Asserting Carbon Offsets from Landfill Gas Flaring at Reginas - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

1

Asserting Carbon Offsets from Landfill Gas Flaring at Regina’s Landfill Site

Presented at SEIMA Lunch Meeting Regina, Saskatchewan December 7, 2010 By: Paresh Thanawala, P.Eng; QEP

pthanawa@regina.ca T: (306) 777-7493

2

Objectives

• Explain LFG Collection & Flaring Project
• Other LFG Experience
• Regulatory Aspects of Credits/Offsets
• Validation/Verification Steps
• Emission Assertion –

Approach

• Conclusion

3

Fleet Street Landfill

4

PROJECT SCOPE

Phase 1 (North Hill) Main Components:

• 27 vertical gas wells
• Gas collection headers
• Condensate removal sump and

tank

• Blower building
• Instrumentation and Control Room
• Flare header, flame arrestor and

candlestick flare System Commissioned in July 2008

5

Gas Wells & Collection System

6

Flare & Blower Building

7

Typical Quantity and Quality

• 250 –

350 acfm

• HHV 16 –

18 MJ/m3

• Up to 1.5 MW potential

Compound Mol % CH4 50 CO2 40 N2 9 O2 0.5 H2 O Trace H2 S Trace Siloxanes Trace

8

LFG UTILIZATION IN CANADA

Number of Sites Surveyed by Environment Canada, January 2009 Number of Sites Surveyed by Environment Canada, January 2009

Year Utilization (U) Flaring (F) U & F 2006 26 44 12 2007 29 50 15 Year Power (P) Heating (H) CPH 2006 17 9 2007 17 10 2

Number of Landfills Capturing LFG in Canada 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 1997 1999 2001 2003 2005 2006 2007 Year Landfill

9

Experience of Selected Landfills Western Canada

Vancouver Cogeneration (Electricity + Waste heat). 4 x 1.7 MW Cat Engines. Waste heat for greenhouse heating Prince George Gas recovery system. No power or heat recovery Kelowna (Glenmore) Generate electricity (kW TBC) + Waste heat utilization. Micro-turbines. Export power Victoria 1.6 MW Cat engine Edmonton (Clover Bar) 3 x 1.6 MW Cat engines Calgary (Shepard) Gas recovery/clean up - 400 kW engine Calgary East 70 kW micro-turbine. Expand to install 1 -2 MW engines Brandon, MB Open flare. MB to buy LFG credits. Discussing “design – build –

• perate –

finance” scheme for LFG energy use with IGR

10

Carbon Offsets/Credits

Value of GHG emission reduction as carbon dioxide equivalent (CO Value of GHG emission reduction as carbon dioxide equivalent (CO2

2

E) in tonnes E) in tonnes

GHG CO2 CH4 N2 O GWP 1 21 310 CO2 E 1*CO2 + 21*CH4 + 310*N2 O

CER

Certified emission reductions, CDM, Kyoto

ERU

Emission reduction unit, JI, Kyoto

VER

Verified emission reductions, Voluntary

11

Regulatory Framework

Framework Key Highlights Website

Federal Draft Offset System Documents (summer 2009). Finalization delayed – awaiting US directive. Administer under CEPA. Must achieve real, incremental, quantifiable, verifiable and unique reductions of greenhouse gases http://www.ec.gc.ca/creditscompensatoires-

• ffsets/default.asp?lang=En&n=92CA76F4-1

SK LFG not regulated and hence eligible. Bill 126. Target 20% reduction by 2020. Registry for offsets. Adopt/merge with AB. Reduction Targets for regulated emitters. Climate R&D Corp. Expect regulated frame work in place by 2010 http://www.qp.gov.sk.ca/documents/english/FirstRead/ 2009/Bill-126.pdf BC Bill 18 - Greenhouse Gas Reduction Cap & Trade Act 2008. Partner with WCI. Registry, trading, verification as of 2010. Compliance unit tracking system http://www.leg.bc.ca/38th4th/3rd_read/gov18-3.htm AB Climate Change Central. Offset registry in place. Trade within AB

• nly. LFE > 100,000 t CO2

E to meet targets or pay to carbon fund. Quantification protocols in place and under development. http://carbonoffsetsolutions.climatechangecentral.com/ MB Bill 15 - the climate change and Emissions Reduction Act. MB will buy out credits from LFG operators. http://web2.gov.mb.ca/bills/39-2/b015e.php Western Climate Initiative Launched Cap & Trade Program in 2008. Partners are: Arizona, California, Montana, New Mexico, Oregon, Utah, and Washington, Manitoba, BC, ON and Quebec. AB and SK oppose the scheme (cash grab) http://www.westernclimateinitiative.org/ Montreal Carbon Exchange (MCeX) Created in 2006. CO2 E futures contracts. Joint venture between CCX and MCeX. www.m-x.ca Chicago Climate Exchange (CCX) Voluntary Cap & Trade System. Sell surplus allowances or purchase carbon financial instrument (CFI) http://www.chicagoclimatex.com/content.jsf?id=821

12

Project Validation

• Eligibility [real, additional, quantifiable, verifiable, unique]
• Description/Quantification methods
• Assertion [relevance, completeness, consistency,

accuracy, transparency, conservativeness]

• Monitoring
• Document so 3rd

party can verify

• Follow ISO 14064(2)(3)

Generally occurs once, before registration

13

Verification

• Systematic, independent and documented process to

confirm assertion of credits

• “Reasonable” (high level) or “Limited” (low level)

assurance

• Occurs after emission reductions have occurred
• Usually once a year
• Validated project/documentation must be in place
• 3rd

party, knowledgeable of industry, no conflict

• Follow ISO 14064 (3) guidance

14

Project Registration

• After project is validated
• “License”

for creating carbon credits

• Can occur as part of verification

COR LFG Project: SK or Federal System

15

Project Proponent

Validates the project. Applies to the Project Authority to register GHG reduction report

REGISTRATION OF PROJECT

Project Authority Project Proponent Verifier Project Authority

REPORTING & VERIFICATION OF REDUCTIONS ISSUANCE OF OFFSET CREDITS

Reviews the project and registers the Project Document Implements the Project Asserts/reports the GHG reductions in the Reduction/Removal Report Engages verifier to verify the assertion/claim Conducts verification Issues instructions to deposit offset credits in account in the tracking system Certifies all conditions for credit issuance have been satisfied Submits Verification Report to Project Authority

16

GHG Statement Validator/ Responsible Party Verifier Intended User A c c

• u

n t a b i l i t y Assurance Independence

Verification Triangle

17

Schematic of Flare & Monitoring System

18

Data Management

19

Asserting LFG Offsets

• CO2

E Offsets = CO2 E Baseline – CO2 E Project

• CO2

E Offsets = 21(mass of methane in LFG that is destroyed in the flare)

• MR = (QLFG

)(CCH4 )( t)(ρCH4 )( η)(1 tonne/1,000 kg) )/(35.31 ft3/m3) MR = Mass of methane reductions (tonnes CH4 /day) QLFG = Average flow of LFG collected (sft3/min) @ 1 atmosphere and 0 °C CCH4 = Mol fraction of CH4 in LFG t = Net operational period (min/day) ρCH4 = Density of methane (kg/m3 ) = 0.6557 @ 1 atmosphere and 25 °C η = Methane destruction efficiency of flare (80%) Calculated Offsets: 2008 12,268 t CO2 E 2009 17,038 t CO2 E

20

About DRE and CE

Destruction & Removal η (DRE) DRE = 100* (Wt. of Compound in – Wt. of Compound Out)/(Wt. of Compound in) DRE indicates how well a specific compound is destroyed during combustion _______________________________________________________________ Combustion η = 100* (Mass Rate of Carbon in fuel converted to CO2 )/(Mass Rate of Carbon in Fuel) CE is a measure of how much carbon is converted to CO2

21

Default DREs for Open Flares

Jurisdiction/Organization Default DRE (%) Alberta 25 California 50 - 96 UNFCC 50 US EPA 40CFR60.18 85 – 97 (93 default)

22

Flare Testing: DRE of CH4

CH4 + 2O2 = CO2 + 2H2 O

• Grab samples at various points
• Testing by Maxxam Analytics, Nov, 2009
• Follow Alberta Stack Sampling Code/
• US EPA Methods

23

Impact of Wind on Flare Efficiency

Ref: Efficiency Measurements of Flares in a Cross Flow, by M.R. Johnson, O. Zastavniuk, D.J. Wilson and L.W. Kostiuk, Department of Mechanical Engineering, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Alberta, Presented at Combustion Canada 1999, Calgary Alberta, May 26, 1999

24

DRE of Methane

• Flare gas testing in November 2009 indicated average DRE of 86%.
• Flame color –

blue or colorless (mostly)

• HHV ~ 16 MJ/m3 indicating good combustion
• Flare velocity and design comply with 40 CFR60.18 which recommends a minimum

DRE of 93% (for compliant flares)

• Auto pilot ignition
• KO Pot to remove water. No free liquids or hydrocarbons carried

to the flare – which may impair combustion

• Wind guard to minimize wind impacts and loss of DRE
• O/M procedures in place
• 3% reduction allowed due to possible wind impacts
• Additional 3% reduction allowed to add conservativeness
• 80% DRE assumed for offsets calculations

25

Anticipated Price of Carbon

• AB –

Trades between $12/t - $15/t

• SK –

Expect AB trend. +$15/t anticipated (once offset framework in place)

• BC –

Pacific Carbon Trust proposed to buy @ $25/t

• FED –

LFE to comply if cost of reduction < $15/t

• CCX –
• MCEx

– $2.00 settlement price for March 2011 contract

• Voluntary –

($3/t - $8/t)

26

Federal Price Projection

10 20 30 40 50 60 70 2010 2012 2014 2016 2018 2020 $/tonne

Marginal Emissions Price

Ref: Don McCabe, Soil Conservation Council of Canada, October 2008

27

Conclusions

• Carbon offsets from flaring of LFG at the Regina landfill

are eligible for registration and trading

• Emission offsets verified to “reasonable level of

assurance” by ICF International – Summer 2010

• Awaiting SK regulations and registry to be finalized
• 29,306

t CO2 E offered for sell

• Carbon trading prices in AB/SK expected around ~ $15/t
• r more at the present and in near future