CLEAN DEVELOPMENT MECHANISM CDMMP59A09 Draft Largescale Consolidated Methodology ACM0010: Consolidated baseline methodology for GHG emission reductions from manure management systems Version 08.0 Draft Sectoral scope(s): 13 and 15
Version 08.0 Draft COVER NOTE 1. Procedural background 1. The Board considered regulatory documents relating to the introduction of new provisions or changes to existing ones related to PoAs and adopted amendments to the revised Project standard (PS), Validation and Verification Standard (VVS), Project Cycle Procedure (PCP), Standard for demonstration of additionality, development of eligibility criteria and application of multiple methodologies for programme of activities, Guidelines for completing the programme design document form for CDM programmes of activities, and Glossary of CDM terms. The amendments include: (a) (b) (c) A revised definition of the start date of a PoA and the start date of a component project activity (CPA), including an option for the coordinating/managing entity to notify the designated national authorities (DNA) and the secretariat of their intention to seek the CDM status to signify the start date of the PoA; Clarification that for PoAs applying more than one technology/measure or more than one methodology, specific case CPADDs for each technology/measure and each methodology or combinations thereof would be required and that these specific case CPADDs shall be registered before any inclusion of CPADD of same type, however the registration can take place either at the time of registration of the PoA or at any time during the crediting period. In this regard the Board agreed that the requirements specified in the PS have precedence over any requirement for specific case CPADDs (also referred to as real case or actual case CPADDs) indicated in an approved methodology. The Board requested the Methodologies Panel (Meth Panel) to propose, as a matter of urgency, revisions to methodologies, where relevant, to ensure that the requirements specified in the methodologies are consistent with the requirements specified in the PS; Clarification that a PoA shall be updated every seven years (every 20 years for an A/R PoA), counting from the date of its registration, and a fixed or renewable crediting period may be chosen for each CPA. In the case of a CPA with a renewable crediting period, the first renewal of the CPA shall be conducted seven years after the start date of the crediting period of the CPA. 2. The Meth Panel agreed at its 59 th meeting to revise this methodology (as well as another five large scale methodologies ACM0001, ACM0002, ACM0022, AM0009 and ACM0014) that contain requirements for specific case CPADDs and frequency of updating of eligibility criteria by deleting these requirements as these requirements are specified in the standards mentioned above. In addition, the number of editorial changes has been applied to the methodology to improve its consistency and readability. 2. Purpose 3. The revision aims to improve the consistency in existing regulations related to PoAs. The purpose of the call for public input aims to facilitate the work of the Meth Panel on the
Version 08.0 Draft revision of the methodology taking into account feedback/comments received through wider consultation process. 3. Key issues and proposed solutions 4. The draft revision removes requirements for specific case CPADDs and frequency of updating of eligibility criteria as these requirements are specified in the relevant standards. 4. Impacts 5. The revision of the methodology, if approved, will improve the consistency in existing regulations related to PoAs. 5. Proposed work and timelines 6. A call for public inputs on the proposed draft revision of the methodology will be launched. The received public inputs, if any submitted, will be considered to inform the revision of the methodology. If no inputs will be received, the Meth Panel will recommend the draft revised methodology to the Board for approval. 6. Recommendations to the Board 7. Not applicable (call for public input).
Version 08.0 Draft TABLE OF CONTENTS Page 1. INTRODUCTION... 6 2. SCOPE, APPLICABILITY, AND ENTRY INTO FORCE... 6 2.1. Scope... 6 2.2. Applicability... 6 2.3. Entry into force... 7 3. NORMATIVE REFERENCES... 7 3.1. Selected approach from paragraph 48 of the CDM modalities and procedures... 7 4. DEFINITIONS... 8 5. BASELINE METHODOLOGY... 8 5.1. Project boundary... 8 5.2. Identification of the baseline scenario and demonstration of additionality... 10 5.2.1. Baseline scenario for managing the manure... 10 5.2.2. Baseline scenario for electricity and heat generation... 11 5.3. Baseline emissions... 12 5.3.1. Baseline CH 4 emissions (BE CH4,y )... 13 5.3.2. Estimation of various variables and parameters used in the above equation... 13 5.3.3. Baseline N 2 O emissions (BE N2O,y )... 16 5.3.4. Baseline CO 2 emission from electricity and/or heat used in the baseline... 17 5.3.5. Baseline emissions associated with electricity generation (BE EC,y )... 17 5.3.6. Baseline emissions associated with heat generation (BE HG,y )... 17 5.4. Project emissions... 18 5.4.1. Project emissions associated with the anaerobic digester in year y (PE AD,y )... 19 5.4.2. Project CH4 emissions from aerobic AWMS treatment (PE Aer, y )... 19 5.4.3. Project N 2 O emissions in year y (PE N2O,y )... 20 4 of 57
Version 08.0 Draft 5.4.4. Project emissions from use of heat and/or electricity (PE elec/heat )... 22 5.5. Leakage... 23 5.5.1. Estimation of leakage N 2 O emissions released during baseline scenario from land application of the treated manure in year y... 24 5.5.2. Estimation of leakage N 2 O emissions released during project activity from land application of the treated manure in year y... 25 5.5.3. Estimation of leakage CH 4 emissions from land application of the treated manure... 26 5.5.4. Estimation of leakage emissions associated with the anaerobic digester... 27 5.6. Emission reduction... 27 5.7. Changes required for methodology implementation in 2nd and 3rd crediting periods... 28 5.8. Project activity under a programme of activities... 28 5.9. Data and parameters not monitored... 29 6. MONITORING METHODOLOGY... 34 6.1. Monitoring procedures... 34 6.2. Data and parameters monitored... 36 APPENDIX 1. ANAEROBIC UNIT PROCESS PERFORMANCE... 45 APPENDIX 2. PROCEDURE FOR ESTIMATING NEX LT,Y... 46 APPENDIX 3. TABLE 10.17 OF IPCC 2006... 48 APPENDIX 4. DETERMINATION OF TOTAL NITROGEN IN ANIMAL WASTE... 51 APPENDIX 5. GUIDANCE ON SAMPLE EXTRACTION AND STATISTICAL PROCEDURES... 54 5 of 57
1. Introduction Table 1. Methodology key elements Typical project(s) Type of GHG emissions mitigation action Manure management on livestock farms (cattle, buffalo, swine, sheep, goats, and/or poultry) where the existing anaerobic manure treatment system is replaced by, or a new system is constructed as, one or a combination of more than one animal waste management systems that result in less GHG emissions (a) GHG destruction. Destruction of methane emissions and displacement of a moreghgintensive service 2. Scope, applicability, and entry into force 2.1. Scope 1. This methodology applies to project activities that include destruction of methane emissions and displacement of a more GHGintensive service in manure management of livestock farms by introducing a new animal waste management system or a combination of animal waste management systems that result in less GHG emissions. 2.2. Applicability 2. This methodology is applicable to manure management on livestock farms where the existing anaerobic manure treatment system, within the project boundary, is replaced by one or a combination of more than one animal waste management systems (AWMSs) that result in less GHG emissions compared to the existing system. The methodology is also applicable to Greenfield facilities. 3. This methodology is applicable to manure management projects under the following conditions: (a) (b) (c) (d) (e) Farms where livestock populations, comprising of cattle, buffalo, swine, sheep, goats, and/or poultry, 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 systems, the depth of the lagoons used for manure management under the baseline scenario should be at least 1 m; The annual average ambient temperature at the site where the anaerobic manure treatment facility in the baseline existed is higher than 5 C; In the baseline case, the minimum retention time of manure waste in the anaerobic treatment system is greater than one month; 6 of 57
(f) The AWMS(s) in the project case results in no leakage of manure waste into ground water, e.g. for example the lagoon should have a nonpermeable layer at the lagoon bottom. 4. In addition, the applicability conditions included in the tools referred to above apply. 2.3. Entry into force 5. Not applicable. 3. Normative references 6. This consolidated baseline methodology is based on elements from the following methodologies: (a) (b) AM0006: GHG ; AM0016: Greenhouse gas mitigation from improved Animal Waste Management Systems in confined animal feeding operations. 7. This methodology also refers to the latest approved versions of the following tools: (a) (a) (b) (c) (d) (e) (f) (g) Project emissions from flaring ; Tool to calculate baseline, project and/or leakage emissions from electricity consumption ; Tool to calculate project or leakage CO 2 emissions from fossil fuel combustion ; Assessment of the validity of the original/current baseline and update of the baseline at the renewal of the crediting period ; Combined tool to identify the baseline scenario and demonstrate additionality ; Project and leakage emissions from anaerobic digesters ; Tool to determine the baseline efficiency of thermal or electric energy generation systems ; Tool to determine the mass flow of a greenhouse gas in a gaseous stream. 8. For more information regarding the proposed new methodologies and the tools as well as their consideration by the Executive Board (hereinafter referred to as the Board) of the clean development mechanism (CDM) please refer to <http://cdm.unfccc.int/goto/mpappmeth>. 3.1. Selected approach from paragraph 48 of the CDM modalities and procedures 9. Emissions from a technology that represents an economically attractive course of action, taking into account barriers to investment. 7 of 57
4. Definitions The definitions contained in the Glossary of CDM terms shall apply. 5. Baseline methodology 5.1. Project boundary 10. The spatial extent of the project boundary encompasses the site of the AWMS(s), including the flare or energy and/or heat generation equipment and the power/heat source. Figure 1. The project boundary Power/ heat Source ANIMAL BARNS Combustion Flare; Heat and/or electricity Loading AWMS (more than one technology/process can replace baseline AWMS) PROJECT BOUNDARY Effluent Usage or Disposal User 8 of 57
Project activity Baseline CDMMP59A09 Table 2. Emissions sources included in or excluded from the project boundary Source Gas Included Justification/Explanation Emissions from the waste treatment processes Emissions from electricity consumption/ generation Emissions from thermal energy generation Emissions from thermal energy use Emissions from onsite electricity use Emissions from the waste treatment processes CH 4 Yes The major source of emissions in the baseline 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 CO 2 Yes Electricity may be consumed from the grid or generated onsite in the baseline scenario CH 4 No Excluded for simplification. This is conservative N 2 O No Excluded for simplification. This is conservative CO 2 Yes If thermal energy generation is included in the project activity CH 4 No Excluded for simplification. This is conservative N 2 O No Excluded for simplification. This is conservative CO 2 Yes May be an important emission source CH 4 No Excluded for simplification. This emission source is assumed to be very small N 2 O No Excluded for simplification. This emission source is assumed to be very small CO 2 Yes May be an important emission source. If electricity is generated from collected biogas, these emissions are not accounted for CH 4 No Excluded for simplification. This emission source is assumed to be very small N 2 O No Excluded for simplification. This emission source is assumed to be very 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 aerobic treatment 9 of 57
11. The project proponents shall provide a clear diagrammatic representation in the CDMPDD of the project scenario showing all the manure waste treatments steps as well as its final disposal. This shall include the final use of methane, if any is captured, and also the auxiliary energy used to run project treatments steps. The diagrammatic representation shall also indicate the fraction of volatile solids degraded within the project boundary in the preproject situation before disposal. 12. The precise location of the farm(s) where the project activity takes place shall be identified in the CDMPDD (e.g. coordinates of farm(s) using global positioning system). 5.2. Identification of the baseline scenario and demonstration of additionality 13. Identify the baseline scenario and demonstrate additionality using the Combined tool to identify the baseline scenario and demonstrate additionality, following the requirements below. 5.2.1. Baseline scenario for managing the manure 5.2.1.1. For existing facilities 14. In applying Step 1 of the tool, baseline alternatives for managing the manure, shall take into consideration, inter alia, the complete set of existing/possible manure management systems listed in the 2006 IPCC Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas Inventories (Volume 4, Chapter 10, Table 10.17). In drawing up a list of possible scenarios, possible combinations of AWMS shall be taken into account. 5.2.1.2. For Greenfield facilities 15. For Greenfield facilities, the methodology only applies where the baseline scenario selected from the complete set of the list of the 2006 IPCC Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas Inventories (Volume 4, Chapter 10, Table 10.17), is an uncovered anaerobic lagoon. 16. The following two steps will define the baseline uncovered anaerobic lagoon: (a) (b) Define several anaerobic lagoon design options for the particular manure stream that meet the relevant regulations and take into consideration local conditions (e.g. environmental legislation, ground water table, land requirement, temperature). Design specifications shall include average depth and surface area of the anaerobic lagoon, residence time of the organic matter, as well as any other key parameters. Document the different design options in a transparent manner and provide transparent and documented evidence of key assumptions and data used, and offer conservative interpretations of this evidence; Carry out an economic assessment of the identified lagoon design option, as per Step 3 (investment analysis) of the latest approved version of the Combined tool to identify the baseline scenario and demonstrate additionality and additional guidance given below. Choose the least cost anaerobic lagoon design option from the options identified through Step (a) above. If several options with comparably low cost exist, choose the one with the lowest lagoon depth as the baseline lagoon design. 10 of 57
17. In applying Step 3 of the tool, baseline alternatives for managing the manure shall take into consideration the following additional guidance to compare the economic or financial attractiveness for Step (b) above. 18. To compare the economic attractiveness without revenues from CERs for all possible anaerobic lagoon design options that are identified, and in applying the investment analysis the IRR shall be used as an indicator. The following parameters inter alia should be explicitly documented: (a) (b) (c) (d) (e) (f) (g) (h) (i) (j) Land cost; Engineering, procurement and construction cost; Labour cost; Operation and maintenance cost; Administration cost; Fuel cost; Capital cost and interest; Revenue from electricity sales; All other costs of implementing the technology of each lagoon design option; All revenues generated by the implementation of the proposed technology (including energy savings due to captive use of biogas as fuel for either electricity or heat generation at the project site, revenue on account of avoided water consumption, fossil fuel replacement, sale of concentrated solids as fertilizers, subsidies/fiscal incentives etc.). 5.2.2. Baseline scenario for electricity and heat generation 19. 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 activity: 20. For electricity generation, alternative(s) shall include, inter alia: (a) (b) (c) (d) (e) E1: Electricity generation from biogas, undertaken without being registered as CDM project activity; E2: Electricity generation in existing or new renewable based captive power plant(s); E3: Electricity generation in existing and/or new gridconnected power plant; E4: Electricity generation in an offgrid fossil fuel fired captive power plant; E5: Electricity generation in existing and/or new gridconnected power plant and fossil fuel fired captive power plant(s). 21. Baseline emissions due to electricity generation can be accounted for only if the baseline scenario is E3, E4 and E5. 11 of 57
22. For heat generation, alternative(s) shall include, inter alia: (a) (b) (c) (d) (e) (f) (g) H1: Heat generation from biogas undertaken without being registered as CDM project activity; H2: Heat generation in existing or new fossil fuel fired cogeneration plant(s); H3: Heat generation in existing or new renewable based cogeneration plant(s); H4: Heat generation in existing or new onsite or offsite fossil fuel based boiler(s) or air heater(s); H5: Heat generation in existing or new onsite or offsite renewable energy based boiler(s) or air heater(s); H6: Any other source, such as district heat; and H7: Other heat generation technologies (e.g. heat pumps or solar energy). 23. Baseline emissions due to heat generation can be accounted for only if the baseline scenario is H4. 5.3. Baseline emissions 24. 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. 25. Baseline emissions are: Equation (1) Where: = Baseline emissions in year y (t CO 2 /yr) = Baseline CH 4 emissions in year y (t CO 2 /yr) = Baseline N 2 O emissions in year y (t CO 2 /yr) = Baseline CO 2 emissions from electricity and/or heat used in the baseline (tco 2 /yr) 12 of 57
5.3.1. Baseline CH 4 emissions (BE CH4,y ) 26. The manure management system in the baseline could be based on different livestock, treatment systems and on one or more stages. Therefore: Equation (2) ( ) Where: = Baseline CH 4 emissions (t CO 2 /yr) = Global Warming Potential (GWP) of CH 4 (t CO 2 e/tch 4 ) = Density of CH 4 (t/m 3 ) = Annual methane conversion factor (MCF) for the baseline AWMSj = Maximum methane producing potential of the volatile solid generated by animal type LT (m 3 CH 4 /kg dm) = Annual average number of animals of type LT for the year y (number) = Annual volatile solid excretions for livestock LT entering all AWMS on a dry matter weight basis (kg dm/animal/yr) = Fraction of manure handled in system j in the baseline = Type of livestock = Type of treatment system 5.3.2. Estimation of various variables and parameters used in the above equation 5.3.2.1. VS LT,y shall be determined in one of the following ways, presented in the order of preference 5.3.2.2. Option 1 27. Using published country specific data. If the data is expressed in kilogram volatile solid excretion per day on a drymatter basis (kg dm per day), multiply the value with nd y (number of days treatment plant was operational in year y). 5.3.2.3. Option 2 28. Estimation of VS LT,y based on dietary intake of livestock: [ ( ) ( )] [( )] Equation (3) 13 of 57
Where: = Annual volatile solid excretions for livestock LT entering all AWMS on a dry matter weight basis (kg dm/animal/yr) = Daily average gross energy intake (MJ/animal/day) = Digestible energy of the feed (percent) (per cent) = Urinary energy (fraction of GE LT ) = Ash content of manure (fraction of the dry matter feed intake) = Energy density of the feed fed to livestock type LT (MJ/kg dm) = Number of days treatment plant was operational in year y 5.3.2.4. Option 3 29. Scaling default IPCC values VS default to adjust for a sitespecific average animal weight as shown in equation below: ( ) Equation (4) Where: = Annual volatile solid excretions for livestock LT entering all AWMS on a dry matter weight basis (kg dm/animal/yr) = Average animal weight of a defined livestock population at the project site (kg) = Default average animal weight of a defined population (kg) = Default value for the volatile solid excretion per day on a drymatter basis for a defined livestock population (kgdm/animal/day) = Number of days treatment plant was operational in year y 5.3.2.5. Option 4 30. Utilizing published IPCC defaults for VS LT,y (IPCC 2006 guidelines, volume 4, chapter 10), multiply the value by nd y (number of days in year y). 31. Developed countries VS LT,y values may be used provided the following conditions are satisfied: (a) (b) The genetic source of the production operations livestock originate from an Annex I Party; The farm use formulated feed rations (FFR) which are optimized for the various animal(s), stage of growth, category, weight gain/productivity and/or genetics; 14 of 57
(c) (d) The use of FFR can be validated (through onfarm record keeping, feed supplier, etc.); and The project specific animal weights are more similar to developed country IPCC default values. 32. For subsequent treatment stages, the reduction of the volatile solids during a treatment stage is estimated based on referenced data for different treatment types. 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 by multiplying by (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 technology and should be estimated in a conservative manner. Default values for different treatment technologies can be found in appendix 1 (values for VS). 5.3.2.6. Annual average number of animals of type LT (N LT ) shall be determined in one of the following ways, presented in order of preference: 5.3.2.7. Option 1 ( ) Equation (5a) Where: = Annual average number of animals of type LT for the year y (number) = Number of days animal of type LT is alive in the farm in the year y (number) = Number of animals of type LT produced annually for the year y (number) 5.3.2.8. Option 2 33. If the project developer can monitor in a reliable and traceable way the daily stock of animals in the farm, discounting dead animals and animals discarded from the productive process from the daily stock, then the annual average number of animals (N LT ) may be calculated as follows: Equation (5b) Where: = Annual average number of animals of type LT for the year y (number) = Daily stock of animals of type LT in the farm, discounting dead and discarded animals (number) 15 of 57
5.3.3. Baseline N 2 O emissions (BE N2O,y ) ( ) Equation (6) Where: = Annual baseline N 2 O emissions in (t CO 2 e/yr) = Global Warming Potential (GWP) for N 2 O (t CO 2 e/tn 2 O) = Conversion factor N 2 ON to N 2 O (44/28) = Direct N 2 O emission in year y (kg N 2 ON/year) = Indirect N 2 O emission in year y (kg N 2 ON/year) Equation (7) Where: = Direct N 2 O emission in year y (kg N 2 ON/yr) = Direct N 2 O emission factor for the treatment system j of the manure management system (kg N 2 ON/kg N) = Annual average nitrogen excretion per head of a defined livestock population (kg N/animal/yr) estimated as described in appendix 2 = Fraction of manure handled in system j (fraction) = Annual Average number of animals of type LT for the year y estimated as per equation (5(a)) or (5(b)) (number) Equation (8) Where: = Indirect N 2 O emission in year y (kg N 2 ON/year) = Indirect N 2 O emission factor for N 2 O emissions from atmospheric deposition of nitrogen on soils and water surfaces (kgn 2 ON/kg NH3N and NO X N) = Annual average nitrogen excretion per head of a defined livestock population (kg N/animal/year) estimated as described in appendix 2 = Fraction of manure handled in system j (fraction) 16 of 57
= Default values for nitrogen loss due to volatilisation of NH 3 and NO X from manure management (fraction) = Annual average number of animals of type LT for the year y estimated as per equation (5(a)) or (5(b)) (number) 34. For subsequent treatment stages, the reduction of the nitrogen during a treatment stage is estimated based on referenced data for different treatment types. 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 by multiplying by (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 technology and should be estimated in a conservative manner. Default values for different treatment technologies can be found in appendix 1 (values for TN). 5.3.4. Baseline CO 2 emission from electricity and/or heat used in the baseline Equation (9) Where: = Baseline CO 2 emissions from electricity and/or heat used in the baseline (t CO 2 /yr) = Baseline emissions associated with electricity generation in year y (t CO 2 /yr) = Baseline emissions associated with heat generation in year y (t CO 2 /yr) 5.3.5. Baseline emissions associated with electricity generation (BE EC,y ) 35. The baseline emissions associated with electricity generation in year y (BE EC,y ) shall be calculated using the Tool to calculate baseline, project and/or leakage emissions from electricity consumption. When applying the tool: (a) (b) The electricity sources k in the tool correspond to the sources of electricity identified in the selection of the most plausible baseline scenario; EC BL,k,y in the tool is equivalent to the net amount of electricity generated using biogas in year y (EG d,y ). 5.3.6. Baseline emissions associated with heat generation (BE HG,y ) 36. The baseline emissions associated with heat generation in year y (BE HG,y ) are determined based on the amount of biogas which is sent to the heat generation equipment in the project activity (boiler or air heater), as follows: Equation (10) 17 of 57
Where: = Baseline emissions associated with heat generation in year y (t CO 2 /yr) = Net quantity of heat generated with biogas by equipment type k in the project in year y (TJ/yr) = CO 2 emission factor of the fossil fuel type used for heat generation by equipment type k in the baseline (t CO 2 /TJ) = Efficiency of the heat generation equipment type k used in the baseline = Heat generation equipment (boiler or air heater or kiln) 5.3.6.1.1. Determination of EF CO2,BL,HG,k 37. For existing facilities: (a) Project participants shall choose the fossil fuel with the lowest emission factor among all the fuel options that were being used in the existing facility for heating purposes in the heat generation equipment. 38. For Greenfield facilities: (a) Project participants shall identify what is the most common fuel used in the identified baseline scenario and use it as the baseline fuel. Detailed justifications shall be provided and documented in the CDMPDD for the selected baseline fuel. 39. To estimate the baseline energy efficiency of an air heater or boiler ( HG,BL,k ) project participants shall apply the Tool to determine the baseline efficiency of thermal or electric energy generation systems. 5.4. Project emissions 40. The project activity 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. 41. Project emissions are estimated as follows: Equation (11) Where: = Project emissions in year y = Project emissions associated with the anaerobic digester in year y (t CO 2 e/yr) = Project CH 4 emissions from aerobic AWMS treatment (t CO 2 e/yr) 18 of 57
= Project N 2 O emissions in year y (t CO 2 /yr) = Project emissions from electricity consumption and fossil fuel combustion (t CO 2 e/yr) 5.4.1. Project emissions associated with the anaerobic digester in year y (PE AD,y ) 42. PE AD,y is determined using the methodological tool Project and leakage emissions from anaerobic digesters. 5.4.2. Project CH4 emissions from aerobic AWMS treatment (PE Aer, y ) 43. IPCC guidelines specify emissions from aerobic lagoons as 0.1% per cent of total methane generating potential of the waste processed, which can be used as a default for all types of aerobic AWMS treatment. [ ( )] Equation (12) ( ) Where: = Global Warming Potential (GWP) of CH 4 (t CO 2 e/tch 4 ) = Fraction of volatile solid degraded in AWMS treatment method n of the N treatment steps prior to waste being treated (fraction) = Density of CH 4 (t/m 3 ) = Fraction of volatile solid directed to aerobic system (fraction) = Type of livestock = Maximum methane producing potential of the volatile solid generated by animal type LT (m 3 CH 4 /kg dm) = Annual volatile solid excretion livestock type LT entering all AWMS on a dry matter weight basis in (kg dm/animal/yr) = Annual average number of animals of type LT for the year y (number) as estimated in equation (5(a)) or (5(b)) = Project CH 4 emissions from sludge disposed of in storage pit prior to disposal during the year y (t CO 2 e/yr) = Fraction of manure handled in system j in the project activity (fraction) 44. Aerobic treatment results in large accumulations of sludge. Sludge requires removal and has large VS values. It is important to identify the following management process for the sludge and estimate the emissions from that management process. If the sludge ponds 19 of 57
are not within the project boundary, the emissions should be included as leakage. The emissions from sludge ponds shall be estimated as follows: [ ( )] Equation (13) ( ) Where: = Global Warming Potential (GWP) of CH 4 (t CO 2 e/tch 4 ) = Fraction of volatile solid degraded in AWMS treatment method n of the N treatment steps prior to waste (sludge) being treated. (fraction) = Density of CH 4 (t/m 3 ) = Fraction of volatile solid directed to aerobic system (fraction) = Type of livestock = Maximum methane producing potential of the volatile solid generated by animal type LT (m 3 CH 4 /kg dm) = Annual volatile solid excretion livestock type LT entering all AWMS on a dry matter weight basis in (kg dm/animal/yr) = Annual average number of animals of type LT for the year y (number) as estimated as per equation (5(a)) or (5(b)) = Fraction of manure handled in system j in the project activity (fraction) = Methane conversion factor (MCF) for the sludge stored in sludge pits (fraction) 5.4.3. Project N 2 O emissions in year y (PE N2O,y ) ( ) Equation (14) Where: = Project N 2 O emissions in year y (t CO 2 /yr) = Global Warming Potential (GWP) for N 2 O (t CO 2 e/tn 2 O) = Conversion factor N 2 ON to N 2 O (44/28) = Direct N 2 O emission in year y (kg N 2 ON/year) = Indirect N 2 O emission in year y (kg N 2 ON/year) 20 of 57
5.4.3.1. Option 1 Equation (15) Where: = Direct N 2 O emission in year y (kg N 2 ON/yr) = Direct N 2 O emission factor for the treatment system j of the manure management system (kg N 2 ON/kg N) = Annual average nitrogen excretion per head of a defined livestock population (kg N/animal/yr) estimated as described in appendix 2 = Fraction of manure handled in system j in the project activity (fraction) = Annual average number of animals of type LT for the year y estimated as per equation (5(a)) or (5(b)) (number) Equation (16) Where: = Indirect N 2 O emission in year y (kg N 2 ON/year) = Indirect N 2 O emission factor for N 2 O emissions from atmospheric deposition of nitrogen on soils and water surfaces(kg N 2 ON/kg NH 3 N and NO X N) = Annual average nitrogen excretion per head of a defined livestock population (kg N/animal/yr) estimated as described in appendix 2 = Fraction of manure handled in system j in the project activity (fraction) = Default values for nitrogen loss due to volatilisation of NH 3 and NO X from manure management (fraction) = Annual average number of animals of type LT for the year y estimated as per equation (5(a)) or (5(b)) (number) 5.4.3.2. Option 2 ( ) Equation (17) 21 of 57
( ) Equation (18) Where: = Direct N 2 O emission in year y (kg N 2 ON/year) = Indirect N 2 O emission in year y (kg N 2 ON/year) = Direct N 2 O emission factor for the treatment system j of the manure management system (kg N 2 ON/kg N) = Monthly volume of the effluent mix entering the manure management system (m 3 /month) = Monthly total nitrogen concentration in the effluent mix entering the manure management system (kg N/m 3 ) = Indirect N 2 O emission factor for N 2 O emissions from atmospheric deposition of nitrogen on soils and water surfaces (kg N 2 ON/kg NH 3 N and NO X N) = Default values for nitrogen loss due to volatilisation of NH 3 and NO X from manure management (fraction) 45. 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. 46. For subsequent treatment stages, the reduction of the nitrogen during a treatment stage is estimated based on referenced data for different treatment types. 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 by multiplying by (1R 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 technology and should be estimated in a conservative manner. Default values for different treatment technologies can be found in appendix 1 (values for TN). 5.4.4. Project emissions from use of heat and/or electricity (PE elec/heat ) 47. These emissions should only be considered for consumption of electricity or heat that is not related to the anaerobic digester, as those emissions will be considered while estimating PE AD,y. Equation (19) 22 of 57
Where: = Project emissions from electricity consumption in year y. The project emissions from electricity consumption will be calculated following the latest version of the Tool to calculate baseline, project and/or leakage emissions from electricity consumption. In case, the electricity consumption is not measured then the electricity consumption shall be estimated as follows, where CP i,y is the rated capacity (in MW) of electrical equipment i used for the project activity = Project emissions from fossil fuel combustion in process j during the year y. The project emissions from fossil fuel combustion will be calculated following the latest version of the 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 any other onsite transportation) 5.5. Leakage 48. 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 boundary. These emissions are estimated as net of those released under project activity and those released in the baseline scenario. Net leakage are only considered if they are positive. ( ) ( ) Equation (20) Where: = Leakage N 2 O emissions released during project activity from land application of the treated manure in year y (t CO 2 e/yr) = Leakage N 2 O emissions released during baseline scenario from land application of the treated manure in year y (t CO 2 e/yr) = Leakage CH 4 emissions released during project activity from land application of the treated manure in year y (t CO 2 e/yr) = Leakage CH 4 emissions released during baseline scenario from land application of the treated manure in year y (t CO 2 e/yr) = Leakage emissions associated with the anaerobic digester in year y (t CO 2 e) 23 of 57
5.5.1. Estimation of leakage N 2 O emissions released during baseline scenario from land application of the treated manure in year y Equation (21) ( ) ( ) Equation (22) ( ) Equation (23) ( ) Equation (24) Where: = Global Warming Potential (GWP) for N 2 O (t CO 2 e/tn 2 O) = Conversion factor N 2 ON to N 2 O (44/28) = Leakage N 2 O emissions from application of manure waste in year y (kg N 2 ON/year) = Leakage N 2 O emissions due to leaching and runoff in year y (kg N 2 ON/year) = Leakage N 2 O emissions due to volatilisation in year y (kg N 2 ON/year) = Fraction of N lost due to volatilization (fraction) = Annual average number of animals of type LT estimated as per equation (5(a)) or (5(b)) (number) = Annual average nitrogen excretion per head of a defined livestock population (kg N/animal/year) estimated as described in appendix 2 = Emission factor for N 2 O emissions from N inputs (kg N 2 ON/kg N input) 24 of 57
= Emission factor for N 2 O emissions from N leaching and runoff in (kg N 2 ON/kg N leached and runoff) = Emission factor for N 2 O emissions from atmospheric deposition of N on soils and water surfaces, [kg N N 2 O/(kg NH 3 N + NO X N volatilized)] = Fraction of all N added to/mineralised in managed soils in regions where leaching/runoff occurs that is lost through leaching and runoff (fraction) = Nitrogen reduction factor (fraction) 5.5.2. Estimation of leakage N 2 O emissions released during project activity from land application of the treated manure in year y Equation (25) ( ) ( ) Equation (26) ( ) Equation (27) ( ) Equation (28) Where: = Global Warming Potential (GWP) for N 2 O (t CO 2 e/tn 2 O) = Conversion factor N 2 ON to N 2 O (44/28) = Leakage N 2 O emissions from application of manure waste in year y (kg N 2 ON/year) = Leakage N 2 O emissions due to leaching and runoff in year y (kg N 2 ON/year) = Leakage N 2 O emissions due to volatilisation in year y (kg N 2 ON/year) = Fraction of N lost due to volatilization (fraction) 25 of 57
= Annual average number of animals of type LT estimated as per equation (5(a)) or (5(b)) (number) = Annual average nitrogen excretion per head of a defined livestock population in year y (kg N/animal/year) estimated as described in appendix 2 = Emission factor for N 2 O emissions from N inputs (kg N 2 ON/kg N input) = Emission factor for N 2 O emissions from N leaching and runoff in (kg N 2 ON/kg N leached and runoff) = Emission factor for N 2 O emissions from atmospheric deposition of N on soils and water surfaces, [kg NN 2 O/(kg NH 3 N + NO X N volatilized)] = Fraction of all N added to/mineralised in managed soils in regions where leaching/runoff occurs that is lost through leaching and runoff (fraction) = Nitrogen reduction factor (fraction) 49. It is possible to measure the quantity of manure applied to land in kg manure/yr (Q DM ) and the nitrogen concentration in kg N/kg manure (N DM ) in the manure to estimate the total quantity of nitrogen applied to land. In this case, ( ) in equations (28 26), (29 27) and (30 28) above should be substituted by Q DM N DM. 5.5.3. Estimation of leakage CH 4 emissions from land application of the treated manure 50. The calculation of methane emissions from land application of manure in the baseline and project cases are estimated from equations 29 and 30 below: [ ( )] Equation (29) ( ) [ ( )] Equation (30) ( ) 26 of 57
Where: = Leakage CH 4 emissions released during baseline scenario from land application of the treated manure in year y (t CO 2 e/yr) = Leakage CH 4 emissions released during project activity from land application of the treated manure in year y (t CO 2 e/yr) = Fraction of volatile solid degraded in AWMS treatment method n of the N treatment steps prior to sludge being treated = Global Warming Potential (GWP) of CH 4 (t CO 2 e/tch 4 ) = Density of CH 4 (t/m 3 ) = Maximum methane producing potential of the volatile solid generated by animal type LT (m 3 CH 4 /kg dm) = Annual average number of animals of type LT estimated as per equation (5(a)) or (5(b)), expressed (number) = Annual volatile solid excretions for livestock LT entering all AWMS on a dry matter weight basis (kg dm/animal/yr) = Fraction of manure handled in system j in the project activity (fraction) = Methane conversion factor (MCF) assumed to be equal to 1 5.5.4. Estimation of leakage emissions associated with the anaerobic digester 51. LE AD,y is determined using the methodological tool Project and leakage emissions from anaerobic digesters. 5.6. Emission reduction 52. The emission reduction ER y by the project activity during a given year y is the difference between the baseline emissions (BE y ) and the sum of project emissions (PE y ) and leakage, as follows: Equation (31) 53. Further, in estimating emissions reduction for claiming certified emissions reductions, if the calculated CH 4 baseline emissions from anaerobic lagoons are higher than the measured CH 4 generated in the anaerobic digester in the project situation (Q CH4,y in the tool Project and leakage emissions from anaerobic digesters ), then the latter shall be used to calculate the emissions reduction for claiming certified emissions reductions. Therefore, the actual methane captured from an anaerobic digester shall be compared to the (BE CH4,y PE AD,y in the tool Project and leakage emissions from anaerobic digesters ) and if found lower, then (BE CH4,y PE AD,y ) (which is a component of BE y PE y ) in equation (32 31) is replaced by Q CH4,y. 27 of 57
5.7. Changes required for methodology implementation in 2nd and 3rd crediting periods 54. At the start of the second and third crediting period for a project activity, the continued validity of the baseline scenario shall be assessed by applying the latest version of the tool Assessment of the validity of the original/current baseline and update of the baseline at the renewal of the crediting period. 5.8. Project activity under a programme of activities 55. In addition to the requirements set out in the latest approved version of the Standard for demonstration of additionality, development of eligibility criteria and application of multiple methodologies for programme of activities, the following shall be applied for the use of this methodology in a project activity under a programme of activities (PoAs). 56. The PoA may consist of one or several types of CPAs. CPAs are regarded to be of the same type if they are similar with regard to the demonstration of additionality, emission reduction calculations and monitoring. The coordination/managing Entity (CME) shall describe in the CDMPoADD for each type of CPAs separately: (a) Eligibility criteria for CPA inclusion used for each type of CPAs; (i) (ii) (iii) In case of different setups of animal waste management systems in one CPA, the eligibility criteria shall be defined for each setup of animal waste management system separately; Emission reduction calculations for each type of CPAs; Monitoring provisions for each type of CPAs. 57. The CME shall describe transparently and justify in the CDMPoADD which CPAs are regarded to be of the same type. CPAs are not regarded to be of the same type if one of the following conditions is different: (a) The baseline scenario with regard to any of the following aspects: (i) (ii) The manure management system used in the baseline; The alternative scenarios for the use of gas generated from an anaerobic digester (biogas); (b) (c) (d) The project activity with regard to the animal waste management systems used and the use of the gas generated from an anaerobic digester (biogas): flaring, electricity generation or heat generation; The legal and regulatory framework; Type of animal manure. 58. For example, one type of CPAs may be characterized by the following combinations. The baseline scenario is the use of an uncovered anaerobic lagoon for manure treatment. Under the project activity, an anaerobic digester is used. The biogas from the digester is used to produce heat. 28 of 57
59. When defining eligibility criteria for CPA inclusion for a distinct type of CPAs, the CME shall consider relevant technical and economic parameters, such as: (a) (b) (c) (d) (e) Ranges of design specifications of baseline and project manure management systems (e.g. a range of average depths and surface areas of lagoons, electricity consumption, residence time of the organic matter and effluent adjustment factor); Local conditions (temperature); Ranges of capacity of biogas production; Ranges of costs (capital investment in Greenfield manure management system, operating and maintenance costs, etc.); Ranges of revenues (income from electricity or heat production, subsidies/fiscal incentives, ODA). 60. The eligibility criteria related to the costs and revenues parameters shall be updated every two years in order to correctly reflect the technical and market circumstances of a CPA implementation. 61. In case the PoA contains several types of CPAs, the actual CPADD shall contain the description of each type of actual CPAs, be validated by a DOE and submitted for the registration to the Board. 5.9. Data and parameters not monitored 62. All data collected as part of not monitored parameters or monitoring should be archived electronically and be kept at least for two years after the end of the last crediting period. Data / Parameter table 1. Any comment: R VS,n Fraction Fraction of volatile solid degraded in AWMS treatment method n of the N treatment steps prior to waste being treated Refer to appendix 1 (values for VS) The most conservative value for the given technology must be used Data / Parameter table 2. EF N2O, D,j kg N 2 ON/kg N Direct N 2 O emission factor for the treatment system j of the manure management system Estimated with sitespecific, 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 29 of 57
Any comment: Data / Parameter table 3. EF N2O,ID kg N 2 ON/kg NH3N and NO X N Indirect N 2 O emission factor for N 2 O emissions from atmospheric deposition of nitrogen on soils and water surfaces Any comment: Estimated with sitespecific, 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 Data / Parameter table 4. F gasms,j,lt Fraction Default values for nitrogen loss due to volatilisation of NH 3 and NO X from manure management IPCC 2006 Guidelines. Volume 4, Chapter 10 Table 10.22 Any comment: Data / Parameter table 5. Any comment: F gasm Fraction Fraction of N lost due to volatilization Estimated with sitespecific, regional or national data if such data is available. Otherwise, default values from table 11.3, chapter 11, volume 4 of IPCC 2006 guidelines can be used Data / Parameter table 6. EF 1, EF 4, EF 5 kg N 2 ON/kg N for EF 1, EF 5 and [kg N 2 ON/(kg NH 3 N and NO X N) for EF 4 30 of 57
Any comment: Emission factor for N 2 O emissions from N inputs; from N leaching and runoff; from atmospheric deposition of N on soils and water surfaces Estimated with sitespecific, regional or national data if such data is available IPCC 2006 Guidelines default values may be used, if country specific or region specific data are not available. EF 1 from table 11.1, chapter 11, volume 4. EF 4 and EF 5 from table 11.3, chapter 11, volume 4 Data / Parameter table 7. Any comment: F leach Fraction Fraction of all N added to/mineralised in managed soils in regions where leaching/runoff occurs that is lost through leaching and runoff Estimated with sitespecific, regional or national data if such data is available. Otherwise, default values from table 11.3, chapter 11, volume 4 of IPCC 2006 guidelines can be used Data / Parameter table 8. Any comment: MS% Bl,j Fraction Fraction of manure handled in system j in the baseline Project proponents Data / Parameter table 9. GWP CH4 t CO 2 e/t CH 4 Global warming potential of CH 4 IPCC Any comment: 21 for the first commitment period. Shall be updated according to any future COP/MOP decisions Data / Parameter table 10. GWP N2O t CO 2 e/tn 2 O 31 of 57
Any comment: Global warming potential for N 2 O IPCC 310 for the first commitment period. Shall be updated according to any future COP/MOP decisions Data / Parameter table 11. D CH4 t/m 3 Density of CH 4 Technical literature Any comment: 0.00067 t/m 3 at room temperature 20 o C and 1 atm pressure Data / Parameter table 12. Any comment: MCF d Methane conversion factor for leakage calculation assumed to be equal 1 Data / Parameter table 13. MCF j Methane conversion factor for the baseline AWMS j IPCC 2006 table 10.17, chapter 10, volume 4 (see appendix 3) Any comment: (a) (b) MCF values depend on the annual average temperature where the anaerobic manure treatment facility 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; A conservativeness factor should be applied by multiplying MCF values (estimated as per above bullet) with a value of 0.94, to account for the 20% uncertainty in the MCF values as reported by IPCC 2006 32 of 57