USE OF SULPHUR CONCRETE IN PRECAST APPLICATIONS

Transcription

1 USE OF SULPHUR CONCRETE IN PRECAST APPLICATIONS Document Prepared by Leading Carbon Ltd. Contact Information: Keith Driver # th Ave SW T2R 0A5 Calgary, Alberta Title Quantification Methodology for the Use of Sulphur Concrete in Precast Applications Version 1.2 Date of Issue Type Sectoral Scope Prepared By Contact Reference Number 28-Jun-2012 Methodology Manufacturing Industries, Construction Leading Carbon Ltd. and Shell Timo Makinen Sustainable Development Manager Downstream Specialties Business (Bitumen & Sulphur) c/o Shell Canada Limited 400 4th Avenue SW, P.O. Box 100, Station M Calgary, Alberta T2P 2H5 Reference number is assigned by VCSA upon approval 1

2 Relationship to Approved or Pending Methodologies Approved and Pending VCS methodologies for all sectoral scopes were reviewed to determine if an existing methodology could be reasonably revised to meet the objective of this proposed methodology. Two methodologies related to process changes in concrete production were identified, and are outlined in Table 1. Table 1: Summary of Methodologies Methodology Title Primary Reduction Mechanism Comments ACM0015 v3 Consolidated baseline and monitoring methodology for project activities using alternative raw materials that do not contain carbonates for clinker production in cement kilns, CDM March 2010 Avoidance of process CO2 emissions due to reduction of carbonate materials in the feedstock. The production of sulphur concrete requires significant process changes not reflected in this methodology. The project activity SSRs include calcination of raw materials and kiln emissions. Calcination does not occur in sulphur concrete and there is no clinker. ACM0005 v5 Consolidated baseline methodology for increasing the blend in concrete production, CDM October 2009 Avoidance of process CO2 emissions due to feedstock switch. The production of sulphur concrete requires significant process changes not reflected in this methodology. A review of the related methodologies indicated that the process changes required to produce sulphur concrete would result in significant changes to the existing methodologies, and adaptation would not be feasible. Other approved VCS large scale and consolidated methodologies under Manufacturing Industries sectoral scope are listed in Table 2. Approved Small Scale methodologies under Manufacturing Industires are listed in Table 3. No other methodologies exist under Construction sectoral scope. Table 2: List of Approved Large Scale and Consolidated Methodologies under Manufacturing Industries Methodology Title Methodology Type Comments AM0007 Analysis of the least-cost fuel option for seasonally-operating biomass cogeneration plants --- Version 1.0 Approved Large Scale AM0014 Natural gas-based package cogeneration --- Version 4.0 Approved Large Scale AM0036 Fuel switch from fossil fuels to biomass residues in heat generation equipment --- Version Approved Large Scale 2

3 AM0041 Mitigation of Methane Emissions in the Wood Carbonization Activity for Charcoal Production --- Version 1.0 Approved Large Scale AM0049 Methodology for gas based energy generation in an industrial facility --- Version 3.0 Approved Large Scale AM0055 Recovery and utilization of waste gas in refinery --- Version Approved Large Scale AM0057 Avoided emissions from biomass wastes through use as feed stock in pulp and paper, cardboard, fibreboard or bio-oil production --- Version Approved Large Scale AM0065 Replacement of SF6 with alternate cover gas in the magnesium industry --- Version 2.1 Approved Large Scale AM0070 Manufacturing of energy efficient domestic refrigerators --- Version Approved Large Scale AM0078 Point of Use Abatement Device to Reduce SF6 emissions in LCD Manufacturing Operations --- Version Approved Large Scale AM0092 Substitution of PFC gases for cleaning Chemical Vapour Deposition (CVD) reactors in the semiconductor industry --- Version Approved Large Scale AM0095 Waste gas based combined cycle power plant in a Greenfield iron and steel plant --- Version Approved Large Scale AM0096 CF4 emission reduction from installation of an abatement system in a semiconductor manufacturing facility --- Version ACM0003 Emissions reduction through partial substitution of fossil fuels with alternative fuels or less carbon intensive fuels in cement Approved Large Scale Approved Consolidated 3

4 or quicklime manufacture --- Version ACM0009 Consolidated baseline and monitoring methodology for fuel switching from coal or petroleum fuel to natural gas --- Version 3.2 ACM0012 Consolidated baseline methodology for GHG emission reductions from waste energy recovery projects --- Version Approved Consolidated Approved Consolidated Table 3: List of Approved Small Scale Methodologies under Manufacturing Industries Methodology Title Methodology Type Comments AMS-II.D. Energy efficiency and fuel switching measures for industrial facilities --- Version 12.0 AMS-II.H. Energy efficiency measures through centralization of utility provisions of an industrial facility - -- Version 3.0 AMS-II.I. Efficient utilization of waste energy in industrial facilities --- Version 1.0 Approved Small Scale Approved Small Scale Approved Small Scale AMS-III.K. Avoidance of methane release from charcoal production --- Version 5.0 Approved Small Scale AMS-III.N. Avoidance of HFC emissions in rigid Poly Urethane Foam (PUF) manufacturing --- Version 3.0 Approved Small Scale AMS-III.P. Recovery and utilization of waste gas in refinery facilities --- Version 1.0 Approved Small Scale AMS-III.Q. Waste energy recovery (gas/heat/pressure) projects --- Version 4.0 Approved Small Scale AMS-III.V. Decrease of coke consumption in blast furnace by installing dust/sludge recycling system in Approved Small Scale 4

5 steel works --- Version 1.0 AMS-III.Z. Fuel Switch, process improvement and energy efficiency in brick manufacture --- Version 3.0 Approved Small Scale AMS-III.AD. Emission reductions in hydraulic lime production --- Version 1.0 Approved Small Scale AMS-III.AN. Fossil fuel switch in existing manufacturing industries --- Version 2.0 Approved Small Scale Research into other voluntary and compliance based GHG offset systems did not uncover any existing GHG quantification protocols that relate to the use of 5

6 Table of Contents 1 Sources Summary Description of the Methodology Definitions Applicability Conditions Project Boundary Procedure for Determining the Baseline Scenario Procedure for Demonstrating Additionality Quantification of GHG Emission Reductions and Removals Baseline Emissions Project Emissions Leakage Summary of GHG Emission Reduction and/or Removals Monitoring Data and Parameters Available at Validation Data and Parameters Monitored Description of the Monitoring Plan Uncertainty Assessment References and Other Information

7 1 SOURCES This methodology is based on the draft Quantification Protocol for the Use of Sulphur Concrete in Precast Applications v0.4, issued under the Alberta Specified Gas Emitters Regulation. The methodology references the following CDM Methodological Tools: Combined tool to identify the baseline scenario and determine additionality v03.0.1; and Tool for the demonstration and assessment of additionality v In addition, technical and good practice guidance was obtained from Environment Canada s annual GHG reporting, the US EPA s Emission Inventory, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), and various other reliable sources of information pertaining to the concrete production industry. The good practice guidance and best science used to develop the quantification methodology are presented in Section SUMMARY DESCRIPTION OF THE METHODOLOGY Concrete is a commonly used material for infrastructure, industrial and construction applications, consisting of aggregate (rock & sand), water and cement. The production of calcium and/or magnesium carbonate-derived cement (often from limestone) releases significant amounts of greenhouse gases ( GHG ). This methodology is applicable to processes that involve the substitution of calcium and/or magnesium carbonate-derived ( Portland ) cement with an alternative binder, such as a modified heated sulphur product, during the production of concrete and other concrete-based products such as pre-cast pipe, paving stones, slabs and tanks. This Methodology is not applicable to concrete standard production process (i.e. for poured in place applications) as it would entail different baseline emissions quantification method. The parameters and equations in the baseline of this methodology are specific to precast applications as opposed to poured in place applications. Traditional cementitious binders derived from limestone and clay rely on the chemical bonds formed upon contact with water to bind together aggregate material (sand and rock) to form concrete. This binder ( clinker ) is a key component of cement; however, the production of clinker results in the release of a significant amount of GHG from two main sources: process emissions and combustion emissions. Carbon dioxide process emissions occur as a by-product of the calcination process, where a calcium or magnesium carbonate such as limestone is heated with clay to form clinker (primarily calcium oxide) and carbon dioxide. Additional GHG emissions occur because heat for the calcination process is normally supplied via the combustion of fossil fuels, releasing carbon dioxide, methane and nitrous oxide as a result. Portland cement may be completely substituted with modified heated sulphur to form a stable, hard concrete product, avoiding the process and combustion emissions associated with the manufacture of Portland cement. In the case of a modified sulphur alternative, the sulphur itself is generated as a by-product of natural gas processing and petroleum refining. Unlike concrete made from Portland cement (which can be cold mixed), concrete made with modified heated sulphur needs to be heated during production. Aggregate needs to be heated too to the same temperature as the molten sulphur prior to mixing in order to maintain the heat in the sulphur product during the mixing process. Despite the need to be hot mixed (with heat likely obtained from the combustion of fossil fuels), concrete and cement products made with modified heated sulphur releases far fewer GHGs than concrete made with Portland cement because it avoids the process emissions resulting from the calcination process used during clinker production, as well as the combustion emissions typically generated to supply heat to that process. The clinker production process typically operates at approximately 1450 deg C. The presence of 7

8 sulphur in sulphur concrete places a temperature ceiling on potential product applications, since the melting point of sulphur is relatively low (113 deg C). The high strength properties of sulphur concrete to allow it to be used in a wide variety of pre-cast applications, such as traffic barriers, drainage tiles, paving stones, and marine defences. The baseline condition is defined as the production of concrete using traditional cementitious binders derived from limestone and clay that rely on the chemical bonds formed upon contact with water to bind together aggregate material (sand and rock). This binder ( clinker ) is a key component of Portland cement. The calculation of the emissions related to the production of Portland cement will be based on the mass of sulphur cement used in the project condition. An equivalency factor will be used to provide functional equivalence between the mass of sulphur cement and Portland cement. Finally, an emission factor representing the mass of carbon dioxide equivalent greenhouse gas emissions per tonne of Portland cement displaced will be applied. 3 DEFINITIONS Aggregate: Binder: Portland Cement: Sulphur Cement: Concrete: Precast Products: Aggregate is composed of such coarse particulate material as sand, gravel, crushed stone, slag, and recycled concrete. It may be sourced from gravel pits, quarries and other local sources near to the pre-cast facility. In addition to sand and rock, aggregate may include other materials such as fly ash and slag that can be blended with cement to form a final product. Fly ash and slag are cementous materials partially displacing Portland cement in the baseline product, however can also be included in sulphur concrete products. A material that serves as an adhesive that binds with the aggregate to form concrete. A finely ground, usually grey coloured mineral powder that when mixed with water, acts as a glue to bind together aggregate to form concrete. A product composed of molten elemental sulphur and a proprietary modifier that acts as a glue to bind together aggregate to form sulphur concrete. Sulphur cement requires no water to form sulphur concrete. A composite building material made from the combination of aggregate and a cement binder. A form of construction where concrete is cast in a reusable mould or form, which is then cured in a controlled environment. Examples of precast products include paving stones, planters, traffic barriers, holding tanks and retaining walls, among many others. 4 APPLICABILITY CONDITIONS This methodology is applicable to the production of sulphur concrete for precast applications, where the following conditions are met: 1. The most reasonable and credible baseline scenario is the production of precast concrete products using Portland cement, as demonstrated using the methodology outlined in section 6; 2. The handling, storage, mix production temperature and other key factors specified by the manufacturer for the proper and safe use of sulphur cement have been followed by the project 8

9 proponent. Evidence of adherence to manufacturer specification must be made available during a verification site visit, conducted during precast product production; 3. The resulting sulphur concrete product meets local legal and technical requirements. In the absence of local technical specifications for concrete, project proponents must demonstrate that sulphur concrete produced under the project condition provides the equivalent function to concrete that would have been produced under the baseline condition. 9

10 5 PROJECT BOUNDARY Sources, Sinks and Reservoirs (SSRs) included in project and baseline quantification include those that are within the project site (the physical, geographic location of the hot mix asphalt production facility), as well as others that are off-site. A generalized process flow diagram of a typical project and baseline are presented in Figure 1 and Figure 2 respectively. The SSRs represented in those figures were compared and their relevancy evaluated to determine if they should be included or excluded from the quantification methodology. Table 4 provides justification for the inclusion or exclusion of each of the potential SSRs in the project and baseline conditions. Project proponents must justify the baseline and project SSRs selected for quantification in their project. Project proponents must account for: Direct emissions avoided by displacing Portland cement production and use with sulphur cement production and use Direct emissions due to fuel combustion at the precast concrete facility for: o heating of aggregate; o additional heating of the sulphur additive; Direct emissions due to fuel combustion and process emissions outside the precast concrete facility for: o Production of the sulphur modifier; o Transport of the modifier and modified sulphur product; Indirect emissions due to the extraction and processing of fossil fuels used; and Indirect emissions due to the degassing of sulphur (if applicable). A generalized process flow diagram of a typical project is presented in Figure 1. The temporal project boundary includes the operation of an existing precast concrete facility during the incorporation of a sulphur binder. SSRs related to the construction and decommissioning of the facility are considered outside the scope of this methodology and have been excluded from quantification. This is reasonable given the minimal emissions associated with the construction and decommissioning phases and the long operational life of the facility. 10

11 Project Scenario Molten Sulphur Production Fuel Extraction & Processing Electricity Generation Project Scenario Sulphur Degassing Aggregate Production & Processing Fuel Delivery Modifier Production & Sulphur & Storage Aggregate Additional Sulphur Heating Aggregate Heating Concrete Mixing Concrete Recycling & Disposal Concrete Precast Product Pouring & Forming Precast Product Figure 1: Project Process Flow Diagram 11

12 Production of Molten Sulphur Limestone Production Fuel Extraction & Processing Electricity Generation Baseline Scenario Sulphur Degassing Cement Kiln Dust Production & Processing Portland Cement Production Aggregate Production & Processing Fuel Delivery & Storage of Molten Sulphur Portland Cement Aggregate Water Treatment & Pumping Concrete Mixing Concrete Recycling & Disposal Concrete Precast Product Pouring & Forming Precast Product Figure 2: Baseline Process Flow Diagram 12

13 Table 4: GHG Sources, Sinks and Reservoirs Baseline Source Production of Molten Sulphur Sulphur Degassing and Storage of Molten Sulphur Limestone Production Portland Cement Production Cement Kiln Dust Production and Processing Portland Cement Aggregate Production and Processing of Aggregate Controlled,, or Affected Gas Included Justification/Explanation CO 2 No Excluded as the quantity of molten sulphur CH 4 No produced in the project and baseline scenarios N 2 O No are functionally equivalent. Sulphur is a byproduct of gas processing and would be produced in both the project and baseline scenarios in the same quantity. CO 2 No If sulphur degassing was occurring in the CH 4 No baseline condition, it will continue under the N 2 O No project condition and emissions will be equivalent. CO 2 No If sulphur is used as it is produced rather than CH 4 No storing it, emissions will be lower in the project N 2 O No condition. Therefore it is conservative to exclude this SSR. CO 2 No Less limestone will be produced in the project CH 4 No condition and therefore emissions will be lower in the project condition. The emissions from N 2 O No this SSR are relatively low and difficult to estimate accurately. Exclusion of this SSR is conservative. CO 2 Yes The production of Portland cement in the CH 4 Yes baseline condition has relevant emissions and N 2 O Yes must be included. CO 2 No Cement kiln dust (CKD) refers to the portion of CH 4 No the cement raw materials that does not become part of the clinker. CO 2 might be emitted from CKD that is not recycled to the N 2 O No Portland cement production process. CKD is not produced in the project condition, therefore it is conservative to exclude its production and processing related emissions. CO 2 No The quantity of Portland cement that is CH 4 No transported in the project condition would be less than the quantity in the baseline scenario, N 2 O No therefore it is conservative to exclude these emissions. CO 2 No Excluded as the same quantity of aggregate CH 4 No would be produced and processed in the N 2 O No project and baseline conditions. CO 2 No Excluded as the same quantity of aggregate CH 4 No would be transported in the project and N 2 O No baseline conditions. CO 2 No Emissions from this SSR are avoided in the CH project condition. This emission reduction is 4 No not the focus of this methodology. Emissions N 2 O No are excluded as it is conservative to do so. Fuel CO 2 No The quantity of fuel consumed in the baseline Water Treatment and Pumping 13

14 Project Source Extraction/Pro cessing Fuel Delivery Electricity Generation Concrete Mixing Concrete Precast Product Pouring and Forming Precast Product Concrete Recycling or Disposal Production of Molten Sulphur Sulphur degassing Sulphur and Storage Modifier Production and Aggregate Production and Processing of Aggregate Controlled,, or Affected Controlled Controlled Controlled Affected Affected Gas Included Justification/Explanation CH 4 No condition for the production of Portland cement N 2 O No will be considered in the SSR: Portland Cement Production. CO 2 No The quantity of fuel consumed in the baseline CH 4 No condition for the production of Portland cement will be greater than the quantity of fuel N 2 O No consumed in the project condition for mixing sulphur concrete. Emissions are excluded as it is conservative to do so. CO 2 No There will be no incremental electricity CH 4 No consumption in the project condition over the N 2 O No baseline condition. CO 2 No The process for concrete mixing is equivalent CH 4 No in the baseline and project conditions. N 2 O No CO 2 No The same quantity of concrete will be CH 4 No transported in the baseline and project N 2 O No scenarios. CO 2 No The process for pouring and forming will not CH 4 No change between the baseline and project N 2 O No scenarios. CO 2 No There is no difference in the transportation CH 4 No related emissions between the baseline and N 2 O No project scenarios. CO 2 No Excluded for simplification. This is CH 4 No conservative as the emissions are likely higher N 2 O No under the baseline condition. CO 2 No Excluded as the quantity of molten sulphur CH 4 No produced in the project and baseline scenarios are functionally equivalent. Sulphur is a byproduct N 2 O No of gas processing and would be produced in both the project and baseline scenarios in the same quantity CO 2 Yes If sulphur degassing is occurring as a result of CH 4 Yes the project and the producer would otherwise N 2 O Yes not be degassing the sulphur, the emissions must be included. CO 2 Yes If sulphur was stored in the baseline condition, CH 4 Yes transportation emissions in the project N 2 O Yes condition are deemed to be additional and must be included. CO 2 Yes Emissions associated with the production and CH 4 Yes transportation of the sulphur modifier are N 2 O Yes directly related to the project and must be included. CO 2 No Excluded as the same quantity of aggregate CH 4 No would be produced and processed in the N 2 O No project and baseline conditions. CO 2 No Excluded as the same quantity of aggregate CH 4 No would be transported in the project and 14

15 Source Fuel Extraction and Processing Fuel Delivery Electricity Generation Additional Sulphur Heating Aggregate Heating Concrete Mixing Concrete Precast Product Pouring and Forming Precast Product Concrete Recycling or Disposal Controlled,, or Affected Controlled Controlled Controlled Controlled Controlled Controlled Controlled Sulphur Concrete v1.2 Gas Included Justification/Explanation N 2 O No baseline conditions. CO 2 Yes Fuel used for Additional Sulphur Heating is CH 4 Yes incremental in the project condition and N 2 O Yes emissions must be included. CO 2 No Excluded as the emissions from transportation CH 4 No are likely negligible. N 2 O No CO 2 No There will be no incremental electricity CH 4 No consumption in the project condition over the N 2 O No baseline condition. CO 2 Yes Any heat derived from sources that emit CH 4 Yes greenhouse gases is incremental to the N 2 O Yes baseline condition and must be included. CO 2 Yes Any heat derived from sources that emit CH 4 Yes greenhouse gases is incremental to the N 2 O Yes baseline condition and must be included. CO 2 No The process for concrete mixing is equivalent CH 4 No in the baseline and project conditions. N 2 O No CO 2 No The same quantity of concrete will be CH 4 No transported in the baseline and project N 2 O No scenarios. CO 2 No The process for pouring and forming will not CH 4 No change between the baseline and project N 2 O No scenarios. CO 2 No There is no difference in the transportation CH 4 No related emissions between the baseline and N 2 O No project scenarios. CO 2 No Excluded for simplification. This is CH 4 No conservative as the emissions are likely higher N 2 O No under the baseline condition. 15

16 6 PROCEDURE FOR DETERMINING THE BASELINE SCENARIO Sulphur Concrete v1.2 The baseline scenario for projects applying this methodology is the production of precast concrete products using Portland cement. Project proponents must demonstrate that this is the most reasonable and credible baseline for their project using the most recent version of the methodological tool Combined tool to identify the baseline scenario and determine additionality as published on the UNFCC website. Project proponents should use Step 1 of the referenced tool to identify all realistic and credible baseline alternatives, and Step 2 of the tool to identify barriers and to assess which alternatives are prevented by these barriers. In doing so, relevant local regulations governing the use of different technologies, and technical specifications of concrete products should be taken into account. Project proponents should also use Step 3: Investment Analysis, and Step 4: Common Practice Analysis, where applicable in their project and as described by the referenced tool. 7 PROCEDURE FOR DEMONSTRATING ADDITIONALITY Additionality will be assessed and demonstrated using the most recent version of the methodological tool Combined tool to identify the baseline scenario and determine additionality and Tool for the demonstration and assessment of additionality v as published on the UNFCC website. 8 QUANTIFICATION OF GHG EMISSION REDUCTIONS AND REMOVALS 8.1 Baseline Emissions The production of clinker results in the release of significant process GHG emissions and combustion GHG emissions. Carbon dioxide process emissions occur as a by-product of the calcination process, where a calcium or magnesium carbonate such as limestone is heated with clay to form clinker (primarily calcium oxide) and carbon dioxide. The heat required for the calcination process is typically supplied from the combustion of fossil fuels, resulting in the emission of further carbon dioxide as well as smaller amounts of methane and nitrous oxide. Baseline quantification in this methodology is projection based, which uses projections of reductions or removals in the project to estimate the baseline activity that would have occurred in the absence of the project. The calculation of the emissions related to the production of Portland cement in the baseline condition will be based on the mass of sulphur cement used in the project condition. An equivalency factor will be used to provide functional equivalence between the mass of sulphur cement and Portland cement. Finally, an emission factor representing the mass of carbon dioxide equivalent greenhouse gas emissions per tonne of Portland cement displaced will be applied. Emissions under the baseline condition (in tonnes CO 2 E) are determined using the following equation: BE y = BE Portland (1) Where: BE y = the sum of baseline emissions in a given year, y BE Portland = emissions due to the production of Portland cement 16

17 The emissions due to the production of Portland cement under the baseline condition are calculated as follows: BE Portland = ( Mass Precast % PC ) EF Portland Cement Production (2) Where: Mass Precast = the measured mass of finished precast products containing sulphur cement in the project scenario (tonnes) % PC = the ratio of Portland cement used in the finished product under the baseline scenario, based on manufacturer specifications. This percentage represent the amount of Portland cement actually contained within the finished product (in the baseline) compared to other components such as aggregate, water. (unitless value) EF Portland Cement Production = CO 2 equivalent emission factor for the production of Portland Cement (kg CO 2 E or kg CO 2 /CH 4/ N 2 O per tonne Portland cement) The emission factor for Portland cement production can be calculated as follows: EF Portland Cement Production = Mass Clinker Mass Cement EF Clinker (3) Where: Mass Clinker /Mass Cement = the clinker to cement ratio for the baseline condition. Guidance on this figure provided in Appendix A, for site specific values and in Table A2 for regional values. EF Clinker = the emission factor per tonne of clinker for the baseline condition. Guidance on this figure provided in Appendix A for site specific values and based on kiln type used in the baseline region. 8.2 Project Emissions Emissions under the project condition (in tonnes CO 2 E) are determined using the following equation: PE y = PE Degassing + PE Additional S Heating + PE Agg Heating + PE Fuel + PE S Trans&Storage + PE Modifier (4) Where: PE y = the sum of project emissions in a given year, y PE Degassing = emissions due to sulphur degassing PE Additional S Heating = emissions due to the additional heating requirements of sulphur concrete PE Agg Heating = emissions due to heating the aggregate PE Fuel = emissions due to the extraction and processing of fuel 17

18 PE S Trans&Storage = emissions due to the transportation and storage of sulphur PE Modifier = emissions due to the production and transportation of the sulphur modifier The emissions due to sulphur degassing under the project condition are calculated as follows: PE Degassing = (Vol Fuel i EF Fuel CO2 ) + Vol vent gas MF CO2 m CO2 V STP ; (Vol Fuel i EF Fuel CH4 ) ; (Vol Fuel i EF Fuel N2O ) (5) Where: VolFuel i = the volume of each type of fuel combusted under the project scenario (L, m 3 or other) EF Fuel x = the emissions factor for fuel production and processing for each GHG listed (kg GHG/L, m 3 or other). Vol vent gas = volume of degassing vent gas incinerated (m 3 ) MF CO2 = molar fraction of CO 2 in degassing vent gas incinerated (%) m CO2 = molar mass of CO 2 (kg/mol) V STP = volume of on kg-mole of an ideal gas at standard temperature and pressure (m 3 ) The emissions for additional heating of sulphur are calculated as follows: PE Additional S Heating = (Vol Fuel i EF Fuel CO2 ) ; (Vol Fuel i EF Fuel CH4 ) ; (Vol Fuel i EF Fuel N2O ) (6) Where: VolFuel i = EF Fuel x = the volume of each type of fuel combusted for additional sulphur heating (L, m 3 or other) the emissions factor for fuel combustion for each GHG listed (kg GHG/L, m 3 or other). The emissions for heating of aggregate are calculated as follows: PE Agg Heating = (Vol Fuel i EF Fuel CO2 ) ; (Vol Fuel i EF Fuel CH4 ) ; (Vol Fuel i EF Fuel N2O ) (7) Where: VolFuel i = EF Fuel x = the volume of each type of fuel combusted for aggregate heating (L, m 3 or other) the emissions factor for fuel combustion for each GHG listed (kg GHG/L, m 3 or other). 18

19 The emissions due to the extraction and processing of fossil fuels under the project condition are calculated as follows: PE Fuel = (Vol Fuel i EF Fuel CO2 ) ; (Vol Fuel i EF Fuel CH4 ) ; (Vol Fuel i EF Fuel N2O ) (8) Where: VolFuel i = EF Fuel x = the volume of each type of fuel combusted under the project scenario (L, m 3 or other) the emissions factor for fuel production and processing for each GHG listed (kg GHG/L, m 3 or other). The emissions due to transportation and storage of molten sulphur under the project condition are calculated as follows: PE S Trans&Storage = Mass Distance EF Transport (9) Where: Mass Distance = EF Transport = the product of the mass of sulphur and the distance shipped from sulphur manufacturing facility to pre-cast manufacturing facility (tonne.km) CO 2 equivalent emissions factor for truck transportation (kg CO 2 E/ tonne.km). The emissions due to the production and transportation of modifier are calculated as follows: Where: PE Modifier = M Modifier EF Modifier + Mass Distance Modifier EF Transport (10) M Modifier = mass of modifier used (tonne) EF Modifier = CO 2 equivalent emission factor for modifier production (kg CO 2 E/tonne modifier) Mass Distance Modifier = the product of the mass of modifier and the distance shipped from modifier manufacturing facility to facility where modifier is added to sulphur (tonne.km) EF Transport = CO 2 equivalent emissions factor for truck transportation (kg CO 2 E/ tonne.km). 8.3 Leakage No sources of leakage have been identified for this project activity. 8.4 Summary of GHG Emission Reduction and/or Removals The emission reductions for this project activity are calculated as follows: ER y = BE y PE y (11) 19

20 Where: ER Y = Net GHG emissions reductions and/or removals in year y BE Y =Baseline emissions in year y PE y = Project emissions in year y Sulphur Concrete v1.2 9 MONITORING 9.1 Data and Parameters Available at Validation The following data will be made available at validation by the project proponent. Default values may vary according the physical location of the project activity. The project proponent must provide evidence and justification that the values presented here are applicable to their project activity, or provide and justify project-specific values as needed. Should the data parameters listed below not be available at the time of validation, the project proponent must provide a plan for determination and/or monitoring the data during the project. All parameters used must be reviewed on an annual basis to ensure the most current value is used in calculations. Data Unit / Parameter: Data unit: Description: Source of data: Justification of choice of data or description of measurement methods and procedures applied: Any comment: Emission factor for the production of Portland cement (EF Portland Cement Production ) kg CO 2 E (or kg CO 2, CH 4, N 2 O as applicable) per tonne of Portland Cement Emission factor describing GHG emissions from production of Portland cement. This factor includes emissions from the chemical process of calcination as well as emissions from fuel combustion, as provided by project proponent records and/or the World Business Council for Sustainable Development, Cement Industry Energy and CO2 Performance Getting the Numbers Right report. Estimation Proponents may use site-specific emission factors for accuracy if a specific facility can be justified for the baseline cement production facility. Reference values may be calculated following the methodology presented in Appendix A, using data published by the World Business Council for Sustainable Development based on region. Project proponents should justify that the EF Portland Cement Production in Appendix A is conservative for their project. Project proponents must provide justification for factor used based on the region, kiln type and / or 20

21 baseline facility records. Data Unit / Parameter: Emissions factors for fuel combustion (EF Fuel i, GHG) Data unit: Description: Source of data: Justification of choice of data or description of measurement methods and procedures applied: Any comment: kg (CO 2, CH 4, N 2 O) per L, m3 or other of each type of fuel used Emission factor describing GHG emissions from combustion of fuel. Used under both the project and baseline conditions. Estimation Reference values may be obtained from national and international GHG inventories. In the absence of local or regional data, reference values may be obtained from the most recent version of the IPCC guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas Inventories. Review of best practice guidance and accepted standards. Reference values are generally available. Data Unit / Parameter: Molar mass of carbon dioxide: Data unit: Description: g/mol Physical property / Constant Source of data: General Chemistry book, 9 th Edition, Ebbing & Gammon Justification of choice of data or description of measurement methods and procedures applied: Any comment: - n/a Data Unit / Parameter: Volume of one kg-mole of an ideal gas at standard temperature and pressure: Data unit: m 3 Description: Physical property / Constant Source of data: General Chemistry book, 9 th Edition, Ebbing & Gammon Justification of choice of data or description of measurement methods and procedures applied: n/a 21

22 Any comment: - Data Unit / Parameter: Emissions factors for fuel extraction and processing (EF Fuel i, GHG ) Data unit: Description: Source of data: Justification of choice of data or description of measurement methods and procedures applied: Any comment: kg (CO 2, CH 4, N 2 O) per L, m3 or other of each type of fuel used Emission factor describing GHG emissions from extraction and processing of fuel combusted. Estimation Reference values may be obtained from national and international GHG inventories. In the absence of local or regional data, reference values may be obtained from the most recent version of the IPCC guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas Inventories. Review of best practice guidance and accepted standards. Reference values are generally available. 9.2 Data and Parameters Monitored The following data parameters will be monitored during the project. Data Unit / Parameter: Mass of precast products produced (Mass Precast ) Data unit: Description: Source of data: Description of measurement methods and procedures to be applied: Frequency of monitoring/recording: QA/QC procedures to be applied: Any comment: Tonne The mass of finished precast concrete products Measurement Direct measurement of the mass of the finished product. Each product General guidance on QA/QC procedures for this parameter is provided in Section 9.3 Description of the Monitoring Plan. Measurement is standard practice. Data Unit / Parameter: Data unit: Description: Ratio of Portland cement in finished product (% PC ) Unitless The ratio of Portland cement in the finished 22

23 Source of data: Description of measurement methods and procedures to be applied: Frequency of monitoring/recording: QA/QC procedures to be applied: Any comment: product Estimated This percentage represent the amount of Portland cement actually contained within the finished product (in the baseline) compared to other components such as aggregate, water. (unitless value) Per product. General guidance on QA/QC procedures for this parameter is provided in Section 9.3 Description of the Monitoring Plan. The use of manufacturer s specifications provides a method for establishing functional equivalence between the product used in the baseline condition and the product used in the project condition. Data Unit / Parameter: Volume of each type of fuel combusted during the project for sulphur degassing, aggregate heating and additional sulphur heating (VolFuel i ) Data unit: Description: Source of data: Description of measurement methods and procedures to be applied: Frequency of monitoring/recording: L, m 3 or other The volume of fuel used Measurement The project proponent may measure the volume of fuel consumed in one of two ways: 1. Direct metering or reconciliation of volumes received and in storage; 2. Reconciliation of volume of fuel purchased within a given time period. Monthly QA/QC procedures to be applied: Cross-checking of metered volumes vs. theoretical fuel use, analysis of data trends. Any comment: - Data Unit / Parameter: Volume of degassing vent gas incinerated (Vol vent gas) Data unit: m 3 Description: The volume of vent gas incinerated 23

24 Source of data: Description of measurement methods and procedures to be applied: Frequency of monitoring/recording: QA/QC procedures to be applied: Any comment: - Measurement Sulphur Concrete v1.2 Direct metering of vent gas to the incinerator Continuous metering with monthly reconciliation General guidance on QA/QC procedures for this parameter is provided in Section 9.3 Description of the Monitoring Plan. Data Unit / Parameter: Molar fraction of carbon dioxide in incinerated vent gas (MF CO2 ) Data unit: % Description: Source of data: Description of measurement methods and procedures to be applied: Frequency of monitoring/recording: QA/QC procedures to be applied: Any comment: Molar fraction of carbon dioxide in incinerated vent gas Measurement Direct metering of vent gas to the incinerator Monthly General guidance on QA/QC procedures for this parameter is provided in Section 9.3 Description of the Monitoring Plan. Data Unit / Parameter: Mass distance of sulphur transported to the concrete facility (Mass Distance) Data unit: Description: Source of data: Description of measurement methods and procedures to be applied: Frequency of monitoring/recording: QA/QC procedures to be applied: Any comment: - Tonne.km Product of the mass of sulphur used and the distance shipped from sulphur manufacturing facility to precast manufacturing facility. Measurement Direct measurement of mass of sulphur received and distance traveled based on manifests or supplier invoices. Each shipment Retention of trucking manifests, copies of truck logs, or invoices from the supplier. 24

25 Data Unit / Parameter: Emissions factor for truck transportation (EF Transport ) Data unit: kg CO 2 E per tonne.km Description: Emissions factor describing transportation emissions. Source of data: Description of measurement methods and procedures to be applied: Frequency of monitoring/recording: QA/QC procedures to be applied: Any comment: - Measurement Actual measured or local data is to be used. If not available, regional data should be used and, in its absence, IPCC defaults can be used from the most recent version of IPCC Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas Inventories. Per shipment if actual fuel consumption is used, or annual adjustment of a calculated emissions factor. General guidance on QA/QC procedures for this parameter is provided in Section 9.3 Description of the Monitoring Plan. Data Unit / Parameter: Mass of modifier used in sulphur cement (M Modifier ) Data unit: Description: Source of data: Description of measurement methods and procedures to be applied: Frequency of monitoring/recording: Tonne Mass of modifier used in sulphur cement Measurement Direct measurement Per shipment of modifier QA/QC procedures to be applied: Comparison to historical values and analysis of trends Any comment: - Data Unit / Parameter: Emissions factor for modifier production (EF Modifier ) Data unit: Description: Source of data: Description of measurement methods and procedures to be applied: kg CO 2 E/ tonne of modifier Emission factor describing emissions due to production of modifier Estimated Value provided by the modifier manufacturer based on fuel and electricity consumed. 25

26 Frequency of monitoring/recording: QA/QC procedures to be applied: Any comment: - Sulphur Concrete v1.2 Per shipment of modifier, to be updated annually by manufacturer of modifier Comparison to historical values and analysis of trends Data Unit / Parameter: Mass distance of modifier transported to the concrete facility (Mass Distance) Data unit: Description: Source of data: Description of measurement methods and procedures to be applied: Frequency of monitoring/recording: QA/QC procedures to be applied: Any comment: - Tonne.km Product of the mass of modifier used and the distance shipped from modifier manufacturing facility to sulphur cement manufacturing facility. Measurement Direct measurement of mass of modifier received and distance traveled based on manifests or supplier invoices. Each shipment Retention of trucking manifests, copies of truck logs, or invoices from the supplier. 9.3 Description of the Monitoring Plan The project proponent must develop a monitoring plan detailing the procedures for data capture, measurement and reporting of the data parameters listed in Section 9.2. In general, data quality management must include sufficient data capture such that the mass and energy balances may be easily performed with the need for minimal assumptions and use of contingency procedures. The data should be of sufficient quality to fulfill the quantification requirement and be substantiated by company records for the purpose of verification. The project proponent shall establish and apply quality management procedures to manage data and information. Written procedures should be established for each measurement task outlining responsibility, timing and record location requirements. The greater the rigour of the management system for the data, the more easily an audit will be conducted for the project. Record keeping practices shall be established that include: Electronic recording of values of logged primary parameters for each measurement interval; Printing of monthly back-up hard copies of all logged data; Written logs of operations and maintenance of the project system including notation of all shutdowns, start-ups and process adjustments; Retention of copies of logs and all logged data for a period of 7 years; and Keeping all records available for review by a verification body. 26

27 The project proponent must also develop a QA/QC plan to add confidence that all measurements and calculations have been made correctly. QA/QC measures that may be implemented include, but are not limited to: Protecting monitoring equipment (sealed meters and data loggers); Protecting records of monitored data (hard copy and electronic storage); Checking data integrity on a regular and periodic basis (manual assessment, comparing redundant metered data, and detection of outstanding data/records); Comparing current estimates with previous estimates as a reality check ; Provide sufficient training to operators to perform maintenance and calibration of monitoring devices; Establish minimum experience and requirements for operators in charge of project and monitoring; and Performing recalculations to make sure no mathematical errors have been made. 9.4 Uncertainty Assessment In general, measurement inaccuracies are inherently addressed in this methodology because the inputs into concrete production are metered to ensure mix specifications are met. Therefore, there is a high degree of certainty in the measurements of associated with sulphur, aggregate, modifier, and volumes of fuel employed. However, project proponents should address uncertainties in measured values by ensuring that meters are appropriately calibrated as prescribed by the manufacturer. Project proponents must assess each assumption, parameter or procedure for uncertainties and describe how the uncertainties will be addressed. Where applicable, project proponents must provide a means to estimate a 90 or 95 percent confidence interval for estimated values. As a measure for addressing uncertainty while estimating a 90 or 95 percent confidence interval for estimated values, project proponents must apply appropriate confidence deductions if: 90 percent confidence intervals have been applied and the width of the confidence interval exceeds 20% of the estimated value; or 95 percent confidence intervals have been applied and the width of the confidence interval exceeds 30% of the estimated value Methods used by the project proponents for estimating uncertainty should be based on recognized statistical approaches such as those described in the IPCC Good Practice Guidance and Uncertainty Management in National Greenhouse Gas Inventories. Where applicable, confidence deductions applied should use conservative factors such as those specified in the CDM Meth Panel guidance on addressing uncertainty in its Thirty Second Meeting Report, Annex REFERENCES AND OTHER INFORMATION The good practice guidance and best science used to develop the quantification methodology are presented below in Table 5. 27

28 Table 5: Good Practice Guidance Document Title Publishing Body / Date Description General Protocol Guidance Canada s National Inventory Report: Greenhouse Gas Sources and Sinks in Canada, Alberta Offset System Offset Credit Project Guidance Document ISO ISO Protocols Reviewed Government of Canada (2012) Alberta Environment (February 2008) International Organization for Standardization (2006) International Organization for Standardization (2006) On behalf of the Government of Canada, Environment Canada releases a national inventory of greenhouse gases annually in accordance with international UNFCCC reporting standards. A draft guidance document outlining how to develop offset projects under the Alberta Offset System. Provides guidance at the project level for quantification, monitoring and reporting of greenhouse gas emission reductions or removal enhancements. Provides guidance for the validation and verification of greenhouse gas assertions. ACM0015 Version 3: Consolidated baseline and monitoring methodology for project activities using alternative raw materials that do not contain carbonates for clinker production in cement kilns Quantification Protocol for the Substitution of Bitumen Binder in Hot Mix Asphalt Production and Usage Clean Development Mechanism Executive Board (March 2010) Alberta Environment (October 2009) Approved baseline and monitoring methodology for alternative raw materials for clinker production in cement kilns. Reference for global warming potential figures. Draft quantification protocol for the use of Sulphur concrete in precast applications ACM0005 Version 5: Consolidated Baseline Methodology for Increasing the Blend in Cement Alberta Environment (February 2010) Clean Development Mechanism Executive Board (October 2009) General guidance on selection of SSR, quantification and monitoring. Approved baseline and monitoring methodology for reducing the amount of clinker per tonne of blended cement. 28

29 Document Title Publishing Body / Date Description Production Cement Reporting Protocol CO2 Accounting and Reporting Standard for the Cement Industry DRAFT Quantification Protocol for the Use of Fly Ash in Concrete and Other Cement Based Products Other Resources California Climate Action Registry World Business Council for Sustainable Development, Version 2.0 (June 2005) Alberta Environment (October 2008) Provides guidance on accounting and reporting GHG emissions for cement companies. Provides a methodology for calculating and reporting CO2 emissions. Early technical work considering selection of SSRs and quantification for alternatives to cement used to produce concrete and other cement based products. Submission to the Prime Ministerial Task Group on Emissions Trading A Sulphur Concrete Retaining Wall Corrosion and Chemical Resistant Masonry Materials Handbook, Walter Lee Sheppard National Pollution Inventory, Hydrogen Sulfide: Environmental Effects A blueprint for a climate friendly cement industry CO2 emissions from cement production Cement Australia (March 2007) University of Alberta (2002) Noyes Publications (1986) Australian Government WWF International ICF Incorporated / USEPA Comments on the Issues Paper released by the Prime Minister s Task Group on Emissions Trading An evaluation of the technical feasibility of constructing sizer walls using sulphur concrete. See for further information. Good Practice Guidance and Uncertainty Management in National Greenhouse Gas Inventories Sulfurcrete Sulfur Concrete Technology Concrete Technology Third Edition, M L Gambhir Cominco Tata McGraw-Hill (2004) 29