Biomass Feedstock Accounting
Loading...
This moduleModule (Independent components of Isometric Certified Protocols which are transferable between and applicable to different Protocols.) establishes the requirements associated with the use of biomass feedstocks (Raw material which is used for CO₂ Removal or GHG Reduction.) as a part of carbon dioxide removal (CDRThe (Activitiesterm thatused removeto carbonrepresent dioxidethe (CO₂) fromtaken out of the atmosphere andas storea itresult inof productsa CDR process.)Projects (An activity or geological,process terrestrial,or group of activities or processes that alter the condition of a Baseline and oceanicleads Reservoirs.to CDR includes the enhancement of biologicalRemovals or geochemical sinks and direct air capture (DAC) and storage, but excludes natural CO₂ uptake not directly caused by human interventionReductions.)) projects. This includes setting out eligibility criteria for biomass feedstocks in relation to market leakagesustainability, counterfactual (An assessment of what would have happened in the absence of a particular intervention – i.e., assuming the Baseline scenario.) storage and dedicatedmarket energyleakage feedstock(The considerationsincrease in GHG emissions outside the geographic or temporal boundary of a project that results from that project's activities.). This moduleModule also provides requirementsmethods for the quantification of counterfactual storage to determine eligible biomass ([math: CO_{2}e_{Counterfactual}]), and market leakage to determine emissionseligible associatedfeedstocks. with replacement of biomass ([math: CO_{2}e_{Leakage}]).
This moduleModule is currently applicable to the following biomass feedstocks:
Every projectProject Proponent (The organization that develops and/or has overall legal ownership or control of a Removal or Reduction Project.) must consider specific alternative uses of biomassfeedstocks that would have occurredoccured in the absence of the projectProject. The baseline (A set of data describing pre-intervention or control conditions to be used as a reference scenario for comparison.) scenario must be considered relative to each feedstock used if the projectProject utilizes multiple feedstock types, in line with Section 2.5.2. of the Isometric Standard.
Requirements If a Project uses any feedstock that is deemed ineligible by this Module, this feedstock will not count towards Crediting. If a Project utilizes ineligible biomass for biomassalternative uses in excess of 25% of the feedstock eligibilitymass in a given Reporting Period, removals within the Reporting Period will not be Credited by Isometric.
The current approach outlined in this Module provides:
This moduleModule was developed based on the current state of the art and publicly available science regarding thesourcing landbiomass for Biomass Carbon Removal and Storage (BiCRS) (A range of processes that use changesbiogenic material to remove carbon dioxide (CO₂) from the atmosphere and store that resultCO₂ fromunderground paymentsor forin biomasslong-lived feedstockproducts (LLNL BiCRS Roadmap, 2020).) Projects. This moduleModule is based in part on the most up-to-date literature and models (A calculation, series of calculations or simulations that use input variables in order to generate values for variables of interest that are not directly measured.) likeat GREETthe time of publication. This Module will continue to be updated as scientific and CCLUBeconomic forunderstanding lifedevelops.
Future cyclework analysisto developedinclude atadditional Argonne National Laboratoryfeedstocks, and Global Trade Analysis Project (GTAP) for general equilibrium economic impacts developed at Purdue University. More specific modeling for the use case of biomass residuesuch as apurpose-grown feedstockBiCRS for CDR (Activities that remove carbon dioxide (CO₂) from the atmosphere and store it in products or geologicalfeedstocks, terrestrial, and oceanic Reservoirs. CDR includes the enhancement of biological or geochemical sinks and direct air capture (DAC) and storage, but excludes natural CO₂ uptake not directly caused by human intervention.) will be done in the future.
The current approach outlined in this module provides additional sustainable sourcing criteria that aim to minimize the risk of potential land use effects, whilst accounting for limited data availability when only a relatively small volume of feedstock is sourced.
To extend the functionality of this module, future work will be undertaken toas applynecessitated theby GTAP model to scenarios involving payments made for biomass residues for use in CDRdemand, and thisas moduleenabled willby beimproved updatedresearch accordinglyand modeling.
This moduleModule will be reviewed on an annual cadence in line with the Isometric Standard.
The Projectframework Proponentoutlined mustin considerthis Module sets out sourcing criteria that qualify feedstocks as eligible for use in BiCRS Projects in a way that ensures sustainable sourcing and accounts for the followingemissions factorsimpacts inthat assessingresult howfrom amarket particular biomass feedstock affects their net carbon dioxide equivalent (CO2e) removalleakage. These considerations may vary based on the impactscharacteristics ofand feedstocksourcing use in a given project.
These impacts are defined below in Table 1:
Table 1
Feedstock eligibility requires the
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
2.1 Sustainability CriteriaFor use by a Project Proponent for Crediting, feedstock sourcing must be deemed sustainable. The following section outlines how a Project Proponent is required to assess whether their feedstock sourcing is sustainable and provide evidence of sustainability for their feedstock type. In some instances, sustainability criteria also include an evaluation of market leakage (e.g., SC5.1). The following information must be submitted as part of the verification (A process for evaluating and confirming the net Removals and Reductions for a Project, using data and information collected from the Project and assessing conformity with the criteria set forth in the Isometric Standard and the Protocol by which it is governed. Verification must be completed by an Isometric approved third-party (VVB).) for each Reporting Period:
3.0 CounterfactualsWhen feedstocks are used for BiCRS Projects, each eligible unit of stored carbon will be Credited as CO2e. However, not all removed and stored carbon is considered environmentally additional from a climate impact perspective. To accurately determine a Project's climate impact, the Project Proponent must assess if the feedstock's biogenic carbon would have been released into the atmosphere in the near term (e.g., through burning or rapid decay), termed [math: CO_2e_{CounterfactualEmissions}], or if this carbon would have remained stored longer, termed [math: CO_2e_{Counterfactual}]. Only the fraction that would have been emitted in the absence of the Accounting for counterfactual storage ensures Credits (A publicly visible uniquely identifiable Credit Certificate Issued by a Registry that gives the owner of the Credit the right to account for one net metric tonne of Verified CO₂e Removal or Reduction. In the case of this Standard, the net tonne of CO₂e Removal or Reduction comes from a Project Validated against a Certified Protocol.) accurately reflect the Project's actual climate impact, preventing overstatement of removals by accounting for carbon that would have stayed out of the atmosphere for long periods regardless of the Project's intervention. This is | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Feedstock eligibility is determined by its potential market leakage (The increase in GHG emissions outside the geographic or temporal boundary of a project that results from that project's activities.) impact (see Section 2.1), its counterfactual CO2 storage scenario (see Section 2.2) and whether it’s a purpose-grown feedstock (see Section 2.3). To be eligible under Protocols applicable to this module, a given feedstock must meet the requirements in all three Sections. Eligibility requires satisfying an acceptable combination (as outlined below) of EC1-EC12, satisfying one of EC13-EC14, and, if applicable, satisfying EC15impacts.
Creating a market for biomass feedstocks may generate new revenue in the source sector that alters producer behaviour in ways that result in additional GHG emissions. For example, increased profit may lead to changes in forest treatment or agronomic management activity to increase biomass yield or changes to livestock management to consolidate waste.
The framework outlined in this module sets outsourcing criteria that qualify the feedstock as eligible for use in a way that minimizes the emissions impact of possible market leakage effects. Market leakage can be classified into two types:
Project Proponents must demonstrate that boththe indirectcounterfactual fate has been properly assessed and directthe marketcounterfactual leakagestorage havehas been minimized or appropriately accountedquantified. Once a feedstock's counterfactual fate has been established, it's determined fate is valid for 10 years provided the feedstock sourcing does not change. DemonstratingUnder anyexceptional circumstances where Isometric identifies a significant change to the understood counterfactual fate, Isometric reserves the right to conduct an audit to ensure feedstocks continue to meet the criteria laid out in this Module. Typically the historical fate of the feedstock is a good indicator of the future counterfactual fate of the feedstock absent the Project activities. To assess the counterfactual fate of the feedstock, at least one of EC1the throughfollowing EC4pieces satisfiesof bothevidence requirementsmust be provided by the Project Proponent:
All feedstocks eligible for crediting must meet one of EC5-EC7 satisfies the indirect market criteria andlisted demonstratingin any one of EC8-E12 satisfies the direct market criteria.
Table 2 to evaluate counterfactual storage.
| Counterfactual Criteria | ||
|---|---|---|
| Criteria | Documentation Required | |
| CC1 | Project feedstock harvesting activities will increase ecosystem carbon sequestration over 15 years by an amount equal to or greater than the carbon in the feedstock. The [math: CO_2e_{Counterfactual}] of these feedstocks is 0. | The Project Proponent must provide documentation detailing the current counterfactual and Project-affected (15 year) ecosystem carbon sequestration from feedstock collection as well as an ongoing monitoring plan to ensure ecosystem carbon sequestration takes place. |
| CC2 | Feedstock is sourced through a government managed, funded or otherwise supported wildfire mitigation program. The [math: CO_2e_{Counterfactual}] of these feedstocks is 0. | The Project Proponent must provide evidence that the feedstock originates from a government mandated, managed or otherwise supported wildfire mitigation program, including evidence of program participation and chain-of-custody. |
| CC3 | The [math: CO_2e_{Counterfactual}] of the feedstock is quantified (See Section 3.3 for details). | The Project Proponent must provide a quantification of [math: CO_2e_{Counterfactual}] including all documentation, data-sets, references and assumptions associated with the calculation of counterfactual storage. |
Feedstocks that do not meet CC1 or CC2 within Table 2 must quantify counterfactual storage. Biogenic carbon that would likely be stored in the biomass for the next 15 years in the counterfactual is considered counterfactually stored.
Counterfactual storage is a quantified measurement of stored biogenic carbon, and takes into account the amount of biogenic carbon within the feedstock and the emissions associated with the release of the biogenic carbon.
Biomass decay that would lead to additional carbon storage in the landscape is taken into account (e.g., soil organic carbon gains from biomass decay). This effect may be nonlinear and Project Proponents can provide evidence of its negligibility at the feedstock removal rates.
Counterfactual storage is reported in CO2e units. Counterfactual emissions are evaluated as the CO2e using the 100-year Global Warming Potential (GWP) (A measure of how much energy the emissions of 1 tonne of a GHG will absorb over a given period of time, relative to the emissions of 1 ton of CO₂.), GWP100, of all released GHGs within 15 years. The most recent volume of the IPCC Assessment Report should be used (currently the Sixth Assessment Report) to represent the GWP100 of GHGs.
If all stored biogenic carbon within the feedstock would be emitted within 15 years in the counterfactual, then [math: CO_2e_{Counterfactual}] = 0. If CO2e emissions within 15 years exceed the equivalent stored biogenic carbon within the feedstock at 15 years, counterfactual storage can be quantified by the amount of biogenic CO2e that is stored after 50 years. This is to increase the eligibility of feedstocks that have a disproportionately large near-term release of GHGs with a GWP100 >1 in the counterfactual. Example calculations can be found in Appendix 6.
Equation 1 and equation 2 must be used to quantify the total CO2e that is ineligible for Crediting.
[math: CO_2e_{Counterfactual,\ x}\ \ = \ \ CO_2e_{Feedstock} \ \ - \ \ CO_2e_{CounterfactualEmissions}]
(Equation 1)
[math: CO_2e_{CounterfactualEmissions} \ \ = \ \ min(CO_2e_{CounterfactualEmissions15}, \ \ CO_2e_{Feedstock}\ \ - \ \ CO_2e_{CounterfactualStorage50})]
(Equation 2)
Where:
For each Reporting Period, [math: CO_2e_{Counterfactual}] must be aggregated across all feedstock batches, where [math: n] is the total number of batches:
[math: CO_2e_{Counterfactual}\ \ =\ \ \sum_{x=1}^{n}\ CO_2e_{Counterfactual,\ x}]
(Equation 3)
Where:
Sourcing feedstocks for the purpose of BiCRS Projects can lead to an increase in GHG emissions resulting from changes to the supply and demand equilibrium, also called market leakage. For example, the sourcing of a feedstock above the Baseline Feedstock Generation Rate could lead to increased feedstock production (e.g., land use change). This can also occur when removed feedstocks exceed the Sustainable Usage Rate, leading to demand for a replacement product (e.g., fertilizer). Feedstocks that do not meet the criteria established in Table 3 are deemed ineligible under the current Module due to high risks of significant market leakage. Market leakage must be evaluated in all cases using the criteria within Table 4.
Once a Project's feedstock is identified as eligible, it maintains it's eligibility for a period of 10 years provided the feedstock sourcing does not change. Under exceptional circumstances where Isometric identifies a significant risk of substantial market leakage, Isometric reserves the right to conduct an audit to ensure feedstocks continue to meet the criteria laid out in this Module.
The following information must be submitted every 10 years:
Certain feedstocks are deemed ineligible by this Module due to the associated high risk of significant market leakage. These include cases where the feedstock was cultivated for the purpose of food, feed, energy or use in BiCRS as well as materials used in long-lived wood products such as construction materials and furniture. There are exceptions under specific circumstances. To establish feedstock eligibility, the feedstock must meet the relevant criterion outlined in Table 3.
| Table 3 | ||
|---|---|---|
| Prohibited Feedstocks | ||
| Criteria | Documentation Required | |
| PF1 | Applicable to non-woody feedstocks: The feedstock must not have been produced for bioenergy applications. This does not affect the use of residues that have fulfilled their purpose for energy generation (e.g., post anaerobic digestion manure). | The Project Proponent must provide evidence that the feedstock was not produced for bioenergy use for 2 years prior to the Project's first procurement date. |
| PF2 | Applicable to woody feedstocks: The feedstock must not be suitable for use as a component of long-lived wood products or pulpwood (e.g, construction materials, furniture, fiberboard etc.). Feedstocks that have fulfilled their use as long-lived wood products or pulpwood are eligible if they cannot be further repurposed. Residues from wood processing are eligible if non-marketable or marketed only for bioenergy, landscaping or mulch over the previous 2 years. | The Project Proponent must provide evidence of the feedstock lifecycle including generation and utilization/disposal for 2 years prior to the Project's first procurement date. Feedstocks sourced from wildfire mitigation programs are exempt from this requirement if the Project Proponent can provide evidence that the feedstock was sourced by, or to meet the clear goals of, a government supported wildfire mitigation program, including evidence of program participation and chain-of-custody. |
All feedstocks must select a market leakage assessment and meet all criteria within the selected assessment as laid out in Table 4 (e.g., ML5.1 and ML5.2) for the evaluation of market leakage emissions, termed [math: CO_2e_{Leakage}].
| Table 4 | ||
|---|---|---|
| ML1: Quantify Market Leakage | ||
| Criteria | Documentation Required | |
| ML1.1 | The [math: CO_2e_{Leakage}] of the feedstock is quantified (See Section 4.3 for details). | The Project Proponent must quantify the emissions associated with market leakage and provide the documentation used in this quantification including references, data-sets and assumptions. |
| ML2: CCS retrofits where baseline facility emissions exceed capture capacity. For feedstocks that meet both of the following criteria, [math: CO_2e_{Leakage}\ =\ 0]. | ||
| Criteria | Documentation Required | |
| ML2.1 | The Maximum Biogenic Carbon Utilization Rate of the CCS infrastructure does not meet or exceed the Baseline Emission Rate. This criteria allows for the qualification of a feedstock mass that does not exceed the Maximum Biogenic Carbon Utilization Rate, after subtracting both the Baseline Emission Rate and any parasitic load of the retrofit infrastructure. All values are expressed in feedstock equivalent units. | Documentation demonstrating the Baseline Emission Rate over the last 5 years and an evidenced calculation of the Maximum Biogenic Carbon Utilization Rate of the CCS infrastructure (See Appendix 4 for calculation requirements). |
| ML2.2 | All feedstock sourced outside the baseline, including any feedstock sourced to meet parasitic energy requirements or reductions in the facility's primary outputs, must be accounted for under another market leakage criteria. | A quantification of the parasitic load, and/or any decrease in the primary output of the facility due to the retrofit infrastructure and evidence of how this is accounted for. |
| ML3: Retrofit baseline feedstocks. For feedstocks that meet both of these criteria, [math: CO_2e_{Leakage}\ =\ 0]. | ||
| Criteria | Documentation Required | |
| ML3.1 | The facility feedstock consumption remains consistent in mass and sourcing compared to the pre-retrofit baseline. | A quantification of the Baseline Feedstock Consumption Rate for the facility for 5 years prior to the retrofit installation (See Appendix 4 for calculation requirements). |
| ML3.2 | All feedstock sourced outside the baseline, including any feedstock sourced to meet parasitic energy requirements or reductions in the facility's primary outputs, must be accounted for under another market leakage criteria. | A quantification of the parasitic load, and/or any decrease in the primary output of the facility due to the retrofit infrastructure and evidence of how this is accounted for. |
| ML4: The Project Proponent does not | |||
| Criteria | Documentation Required | ||
| ML4.1 | The Project Proponent must demonstrate one of the following: There was no payment made to the feedstock supplier for the feedstock. The |
| |
|
| ||
| The |
|
| ML5: There is an excess supply of feedstock with an economic purpose. | ||
| Criteria | Documentation Required | |
| ML5.1 | The feedstock is demonstrated to serve an economic purpose7 and | The Project Proponent must provide all of the following: Historical contracts between the feedstock supplier and the end-use/disposal sites. A quantification of the Baseline Feedstock Generation Rate over the previous 5 years (See Appendix 4 for details). Where this detail is unavailable, an affidavit from the feedstock supplier demonstrating the historical fate of the feedstock
|
| ML5.2 | The | |
|
|
Any onedoes not exceed 5% of the criteriatotal inrevenue Tablegenerated 3from the feedstock supplier's operations.
A demonstration that the price paid to the feedstock supplier does not exceed 2x the cost the feedstock supplier would have paid for disposal.
A demonstration that the price paid to the feedstock supplier for the feedstock is sufficientless tothan demonstrate5% minimalof indirectthe markettotal leakage:
Tablebenchmark-priced 3
| The Project Proponent must | |
|
| |
|
|
Any one of the criteria in the following Table 4 is sufficient to demonstrate minimal direct market leakage:
Table 4
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
Thus, to establish eligibility under market leakage criteria, the Project Proponent must demonstrate either:
Itdetail is recommended that where feasible a Project Proponent collects farm-specific information as part of their sustainable sourcing practices. However this information is not currently required for the determination of eligibility.
Biomass stores CO2 as organic carbon, C. A quantity of C can be converted to units of CO2 using the atomic mass of both elements. In this section C in biomass is described in terms of CO2, presented as CO2e in equations for consistency.
When C decomposes it can release CO2, but also potentially methane (CH4) under anaerobic conditions. Non-CO2 GHGs can be converted to CO2e values based on their global warming potential (GWP) in order to measure how much energy the emissions of 1 tonne of a gas will absorb over a given period of time, relative to the emissions of 1 ton of CO2. The GWP for CH4 is 27.9 for GWP100. In this section CH4 is presented in terms of CO2e.
Eligibility criteria is set out for biomass feedstocks in Table 5 which determines how much of the CO2e stored as part of the Removal activity is eligible to count towards Crediting. This eligibility criteria is in place to ensure that the CO2 stored would not have remained stored as CO2 in the absence of the project. This ensures that Crediting is conservative and the project passes environmental additionality.
The eligibility criteria includes consideration of the counterfactual fate of the biomass. If the biomass is anticipated to have decomposed in the absence of the project, the potential for CH4 emissions are also considered. Methane has a short term global warming impact with a high GWP and as such the benefits of avoiding methane emissions are included within the eligibility criteria.
Table 5
|
|
| ML6:
| ||
|
|
If all of the biogenic C would have been released from storage within 15 yearscriteria, [math: CO_CO_2e_{2Leakage}e_{Counterfactual}\ =\ 0].
1
[math: CO_2e_{Counterfactual,\ n} = CO_2e_{Feedstock} - CO_2e_{EmissionsCounterfactual}]
(Equation 1)
[math: CO_2e_{EmissionsCounterfactual} = min(CO_2e_{StorageCounterfactualEmissions15}, (1-δ_{50})\\ \times CO_2e_{Feedstock}) ]
(Equation 2)
Where:
This discount can arise through two different mechanisms:
Generation Rate.
The feedstock must meet the eligibility criteria in Table 6 in order to be eligible for use under this Module:
Table 6
| Project Proponent must
| |
| ML6.2 | The Project Proponent must demonstrate A A demonstration that the price paid to the feedstock supplier does not exceed 2x the cost the feedstock supplier would have paid for disposal. A demonstration that the price paid to the feedstock supplier for the feedstock is less than 5% of the total benchmark-priced revenue. This revenue is derived from all marketed products and calculated per unit of residue produced. | The Purchase/removal Evidence |
Specific emission calculationsproducts associated with a project’s counterfactual storage scenario and market leakage, as required in Protocols applicable to this module, are determined as described below.
For a specific removal, emissions must be aggregated across allthe feedstock production batches, [math:a p]quantification of marketed products production per unit of feedstock and an evidenced price point for the sum of the products produced.
Where this detail is unavailable, withinan affidavit from the feedstock supplier that removal,documents wherepayments [math:made n] isfor the total number of batches:
[math: CO_2e_{Counterfactual,\ n} = \sum_{p=1}^{n}CO_{2}e_{Counterfactual,\ p}]
(Equation 3)
For eligible feedstocks, emissions associated with market leakage will be equal to the total emissions associated with replacement material, as other forms of market leakage are assessed to be 0 for eligible feedstocks. Thus, market leakage for a batch [math: n], is givenfeedstock by the followingProject equation:
[mathProponent do not constitute a large share of upstream operations revenue.
| ML7:
| |||||||||||||||
| Criteria | Documentation | ||||||||||||||
| ML7.1 | The
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
Calculation of [math: CO_{2}e_{Replacement}] requires, but is not limited to, the following measurements:
For replacement of fertilizer function provided by the Project feedstock, the mass of fertilizer accounted for in emission calculations, [math: m_{Replacement}], must account for the equivalent amount of service that the Project feedstock provided.
The total fertilizer capacity previously provided by the Project feedstock must be calculated based on the feedstock(s) nitrogen, phosphorus and potassium (NPK (Nitrogen [N], Phosphurus [P], and Potassium [K] are three nutrients essential to crop growth.)) content. Feedstock NPK content must be determined by sampling of the feedstock(s) for each production batch [math: p], or from available scientific literature.
The amount of fertilizer replacement in the counterfactual scenario must account for replacing the same amount of NPK as in the project feedstock, using the most limiting factor (either N, P, K) to determine the mass of fertilizer required. This is likely to be a very conservative estimate, since not all nutrition will be able to be utilized. As better data & evidence is built, a lower estimate can be used when well evidenced with scientific literature.
If the Project's feedstock only qualifies for ML1 within Table 4 the emissions associated with market leakage must be calculated.
[math: CO_CO_2e_{2}e_{Replacement, nLeakage}] calculations:
Records as set out by the relevant Protocol (A document that describes how to quantitatively assess the net amount of CO₂ removed by a process. To Isometric, a Protocol is specific to a Project Proponent's process and comprised of Modules representing the Carbon Fluxes involved in the CDR process. A Protocol measures the full carbon impact of a process against the Baseline of it not occurring.). [math: CO_2e_{Leakage}] must be maintainedquantified and providedaggregated foracross verificationall purposesfeedstock batches, [math: x], within that removal, where [math: n] is the total number of batches.
[math: CO_2e_{Leakage}] attributed to feedstocks for a periodReporting Period is quantified with the following equation:
[math: CO_2e_{Leakage}\ \ =\ \ \sum_{x=1}^{n}\ CO_2e_{Leakage,\ x}]
(Equation 5)
Where:
The calculation of [math: CO_2e_{Leakage}] is informed by:
The Project Proponent must undertake an appropriate assessment based on the available information regarding the feedstock. The assessment must consider the market leakage impact of the feedstock use for the Project, including all relevant emissions.
If the Project Proponent contributes more than 5% of revenue to the feedstock supplier, the Project Proponent must assess their upstream attributional emissions (See Section 6.4 of the GHG Accounting Module for guidance).
To quantify the impact of market leakage, Projects must identify the alternative use of the feedstock and the marginal impact associated with the diversion of feedstock from this alternative use. This will typically involve identifying the unconstrained marginal product and applying a conversion rate to understand the quantity of the replacement product required.
Examples of the calculation of [math: CO_2e_{Leakage}] for different cases are set out below.
A Project Proponent may source wood products that were otherwise used for bioenergy production. Therefore, by sourcing the wood for the Project, the wood has been diverted from its alternative use for energy production. If wood suitable for bioenergy is a constrained resource, diverting wood from bioenergy plants may lead to an increased use of fossil power sources. The market leakage emissions are the emissions associated with the generation of energy based on the remaining grid mix8. The Project calculates the quantity of forgone energy production associated with the feedstock used for the Project. The forgone energy production (kWh) is multiplied by the average emissions intensity of the grid in the region.
A Project Proponent may source manure that is partially over the Sustainable Usage Rate. The Project causes some displacement to the manure that would have been used for nutrient replenishment. Manure is a constrained resource (as a residue from the dairy or livestock industry), so it is generally assumed that the replacement material is synthetic fertilizer. The Project Proponent must calculate the quantity of manure over the Sustainable Usage Rate, apply a conversion factor for the requisite fertilizer required to fulfill the same function as the manure, and source an emission factor for fertilizer use (see Appendix 4 for more details). The market leakage emissions are the quantity of fertilizer required multiplied by the emission factor for the fertilizer production.
A Project Proponent may source feedstock that otherwise would have been used for animal bedding. The biomass product is constrained as it is a residue from an industrial process, and the unconstrained marginal product is identified as hay. The Project Proponent quantifies the amount of feedstock that would have been used for animal bedding and applies a conversion factor to identify the quantity of hay that must be sourced as a replacement material. The market leakage emissions are the quantity of hay required multiplied by the emission factor for hay.
Isometric would like to thank the following contributors to this Module:
Matthew Gammans, Ph.D. (North Dakota State University)
Kevin Fingerman, Ph.D. (Cal Poly Humboldt)
This section outlines how to calculate the replacement mass of fertilizer, [math: m_{Replacement}], for a specific quantity of sourced manure from a single location. The actual replacement emissions depend on various variables related to the nutrient composition of the sourced manure and the nutrient requirements of the cropland surrounding the manure source location.
This appendix details how the Project Proponent must monitor, document and report all metrics This methodology utilizes a comprehensive monitoring and documentation framework that captures the The Project Proponent must develop and apply a monitoring plan according to ISO 14064-2 For replacement of fertilizer function provided by the feedstock, the mass of fertilizer accounted for in emission calculations must account for the equivalent amount of service that the feedstock provided. See Section 8.2 for a worked example using manure. The total fertilizer capacity previously provided by the feedstock must be calculated based on the feedstock's NPK (Nitrogen [N], Phosphurus [P], and Potassium [K] are three nutrients essential to crop growth.) content. Feedstock NPK content must be determined by sampling of the feedstock The amount of fertilizer replacement in the counterfactual scenario must account for replacing the same amount of NPK This If the quantity of manure procured does not exceed the Sustainable Usage Rate then [math: CO_2e_{ The following equation can be used to calculate [math: CO_2e_{Replacement,\ (Equation 6) Where: Pre-approved forestry certification/management programs are listed in Table 6. For retrofit Projects, feedstock sourcing has a broader range of eligible certification/management programs for the Project activities necessitates the requirement of defining the baseline activities to inform all three of the themes within this Module, sustainable sourcing, counterfactual storage and market leakage. Below are some specific baseline definitions defined to demonstrate how the baseline scenario of a given Project is determined. The Baseline Feedstock Consumption Rate can be used by Projects that retrofit existing facilities/processes, making use of residues that are generated through the production of primary products. This allows the Project to demonstrate what feedstock would be sourced over a given time frame, regardless of the Project activities, and what feedstock is sourced due to the Project activities.
To establish the Baseline Feedstock Consumption Rate Project Proponents must use facility-level data on average feedstock consumption for each feedstock from the 5 years prior to the Project's first procurement date. This is usually calculated from operational data or prior purchase agreements. If such data is unavailable, the value can be calculated using feedstock-to-output ratios. The value will be a rolling average of feedstock consumption over a defined time horizon, typically 5 years for industrial facilities, though other selections may be necessary due to highly variable feedstock consumption or data limitations. The variability of the feedstock consumption must also be characterized for the 5-year baseline period. This can be achieved by calculating the variance of feedstock consumption on both a reporting-period-length and annual level. Normal deviations from the mean versus induced changes can be evaluated using statistical tests such as a statistical process control assessment (SPC) or a similar test with appropriate justification. If a perceived change in feedstock consumption is detected, the Project Proponent has three options: Calculated baselines must be representative of historical data, and a seasonal baseline may be appropriate in markets with high-seasonal variability such as energy production facilities. To utilize the expanded list of criteria options available (e.g., SC2, ML2) by establishing a Baseline Feedstock Consumption Rate, the volume and source of feedstock must be consistent before and after the retrofit. Should the 5 year baseline period include facility downtime due to exceptional circumstances, these observations will not be included in the average calculation. Baseline periods of shorter or longer durations than 5 years will be considered on a case-by-case basis. Isometric is open to the necessity of some adjustments being made in cases where a facility underwent significant upgrades or efficiency improvements within the baseline period. The adjustments will be made conservatively and justified based on comparisons to other analogous facilities. After the Project start date, the Baseline Feedstock Consumption Rate must be recalculated annually using a rolling average. However, in order to be eligible to revise the baseline upwards, the Project Proponent must demonstrate that the total biomass claimed as falling within baseline operations did not exceed 110% of the Baseline Feedstock Consumption Rate in the prior year In cases where feedstock use by a Project is in excess of the Baseline Feedstock Consumption Rate, the Project Proponent must assess this excess feedstock separately. For CCS retrofit Projects, Project Proponents may be eligible to use ML2 to quantify market leakage, if their Baseline Emission Rate is greater than the Maximum Biogenic Carbon Utilization Rate of their capture process. The Baseline Emission Rate is the annual mass of biogenic carbon that is released as flue gas from the facility pre-retrofit. Like the Baseline Feedstock Consumption Rate, this value will be based on the average annual value over the 5 years prior to the Project start. Ideally, this is calculated from operational data or prior purchase agreements. If such data is unavailable, the value can be calculated using feedstock-to-output ratios. The Maximum Biogenic Carbon Utilisation Rate, termed [math: \phi _{Bio}], is the maximum quantity of input biogenic carbon that can be utilized by the capture process. The following calculation will be used to calculate the [math: \phi _{Bio}]: (Equation 7) Where: For example, if a facility has a [math: Capture_{Capacity}] of 100 gross tonnes of CO2 annually, and a [math: Capture_{Efficiency}] of 0.8, the [math: \phi_{Bio}] is 1,250 tonnes of biogenic CO2. The portion of a facility’s on-site biomass energy output (electric and/or thermal) that is consumed by or diverted to equipment, within the Project system boundary thereby reducing net energy available for other uses. Only the share supplied for biomass combustion within the facility is counted as parasitic load. Projects must quantify this energy and convert it to an equivalent feedstock mass using documented fuel properties and conversion efficiencies. The Baseline Feedstock Generation Rate is the rate at which a feedstock supplier produces or generates feedstock material. For example, it could be the rate of manure production at a dairy, or forest residue generation at a forestry operation. Project Proponents calculate this by using facility, farm, or operation-level data on the average annual feedstock generated prior to the Project start date. This Module does not specify a general time horizon, but highly-capitalized industrial facilities or industries with substantial year-to-year variation in feedstock production will select a longer time horizon than farms or forestry operations. For animal agriculture residues, the Baseline Feedstock Generation Rate is set at the levels of total output 2 years before the Project Proponent sources a batch of feedstock, as outlined in SC4. The Project Proponent must demonstrate that the total annual amount of feedstock the Project Proponent contracts for the current year will be at or below the Baseline Feedstock Generation Rate. Similar methods to those outlined in the Baseline Feedstock Consumption Rate can be used in evaluating the Baseline Feedstock Generation Rate. By linking eligibility to past production, we ensure that increasing production for the purposes of receiving additional payments would incur losses for at least 2 years. Given the low margins in agricultural production and current costs of capital, this delay period likely makes these decisions economically infeasible. Some feedstocks may play important economic or ecological roles even if they are not typically sold in markets. For example, farmers may depend on locally available corn stover or manure for fertilization. The Sustainable Usage Rate refers to the maximum amount of a feedstock that can be removed from a region without compromising the region’s ability to meet a specific economic or ecological need. In the case of manure, for The following calculation is an example of how to calculate the Sustainable Usage Rate for manure when there is no observable counterfactual. Other calculations may be appropriate, (Equation 8) Where: (Equation 9) Where: (Equation 10) Where: If a Project Proponent can demonstrate that all produced manure can be accounted for using a manure management plan or a signed affidavit from the feedstock supplier, the equation can be simplified to: (Equation 11) Where: The following list is to be used as guidance for which industry residues are considered by Isometric to have a sufficiently low risk of market leakage to be eligible to use the Sustainability Criteria outlined in SC5. This list, while not exhaustive, is aimed to highlight appropriate industry residues that are likely to be deemed eligible within this Module. Additional feedstocks will be considered on a case-by-case basis. A Project Proponent identifies an excess supply of corn stover over the SUR (Sustainable Usage Rate: the rate at which a feedstock can be removed from a location without affecting the feedstock's environmental benefits or availability for alternative uses.). The corn stover contains 30t of biogenic carbon. The counterfactual fate of the excess stover is combustion in piles and therefore all biogenic carbon would be released as emissions much earlier than 15 years. Convert the carbon to CO2e Calculate [math: CO_2e_{CounterfactualEmissions}] by applying equation 2 Apply equation 1 A Project Proponent sources excess slash residue from an FSC certified forestry project. The wood contains 30t of biogenic carbon. The decay rate of the wood residue is slow due to recalcitrant components such as lignin. The counterfactual fate of the slash material is piled up and left to decay. 25% of the biogenic carbon remains after 15 years. 5% of the biogenic carbon remains after 50 years. 1% of the emissions from decaying C are released as CH4 in the first 15 years. The 100-year GWP of CH4 is 27. Convert the carbon to CO2e Calculate [math: CO_2e_{CounterfactualEmissions15}] by combining CO2 and CH4 emissions as CO2e Calculate [math: CO_2e_{CounterfactualStorage50}] Calculate [math: CO_2e_{CounterfactualEmissions}] by applying equation 2 Apply equation 1 A Project Proponent sources excess oat shells from a hulling facility. The oat hulls contain 30t of biogenic carbon. The current counterfactual fate of the oat shells is that they are left to decay in large piles. The decay rate of the oat shells is fairly slow given the recalcitrant components such as lignin. 25% of the biogenic carbon remains after 25 years. 1% of the biogenic carbon remains after 50 years. 4% of the emissions from decaying carbon are released as CH4 within the first 15 years. The GWP of CH4 is 27. Convert the carbon to CO2e Calculate [math: CO_2e_{CounterfactualEmissions15}] by combining CO2 and CH4 emissions as CO2e Calculate [math: CO_2e_{CounterfactualStorage50}] Calculate [math: CO_2e_{CounterfactualEmissions}] by applying equation 2 Apply equation 1 Such as slash material, defined in 40 CFR 80.1401 as "A residue, including treetops, branches and bark, left on the ground after logging or accumulating as a result of a storm, fire, delimbing or other similar disturbance". ↩ The sourcing region is defined as a region of similar ecological characteristics, such as biodiversity, as defined by relevant regional authorities (Carbon Direct 2025). ↩ A primary forest as defined by the UN FAO is a naturally regenerated forest of native tree species, where there are Such as The The Sustainable Use Rate (SUR) () is the quantity of manure that can be taken without the need to calculate replacement emissions. There are three potential cases:6.2 Case 1: There exists an observed counterfactualIf the source can demonstrate through manure management plan records and/or an affadavit or other documentation the quantity of manure that was used for fertilization purposes either on- or off-farm, the SUR can be calculated as follows:[math: SUR = QuantityGenerated\ -\ ObservedCounterfactual](Equation 6)In this case, the [math: SupplyRegion] is the feedlot, thus [math: QuantityGenerated] is total quantity of manure produce annually at the source feedlot6.3 Case 2: No observed counterfactual, but eligible to use the source farm as the supply region and acres servicedIf the source can demonstrate through manure management plan records and/or through a signed affadavit that no manure has left the property of the feedlot for at least the prior two years, the SUR can be calculated at the feedlot level. In this case, variables are calculated in the following manner:Variable Calculation SupplyRegion The source feedlot.AcresThe total number of cropland acres that is operated by the feedlot owner. QuantityGenerated The quantity of manure produce annually at the source feedlot.PrimaryCropThe largest crop by acreage of all cropland operated by the feedlot owner and in the vicinity of the manure source.Then the SUR (Sustainable Usage Rate: the rate at which a feedstock can be removed from a location without affecting the feedstock's environmental benefits or availability for alternative uses.) is provided by the following calculation:[math: SUR = \max\left[\frac{{Acres \cdot NutrientsReq_{cN}}}{{ManureNutrient_{N}}}, \frac{{Acres \cdot NutrientsReq_{cP}}}{{ManureNutrient_{P}}}\right]](Equation 7)6.4 Case 3: No observed counterfactual and not eligible to use the source farm as the supply region and acres servicedIf there does not exist an observed counterfactual and the source farm can not demonstrate that no manure has left the farm within the past 2 years, a regional estimate of the SUR (Sustainable Usage Rate: the rate at which a feedstock can be removed from a location without affecting the feedstock's environmental benefits or availability for alternative uses.) can be computed using Equation 7 above, but with variables are calculated in the following manner:Variable Calculation SupplyRegion The region within a 5-mile radius of the manure source. Acres The total number of cropland acres that are within a 15-mile radius of the manure source multiplied by the share of the county's acres that are fertilized with manure. QuantityGenerated The quantity of manure produced within a 5-mile radius of the manure source, including the manure source. PrimaryCrop The largest crop by acreage of all cropland operated by the feedlot owner and in the vicinity of the manure source.6.5 Replacement mReplacement mass is calculated as follows:If[math: QuantityProcured \leq SUR]then:[math: m_{Replacement,\ p}=0]Otherwise, the appropriate replacement mass value is:[math: m_{Replacement,\ p} = \\
(QuantityProcured-SUR)\\
\times (ManureNutrient_{N} \cdot FertiliserEmissions_{N}\\ + ManureNutrient_{P} \cdot FertiliserEmissions_{P})](Equation 8)Potential additional data sources:[math: NutrientsReq_{cf}] - N, P needs per farmland acre from AESL at UGA (K is assumed to not be limiting).[math: ManureNutrient_{f}] - N, P generated from cow manure in the county from Utah State University Extension.7.0 Appendix
21: Monitoring Plan Requirements
identified within this Module to calculate counterfactual emissions. Following this guidance will ensure the Project Proponent measures
and confirms carbon dioxide removedremovals and long-term storage compliance, and will enable quantification of the
emissions removal resulting from the Project activity during the Project CreditingReporting Period (The period of time over which a Project Design Document is valid, and over which Removals or Reductions may be Verified, resulting in Issued Credits.), prior to each Verification.
GHG impact in each stage of a Project. Monitoring and detailed accounting practices must be
conducted throughout to ensure the continuous integrity of the carbon dioxide removals and creditingCrediting.
principles of transparency and accuracy that allows the quantification and proof of GHG
emissions removals.Table 5 Parameter Parameter Description RequiredEquation Parameter Type Units Data Source MeasurementMonitoring MethodMonitoring Frequency QA/QC ProceduresProcedureRequired Evidence Reference [math: CO_2e_{ StorageCounterfactualEmissions15CounterfactualEmissions15}]EmissionsThe mass of biogenic emissions that would have counterfactually been released in the counterfactual within 15 years or the biomass sourcing date. UnderEquation certain conditions Eq. 12 (Biomass Feedstock Accounting Module)Assessment tonnesTonnes CO2eThe Project Proponent willmust produce evidence or analysis that outlines the expected counterfactual fate of their biomass feedstock. This analysis will either suggest that all of the carbon content of the biomass would have been rereleased into the atmosphere before the threshold time, that part of the carbon content would have been rereleased as GHG, or that none of it would have. Each feedstock, sourceevery 10 yearsTransparency on rationale for the chosen type of evidence Report relying on one or more of the data sources Section 3.3 of the Biomass Feedstock Accounting Module [math: CO_2e_{CounterfactualStorage50}] The mass of biogenic CO2e that would have remained stored in the counterfactual after 50 years. Equation 2 (Biomass Feedstock Accounting Module) [math: δ_{50}]Share of carbon in feedstock that would not have counterfactually returned to the atmosphere within 50 years Under certain conditions 2.2 (Biomass Feedstock Accounting Module)Assessment unitlessTonnes CO2eThe Project Proponent willmust produce evidence or analysis that outlines the expected counterfactual fate of their biomass feedstock. This analysis will either suggest that all of the carbon content of the biomass would have been rereleased into the atmosphere before the threshold time, that part of the carbon content would have been rereleased as GHG, or that none of it would have.Each feedstock source, every 10 years Transparency on rationale for the chosen type of evidence .Report relying on one or more of the data sources .2Section 3.23 (of the Biomass Feedstock Accounting Module)[math: m_CO_2e_{Replacement,\ pFeedstock}]The mass of biogenic CO2e that is contained within the feedstock. Equation 1 & 2 of the Biomass Feedstock Accounting Module. Measured Tonnes of CO2e Determined based on the carbon content of the feedstock converted to CO2e units multiplied by the mass of the feedstock. The Project Proponent must measure the mass of their feedstock and analyze the carbon content of the feedstock. Each feedstock, every 10 years. ISO 20236:2024 Evidence demonstrating the TOC (Total Organic Carbon.) content of the feedstock and the mass of the feedstock. Section 3.3 of the Biomass Feedstock Accounting Module [math: CO_2e_{Leakage}] The GHG emissions associated with the Project's impact on activities that fall outside of the system boundary of the Project. Equation 5 of the Biomass Feedstock Accounting Module Assessment Tonnes of CO2e The Project Proponent must account for the GHG emissions that result from the sourcing of biomass that fall outside of the Project system boundary including land-use change and replacement products. Each feedstock every 10 years Transparency on rationale for chosen type of evidence. Report relying on one or more of the data sources 4.3 of the Biomass Feedstock Accounting Module [math: CO_2e_{Replacement}] The emissions associated with the replacement product required to provide the equivalent service as the massfeedstock.Equation 6 of the projectBiomass feedstockFeedstock forAccounting a function ModuleUnder certain conditions AssessmentN/AMeasuredTonnes kgof CO2eDetermined basedby onthe most likely replacement product. Total fertilizer capacity previously provided by theThe Project feedstockProponent must be calculated based on the feedstock(s) NPK (Nitrogen [N], Phosphurus [P], and Potassium [K] are three nutrients essential to crop growth.) content. Must account for the equivalent amount of service that the Project feedstock provided. The replacement counterfactual for the feedstock is determined to be the economically highest value use of the feedstock in a given stateregion.Each feedstock every 10 years Transparency on rationale for chosen type of evidence. Feedstock weigh scale tickets for each batch or other equivalent records to support the calculation. Replacement product analysis documentation. Appendix 2 of the Biomass Feedstock Accounting Module Baseline Feedstock Consumption Rate A quantification of the average rate that a given feedstock is consumed by a facility over the 5 years prior to a retrofit. Appendix 4 of the Biomass Feedstock Accounting Module Measured Tonnes Determined from purchase records between the feedstock supplier and the facility. The Project Proponent must provide a quantification of the average consumption rate of feedstock by a facility prior to a retrofit installation. Each feedstock, every 10 years Feedstock purchase contracts Appendix 4 of the Biomass Feedstock Accounting Module Baseline Feedstock Generation Rate The rate at which a feedstock is generated over the 5 years prior to the Project Proponent's first purchase date. Appendix 4 of the Biomass Feedstock Accounting Module Measured Tonnes Determined by end-use/disposal records of the feedstock from the feedstock supplier. The Project Proponent must provide evidence of the rate at which the feedstock was generated over the previous 5 years. Each feedstock every 10 years A record of feedstock end-use/disposal. Appendix 4 of the Biomass Feedstock Accounting Module Baseline Emission Rate The average rate at which biogenic CO2 is emitted from a point source over the 5 years prior to the installation of CCS retrofit infrastructure. Appendix 4 of the Biomass Feedstock Accounting Module Measured Tonnes of CO2e Determined from emission monitoring systems. The Project Proponent must provide evidence of the rate at which biogenic CO2 is was released by the facility over the 5 years prior to the installation of CCS retrofit infrastructure. Each facility emission source Quantified in line with the Isometric BioCCS Protocol Outputs from emission monitoring platforms. Appendix 4 of the Biomass Feedstock Accounting Module Maximum Biogenic Carbon Utilization Rate The maximum quantity of input biogenic carbon that can be utilized by a capture process. Equation 7 of the Biomass Feedstock Accounting Module Assessment Tonnes A quantification of the biogenic carbon output from an emission source and the capture capacity of CCS infrastructure. The Project Proponent must quantify the maximum amount of biogenic carbon that can be captured by the CCS infrastructure. Each CCS unit ISO (A worldwide federation (NGO) of national standards bodies from more than 160 countries, one from each member country.)/DIS 27920 Tested or determined capture capacity and a quantification of the Baseline Emission Rate. Appendix 4 of the Biomass Feedstock Accounting Module Sustainable Usage Rate A quantification of the rate a resource can be utilized without compromising the services that the resource provides. Equation 8 of the Biomass Feedstock Accounting Module Assessment Tonnes/ha Regional data-sets demonstrating a Sustainable Usage Rate or a quantification based on the feedstock removed and the services the feedstock provided. The Project Proponent must demonstrate a conservative quantification of the Sustainable Usage Rate including all data-sets, references, assumptions and documentation. Each feedstock, every Reporting Period. Transparency on rationale for chosen type of evidence. Report relying on one or more of the data sources. Appendix 4 of the Biomass Feedstock Accounting Module 8.0 Appendix 2: Replacement Material
8.1 Fertilizer Replacement
(s) for each production batch x, or from available scientific literature. (Nitrogen [N], Phosphurus [P], and Potassium [K] are three nutrients essential to crop growth.) as in the project feedstock, using the most limiting factor (either N, P, K) to determine the mass of fertilizer required. EachThis feedstockis sourceISO 17025 accredited laboratory OR acceptable citations for region and feedstock. Input parameter transparency and analysis. Feedstock weigh scale tickets for each production batch or other equivalent recordslikely to supportbe calculationa very conservative estimate, since not all nutrition will be able to be utilized. As better data & evidence is built, a lower estimate can be used when well evidenced with scientific literature.8.2 Calculating the GHG Emissions Associated with the Replacement
productof analysisManuredocumentation.section 3.2.3outlines (Biomasshow Feedstockto Accountingcalculate Module)the GHG emissions associated with the replacement of manure as a fertilizer, [math: CO_CO_2e_{2Replacement}e_], for a specific quantity of sourced manure from a single location. The actual emissions associated with the replacement material depend on various variables related to the nutrient composition of the sourced manure and the nutrient requirements of the cropland surrounding the manure source location.EnergyReplacement},\ x\ =\ 0]. Guidance on calculating the Sustainable Usage Rate can be found in Appendix 4.nx}]. [math: CO_2e_{Replacement,\ x}\ \ =\ \ max(0,\ Rr\ -\ SUR) \cdot (CO_2e_{EmbodiedReplacement}\ +\ CO_2e_{EnergyReplacement}\ +\ CO_2e_{TransportationReplacement})]lifeGHG emissions associated with the replacement fertilizer, in tonnes of CO2e, for batch [math: x].cycle embodiedThe total GHG emissions associated with the energy consumption related to replacement activities for a tonne of fertilizer production and application, in tonnes of CO2e.replacementnutrient productservices forof injectionthe batchmanure, 𝑛.in Undertonnes certain conditions Eq. 5 (Biomass Feedstock Accounting Module)Measured tonnesof CO2e Argonne National Laboratory GREET Model, California Air Resources Board modified GREET model (CA-GREET), Ecoinvent database, US Federal Life Cycle Inventory database or LCA Commons, or from similar databases used in common LCA practices or tools N/A Each feedstock sourceTransparency on rationale for chosen type of evidenceGHG Statement3.2 (Biomass Feedstock Accounting Module)CO_CO_2e_{2}e_{Transportation\ Replacement,\ nTransportationReplacement}] - The total CO2e emissions associated with transportation and delivery of the replacement product for a feedstock for injection batch 𝑛.Under certain conditionsEq. 5 (Biomass Feedstock Accounting Module)Measuredtonnes CO2eSee calculations for transportation and choice of emission factors in "Transportation Module" as applied during the "Operations" aspect of projectOn-line mapping systems using origin and departure from shipping documents, odometer readings AND fuel flow meters, fleet management system data, vehicle on board diagnostics, miles traveled & vehicle type, or similar; ORfuel flow meters, fleet management system data, vehicle on board diagnostics, miles traveled & vehicle type, or similarEach feedstock sourceTransparency on rationale for chosen type of evidenceGHG Statement3.2 (Biomass Feedstock Accounting Module)[math: CO_{2}e_{Embodied\ Replacement,\ n}]The total life-cycle embodied emissions (Life cycle GHG emissions associated with productionthe transportation of materials,a transportation, and construction or other processes for goods or buildings.) associated with the production and usetonne of thefertilizer, replacementin producttonnes for injection batch 𝑛.Under certain conditionsEq. 5 (Biomass Feedstock Accounting Module)Measuredtonnesof CO2eSee calculations for embodied emissions accounting and choice of emission factors in "Embodied Emissions Accounting Module"See calculations for embodied emissions accounting and choice of emission factors in "Embodied Emissions Accounting Module"Each feedstock sourceTransparency on rationale for chosen type of evidenceGHG Statement3.2 (Biomass Feedstock Accounting Module)[math: Quantity\ Procured]Quantity of manure procured for CDR from a manure source. AlwaysEq. 6 (Biomass Feedstock Accounting Module)Measured tonnes Determined from purchase contract. The Project Proponent will report the amount of manure procured from a source. Each feedstock source N/AFeedstock purchase contractAppendix 1 (Biomass Feedstock Accounting Module)[math: Quantity\ Generated]Total quantity of manure generated at a manure source. Under certain conditions Eq. 5 (Biomass Feedstock Accounting Module)Measured tonnes Determined from feedlot records. The Project Proponent will report the total amount of manure generated from a source. Each feedstock source Thorough documentation from records across multiple months.Feedlot recordsAppendix 1 (Biomass Feedstock Accounting Module)Region The geographic area considered when calculating the sustainable application rate, typically the county of the manure source (broader definitions may apply to sources near county borders, and narrower definitions for exceptionally large counties). Under certain conditions Eq. 5 (Biomass Feedstock Accounting Module)Assessment N/ATypically defined as the county containing the feedlot. Each feedstock source N/AAppendix 1 (Biomass Feedstock Accounting Module)AcresAcres using manure source for crop c within the region of the manure source. Under certain conditions Eq. 5 (Biomass Feedstock Accounting Module)Assessment Acres Most recent Census of Agriculture reportBased on USDA survey results regarding the number of acres in a county that apply manure and data on the most common crop grown in a county. Each feedstock source N/AAppendix 1 (Biomass Feedstock Accounting Module)[math: NutrientsReq_{f}]Necessary quantity of nutrient f (N or P) for crop-type c per cropland acre.Under certain conditions Eq. 5 (Biomass Feedstock Accounting Module)Assessment tonnes University of Georgia Nutrient Needs CropsheetEach feedstock source N/AAppendix 1 (Biomass Feedstock Accounting Module)[math: ManureNutrients_{f}]Quantity of nutrient f (N or P) in 1 tonne of manure Under certain conditions Eq. 4 (Biomass Feedstock Accounting Module)Assessment tonnes Each feedstock source N/AAppendix 1 (Biomass Feedstock Accounting Module)89.0 Appendix 3: AcceptableApproved ForestForestry Certification Programs for EC9ForestUnsustainable certificationsforest canmanagement helpis ensurea thatmajor biomassconcern usedwithin forthe CDRBiCRS activitiesindustry doesas notrates incentivizeof forestrydeforestation activitiescontinue thatto reduceexceed globalregeneration in many areas. While carbon stocks are an important consideration for the validity of removal Credits, additional factors must be considered to protect global forests. FourThis certificationsis why, in addition to our requirements for carbon stock and primary forest considerations, we have the additional requirement that feedstock sourcing adhere with the principles laid out by leading forest sustainability organizations.
Relying on the principles and expertise of these programs allows us to be confident that feedstocks sourced for removals credited by Isometric are vetted against the highest standards to provide aecosystem, highcultural degreeand forest sustainability. This includes the maintenance of confidencehabitats, throughthe supplypreservation chainof visibilitybiodiversity (The diversity of life across taxonomic and regularspatial auditing:scales. FSCBiodiversity can be measured within species (i.e. genetic diversity and variations in allele frequencies across populations), PEFCbetween species (i.e. the total number and abundance of species within and across defined regions), SFIwithin ecosystems (i.e. the variation in functional diversity, such as guilds, life-history traits, and ATFSfood-webs), and between ecosystems (variation in the services of abiotic and biotic communities across large, landscape-level scales) that support ecoregions and biomes.) and ecosystem services, as well as respecting local communities and workforces.BiomassFeedstocks certifiedsourced underfrom these four certificationsprograms are eligiblesatisfy the requirements of SC1.1 and SC2.1, for use in any Biogenic Carbon Capture and Sequestration (BCCS)BioCCS or Biomass with Carbon Removal and Sequestration (BiCRS) project, including retrofit projects, subject to the other eligibility criteria outlined in this Module.Isometricfeedstock Biomasssourced at or under the Baseline Feedstock AccountingConsumption moduleRate (See Appendix 4 for details). TwoThe additionalestablishment biomassof certifications,baseline SBPfeedstock sourcing and RSB,quantity provideprovides eligibility subject to an additional requirementconfidence that Project Proponents provide information on the regionfeedstock (USwould state-level or equivalent is acceptable) from which the biomass isbe sourced and provide evidence that forestry carbon stocks in these regions are stable or increasing. At this time, risk-based approaches that do not conduct site audits are eligible if they are provided through FSC or PEFC. FSC Mix certified biomass is eligible, but should not constitute more than 50%regardless of the biomassBiCRS sourcedproject. These additional programs, that satisfy the requirements of SC2.1 only, are listed in Table 7.Table 6 Forestry Certification/Management programs suitable for aall project.BiCRS Projects
Certification Projects/Management types eligible for:Program Additional documentationDocumentation requiredRequiredForest Stewardship Council (FSC) 100% or FSC 100% chain-of-custody All BCCS and BiCRSNoneNational Members of the Program for the Endorsement of Forest Certification (PEFC) 100% (e.g., SFI 100%, ATFS, SGEC, SAFAS etc. All BCCS and BiCRSNoneSustainableAn Forestryequivalent Initiativeforestry (SFI)All BCCSmanagement/certification and BiCRSchain-of-custody program. Acceptable certification programs differ depending on the Project characteristics and sourcing.NoneThe Project Proponent must provide a detailed analysis of how the program is equivalent to the above programs, including forestry management principles and an auditable chain-of-custody.AmericanA Treegovernment Farmmandated, Systemmanaged (ATFS)or otherwise supported wildfire mitigation program.AllNEPA BCCSor equivalent mandated, managed or otherwise supported forestry management and BiCRSchain-of-custody program.NoneThe Project Proponent must provide evidence that the government collection plan is NEPA equivalent in principles and chain-of-custody oversight.Table 7 Additional Certification/Management Programs Eligible for use by retrofit projects for baseline feedstock sourcing. Certification/Management Program Additional Documentation Required Sustainable Biomass Program (SBP) EligibleThe onlyProject forProponent processesmust whereprovide all of the CDR is not the primary product produced.Information on the region (US state-level or equivalent is acceptable) from which the biomass is sourced. following:
Evidence that forestrythe forest carbon stocks in these regions are stable or increasing in the sourcing region.
A risk assessment of the sourcing area demonstrating there is no clear risk of sourcing from primary forests.Roundtable for Sustainable BiomassBiomaterials (RSB)EligibleThe onlyProject forProponent processesmust whereprovide all of the CDR is not the primary product produced.Information on the region (US state-level or equivalent is acceptable) from which the biomass is sourced. following:
Evidence that forestrythe forest carbon stocks in these regions are stable or increasing in the sourcing region.
A risk assessment of the sourcing area demonstrating there is no clear risk of sourcing from primary forests.FSC Controlled Wood Sources EligibleThe onlyProject forProponent processesmust whereprovide a risk assessment of the CDRsourcing area demonstrating there is notno clear risk of sourcing from primary forests.FSC Mix The Project Proponent must provide a risk assessment of the primarysourcing productarea produced.Submitteddemonstrating PPDsthere should target having FSC Mix account foris no moreclear than 25%risk of projectsourcing biomassfrom primary forests.PEFC Controlled Sources EligibleThe onlyProject forProponent processesmust whereprovide a risk assessment of the CDRsourcing area demonstrating there is notno theclear risk of sourcing from primary product produced.Submitted PPDs should target having FSC Mix account for no more than 25% of project biomassforests.Footnotes10.0 Appendix 4: BaselinesABaseline forestFeedstock residueConsumption Rate can be used by Projects that retrofit existing facilities/processes, making use of residues that are generated through the production of primary products. This allows the Project to demonstrate what feedstock would be sourced over a given time frame, regardless of the Project activities, and what feedstock is sourced due to the Project activities. For more information, see Section 10.1.nonthe energy requirements that retrofit infrastructure demands from a baseline facility. This often necessitates an increase in feedstock sourcing, an increase in energy drawn from the grid, or a drop in primary product(s) from the baseline facility. For more information, see Section 10.4.marketablelived woodmaterials such as fiberboard. For more information see Section 10.5.10.1 Baseline Feedstock Consumption Rate
10.2 Baseline Emission Rate
10.3 Maximum Biogenic Carbon Utilization Rate
[math: \phi_{Bio}\ =\ Capture_{Capacity}\ \cdot\ ( \dfrac{1}{Capture_{Efficiency}})]10.4 Parasitic Load
10.5 Baseline Feedstock Generation Rate
10.6 Sustainable Usage Rate
exampleinstance, beetlethe killSustainable Usage Rate would represent the highest annual quantity that can be exported while still leaving enough for farmers who rely on it to meet their fertilization requirements.sticksparticularly for other feedstocks, and twigsmust be evidenced when submitting the PDD (The document that clearly outlines how a Project will generate rigorously quantifiable Additional high-quality Removals or Reductions.).[math: Manure_{SUR}\ =\ Manure_{Gross}\ -\ Manure_{Demand}][math: Manure_{Gross}\ =\ Livestock_{Output}\ \cdot\ Livestock_n][math: Manure_{Demand}\ =\ Crop_{Area}\ \cdot\ Crop_{Req}]millusing a manure management plan or signed affidavit, then the CropArea can be constrained to property operated by the feedstock supplier.[math: Manure_{SUR}\ =\ Manure_{Gross}\ -\ Observed_{Counterfactual}]11.0 Appendix 5: Industry Residues Considered to have a low Market Leakage Risk
Table 8 Residues eligible for SC5 Industry Residue Example(s) Landscaping Lawn trimmings, below-grade wood chips, etc. Primary agricultural processing Rice husks, oat hulls, etc. Food processing Waste streams from food manufacturing facilities Beverage processing Spent grains etc. Textiles Cotton gin trash, wool lanolin etc. 12.0 Appendix 6: Counterfactual Storage Example Calculations
12.1 Example 1
[math: CO_2e_{Feedstock}\ \ = \ \ 30 \cdot \dfrac{44}{12}\ \ = 110][math: CO_2e_{CounterfactualEmissions}\ \ =\ \ min(CO_2e_{CounterfactualEmissions15},\ \ CO_2e_{Feedstock}\ \ -\ \ CO_2e_{CounterfactualStorage50})\\\ \\\
110\ \ =\ \ min(110,\ \ 110\ \ -\ \ 0)][math: CO_2e_{Counterfactual}\ \ =\ \ CO_2e_{Feedstock}\ \ -\ \ CO_2e_{CounterfactualEmissions}\\\ \\\
0\ \ =\ \ 110\ \ -\ \ 110]12.2 Example 2
[math: CO_2e_{Feedstock}\ \ =\ \ 30\ \ \cdot\ \ \dfrac{44}{12}\ \ =\ \ 110][math: CO_2e_{CounterfactualEmissions15}\ (CO_2)\ =\ (30\ \cdot\ (1\ -\ 0.25))\ \cdot\ 0.99\ \cdot\ \dfrac{44}{12}\ =\ 81.7\\\ \\\ CO_2e_{CounterfactualEmissions15}\ (CH_4)\ =\ (30\ \cdot\ (1-0.25))\ \cdot\ 0.01\ \cdot\ \dfrac{16}{12}\ \cdot\ 27\ =\ 8.1\\\ \\\ CO_2e_{CounterfactualEmissions15}\ =\ 81.7\ +\ 8.1\ =\ 89.8][math: CO_2e_{CounterfactualStorage50}\ =\ 110\ \cdot\ 0.05\ =\ 5.5][math: CO_2e_{CounterfactualEmissions15}\ =\ min(CO_2e_{CounterfactualEmissions15},\ CO_2e_{Feedstock}\ -\ CO_2e_{CounterfactualStorage50})\\\ \\\ 89.8\ =\ min(89.8,\ 110\ -\ 5.5)][math: CO_2e_{Counterfactual}\ =\ CO_2e_{Feedstock}\ -\ CO_2e_{CounterfactualEmissions}\\\ \\\ 20.2\ =\ 110\ -\ 89.8]12.3 Example 3
[math: CO_2e_{Feedstock}\ =\ 30\ \cdot\ \dfrac{44}{12}\ =\ 110][math: CO_2e_{CounterfactualEmissions15}\ (CO_2)\ =\ (30\ \cdot\ (1\ -\ 0.25))\ \cdot\ 0.96\ \cdot\ \dfrac{44}{12}\ =\ 79.2\\\ \\\ CO_2e_{CounterfactualEmissions15}\ (CH_4)\ =\ (30\ \cdot\ (1\ -\ 0.25))\ \cdot\ 0.04\ \cdot\ \dfrac{16}{12}\ \cdot\ 27)\ =\ 32.4\\\ \\\ CO_2e_{CounterfactualEmissions15}\ =\ 79.2\ +\ 32.4\ =\ 111.6][math: CO_2e_{CounterfactualStorage50}\ =\ 110\ \cdot\ 0.01\ =\ 1.1][math: CO_2e_{CounterfactualEmissions}\ =\ min(CO_2e_{CounterfactualEmissions15},\ CO_2e_{Feedstock}\ -\ CO_2e_{CounterfactualStorage50})\\\ \\\ 108.9\ =\ min(111.6,\ 110\ -\ 1.1)][math: CO_2e_{Counterfactual}\ =\ CO_2e_{Feedstock}\ -\ CO_2e_{CounterfactualEmissions}\\\ \\\ 1.1\ =\ 110\ -\ 108.9]Footnotes
AllowedDownstream Statewood levelprocessing alternativeis programsdefined as wood processing that converts raw wood material into products such as sawn timber, plywood, furniture or other goods. ↩outlinedno clearly visible indication of human activities and the ecological processes are not significantly disturbed. For more information visit:herehttps://openknowledge.fao.org/server/api/core/bitstreams/531a9e1b-596d-4b07-b9fd-3103fb4d0e72/content.
Resources to demonstrate the sourcing region is not a primary forest:
↩woodMSW, removalwaste water treatment sludge, expired food waste, hospital/commercial waste, biogas from areasthe affecteddigestion byof windfall,waste fires,treatment insect,sludge orand diseasemunicipal attacks,woody or where wood is removed for widely-recognized ecological reasons (e.g., to reduce wildfire hazard)waste. ↩Criterion 1.1Recovery, Sustainabletransportation Biomassand Sourcingreplacement costs include but are not limited to the following:
feedstock, Carbonthe Dioxide RemovalVersionsuch 1as the removal of corn stover residue from fields or the chipping of forestry residues.1Octobersuch 2023as the use of fertilizer, including the cost to source these fertilizers and the cost of spreading these fertilizers.CriterionAn 3.4,economic Sustainablepurpose Biomassis Sourcingone providing market recognized economic value through revenue generation or cost reductions for Carbonan Dioxideoperation. Removal,This Versioncould 1.1,include Octoberthe 2023sale ↩Criterionof 1.1, Sustainable Biomass Sourcinggood(s) for Carboneconomic Dioxide Removalprofit, Version 1.1, October 2023 ↩Criterion 3.4, Sustainable Biomass Sourcing for Carbon Dioxide Removal, Version 1.1, October 2023 ↩Criterion 4.2, Sustainable Biomass Sourcing for Carbon Dioxide Removal, Version 1.1, October 2023 ↩Cellulosic biorefinery locations and capacities can be obtained fromor the Renewableuse Fuels Association: https://ethanolrfa.org/resources/ethanol-biorefinery-locations. Ifof the feedstock isfor listedan environmental service such as “Cellulosicsoil Biomass”,nutrient thenenhancement wethat assumewould 100%otherwise ofrequire harvested-for-salea corncostly stover within 50 km has an alternative fate of an ethanol production use. At present, given the small total production of cellulosic biofuel, facilities where “Cellulosic Biomass” is listed as only one potential feedstock among multiple (e.g., “Corn/Cellulosic Biomass”) will be assumed to be primarily corn and stover procured from these areas will be assumed to not have an alternative use as an energy cropintervention. ↩verifieruse mayof providemarginal thirdemissions partyrates verificationwould duringbe the verificationmost siteconceptually visitsaligned viaapproach on-sitewith reviewa ofconsequential feedstockemissions practicesaccounting framework, utilization,however currently available data and records,methodologies includingfor observationtheir ofcalculation feedstockare stockpiles,not deliveries,sufficient applications,to orpermit otherconfident usesreal-world usage. ↩