SWICS GHG Inventory Protocol and Latest on AP42 Revisions Amy Banister Waste Management

1
SWICS GHG Inventory Protocol and Latest on AP-42
RevisionsAmy Banister Waste Management
2
Introduction

• Current status of GHG reporting programs
• SWICS Landfill GHG Emissions Quantification
  Protocol
• Latest News on AP-42 Revisions

3
GHG Inventory and Reporting

• First step in process of managing emissions
• You cannot manage what you cannot measure.

4
Current Mandatory Reporting

• Canada federal
• Canada Alberta Province
• California
• Iowa
• Maine
• New Jersey
• New Mexico
• Oregon
• Wisconsin

5
Mandatory Reporting Under Development

• USA - federal
• Colorado
• Hawaii
• Iowa
• Massachusetts
• Nevada
• North Carolina
• Washington
• Canada British Columbia Province
• Western Climate Initiative (AZ, CA, NM, OR, UT,
  and WA. British Columbia, Manitoba, Ontario, and
  Quebec)

6
Voluntary Reporting Programs

• Connecticut (as of 10/1/2008, formally was
  mandatory)
• Kansas
• New Hampshire
• North Carolina (for CY2008)
• Pennsylvania
• West Virginia
• Wisconsin (sources not subject to mandatory
  reporting)
• The Climate Registry

7
The Climate Registry

• Establishes uniform standards for business and
  government to calculate, verify and report GHG
  emissions.
• Currently, 40 U.S. States, all 10 Canadian
  Provinces and 2 Territories, 6 Mexican States,
  and 4 Indian Tribes are members.
• TCR Rules will be template for most, if not all,
  state reporting programs.
• WM and others in waste sector participated on the
  Stakeholder Advisory Committee and submitted
  comments on General Reporting Protocol (GRP)

8
Industry Comments on GRP

• Supported standardization of inventorying
  protocols
• Protocol development process was not
  transparent/inclusive of stakeholders
• GRP very stringent and labor intensive
• Third Party verification not logistically or
  financially feasible
• Disagreed with required reporting of biogenic
  emissions
• Supported entity-level reporting, but not
  facility-level reporting
• De minimis level is too stringent/not consistent
  with other registries

9
The Climate Registry

• GRP Version 1.1 (May 2008) for voluntary
  emissions reporting
• All 6 GHGs annually
• Entity-wide emissions from North American
  operations at facility level
• Direct, indirect emissions AND biogenic emissions
• No de minimis but simplified estimation for
  aggregate emission sources less than 5
• Third Party verification required
• Public disclosure of entity and facility-level
  data

10
The Climate Registry

• Solid Waste Technical Expert Panel Convened
  11/2008
• Develop standardized calculation of Landfill GHG
  emissions as part of Local Government Protocol
• Current proposed standard 75 Collection
  Efficiency, 10 oxidation
• Draft protocol issued late February 2009
• SWICS Protocol reference
• Comments due March 20, 2009

11
SWICS Landfill GHG Emissions Quantification
Protocol
12
Solid Waste Industry for Climate Solutions (SWICS)

• Informal coalition of solid waste stakeholders
• Provide technical and policy feedback on
  designing and implementing GHG programs
• Support development of GHG inventory/reporting
  systems based on accurate data that recognize
  source reductions/beneficial use
• Formal written and oral comments on California
  AB32 implementation, CCAR, and TCR protocols
• Meetings with CARB, CCAR, and USEPA

13
SWICS

• Members also represent SWANA LFG Rules and
  Regulations Committee, WIAC, and California SWIG
• July 2007 issued White Paper titled, Current MSW
  Industry Position and State-of-the-Practice on
  LFG Collection Efficiency, Methane Oxidation, and
  Carbon Sequestration in Landfills
• January 2009 latest update (Version 2.2)

13
14
Overview of SWICS Inventory Protocol for Landfills

• Follows CARB/Climate Leaders but refines default
  values based on site data and research.
• Protocol reviewed by academic experts. Updated
  based on comments received.
• Considers methane collection and destruction
  efficiencies, methane oxidation and carbon
  storage in calculations
• Calculation spreadsheet developed to supplement
  Protocol

15
SWICS Inventory Process

• Uses LFG recovery data and site specific
  collection efficiency to determine uncollected
  gas
• Uncollected methane experiences site specific
  oxidation rate based on current research
• Uses destruction efficiencies specific to each
  type of device based on current research
• Use gas collection efficiency and methane
  oxidation in cover based on cover type

16
SWICS Inventory Process

• Uses device specific destruction rates of methane
  in control devices
• Allows for adjustment based on monitoring data
  and system quality
• Includes carbon sequestration as a negative
  emission in the landfill category
• Considers CO2 biogenic
• Site-specific inputs should be available from
  landfill operator on cover type and control
  device destruction efficiency

17
SWICS Collection Efficiencies and Usage Criteria

• Only applicable when a complete LFG collection
  system exists for that the landfill or portion of
  landfill being considered
• 50 assumed for incomplete systems

18
SWICS Methane Destruction Efficiency

• Uses values based on source tests from 2003 to
  2007 of flares, engines, and turbines
• Based on type of control device (flare, engine,
  or turbine)

19
SWICS Collection Efficiency Calculation

• For each year
• Obtain actual LFG recovery data for the LFG
  collection system
• Evaluate the design, operation, performance, and
  the type of LFG collection system (NSPS/air
  quality compliance or other)
• Determine the percent of landfill surface under
  each cover type (daily, intermediate, final, or
  geomembrane) during the year
• Calculate a weighted average collection
  efficiency based on cover type and other factors
• Divide the actual recovery data by a calculated
  average collection efficiency value based on a
  weighted average of land surface area by cover
  type.

20
SWICS Oxidation Rate Usage Criteria

• Recommend oxidation per area rates (g/m2/day) and
  percentage
• Oxidation percentage is more consistent with
  IPCC, USEPA, and CARB methodology
• Percentage values require collection efficiency
  or modeled methane generation for complete
  calculation
• Based on cover type per area
• Daily, intermediate, final, and biocovers
• Account for increased oxidation from improved
  covers

21
SWICS Oxidation Rates
22
SWICS Methane Oxidation Calculation

• For calculating the methane oxidation potential
  for each year
• Determine of landfill surface area under each
  cover type (organic, clay, sand, or other) during
  the year
• If oxidation rates are used, apply the methane
  oxidation rate factor for each cover type to
  calculate the additional methane emission
  reduction or
• If oxidation is used, calculate an average
  oxidation based on a weighted average of land
  surface area by cover type. Apply to the amount
  of methane not collected by the LFG system.

23
SWICS Carbon Sequestration Methodology

• Reflects carbon mass balance for the landfill
• Can use site specific waste characterization data
  if available
• Carbon storage factors (CSF) specific to each
  refuse component (i.e., food, grass, paper,
  etc.).
• Creates a California composite CSF of 0.082
  MTCE/wet ton of refuse
• Suggests inclusion as emission reduction or
  avoided emissions
• 1 ton of waste disposed 0.30 MTCO2E (California)

24
SWICS Carbon Sequestration Calculation

• For calculating amount of carbon sequestered
• Determine the weighted average computed carbon
  storage factor (CSF) for the MSW in the landfill
  
• Determine the amount of MSW landfilled for the
  year (in short wet tons)
• Multiply the weighted average computed CSF for
  the MSW in the landfill by the amount of MSW
  landfilled for the year to calculate the
  sequestered amount of CO2E.
• Include as a separate line item in landfill
  inventory for avoided emissions by carbon
  sequestration.

25
Comparison of Values
26
Thoughts on SWICS Protocol

• Modeled methane generation may not be accurate
  for individual landfills and likely overestimates
  generation.
• Incomplete inventories of gas recovery causes
  USEPA method to overestimate methane emissions.
• USEPA, and CARB defaults for collection
  efficiency and methane oxidation are
• Derived from older data and
• Regulatory defaults from the early 1990s and
• Do not recognize current research and
  improvements.

27
Thoughts on SWICS Protocol

• SWICS methodology will show benefits from
  improved LFG practices where IPCC, USEPA, and
  CARB methodologies will not.
• SWICS methodology may not apply to all landfills.
  Data must be available.
• MSW industry must push for changes in inventory
  methods at all levels.
• Inventory values lead to decisions on how to
  regulate landfills under climate change
  (California example)
• We must prepare to do our own research and
  provide the data necessary.

28

• Proposed AP-42 Revisions

29
Proposed Revisions to AP-42

• EPA Proposed revisions to the Landfill Chapter in
  November 2008
• Optical Remote Sensing preferred approach to
  estimate fugitive emissions.
• New k factor for wet landfills 0.30. wet
  not defined.
• Correction factor for Lo
• Emission Factors proposed for 167 LFG
  constituents
• NMOC Default value of 838 ppmv
• VOC value is 99.7 of NMOC value

30
Proposed Revisions to AP-42

• Revised factors for flares, engines, turbines.
  New factor for dioxin/furan (flares)
• Collection efficiency is 75 - no acceptance of
  methane oxidation factors
• Representative data sets/statistical approach

31
Proposed Revisions to AP-42

• Industry meeting held with EPA February 4, 2009
• Results of meeting
• Outcome of SWANA/NSWMA meeting March 9
• Next Steps/Meetings with EPA
• Comments due May 5, 2009

32
In Closing . . .

• Policymaking is still outpacing technical tools
  and data
• Inventory protocols not defined for most waste
  management activities
• No global agreement on inventory protocols
• Landfill emission protocols should appropriately
  reflect carbon sequestration methane oxidation

Its going to be another busy and interesting
Year!