activit, then the project activit is the most plausible baseline scenario; If there are still several baseline scenario alternatives remaining, either go to Step 3 (investment analsis) or choose the alternative with the lowest emissions (i.e. the most conservative) as the most plausible baseline scenario. Step 3: Investment analsis Undertake investment analsis of all the alternatives that do not face an barriers, as identified in Step 2. For each alternative, all costs and economic benefits attributable to the waste management scenario should be illustrated in a transparent and complete manner, as shown in Table 1 below. Table 1: Calculation of NPV and IRR COSTS AND BENEFITS Year 1 Year 2 Year n Year n+1 Equipment costs (specif the equipment needed) Installation costs Maintenance costs Other costs (e.g. operation, consultanc, engineering, etc.) Revenues from the sale of electricit or other project related products, when applicable SUBTOTAL TOTAL NPV (US$) (specif discount rate) 5/54

6 IRR (%) For each alternative baseline scenario, the internal rate of return (IRR) and/or the net present value (NPV) should be calculated. The calculation of the IRR must include inter alia investment costs, operation and maintenance costs, as well as an other appropriate costs (engineering, consultanc, etc.). Similarl, take into consideration all revenues generated b each manure management scenario, including revenue from the sale of electricit and cost savings due to avoided electricit purchases and other sources of income related to the implementation of the project, except revenues from the sale of CERs. The IRR for all alternative scenarios should be calculated in a conservative manner. To ensure this, assumptions and parameters for the proposed project activit, if still under consideration, should be chosen in a conservative wa such that the tend to lead to a higher IRR and NPV. For all other scenarios considered, assumptions and parameters should be chosen in a wa such that the tend to lead to a lower IRR and NPV. This conservative choice of parameters and assumptions should be ensured b obtaining expert opinions and should be evaluated b the DOE as part of the validation of the project activit. If the IRR cannot be calculated due to the existence of onl negative flows in the financial analsis, the comparison should be based on the NPV, stating explicitl the discount rate used. The baseline scenario is identified as the economicall most attractive course of action i.e., alternative scenario with highest IRR or NPV, where the IRR cannot be calculated Step 4: Baseline revision at renewal of crediting period Renewal of crediting period: The project participants, at the renewal of each credit period, will undertake the relevance of baseline scenario identified above taking into account change in the relevant national and/or sectoral regulations between two crediting periods as well as an increase in the animal stock above the pre-project animal stock. This assessment will be undertaken b the verifing DOE. Additionalit If the baseline determination in this methodolog (see section "Identification of the baseline scenario" above) demonstrates that the baseline is different from the proposed project activit not undertaken as a CDM project activit it ma be concluded that the project is additional. Project boundar The spatial extent of the project boundar encompasses the site of the AWMS(s), including the flare or energ and/or heat generation equipment and the power/heat source. 6/54

7 Power/ heat Source ANIMAL BARNS Combustion Flare; Heat and/or electricit Loading AWMS (more than one technolog/process can replace baseline AWMS) PROJECT BOUNDARY Effluent Usage or Disposal User Figure 1: The Project activit b Boundar 7/54

8 Baseline Project Activit Table 2: Emissions sources included in or excluded from the project boundar Source Gas Included? Justification/Explanation Direct Eemissions CH 4 Yes The major source of emissions in the baseline from the waste treatment N 2 O Yes Direct and indirect N 2 O emissions are accounted processes CO 2 No CO 2 emissions from the decomposition of organic waste are not accounted Emissions from electricit consumption / CO 2 Yes Electricit ma be consumed from the grid or generated onsite in the baseline scenario CH 4 No Excluded for simplification. This is conservative generation N 2 O No Excluded for simplification. This is conservative CO 2 Yes If thermal energ generation is included in Emissions from thermal energ generation Emissions from thermal energ the project activit CH 4 No Excluded for simplification. This is conservative N 2 O No Excluded for simplification. This is conservative CO 2 Yes Ma be an important emission source CH 4 No Excluded for simplification. This emission source is assumed to be ver small generation use N 2 O No Excluded for simplification. This emission source is assumed to be ver small CO 2 Yes Ma be an important emission source. If electricit is generated from collected Emissions from on-site electricit use Direct Eemissions from the waste treatment processes biogas, these emissions are not accounted for CH 4 No Excluded for simplification. This emission source is assumed to be ver small N 2 O No Excluded for simplification. This emission source is assumed to be ver small N 2 O Yes Direct and indirect N 2 O emissions are accounted CO 2 No CO 2 emissions from the decomposition of organic waste are not accounted CH 4 Yes The emission from anaerobic digesters and uncombusted methane, phsical leakage, and minor CH 4 emissions from aerobic treatment The project proponents will shall provide a clear diagrammatic representation in the CDM-PDD of the project scenario with showing all the manure waste treatments steps adopted in treating the manure waste as well as its final disposal in the CDM-PDD. The diagrammatic representation will also indicate the fraction of volatile solids degraded within the project boundar in pre-project situation before disposal. This shall include the final disposal use of methane, if an is captured, and also the auxiliar energ used to run project treatments steps. The diagrammatic representation shall also indicate the fraction of volatile solids degraded within the project boundar in the pre-project situation before disposal. 8/54

9 The precise location of the farm(s) where the project activit takes place shall be identified in the CDM-PDD (e.g. co-ordinates of farm(s) using global positioning sstem). Baseline emissions The baseline is the AWMSs identified through the baseline selection procedure, as well as, when relevant, the baseline for the use of gas generated from the anaerobic digester. Baseline emissions are: BE BECH 4, BEN 2O, BEelec / heat, (1) BE = Baseline emissions in ear (tco 2 /r) BE, CH 4 = Baseline CH 4 emissions in ear (tco 2 /r) N 2 O = Baseline N 2 O emissions in ear (tco 2 /r) BE, BE elec / heat, = Baseline CO 2 emissions from electricit and/or heat used in the baseline (tco 2 /r) (i) Baseline CH 4 emissions (BE CH4, ) The manure management sstem in the baseline could be based on different livestock, treatment sstems and on one or more stages. Therefore: BE CH 4, GWPCH 4 DCH 4 MCFj B0, N VS, MS% Bl, j j, (2) BE CH 4, = Baseline CH 4 emissions (tco 2 /r) GWP CH 4 = Global Warming Potential (GWP) of CH 4 (tco 2 e/tch 4 ) D = Densit of CH CH 4 4 (t/m 3 )( t/m 3 at room temperature (20 ºC) and 1 atm pressure) MCF = Annual methane conversion factor (MCF) for the baseline AWMS j j B 0, = Maximum methane producing potential of the volatile solid generated, in m 3 CH 4 /kg_dm, b animal tpe (m 3 CH 4 /kg_dm) N = Annual average number of animals of tpe for the ear (number) VS, = Annual volatile solid excretions for livestock entering all AWMS on a dr matter weight basis (kg-dm/animal/r), as estimated below MS % Bl, j = Fraction of manure handled in sstem j in the baseline = Tpe of livestock j = Tpe of treatment sstem 9/54

10 Estimation of various variables and parameters used in the above equation: (A) VS, can shall be determined in one of the following was, stated presented in the order of preference Option 1: Using published countr specific data. If the data is expressed in kilogram volatile solid excretion per da on a dr-matter basis (kg-dm per da), multipl the value with nd (number of das treatment plant was operational in ear ). Option 2: Estimation of VS, based on dietar intake of livestock: VS ASH UE GE nd ED, (3) 100 DE 1 GE 1 VS, = Annual volatile solid excretions for livestock entering all AWMS on a dr matter weight basis (kg-dm/animal/r) GE = Dail average gross energ intake (MJ/animal/da) DE = Digestible energ of the feed (percent) (IPCC 2006 defaults available) UE GE = Urinar energ (fraction of GE ) Tpicall 0.04GE can be considered urinar energ excretion b most ruminants (reduce to 0.02 for ruminants fed with 85% or more grain in the diet or for swine). Use countr-specific values where available ASH = Ash content of manure (fraction of the dr matter feed intake). Use countr-specific values where available ED = Energ densit of the feed (IPCC notes the energ densit of feed, ED, is tpicall MJ/kg DM, which is relativel constant across a wide variet of grain-based feeds.) fed to livestock tpe (MJ/kg-dm). The project proponent will record the composition of the feed to enable the DOE to verif the energ densit of the feed nd = Number of das treatment plant was operational in ear Option 3: Scaling default IPCC values VS default to adjust for a site-specific average animal weight as shown in equation below: VS W VS nd site, default (4) W default VS, = Annual volatile solid excretions for livestock entering all AWMS on a dr matter weight basis (kg-dm/animal/r) W = Average animal weight of a defined livestock population at the project site (kg) site Wdefault t = Default average animal weight of a defined population (kg) from where the data on VS default is sourced (IPCC 2006 or US-EPA, which ever is lower) 10/54

11 VS = Default value (IPCC 2006 or US-EPA, which ever is lower) for the volatile solid default excretion per da on a dr-matter basis for a defined livestock population (kg-dm/animal/da) nd = Number of das treatment plant was operational in ear Option 4: Utilizing published IPCC defaults for VS, (IPCC 2006 guidelines, volume 4, chapter 10), multipl the value with b nd (number of das in ear ). Developed countries VS, values can ma be used provided the following conditions can beare satisfied: The genetic source of the production operations livestock originate from an Annex I Part; The farm use formulated feed rations (FFR) which are optimized for the various animal(s), stage of growth, categor, weight gain/productivit and/or genetics; The use of FFR can be validated (through on-farm record keeping, feed supplier, etc.); and The project specific animal weights are more similar to developed countr IPCC default values. The following sources should be used to calculate baseline emissions: IPCC 2006 guidelines, volume 4, chapter 10; US-EPA 2001: Development Document for the Proposed Revisions to the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination Sstem Regulation and the Effluent Guidelines for Concentrated Animal Feeding Operations, Chapter 8.2 ( s1-4.pdf). (B) Maximum Methane Production Potential (B 0, ): This value varies b species and diet. Where default values are used, the should be taken from tables 10A-4 through 10A-9 (IPCC 2006 Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas Inventories volume 4, chapter 10) specific to the countr where the project is implemented. Developed countries B 0, values can be used provided the following conditions are satisfied: The genetic source of the production operations livestock originate from an Annex I Part; The farm use formulated feed rations (FFR) which are optimized for the various animal(s), stage of growth, categor, weight gain/productivit and/or genetics; The use of FFR can be validated (through on-farm record keeping, feed supplier, etc.); The project specific animal weights are more similar to developed countr IPCC default values. (C) Methane conversion factors (MCFs): The IPCC 2006 MCF values given in table (chapter 10, volume 4) should be used, which is attached here as Annex 3. MCF values depend on the annual average temperature where the anaerobic manure treatment facilit in the baseline existed. For average annual temperatures below 10 o C and above 5 o C, a linear interpolation should be used to estimate the MCF value at the specific temperature assuming an MCF value of 0 at an annual average of 5 o C. Future revisions to the IPCC Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas Inventories should be taken into account; 11/54

12 A conservativeness factor should be applied b multipling MCF values (estimated as per above bullet) with a value of 0.94, to account for the 20% uncertaint in the MCF values as reported b IPCC For subsequent treatment stages, the reduction of the volatile solids during a treatment stage is estimated based on referenced data for different treatment tpes. Emissions from the next treatment stage are then calculated following the approach outlined above, but with volatile solids adjusted for the reduction from the previous treatment stages b multipling b (1 - R VS ), where R VS is the relative reduction of volatile solids from the previous stage. The relative reduction (R VS ) of volatile solids depends on the treatment technolog and should be estimated in a conservative manner. Default values for different treatment technologies can be found in Table 8.10 of chapter 8.2 in US-EPA (2001). 4 These values are provided in appendix 1 (values for VS). (B) Annual average number of animals of tpe (N ) shall be determined in one of the following was, presented in order of preference: Option 1: N N da, N p, 365 (5.a) N = Annual average number of animals of tpe for the ear (number) N, = Number of das animal of tpe is alive in the farm in the ear (number) da N p, = Number of animals of tpe produced annuall of tpe for the ear (number) Option 2: If the project developer can monitor in a reliable and traceable wa the dail stock of animals in the farm, discounting dead animals and animals discarded from the productive process from the dail stock, then the annual average number of animals (N ) ma be calculated as an average of the dail stock of animals in the farm without considering dead animals and discarded animalsfollows: 365 N AA, 1 N 365 N : = Annual average number of animals of tpe for the ear (number) N AA, = Dail stock of animals of tpe in the farm, discounting dead and discarded animals (number) (5.b) 4 < 12/54

13 (ii) Baseline N 2 O emissions (BE N2O, ) from manure management 1 BEN 2O, GWPN 2O CFN 2O N, N ( EN 2O, D, EN 2O, ID, ) 1000 (6) BE N 2 O, = Annual baseline N 2 O emissions in (tco 2 e/r) GWP 2 = Global Warming Potential (GWP) for N 2 O (tco 2 e/tn 2 O) N O CF, = Conversion factor N N 2O N N 2 O-N to N 2 O (44/28) E N O, D, E N O, ID, 2 = Direct N 2 O emission in ear (kg N 2 O-N/ear) 2 = Indirect N 2 O emission in ear (kg N 2 O-N/ear) EN 2 O, D, EFN 2O, D, j NEX, N MS% Bl, j (7) j, E = Direct N N 2 O, D, 2 O emission in ear (kg N 2 O-N/r) Are the direct nitrous oxide emissions in kg of N 2 O per ear EF = Direct N N 2 O, D, j 2 O emission factor for the treatment sstem j of the manure management sstem (kg N 2 O-N/kg N) (estimated with site-specific, regional or national data if such data is available, otherwise use default EF 3 from table 10.21, chapter 10, volume 4, in the IPCC 2006 Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas Inventories) NEX, = Annual average nitrogen excretion per head of a defined livestock population (kg N/animal/r) estimated as described in appendix 2 MS % = Fraction of manure handled in sstem j (fraction) Bl, j N = Annual Average number of animals of tpe for the ear estimated as per equation (5.a) or (5.b) (number) EN 2 O, ID, EFN 2O, ID FgasMS, j, NEX, N MS% Bl, j (8) j, E = Indirect N N 2 O, ID, 2 O emission in ear (kg N 2 O-N/ear) Are the indirect nitrous oxide emissions in kg of N 2 O per ear EF = Indirect N N 2 O, ID 2 O emission factor for N 2 O emissions from atmospheric deposition of nitrogen on soils and water surfaces (kg N 2 O-N/kg NH3-N and NO X -N) emitted, estimated with site-specific, regional or national data if such data is available. Otherwise, default values for EF 4 from table 11.3, chapter 11, volume 4 of IPCC 2006 Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas Inventories can be used NEX, = Annual average nitrogen excretion per head of a defined livestock population (kg N/animal/ear) estimated as described in appendix 2 MS % Bl, j = Fraction of manure handled in sstem j (fraction) F gasms,j, = Percent of managed manure nitrogen for livestock categor that volatilises as NH 3 and NO X in the manure management sstem Default values for nitrogen loss due to volatilisation of NH 3 and NO X from manure management (fraction) N = Annual average number of animals of tpe for the ear estimated as per equation (5.a) or (5.b) (number) 13/54

14 For subsequent treatment stages, the reduction of the nitrogen during a treatment stage is estimated based on referenced data for different treatment tpes. Emissions from the next treatment stage are then calculated following the approach outlined above, but with nitrogen adjusted for the reduction from the previous treatment stages b multipling b (1 - R N ), where R N is the relative reduction of nitrogen from the previous stage. The relative reduction (R N ) of nitrogen depends on the treatment technolog and should be estimated in a conservative manner. Default values for different treatment technologies can be found in Chapter 8.2 in US-EPA (2001). 5 These values are provided in appendix 1 (values for TN). (iii) Baseline CO 2 emission from electricit and/or heat within the project boundar used in the baseline BE elec/heat, BE BE (9) EC, HG, BE = Baseline CO 2 emissions from electricit and/or heat used in the baseline (tco 2 /r) elec/heat, BE EC, = Baseline emissions associated with electricit generation in ear (tco 2 /r) BE HG, = Baseline emissions associated with heat generation in ear (tco 2 /r) BE elec / heat, EGBl, CEFBl, elec, EGd, CEFgrid HGBL, CEF (9) Bl, therm, EG BL, = Is the amount of electricit in the ear that would be consumed at the project site in the absence of the project activit (MWh) for operating AWMS CEFBl, elec, = Is the carbon emissions factor for electricit consumed at the project site in the absence of the project activit (tco 2 /MWh) EG d, = Is the amount of electricit generated utilizing the biogas collected during project activit and exported to the grid during the ear (MWh) CEF grid = Is the carbon emissions factor for the grid in the project scenario (tco 2 /MWh) HG BL, = Is the quantit of thermal energ that would be consumed in ear at the project site in the absence of the project activit (MJ) using fossil fuel for operating AWMS CEFBl, therm = Is the CO 2 emissions intensit for thermal energ generation (tco 2 e/mj) Determination of CEF Bl,elec : In cases where electricit would in the absence of the project activit be generated in an on-site fossil fuel fired power plant, project participants should use for CEF Bl,elec, the default emission factor for a diesel generator with a capacit of more than 200 kw for small-scale project activities (0.8 tco 2 /MWh, see Table I.D.1 in the simplified baseline and monitoring methodolog AMS.I.D for selected smallscale CDM project activit categories). In cases where electricit would, in the absence of the project activit, be purchased from the grid, the emission factor CEF Bl,elec should be calculated according to approved methodolog Tool to calculate the emission factor for an electricit sstem. If electricit consumption is less than small scale threshold (15 GWh/r), use the default emission factor for a diesel generator with a capacit of more than 200 kw for small-scale project activities (0.8 tco 2 /MWh, see Table I.D.1 in the simplified baseline and monitoring methodolog AMS.I.D for selected small-scale CDM project activit categories). Determination of CEF grid : 5 < 14/54

15 CEF grid should be calculated according to Tool to calculate the emission factor for an electricit sstem. Determination of CEF Bl,therm : CEF Bl,therm is the CO 2 emissions intensit for thermal energ generation (tco2e/mj). Baseline emissions associated with electricit generation (BE EC, ) The baseline emissions associated with electricit generation in ear (BE EC, ) shall be calculated using the Tool to calculate baseline, project and/or leakage emissions from electricit consumption. When appling the tool: (a) The electricit sources k in the tool correspond to the sources of electricit generated identified in the selection of the most plausible baseline scenario; (b) EC BL,k, in the tool is equivalent to the net amount of electricit generated using biogas in ear (EG d, ) Baseline emissions associated with heat generation (BE HG, ) The baseline emissions associated with heat generation in ear (BE HG, ) are determined based on the amount of methane in the biogas which is sent to the heat generation equipment in the project activit (boiler or air heater), as follows: n R efficienc,k, FCH4,HG,dest,k, EFCO2,BL,HG,k BE NCV (10) HG, CH4 k1 BE = Baseline emissions associated with heat generation in ear (tco 2 /r) HG, NCV CH4 = Net calorific value of methane at reference conditions (TJ/t CH 4 ) R = Ratio of the project and baseline efficienc of heat equipment tpe k in ear efficienc,k, F = Amount of methane in the biogas which is destroed for heat generation b CH4,HG,dest,k, equipment tpe k in ear (t CH 4 /r) EF = CO CO2,BL,HG,k 2 emission factor of the fossil fuel tpe used for heat generation b equipment tpe k in the baseline (t CO 2 /TJ) k = Heat generation equipment (boiler or air heater) n = Number of different heat generation equipment used in the project activit Determination of R efficienc,k, The ratio of the project and baseline efficienc of an air heater or boiler is determined as follows: HG,PJ,k, R efficienc,k, min1; (11) HG,BL,k R = Ratio of the project and baseline efficienc of equipment tpe k in ear efficienc,k, = Efficienc of the heat generation equipment tpe k used in the baseline HG,BL,k = Efficienc of the heat generation equipment tpe k used in the project activit in HG,PJ,k, ear k = Heat generation equipment tpe (boiler, air heater or kiln) 15/54

16 To estimate the baseline energ efficienc of an air heater or boiler ( HG,BL,k ) project participants shall appl the Tool to determine the baseline efficienc of thermal or electric energ generation sstems. Determination of F CH4,HG,dest,k, F CH4,HG, is determined using the Tool to determine the mass flow of a greenhouse gas in a gaseous stream. The following requirements appl: (a) The gaseous stream the tool shall be applied to is the biogas deliver pipeline to each item of heat generation equipment k, F CH4,HG,k, is then calculated as the sum of mass flows to each item of heat generation equipment k; (b) CH 4 is the greenhouse gases for which the mass flow should be determined; (c) The mass flow should be calculated on an hourl basis for each hour h in ear ; (d) The simplification offered for calculating the molecular mass of the gaseous stream is valid (equations 3 or 17 in the tool); and (e) The mass flow for each hour in ear shall be summed to a earl unit basis (tch 4 ). Baseline electricit and thermal energ consumptions should be estimated as the average of the historical 3 ears consumption. Project emissions The project activit might include one or more AWMS to treat the manure. For example, the manure might be first treated in an anaerobic digester and then treated waste might be further processed using an aerobic pond. Each AWMS is referred to as a treatment stage. Project emissions are estimated as follows: PE PE PE PE PE PE PE PE (10) AD, Aer, N 2O, PL, flare, elec / heat PE PE PE PE (12) AD, Aer, N 2O, EC / FC, PE AD, = Project emissions associated with the anaerobic digester in ear (tco 2 e/r) Leakage from AWMS sstems that capture s methane in t CO2e/r PE Aer, = Project CH 4 Methane emissions from aerobic AWMS treatment that aerobicall treats the manure in (tco 2 e/r) PE = Project N N 2 O, 2 O emissions in ear (t CO 2 /r) Nitrous oxide emission from project manure waste management sstem in t CO2e/r PE PL, = Phsical leakage of emissions from biogas network to flare the captured methane or suppl to the facilit where it is used for heat and/or electricit generation in (t CO2e/r) PE flare, = Project emissions from flaring of the residual gas stream in t CO2e/r PE elec/heat, = Project emissions from electricit consumption and fossil fuel combustion use of PE heat and/or electricit in the project case in (tco EC / FC, 2 e/r) (i) Project emissions associated with the anaerobic digester in ear Methane emissions from AWMS where gas is captured (PE AD, ) PE AD, is determined using the methodological tool Project and leakage emissions from anaerobic digesters. 16/54

17 IPCC guidelines specif phsical leakage from anaerobic digesters as being 15% of total biogas production. Where project participants use lower values for percentage of phsical leakage, the should provide measurements proving that this lower value is appropriate for the project. Ex ante leakage to be reported in the CDM-PDD will be estimated using equation 11.a or 11.b below, with a leakage factor of 0.15 or a lower value, if properl justified through documented evidence (which should be validated b the DOE). If project case AWMS is anaerobic digester onl, then use equation (11.a), else use equation (11.b). PE AD, GWPCH 4 DCH 4 * LFAD * FAD * ( B0, * N * VS, ) (11.a) PE AD N, GWPCH 4 DCH 4 * LFAD * FAD * 1 RVS, n * ( B0, * N * VS, * MS% j ) (11.b) n1 j, D CH4 = CH 4 densit ( t/m 3 at room temperature (20 ºC) and 1 atm pressure) LF AD = Methane leakage from Anaerobic digesters, default of 0.15 F AD = Fraction of volatile solid directed to anaerobic digester R VS,n = Fraction of volatile solid treated in AWMS stage n. The project proponents shall provide the values based on proven test results. In absence of such values the conservative value of volatile solids treated in Annex 1 shall be used = Index for livestock tpe B 0, = CH 4 production capacit from manure for livestock tpe, in m 3 CH 4 /kg-vs, to be chosen based on procedure provided for in the baseline methodolog section N = Annual average number of animals of tpe for the ear estimated as per equation (5.a) or (5.b), expressed in numbers VS, = Annual volatile solid excretion of livestock tpe on a dr-matter basis in kg/animal/ear MS% j = Fraction of manure handled in sstem j As noted in equations (11.a) and (11.b), not all volatile solids are degraded in the anaerobic digester. If the undegraded volatile solid in the effluent from anaerobic digester is discharged outside the project boundar without further treatment, these emissions should be treated as leakage and appropriatel reported and accounted. (ii) Project CH 4 Methane emissions from aerobic AWMS treatment (PE Aer, ) IPCC guidelines specif emissions from aerobic lagoons as 0.1% of total methane generating potential of the waste processed, which can be used as a default for all tpes of aerobic AWMS treatment. PEAer, GWPCH 4 DCH FAer n1 j, ) GWP = Global Warming Potential (GWP) of CH 4 (tco 2 e/tch 4 ) CH 4 N 1 RVS, n ( B0, N VS, MS% j PESl, R VS, = Fraction of volatile solid degraded in AWMS treatment method n of the N treatment n steps prior to waste being treated in an aerobic lagoon (fraction) D = Densit of CH 4 (t/m 3 )( t/m 3 at room temperature (20 ºC) and 1 atm pressure). CH 4 F = Fraction of volatile solid directed to aerobic sstem (fraction) Aer = Index for Tpe of livestock tpe (13) 17/54

18 B 0, = Maximum methane producing potential of the volatile solid generated b animal tpe (m 3 CH 4 /kg_dm) CH 4 production capacit from manure for livestock tpe, in m 3 CH 4 /kg-vs, to be chosen based on procedure provided for in the Baseline methodolog section. VS, = Annual volatile solid excretion livestock tpe entering all AWMS on a dr matter weight basis in (kg-dm/animal/r) N = Annual average number of animals of tpe for the ear (number) as estimated in equation (5.a) or (5.b)., expressed in numbers PE Sl, = Project CH 4 emissions from sludge disposed of in storage pit prior to disposal during the ear, expressed in tons of (tco 2 e/r) MS% = Fraction of manure handled in sstem j in the project activit (fraction) j Aerobic treatment results in large accumulations of sludge. Sludge requires removal and has large VS values. It is important to identif the following management process for the sludge and estimate the emissions from that management process. If the sludge ponds are not within the project boundar, the emissions should be included in as leakages. The emissions from sludge ponds shall be estimated as follows: N PE Sl, GWPCH 4 DCH 4 MCFsl FAer 1 RVS, n ( B0, N VS, MS% j ) (14) n1 j, GWP = Global Warming Potential (GWP) of CH 4 (tco 2 e/tch 4 ) CH 4 R VS, = Fraction of volatile solid degraded in AWMS treatment method n of the N treatment n steps prior to waste (sludge) being treated. (fraction) Values for Rvs should be taken from Annex 1 D = Densit of CH CH 4 4 (t/m 3 ) CH 4 densit ( t/m 3 at room temperature (20 ºC) and 1 atm pressure). F = Fraction of volatile solid directed to aerobic sstem (fraction) Aer = Tpe of livestock Index for livestock tpe B 0, = Maximum methane producing potential of the volatile solid generated b animal tpe (m 3 CH 4 /kg_dm) CH 4 production capacit from manure for livestock tpe, in m 3 CH 4 /kg-vs, to be chosen based on procedure provided for in the baseline methodolog section VS, = Annual volatile solid excretion livestock tpe entering all AWMS on a dr matter weight basis in (kg-dm/animal/r)annual volatile solid excretion of livestock tpe on a dr-matter basis in kg/animal/ear N = Annual average number of animals of tpe for the ear (number) as estimated as per equation (5.a) or (5.b), expressed in numbers MS% = Fraction of manure handled in sstem j in the project activit (fraction) j MCF = Methane conversion factor (MCF) for the sludge stored in sludge pits (fraction) sl estimated as in the baseline emissions section (iii) Project N 2 O emissions in ear (PE N2O, ) N 2 O emissions from manure management 1 PEN 2O, GWPN 2O CFN 2O N, N ( EN 2O, D, EN 2O, ID, ) 1000 (15) PE N 2 O, = Project N 2 O emissions in ear (tco 2 /r) Annual project N 2 O emissions in t CO2e/r GWP 2 = Global Warming Potential (GWP) for N 2 O (tco 2 e/tn 2 O) N O 18/54

19 CF, = Conversion factor N N 2O N N 2 O-N to N 2 O (44/28) E N O, D, = Direct N 2 2 O emission in ear (kg N 2 O-N/ear) Direct N 2 O emission in kg N 2 O- ear = Indirect N 2 O, ID 2 O emission in ear (kg N 2 O-N/ear) Indirect N 2 O emission in kg N 2 O- ear E N, Option 1: E N 2 O, D, EFN 2O, D, j NEX, N MS% j (16) j, E = Direct N N 2 O, D, 2 O emission in ear (kg N 2 O-N/r) Are the direct nitrous oxide emissions in kg of N 2 O per ear EF = Direct N N 2 O, D, j 2 O emission factor for the treatment sstem j of the manure management sstem (kg N 2 O-N/kg N) Is the direct N 2 O emission factor for the treatment sstem j of the manure management sstem in kg N 2 O-N/kg N (estimated with sitespecific, regional or national data if such data is available, otherwise use default EF3 in volume 4, chapter 10, table in IPCC 2006 Guidelines) NEX, = Annual average nitrogen excretion per head of a defined livestock population (kg N/animal/r) estimated as described in appendix 2 MS% = Fraction of manure handled in sstem j in the project activit (fraction) j N = Annual average number of animals of tpe for the ear estimated as per equation (5.a) or (5.b) (number) EN 2 O, ID, EFN 2O, ID FgasMS, j, NEX, N MS% j (17) j, E N2O,ID, = Indirect N 2 O emission in ear (kg N 2 O-N/ear) Are the indirect nitrous oxide emissions in kg of N 2 O per ear EF, = Indirect N N 2 O ID 2 O emission factor for N 2 O emissions from atmospheric deposition of nitrogen on soils and water surfaces(kg N 2 O-N/kg NH 3 -N and NO X -N) emitted estimated with site-specific, regional or national data if such data is available Otherwise, default values for EF 4 from table 11.3, chapter 11, volume 4 of IPCC 2006 guidelines can be used NEX, = Annual average nitrogen excretion per head of a defined livestock population (kg N/animal/r)estimated as described in appendix 2 MS% = Fraction of manure handled in sstem j in the project activit (fraction) j F = Percent of managed manure nitrogen for livestock categor that volatilises as NH3 gasms, j, and NO X in the manure management sstem Default values for nitrogen loss due to volatilisation of NH 3 and NO X from manure management (fraction) N = Annual average number of animals of tpe for the ear estimated as per equation (5.a) or (5.b) (number) Option 2: E E 12 EFN O, D, j Q EM, m [ N EM, m 2 N O, D, ] 2 j m1 12 FgasMS, j, Q EM, m [ N EM, m N O, ID, EFN O, ID ] 2 2 j, m1 (18) (19) 19/54

20 E N2O, D, E N2O, ID, = Direct N 2 O emission in ear (kg N 2 O-N/ear) = Indirect N 2 O emission in ear (kg N 2 O-N/ear) EF N2O,D,j = Direct N 2 O emission factor for the treatment sstem j of the manure management sstem (kg N 2 O-N/kg N) Q EM, = Monthl volume of the effluent mix entering the manure management sstem m (m 3 /month) [ N ] = Monthl total nitrogen concentration in the effluent mix entering the manure EM, m management sstem (kg N/m 3 ) EF N O, = Indirect N 2 ID 2 O emission factor for N 2 O emissions from atmospheric deposition of nitrogen on soils and water surfaces(kg N 2 O-N/kg NH 3 -N and NO X -N) F gasms, j, = Default values for nitrogen loss due to volatilisation of NH 3 and NO X from manure management (fraction) Option 2 is the preferred option for estimating N 2 O emissions since it is based on actual measurements. Project proponents should indicate in the PDD which option will be used and should continue with the selected option throughout the crediting period. For subsequent treatment stages, the reduction of the nitrogen during a treatment stage is estimated based on referenced data for different treatment tpes. Emissions from the next treatment stage are then calculated following the approach outlined above, but with nitrogen adjusted for the reduction from the previous treatment stages b multipling b (1-R N ), where R N is the relative reduction of nitrogen from the previous stage. The relative reduction (R N ) of nitrogen depends on the treatment technolog and should be estimated in a conservative manner. Default values for different treatment technologies can be found in Chapter 8.2 in US-EPA (2001). 6 These values are provided in appendix 1 (values for TN). (iv) Phsical leakage from distribution network of the captured methane in (PE PL ) This refers to leaks in the biogas sstem from the biogas pipeline deliver sstem. The sum of the quantities of captured methane fed to the flare, to the power plant and to the boiler (measured as per the monitoring plan) must be compared annuall with the total methane generated as measured b meter at the outlet of the methane generating digester. The difference between the monitored value of methane generated and that consumed in flare/electricit generation/heat shall be accounted as leakage from the pipelines. In the case where biogas is just flared and the pipeline from collection point to flare is short (i.e., less than 1 km, and for on site deliver onl), one flow meter can be used. In such cases the phsical leakage ma be considered as zero. (v) Project emissions from flaring of the residual gas stream (PE flare, ): The combustion of biogas methane ma give rise to significant methane emissions as a result of incomplete or inefficient combustion. Project emissions from flaring of the residual gas stream should be determined following the procedure described in the Tool to determine project emissions from flaring gases containing Methane. 6 < 20/54

21 (vi) Project emissions from use of heat use and/or electricit use (PE elec/heat ) These emissions should onl be considered for consumption of electricit or heat that is not related to the anaerobic digester, as those emissions will be considered while estimating PE AD,. PE PE elec/heat, EC/FC, PE PE (21) Elec, EC, j j heat,j, PE PE (20) FC, j, PE EC, PE Elec, = Are the Project emissions from electricit consumption in ear of electricit in the project case. The project emissions from electricit consumption (PE Elec, = PE EC, ) will be calculated following the latest version of Tool to calculate baseline, project and/or leakage emissions from electricit consumption. In case, the electricit consumption is not measured then the electricit consumption shall be estimated as follows: EC PJ, CPi, * 8760, where CP i, is the rated capacit (in MW) of i electrical equipment i used for the project activit PE FC, j, PE heat,j, = Project emissions from fossil fuel combustion in process j during the ear. Are the emissions from consumption of heat in the project case. The project emissions from fossil fuel combustion (PE heat,j, = PE FC,j, ) will be calculated following the latest version of Tool to calculate project or leakage CO 2 emissions from fossil fuel combustion. For this purpose, the processes j in the tool corresponds to all fossil fuel combustion in the AWMS (not including fossil fuels consumed for transportation of feed material and sludge or an other on-site transportation). paper plant established as part of the project activit, as well as an other on-site fuel combustion for the purposes of the project activit Leakage Leakage covers the emissions from land application of treated manure as well as the emissions related to anaerobic digestion in a digester, occurring outside the project boundar. These emissions are estimated as net of those released under project activit and those released in the baseline scenario. Net leakage of N 2 O and CH 4 are onl considered if the are positive. LE ( LEPJ, N 2O, LEBL, N 2O, ) ( LEPJ, CH 4, LEBL, CH 4, ) LE AD, (21) LE = Are the Leakage N PJ, N 2O, 2 O emissions released during project activit from land application of the treated manure in ear (tco 2 e/r) LE = Are the Leakage N BL, N 2O, 2 O emissions released during baseline scenario from land application of the treated manure in ear (tco 2 e/r) LE = Are the Leakage CH PJ, CH 4, 4 emissions released during project activit from land application of the treated manure in ear (tco 2 e/r) LE = Are the Leakage CH BL, CH 4, 4 emissions released during baseline scenario from land application of the treated manure in ear (tco 2 e/r) LE, = Leakage emissions associated with the anaerobic digester in ear (tco 2 e) AD 21/54