Biomass Geological Storage
Loading...
This 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.) provides the requirements and procedures for the calculation of net CO2e removal (The term used to represent the CO₂ taken out of the atmosphere as a result of a CDR process.) from the atmosphere via the injection of biomass into natural or engineered subsurface features or geologic formations (A body of similar rock type (e.g. color, grain size, mineral composition, texture) and a particular location in the stratigraphic column (vertical rock layers). Formations are large enough to be mappable on Earth's surface or traceable in the subsurface.) which may include, but are not limited to, reservoirs (A location where carbon is stored. This can be via physical barriers (such as geological formations) or through partitioning based on chemical or biological processes (such as mineralization or photosynthesis).), saline aquifers, caverns or mines, for long term sequestration of atmospheric CO2. Biomass Geological Storage (Describes the addition of carbon dioxide removed from the atmosphere to a reservoir, which serves as its ultimate destination. This is also referred to as “sequestration”.) is considered a subsector of Biomass Carbon Removal and Storage (BiCRS) (A range of processes that use biogenic material to remove carbon dioxide (CO₂) from the atmosphere and store that CO₂ underground or in long-lived products (LLNL BiCRS Roadmap, 2020).). This Protocol applies to biomass geological storage technologies or projects (An activity or process or group of activities or processes that alter the condition of a Baseline and leads to Removals or Reductions.), which typically consist of activities (The steps of a Project Proponent’s Removal or Reduction process that result in carbon fluxes. The carbon flux associated with an activity is a component of the Project Proponent’s Protocol.) associated with the following sub-processes — biomass growth, processing of biomass prior to injection, biomass geologic injection and storage.
The Protocol accounts for quantification of the gross amount of CO2 removed via injection of biomass into geologic formations, as well as the accounting for all net greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions (The term used to describe greenhouse gas emissions to the atmosphere as a result of Project activities.) associated with the process, including growth and collection of biomass feedstock (Raw material which is used for CO₂ Removal or GHG Reduction.), biomass injection process, all transportation and embodied emissions (Life cycle GHG emissions associated with production of materials, transportation, and construction or other processes for goods or buildings.) emissions associated with the process, and emissions associated with leakage (The increase in GHG emissions outside the geographic or temporal boundary of a project that results from that project's activities.). The GHG Statement (The process by which all emissions associated with a Project's Removal or Reduction process, including leakages, are accounted for.) is considered as a cradle-to-grave (Considering impacts at each stage of a product's life cycle, from the time natural resources are extracted from the ground and processed through each subsequent stage of manufacturing, transportation, product use, and ultimately, disposal.) analysis.
This Protocol is developed to adhere to the requirements of ISO (A worldwide federation (NGO) of national standards bodies from more than 160 countries, one from each member country.) 14064-2: 2019 – Greenhouse Gases – Part 2: Specification with guidance at the projectProject level for quantification, monitoring, and reporting of greenhouse gas emission reductions or removal (The term used to represent the CO₂ taken out of the atmosphere as a result of a CDR process.) enhancements. The Protocol ensures:
Specific Standards (Standard physical constants as well as standard values set forth by bodies such as the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) or others.) and protocolsProtocols which are utilized as the foundation of this Protocol and for which this Protocol is intended to be fully compliant with are the following:
Additional reference standards that inform the requirements and overall practices incorporated in this Protocol include:
This Protocol was developed based on the current state of the art and current publicly available science regarding biomass processing and biomass geologic injection. Because biomass geologic storage is a novel carbon dioxide removal (CDR) approach, with limited published literature, the Protocol incorporates requirements that may be more stringent than some current relevant regulations for underground injection or other protocolsProtocols related to biomass utilization for CDR.
This approach, notably when specifying requirements for demonstrating biomass geologic storage durability (The amount of time carbon removed from the atmosphere by an intervention – for example, a CDR project – is expected to reside in a given Reservoir, taking into account both physical risks and socioeconomic constructs (such as contracts) to protect the Reservoir in question.) or permanence, will likely be altered in future versions of the Protocol as the stability of biomass in geologic formations becomes well demonstrated and documented, reversal (The escape of CO₂ to the atmosphere after it has been stored, and after a Credit has been Issued. A Reversal is classified as avoidable if a Project Proponent has influence or control over it and it likely could have been averted through application of reasonable risk mitigation measures. Any other Reversals will be classified as unavoidable.) risks are proven to be limited or non-existent, and the overall body of knowledge and data regarding all processes, from feedstock (Raw material which is used for CO₂ Removal or GHG Reduction.) supply, to processing, and to permanent storage is significantly increased.
This Protocol applies to projects or processes which:
This Protocol applies to projects and associated operations that meet all of the following project conditions:
Projects that are explicitly NOT eligible include the following:
The projectProject must consider other environmental and social impacts and the Project Proponent (The organization that develops and/or has overall legal ownership or control of a Removal or Reduction Project.) must provide evidence that the projectProject will do no net environmental or social harm, complying with Sectionthe 3.7relevant section of the Isometric Standard.
In addition to that outlined with the Isometric Standard, it must consider all aspects of theThe projectProject from feedstock growth through injection and storage. At a minimum the Project Proponent must:
The following topics are covered briefly in this Protocol due to their inclusion in the Isometric Standard, which governs all Isometric Protocols. See in-text references to the Isometric Standard for further guidance.
For each specific projectProject to be evaluated under this Protocol, the Project Proponent must document project characteristics in a Project Design Document (The document that clearly outlines how a Project will generate rigorously quantifiable Additional high-quality Removals or Reductions.) (PDD) as outlined in Sectionthe 3.2relevant section of the Isometric Standard. The PDD will form the basis for project validation (A systematic and independent process for evaluating the reasonableness of the assumptions, limitations and methods that support a Project and assessing whether the Project conforms to the criteria set forth in the Isometric Standard and the Protocol by which the Project is governed. Validation must be completed by an Isometric approved third-party (VVB).) and evaluation in accordance with this Protocol, and must include consideration of processes unique to biomass such as:
Projects must be validated and project net CO2e removals verified by an independent third party, consistent with the requirements described in this Protocol, as well as in Sectionthe 4relevant section of the Isometric Standard.
The Validation and Verification Body (VVB) (Third-party auditing organizations that are experts in their sector and used to determine if a project conforms to the rules, regulations, and standards set out by a governing body. A VVB must be approved by Isometric prior to conducting validation and verification.) must consider following requisite components:
The threshold for Materiality (An acceptable difference between reported Removals/emissions or Reductions/emissions and what an auditor determines is the actual Removal/emissions or Reduction/emissions.), considering the totality of all omissions, errors and mis-statements, is 5%, in accordance with Section 4.3 of the Isometric Standard.
Verifiers should also verify the documentation of uncertainty (A lack of knowledge of the exact amount of CO₂ removed by a particular process, Uncertainty may be quantified using probability distributions, confidence intervals, or variance estimates.) of the GHG Statement (A document submitted alongside Claimed Removals and/or Reductions that details the calculations associated with a Removal or Reduction, including the Project's emissions, Removals, Reductions and Leakages, presented together in net metric tonnes of CO₂e per Removal or Reduction.) as required by Sectionthe 2.5.7relevant section of the Isometric Standard. Qualitative Materiality issues may also be identified and documented, such as 5:
Project validation and verification must incorporate site visits to project facilities in accordance with the requirements of ISO 14064-3, 6.1.4.2, including, at a minimum, site visits during validation and initial verification to the biomass processing site and the biomass injection site. Validators should, whenever possible, observe operation of the biomass processing and injection to ensure full documentation of process inputs and outputs through visual observation.
A site visit must occur at least once every 2 years atduring each locationproject validation. Additional site visits may be required if there are substantial changes to field operations over the course of a project's validation period, or if deemed necessary by Isometric or the VVB.
Verifiers and validators must comply with the requirements defined in Section 4 of the Isometric Standard. In addition, teams must maintain and demonstrate expertise associated with the specific technologies of interest, including biomass growth or production, biomass processing, biomass production and geologic storage.
Competency must be demonstrated through the relevant sectoral scope accreditations listed below, based on IAF MD 14 and in accordance with Isometric's VVB policy:
CDR via biomass injection is often a result of a multi-step process (such as biomass growth, harvesting, transport, processing, injection, and storage), with activities in each step managed and operated by a different operator, company, or owner. When there are multiple parties involved in the process (e.g., forestry owner or injection site operator), and to avoid double counting (Improperly allocating the same Removal or Reduction from a Project Proponent more than once to multiple Buyers.) of net CO2e removals, a single Project Proponent must be specified contractually as the sole owner of the Credits. Contracts must comply with all requirements defined in Section 3.1 of the Isometric Standard.
The Project Proponent must be able to demonstrate additionality through compliance with Section 2.5.3 of the Isometric Standard. The baseline (A set of data describing pre-intervention or control conditions to be used as a reference scenario for comparison.) scenario and counterfactual (An assessment of what would have happened in the absence of a particular intervention – i.e., assuming the Baseline scenario.) utilized to assess additionality must be project-specific, and are described in Section 7.2 of this Protocol.
Additionality determinations should be reviewed and completed every two years, at a minimum, or whenever project operating conditions change significantly, such as the following:
Any review and change in the determination of additionality shall not affect the availability of carbonCarbon financeFinance and carbon creditsCredits (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.) for the current or past
Crediting Periods (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.), but, if the review indicates theThe projectProject has become non-additional, this shall make theThe projectProject ineligible for future Credits6.
The uncertainty (A lack of knowledge of the exact amount of CO₂ removed by a particular process, Uncertainty may be quantified using probability distributions, confidence intervals, or variance estimates.) in the overall estimate of the net CO2e removal as a result of theThe projectProject must be accounted for. The total net CO2e removed, ([math: CO_2e_{Removal}]), for a specific batch ([math: n]) must be conservatively (Purposefully erring on the side of caution under conditions of Uncertainty by choosing input parameter values that will result in a lower net CO₂ Removal or GHG Reduction than if using the median input values. This is done to increase the likelihood that a given Removal or Reduction calculation is an underestimation rather than an overestimation.) determined based on the requirements outlined in Sectionthe 2.5.7relevant section of the Isometric Standard.
Projects must report a list of all input variables used in the net CO2e removal calculation and their uncertainties, including:
The uncertainty information should at least include the minimum and maximum values of a variable. More detailed uncertainty information should be provided if available, as outlined in Section 2.5.7 of the Isometric Standard.
In addition, a sensitivity analysis (An analysis of how much different components in a Model contribute to the overall Uncertainty.) that demonstrates the impact of each input parameter’s uncertainty on the final net CO2e uncertainty must be provided. Details of the sensitivity analysis method must be provided such that a third party can reproduce the results. Input variables may be omitted from an uncertainty analysis if they contribute to a < 1% change in the net CO2e removal. For all other parameters, information about uncertainty must be specified.
In accordance with the Isometric Standard, all evidence and data related to the underlying quantification of CO2e removal will be available to the public through Isometric's platform (A community resource where Project Proponents publish and visualize their early processes, Removal and Reduction data and Protocols – enabling the scientific community to share feedback and advice.). That includes:
The Project Proponent can request certain information to be restricted (only available to authorized Buyers (An entity that purchases Removals or Reductions, often with the purpose of Retiring Credits to make a Removal or Reduction claim.), the Registry (A database that holds information on Verified Removals and Reductions based on Protocols. Registries Issue Credits, and track their ownership and Retirement.) and VVB) where it is subject to confidentiality. This includes emissions factors from licensed databases. However, all other numerical data produced or used as part of the quantification of net CO2e removal will be made available.
The scope of this Protocol includes GHG sources (Any process or activity that releases a greenhouse gas, an aerosol, or a precursor of a greenhouse gas into the atmosphere.), sinks (Any process, activity, or mechanism that removes a greenhouse gas, a precursor to a greenhouse gas, or an aerosol from the atmosphere.), and reservoirs (A location where carbon is stored. This can be via physical barriers (such as geological formations) or through partitioning based on chemical or biological processes (such as mineralization or photosynthesis).) (SSRs) associated with a biomass injectiongeological CDRstorage projectProject (An activity or process or group of activities or processes that alter the condition of a Baseline and leads to Removals or Reductions. ).
A cradle-to-grave (Considering impacts at each stage of a product's life cycle, from the time natural resources are extracted from the ground and processed through each subsequent stage of manufacturing, transportation, product use, and ultimately, disposal.)GHG Statement (A document submitted alongside Claimed Removals and/or Reductions that details the calculations associated with a Removal or Reduction, including the Project's emissions, Removals, Reductions and Leakages, presented together in net metric tonnes of CO₂e per Removal or Reduction.) must be prepared encompassing the GHG (Those gaseous constituents of the atmosphere, both natural and anthropogenic (human-caused), that absorb and emit radiation at specific wavelengths within the spectrum of terrestrial radiation emitted by the Earth’s surface, by the atmosphere itself, and by clouds. This property causes the greenhouse effect, whereby heat is trapped in Earth’s atmosphere (CDR Primer, 2022).) emissions relating to the followingactivities activities:
Itincluded should be noted thatin the physicalGHG and system boundaries for the biomass injection and storage site should include the following subprocess:Statement.).
GHG (injectionThose facilitygaseous gate)
sources. Emissions for processes within the system boundary must include all GHG SSRs within the system boundary (GHG sources, sinks and reservoirs (SSRs) associated with the project boundary and included in the GHG Statement.), from the construction or manufacturing of each physical site and associated equipment, closure and disposal of each site and associated equipment, and operation of each process (biomassfeedstock productioncollection/harvest, biomass processing, transportation, injection and monitoring), toincluding include embodied emissions (Life cycle GHG emissions associated with production of materials, transportation, and construction or other processes for goods or buildings.) of equipment and consumables used in the processproject. The Project Proponent is responsible for identifying all sources of emissions directly or indirectly related to project activities.
Any emissions from sub-processes or process changes that would not have taken place without the involvementCDR (Activities that remove carbon dioxide (CO₂) from the atmosphere and store it in products or geological, terrestrial, and oceanic Reservoirs. CDR includes the enhancement of thebiological CDRor process,geochemical such as subsequent transportationsinks and refiningdirect air capture (DAC) and storage, but excludes natural CO₂ uptake not directly caused by human intervention.) Project must be fully considered in the system boundary. Any activity that ultimately leads to the issuance of 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.) should be included in the system boundary. Biomass feedstock (Raw material which is used for CO₂ Removal or GHG Reduction.) emissions must be calculated as outlined in Section 3 and 4 of the Biomass Feedstock Accounting Module v1.3. This allows for accurate consideration of additional, incremental emissions induced by the CDRcarbon process.
Ancillary activities (such as supplementary research and development activities and corporate administrative activities) that are associated with a project but are not directly or indirectly related to the issuance of Credits can be excluded from the system boundary.
In addition, biomass processing will typically produce co-products. All emissions associated with the entire system where biomass processing takes place must be fully allocated to the CDRremoval process.
The system boundary for GHG accounting must include all relevant GHG SSRs controlled by and related to theThe projectProject, including but not limited to the SSRs set out in Table 1. If any GHG SSRs within Table 1 are deemed not appropriate to include in the system boundary, they may be excluded provided that robust justification and appropriate evidence is provided in the PDD.
Figure 1. Process flow diagram showing system boundary for biomass projects
[Image: Figure 1]
Table 1. Scope of activities and GHG SSRs to be included in the system boundary
Activity | GHG | GHG | Scope | Timescale |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Equipment and |
| Embedded | |
|
| |||
| ||||
All |
| |||
|
| |||
| All GHGs | |||
Emissions |
|
| ||
| All GHGs |
| ||
| All GHGs |
| ||
|
| |||
| ||||
| All GHGs | Any embodied, energy and transport emissions associated with biomass cultivation and harvesting. | Over each Reporting Period - must be accounted for in the relevant Reporting Period (See Section 8.5.2) | |
Biomass feedstock transport | All GHGs | Transport of biomass including to biomass processing site and all other transport of biomass ahead of biomass processing. | ||
Biomass feedstock processing | All | Emissions associated with biomass processing and characterization including:
| ||
Biomass storage | All GHGs | Land use change emissions associated with application requiring burial. | ||
Biomass transport | All GHGs | Emissions related to all transport of biomass, including to biomass processing site and to injection site. | ||
Biomass injection | All GHGs | Emissions associated with biomass injection including:
| ||
CO2 | ||||
|
| |||
| ||||
|
| |||
| ||||
| ||||
| CO2 |
| ||
| All GHGs |
| ||
| All GHGs |
| ||
|
| |||
| All GHGs |
| ||
| All GHGs |
| ||
|
| |||
|
| |||
| ||||
End-of-life |
|
| After Reporting Period - must be | |
| ||||
| ||||
|
|
| ||
|
| |||
|
| |||
|
| |||
|
| |||
|
| |||
| ||||
|
| |||
|
| |||
|
| |||
|
|
| ||
|
| |||
|
AllMiscellaneous GHG emissions are those that cannot be categorized by the GHG SSR categories provided in Table X. The Project Proponent is responsible for identifying all sources of emissions directly or indirectly related to project activities and must report any outside of the SSR categories identified as miscellaneous emissions.
Emissions associated with The Project's impact on activities that fall outside of the system boundary of The Project must also be considered. This is covered under Leakage (The increase in GHG emissions outside the geographic or temporal boundary of a project that results from that project's activities.) in Section 8.5.4.
In line with the GHG Accounting Module v1.1, the Project must:
The baseline scenario for biomass geological storage projects assumes the activities associated with theThe projectProject do not take place and any associated infrastructure is not built.
The counterfactual is the CO2 stored in the biomass feedstock that would have remained durably stored in the biomass in the absence of theThe projectProject. This is known as ineligible biomass, given that the CO2 stored would have remained stored in the biomass in the absence of the CDR project and is therefore not eligible to count towards Crediting. The Biomass Feedstock Accounting Module 1v1.23 sets out requirements for establishing ineligible biomass as part of the Counterfactual Storage Eligibility criteria. The Biomass Feedstock Accounting Module 1v1.23 includes details for quantification of [math: CO_2e_{Counterfactual}].
See Section
3
of the Biomass Feedstock Accounting Module for requirements.
The biomass injection process is typically operated on a batch basis, whereby a ‘Production Batch’, [math: p], is produced from a 'Production Process', defined as a process using a single type of biomass feedstock, often of a single source of origin, and treating and processing that biomass in a consistent manner such that the batches resulting from the process can be deemed to have consistent characteristics. The unique characteristics of the biomass used and the processed biomass characteristics will be consistent across the Production Process.
A Production Batch is then a single, particular batch of feedstock, [math: p], originating from a particular Production Process.
An ‘Injection Batch’, [math: n], is a single injection activity where a quantity of biomass is injected into an approved underground storage site. The Injection Batch may consist of a portion of a Production Batch, a full single Production Batch, or a blend of multiple Production Batches, which is injected for durable storage.
The approach for emissions calculations here is based on Injection Batches and the specific calculation of net CO2e removal for each Injection Batch. The following sections outline the process for calculating the net CO2e removed for each specific Injection Batch of biomass processed and associated biomass injection, defined as a Removal.
The Reporting Period for biomass geological storage projects represents an interval of time over which removals are calculated and reported for verification. When total net CO2e removals must be calculated for a Reporting Period, for example during submission of Claimed Removals in a GHG statement, it is calculated as the sum of removals during the Reporting Period:
[math: CO_2e_{Removal,\ RP} = \sum_{n=1}^{k} CO_2e_{Removal,\ n}]
(Equation 1)
Where
Note: Reversals occur after Credits have been issued so are not included in this equation. See Section 5.6 of the Isometric Standard for further information.
Net CO2e removal for a process biomass geological storage project can be calculated as follows. Note that the calculation is completed for a discrete batch, [math: n], of biomass that is injected (‘Injection Batch’). The final net CO2e quantification must be conservatively determined, giving high confidence that at least the estimated amount of carbon dioxide was removed.
[math: CO_2e_{Removal,\ n} = CO_2e_{Stored,\ n}\ –\ CO_2e_{Counterfactual,\ n}\ - \\ CO_2e_{Emissions,\ n}]
(Equation 2)
Where
It should be noted that any potential reversals (The escape of CO₂ to the atmosphere after it has been stored, and after a Credit has been Issued. A Reversal is classified as avoidable if a Project Proponent has influence or control over it and it likely could have been averted through application of reasonable risk mitigation measures. Any other Reversals will be classified as unavoidable.) of CO2 storage in the final storage location occur after 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.) have been issued so are not included in this equation. See the Isometric Standard for further information. Risk of reversal information is given in Appendix 2: Risk of Reversal Questionnaire, with further information provided within the relevant storage module.
[math: CO_2e_{Stored}] represents the amount of CO2 (stored as organic carbon, C) that is injected and stored in the geologic or engineered storage formation. This is the gross amount stored for each batch injection and does not account for spillage nor reversals of storage from the storage formation.
The total amount of CO2 contained in the injectant can be calculated as follows.
Where all biomass production batches are blended prior to injection:
[math: CO_2e_{Stored,\ n} = \frac{C_{Biomass,\ n}\cdot m_{Inj,\ n}}{C_{CO_{2}}}]
(Equation 3)
Where biomass production batches are not blended prior to injection:
[math: CO_2e_{Stored,\ n} = \sum_{p=1}^{j} \bigg(\frac{C_{Biomass,\ p}\cdot m_{Inj,\ p}}{C_{CO_{2}}} \bigg)]
(Equation 4)
Where:
Calculation of [math: CO_2e_{Stored}] requires two primary measurements:
In order to determine [math: C_{Biomass}], the %wt of C in the biomass injectant for either a blended biomass in an Injection Batch [math: n], or for individual Production Batches [math: p], is determined via the analysis of samples of biomass injectant for total C content. This must be assessed via test method ASTM (A standards organization that develops and publishes voluntary consensus international standards.) D5373: Standard Test Methods for Instrumental Determination of Carbon and Hydrogen in Analysis Samples of Coal and Carbon in Analysis Samples of Coal and Coke or similar procedure.
Care should be taken to ensure biomass products with high vapor pressure are treated to ensure evaporation of volatile components is minimized. Alternative methods or analytical equipment which determine total C content may be utilized if justified and documented to be equivalent to ASTM D5373, for example, EPA 9060A can be used for liquids.
Analysis must be completed by a qualified laboratory, as evidenced by accreditation to ISO 17025 or equivalent standards (Standard physical constants as well as standard values set forth by bodies such as the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) or others.) for laboratory quality management for the specific test method (ASTM D5291).
Laboratories must complete standard quality assurance procedures on a schedule in accordance with their quality management plans and accreditation requirements to include:
This Protocol provides two alternative methods for how often C content must be measured and quantified. The first method (A) involves measuring every batch, the second method (B) involves only sampling some batches, and conservatively estimating the C content of unsampled batches.
Method A: Measure every Batch
Using this method, the C content of every Injection Batch must be ascertained through direct measurement, either by:
For the acceptable minimum number of samples to take per sampled Batch, see Minimum number of samples per Batch below. If multiple samples are taken per Batch, the average C content of these samples must be used.
Method B: Sampling a Production Process
For a given Production Process of a feedstock, samples must be taken directly for at least 30 Production Batches, to ensure there is enough data to estimate C content for future Production Batches with appropriate statistical significance. Until this threshold is reached, Method A must be used.
Subsequently, samples must be taken at least every 10 Production Batches.
For the acceptable minimum number of samples to take per Batch, see Minimum number of samples per Batch below.
For batches which are not sampled, C content must be conservatively estimated, as follows:
[math: C_{Biomass} = \mu_{CC} - \sigma_{\overline{CC}}]
(Equation 5)
[math: \sigma_{\overline{CC}} = \frac{\sigma_{CC}}{\sqrt{n_{samples}}}]
(Equation 6)
where:
Eligible samples are those taken in the previous 6 months before a specific Production Batch was produced. Older samples may not be used.
Additionally, batches must be subject to random sampling, to alleviate the risk of any given batch containing a substance with a substantially different C content.
A random sampling approach must be agreed and documented in the Project Design Document, whereby Isometric will contact the Project Proponent on randomly selected days, at an agreed cadence, which must be no less frequent than once per month, on average. Once contacted, the Project Proponent must sample the C content of the subsequent batches processed.
If the Project Proponent is unable to carry this random sampling out on 3 occasions within a 6 month period, or within a 6 month period more than 3 measurements are below 3 SD from the mean, this will trigger a Project review by Isometric.
If there is a significant change to a Production Process for a feedstock, which is likely to alter the average carbon content of the feedstock, or if significant deviations in carbon content are detected, the feedstock should be considered as a new Production Process. This means that sampling must be restarted, with all prior samples no longer able to be used for estimating carbon content.
Minimum number of samples per Batch
For all measurements taken, samples must be from a well mixed and representative aliquot of the biomass. To account for the possibility of variation within a single Production Batch (for example within a large container of liquid biomass), either of the following approaches must be adopted:
Process for handling carbon content measurement outliers
This process applies only if method B is used to calculate carbon content and should be used whether the batch was sampled or not. For a given Production Process, an Outlier is defined as any individual sample which lies more than 3 standard deviations, [math: \sigma_{CC}], above or below the mean. To minimize the potential overall impact of outlier measurements, all C content measurement outliers must be handled via the applying the technique of "winsorization”, as follows.
For a given measurement, [math: m], the winsorized measurement [math: m_w] is defined as follows:
Where [math: \mu] and [math: \sigma_{CC}] are calculated from all carbon content samples from the same Production Process taken within 6 months of the removal for which we are calculating the carbon content. For estimating the carbon content from sampled batches, only historical samples should be used to calculate [math: \mu] and [math: \sigma_{CC}] and not samples from the batch being calculated. The standard deviation, [math: \sigma_{CC}], should be calculated with the formula for sample standard deviation.
The winsorized measurement, [math: m_w], must be used for the determination of C content.
This winsorization process must only be applied once a minimum number of 30 measurements have been taken, to ensure statistical significance.
The Project Proponent must monitor occurrences of outliers, and investigate if significantly more than the statistically expected number occurs, as it may be indicative of a systematic issue. This may be checked at verification, at the discretion of the verifying VVB.
The mass of injectant, [math: m_{Inj}], is measured via determination of weight of delivered biomass to the injection site using a calibrated scale. The total mass injected may be determined by the difference in biomass delivery truck weight measured upon arrival at the injection facility and at departure, after offloading of biomass, either into storage or directly to injection.
Any truck scale used must have a current certification in accordance with applicable local, state, or federal regulations for legal-for-trade weights and measures. Testing and calibration of scales must utilize certified weights in accordance with local, state, or other regulations, calibration weights must meet NIST Handbook 44 specifications7, and scale testing and calibration must be performed by a state certified entity.
The total mass injected may also be determined by other methods, such as use of a calibrated flow meter and density measurement, or use of calibrated on site weigh scales for smaller containers, where such methods are viable and justified. Note that, due to the typical viscosity of biomass, the use of flow meters is not often viable and can result in poor data quality.
The Project Proponent must maintain the following records as evidence of gross CO2e stored in injected biomass:
Records of all C analyses and injection masses (e.g. weigh scale tickets) must be maintained by the injection facility and provided for verification purposes for a period of five years after the end of the monitoring period.
Although limited and of small quantity, injection processes should be monitored to ensure that any process upsets or equipment failures and resulting spills of biomass are monitored, documented, quantified, and accounted for in the GHG Statement (A document submitted alongside Claimed Removals and/or Reductions that details the calculations associated with a Removal or Reduction, including the Project's emissions, Removals, Reductions and Leakages, presented together in net metric tonnes of CO₂e per Removal or Reduction.) of the projectProject batch. For each batch, where a process upset results in loss of biomass, that amount must be deducted from the delivered amount of biomass based on delivery weigh tickets. Such amounts must be allocated directly to the specific injection batch of biomass.
The calculation of [math: CO_2e_{Counterfactual,\ n}], is determined by the requirements of the Biomass Feedstock Accounting Module v1.2.
See Section 3 of the Biomass Feedstock Accounting Module
[math: CO_2e_{ Emissions,\ n}] is the total quantity of GHG emissions from operations and embodied emissions for a batch [math: n]. This can be calculated as:
[math:CO_2e_CO_{2}e_{ Emissions,\ n} =CO_2e_CO_{Energy,\ n2}\ + CO_2e_e_{Transportation,\ n}\ + \\ CO_2e_{EmbodiedEstablishment,\ n} +CO_{2}e_{Misc.Operations,\ n} \\ + CO_{2}e_{End-of-Life,\ n} +CO_{2}e_{Leakage, n}]
(Equation 7)
Where
Note:The Reversalsfollowing occursections afterprovide Creditsan have been issued so are not included in this equation. See Section 5.6 of the Isometric Standardoverview for furthereach infomartion. Risk of reversal information is given in Appendix 2: Risk of Reversal Questionnaire, with further information provided within the relevant storage module storage modulevariable.
Emissions that occur relating to a batch, [math: n], must be included in the reporting of emissions associated with that batch and may not be allocated across multiple batches. Allocation across multiple batches must be agreed with Isometric on a case by case basis.
Embodied emissions which relate to multiple batches may be allocated in line with the allocation rules set out in the Embodied Emissions Accounting Module v1.0.
When the Project Proponent is planning to cease operations within a given storage site, the monitoring emissions required for post-closure monitoring must be calculated and allocated to the remaining removals taking place at the storage site. If that is not possible, the Project Proponent should allocate those emissions to other projects and/or storage sites they conduct removal operations at, in agreement with Isometric. If for any reason emissions are not appropriately allocated, the Reversal process will be triggered in accordance with Isometric Standard, to account for any remaining monitoring emissions.
In instances where monitoring activities are shared between entities, for example if multiple companies inject biomass into the same storage infrastructure, the emissions associated with these activities must be allocated proportionally between the entities.
GHG emissions associated with [math: CO_2e_CO_{Energy2}e_{Establishment,\ n}] should include all historic emissions incurred as a result of project establishment, including but not limited to the SSRs set out in Table 1.
Project establishment emissions occur from the point of project inception through to before the first removal activity takes place. GHG emissions associated with project establishment may be amortized over the anticipated project lifetime, or per output of product. Rules on amortization are outlined in Section 7 of the GHG Accounting Module v1.1.
See Section 7 of the GHG Accounting Module.
GHG emissions associated with [math: CO_{2}e_{Operations,\ n}] should include all emissions associated with operational activities including but not limited to the SSRs set out in Table 1.
[math: CO_{2}e_{Operations,\ n}] emissions must be attributed to the batch [math: n], to which they are associated. Allocation may be permitted in certain instances, on a case by case basis, in agreement with Isometric.
[math: CO_{2}e_{End-of-Life,\ n}] includes all emissions associated with activities that are anticipated to occur after the Crediting Period until the end of the Project Commitment Period. This includes activities related to ongoing monitoring for Reversals.
[math: CO_{2}e_{End-of-Life,\ n}] must be estimated upfront and allocated in the same way as set out for calculation of [math: CO_{2}e_{Establishment,\ n}].
Given the uncertain nature of[math: CO_{2}e_{End-of-Life,\ n}] emissions, assumptions must be revisited at each Reporting Period and any necessary adjustments made.
[math: CO_2e_{Leakage,\ n}] includes emissions associated with a project's impact on activities outside the system boundary of The Project. This includes instances where the Project causes an increase in GHG emissions by diverting material from other uses or incentivizing increased production activity.
It is the Project Proponent's responsibility to identify potential sources of leakage emissions. For a biomass project, replacement emissions (Any emissions that occur to compensate for biomass that was previously serving another purpose and is now being used for carbon removal or GHG reduction. For example, if agricultural waste was previously left on a field to decompose - fertilizer production to replace those nutrients need to be accounted for.) must be considered as a minimum. The calculations required for replacement emissions associated with market leakage are set out in the Biomass Feedstock Accounting Module v1.3.
In line with the Sustainability Criteria set out in the Biomass Feedstock Accounting Module v1.3, projects which would lead to ecological leakage associated with land use change are not eligible under this Protocol.
See Section 2 of the Biomass Feedstock Accounting Module
GHG emissions accounting must be undertaken in alignment with the GHG Accounting Module v1.1, which ensures a consistently rigorous standard in how GHG emissions are quantified and reported between different CDR Projects and approaches. This includes:
Refer to the GHG Accounting Module for guidance on GHG accounting requirements.
The Energy Use Accounting Module v1.3 provides requirements on how energy-related emissions must be calculated for The Project so that they can be subtracted in the net CO₂e removal calculation. It sets out the calculation approach to be followed for intensive facilities and non-intensive facilities and acceptable emission factors.
Energy emissions are those related to electricity usage or fuel combustionusage.
Examples of electricity usage may include, but are not limited to:
Examples of fuel consumption may include, but are not limited to:
TheRefer to the Energy Use Accounting Module for guidance on fuel and energy emissions calculations.
The GHG Accounting Module v1.21 provides requirements on how energy-relatedtransportation and embodied emissions must be calculated for The Project so that they can be subtracted in the net CO2₂e removal calculation.
Embodied Itemissions setsare outthose related to the calculationlife approachcycle to be followed for intensive facilities and non-intensive facilities and acceptable emissions factors.
Refer to Energy Use Accounting Module for the calculation guidelines.
GHG emissions associated with [math: CO_2e_{Transportation,\ n}] should include all emissions associated with transportation of products as part of a batch [math: n]’s process,including the following:
The Transportation Emissions Accounting Module v1.1 provides requirements on how transportation-related emissions must be calculated so that they can be subtracted in the net CO2e removal calculation. It sets out the calculation scope and approach to be followed and acceptable emissions factors.
Refer to Transportation Emissions Accounting Module for the calculation guidelines.
The Project Proponent must identify all equipment and consumables. usedThey inmay the DAC processinclude, identifybut appropriate cradle to grave emission factors, and allocate the emissions to removals appropriately in line with the Embodied Emissions Accounting Module v1.0.
GHG emissions associated with [math: CO_2e_{Embodied, n}] should include all emissions associated with the procurement and use of materials, consumables and equipment, including butare not limited to:
The Embodied Emissions Accounting Module v1.0 sets out the calculation approach to be followed including allocation of embodied emissions, life cycle stages to be considered and requirements for data sources and emission factors.
Refer to Embodied Emissions Accounting Module for the calculation requirements.
GHGTransportation emissions associatedare with [math: CO_2e_{Misc.,\ n}] should include all project emissions that cannot be categorized by [math: CO_2e_{Energy,\ n}], [math: CO_2e_{Transportation,\ n}], or [math: CO_2e_{Embodied,\ n}]. The Project Proponent is responsible for identifying all sources of emissions directly or indirectlythose related to projecttransportation activities,of includingproducts associatedand with any activities additional to those set out in Section 7.1equipment. TheThey Project Proponent must report such emissions as [math: CO_2e_{Misc.,\ n}].
Examplesmay include, but are not limited to:
[math: CO_2e_{Leakage,\ n}] includes emissions associated with a project's impact on activities outside the system boundary of the project. This includes instances where the Project causes an increase in GHG emissions by diverting material from other uses or incentivizing increased production activity.
It is the Project Proponent's responsibility to identify potential sources of leakage emissions. For a biomass project, replacement emissions (Any emissions that occur to compensatesamples for biomasslab that was previously serving another purpose and is now being used for carbon removal or GHG reduction. For example, if agricultural waste was previously left on a field to decompose - fertilizer production to replace those nutrients need to be accounted for.) must be considered as a minimum. The calculations required for replacement emissions associated with market leakage are set out in the Biomass Feedstock Accounting Module v1.2.
In line with the Eligibility Criteria set out in the Biomass Feedstock Accounting Module v1.2, projects which would lead to ecological leakage associated with land use change are not eligible under this Protocol.
SeeRefer to Section 34.1 and Section 4.2 of the Biomass FeedstockGHG Accounting Module for guidance on embodied and transportation emissions calculations.
This Protocol may provide multiple options for durable storage of biomass. The Project Proponent can choose from available options when submitting their Project for verification:
Durability and monitoring requirements for storage in salt caverns.
ADurability Biomassand Storagemonitoring requirements for storage in Permeablepermeable Reservoirs Module will be coming soonreservoirs.
Isometric would like to thank following contributors to this Protocol and relevant Modules:
Isometric would like to thank following reviewers of this Protocol and relevant Modules:
This appendix details how the Project Proponent must monitor, document and report all metrics
identified within this Protocol. Following this guidance will ensure the Project Proponent measures
and confirms carbon dioxide removed and long-term storage compliance, and will enable quantification of the
emissions removal resulting from the Project activity during the Project Crediting Period, prior to each Verification.
This methodology utilizes a comprehensive monitoring and documentation framework that captures the
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 crediting.
The Project Proponent must develop and apply a monitoring plan according to ISO 14064-2
principles of transparency and accuracy that allows the quantification and proof of GHG
emissions removals.
The Modules associated with this Protocol have their own set of required parameters that need to be monitored. Please refer to the following Sections of the Modules to see a complete list of all requirements:
These parameters must be monitored for the purpose of Carbon Emissions Calculation and Embodied Carbon Emissions Calculation.
| |||||||||||
| |||||||||||
| |||||||||||
| |||||||||||
| |||||||||||
| |||||||||||
| |||||||||||
| |||||||||||
| |||||||||||
| |||||||||||
This risk assessment identifies the pathway specific risk factors relevant to a carbon removal project. The relevant risk factors identified as part of a risk assessment are included in the monitoring plan requirements for the project, with details included in the Project Design Document. Project specific risk factors inform the required duration of monitoring along with the monitoring requirements set out in the Protocol and the requirements set out in the Monitoring Section of the Isometric Standard.
Projects using this Protocol have the option of a number of storage modules. The typical buffer pool contributions and the rationale are indicated in the relevant storage module: typically, salt cavern storage is considered Very Low Risk Level (leading to a 1% buffer pool), and permeable reservoir storage is considered Low Risk Level (leading to a 5% buffer pool).
The risk score, as determined by the Risk of Reversal Questionnaire, will determine a project’s buffer pool contribution. Projects must re-assess their reversal risk at the renewal of each crediting period, or if monitoring identifies a reversal-related risk, or if an actual reversal event takes place. In any event, projects should reassess their reversal risk at a minimum every 5 years.
The Risk of Reversal Questionnaire questions that pertain to this protocol, drawn from the programme-level Risk of Reversal Questionnaire defined in Appendix B: Risk Reversal Questionnaire of the Isometric Standard, include the following:
# in Isometric Standard Questionnaire | Question | If answered “Yes” | If answered “No” |
|---|---|---|---|
1 | Is a reversal directly observable with a physical or chemical | Proceed to questions 2- | Proceed to questions 8- |
2 | Is the carbon being stored in an impermeable geologic system? (e.g., salt cavern) | Proceed to questions 8- | Add 1 to Risk Score and proceed to questions 3- |
3 | Is the carbon being stored organic? | Add 1 to Risk Score | |
4 | Are conditions for methane production present (anaerobic conditions, lignin content)? | Add 1 to Risk Score | |
5 | Does this approach have a material risk of reversal due to natural disasters including, but not limited to, floods, storms, earthquakes, fires, etc.? | Add 1 to Risk Score | |
6 | Does this approach have a material risk of reversal due to human-induced events from outside actors, such as change in farming practices, change in ownership and management of project sites, or similar? | Add up to 2 to Risk Score | |
7 | Applicable only for subsurface storage: Is the carbon being stored with trapping mechanisms preventing reversals? (e.g., multiple confining layers, CO₂ dissolves or solidifies) | Minus 1 to Risk Score (unless 0) | |
8 | Is there 10+ years of monitoring and/or lab data demonstrating low project risk? | Minus up to 2 to Risk Score | |
9 | Does this pathway have a documented history of reversals in excess of proposed buffer pool size? | Add 2 to Risk Score | |
10 | Is there one or more project-specific factors that merit a high risk level? | Add up to 2 to Risk Score |
Note the Risk Score at any step cannot be negative.
Risk Score Categories:
Project specific risk factors will depend on the form of carbon being stored (i.e., organic vs. inorganic), the method of storage (e.g., mineralization, encapsulation), the location of carbon storage (e.g., subsurface, ocean), and the proximity of that carbon to potential agents of reversal.
For projects with carbon storage as organic carbon, the presence the following risk factors must be reflected in the risk score corresponding to question 10:
For projects with any form of subsurface carbon storage, the presence of the following risk factors must be reflected in the risk score corresponding to question 10:
ASTM D5291-21 Standard Test Methods for Instrumental Determination of Carbon, Hydrogen, and Nitrogen in Petroleum Products and Lubricants. (2021, November). https://www.astm.org/standards/d5291
ASTM International. (2018). ASTM D7036: Standard Practice for Competence of Air Emission Testing Bodies. https://www.astm.org/d7036-16.html
California Air Resources Board. (2018, August 13). Carbon Capture and Sequestration Protocol under the Low Carbon Fuel Standard. https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/sites/default/files/2020-03/CCS_Protocol_Under_LCFS_8-13-18_ada.pdf
Carbon Direct & EcoEngineers. (2022). Bio-oil Sequestration Prototype Protocol for Measurement, Reporting, & Verification. https://insights.carbon-direct.com/hubfs/Bio-oil-proto-protocol.pdf
International Energy Agency. (n.d.). Insights Series 2015 - Storing CO2 through Enhanced Oil Recovery – Analysis. IEA. Retrieved June 14, 2023, from https://www.iea.org/reports/storing-co2-through-enhanced-oil-recovery
International Organization for Standardization. (2006). ISO 14040:2006 Environmental management — Life cycle assessment — Principles and framework. https://www.iso.org/standard/37456.html
International Organization for Standardization. (2006). ISO 14044:2006 Environmental management — Life cycle assessment — Requirements and guidelines. https://www.iso.org/standard/38498.html
International Organization for Standardization. (2008). Evaluation of measurement data — Guide to the expression of uncertainty in measurement (ISO JGCM GUM). https://www.iso.org/sites/JCGM/GUM/JCGM100/C045315e-html/C045315e.html?csnumber=50461
International Organization for Standardization. (2011). ISO 14066:2011 Greenhouse gases — Competence requirements for greenhouse gas validation teams and verification teams. https://www.iso.org/standard/43277.html
International Organization for Standardization. (2017). ISO/IEC 17025:2017 General requirements for the competence of testing and calibration laboratories. https://www.iso.org/standard/66912.html
International Organization for Standardization. (2019). ISO 14064-2:2019. Greenhouse Gases - Part 2: Specification With Guidance At The Project Level For Quantification, Monitoring And Reporting Of Greenhouse Gas Emissions Or Removal Enhancements. ISO. https://www.iso.org/standard/66454.html
International Organization for Standardization. (2019). ISO 14064-3:2019. Greenhouse gases — Part 3: Specification with guidance for the verification and validation of greenhouse gas statements. ISO. https://www.iso.org/standard/66455.html
International Organization for Standardization. (2022). ISO 9300:2022 Measurement of gas flow by means of critical flow nozzles. https://www.iso.org/standard/77401.html
Isometric. (n.d.). Isometric — Glossary: Defining the terms that appear regularly in our work. Isometric. https://isometric.com/glossary
Matthews, J.B.R. (Ed.). (2018). IPCC, 2018: Annex I: Glossary [Matthews, J.B.R. (ed.)]. In: Global Warming of 1.5°C. An IPCC Special Report on the impacts of global warming of 1.5°C above pre-industrial levels and related global greenhouse gas emission pathways, in the context of... Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781009157940.008
Methodology for assessing the quality of carbon credits, Version 3.0. (2022, May). https://carboncreditquality.org/methodology.html
NIST. (2023). Specifications, Tolerances, and Other Technical Requirements for Weighing and Measuring Devices - 2023 Edition. NIST. https://www.nist.gov/pml/owm/publications/nist-handbooks/handbook-44-current-edition
Sandalow, D., Aines, R., Friedman, J., McCormick, C., & Sanchez, D. (2020, October 2). Biomass Carbon Removal and Storage (BiRCS) Roadmap. https://www.osti.gov/servlets/purl/1763937
Schmidt, H., Anca-Couce, A., Hagemann, N., Werner, C., Gerten, D., Lucht, W., & Kammann, C. (20118, August 17). Pyrogenic carbon capture and storage. GCB Bioenergy, 11(4), 573-591. https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/gcbb.12553
Society of Petroleum Engineers. (2020, April 13). Enhanced oil recovery (EOR) - PetroWiki. PetroWiki. Retrieved June 14, 2023, from https://petrowiki.spe.org/Enhanced_oil_recovery_(EOR)
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. (2014). Test Methods for Evaluating Solid Waste: Physical/Chemical Methods Compendium (SW-846). https://www.epa.gov/hw-sw846/sw-846-compendium
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. (2023, April 18). Understanding Global Warming Potentials | US EPA. Environmental Protection Agency. Retrieved June 14, 2023, from https://www.epa.gov/ghgemissions/understanding-global-warming-potentials
Sustainable sourcing may be demonstrated via certification or demonstrated compliance with programs such as the Forest Stewardship Council (https://fsc.org/en), High Conservation Value Network (https://www.hcvnetwork.org/), Sustainable Biomass Program (https://sbp-cert.org/), Roundtable for Sustainable Biomass (https://rsb.org/the-rsb-standard/about-the-rsb-standard/), European Union Renewable Energy Directive (RED II), Sustainable Forestry Initiative, or other similar biomass sustainability protocols, standards, and compliance methods. ↩
Note that other well classes may be utilized, such as Class II wells, if site specific UIC well permits identify bio-oil as an acceptable injectant. However, Class II wells may not be utilized if the wells are also used for enhanced hydrocarbon recovery (EHR or EHR+) activities. ↩
For Class V wells, the well must be permitted and not ‘authorized by rule’, and must consider the specific emplacement and durable storage of bio-oil in the geologic reservoir. As of writing, the utilization of Class V wells should be limited to wells operating under the Other / Experimental category of Class V wells or other appropriate well type as approved by the UIC permitting authority. ↩
https://www.epa.gov/hw-sw846/sw-846-compendium. Laboratories used for analysis should be accredited specifically for the methods selected and be accredited to ISO 17025 standards. ↩
ISO 14064-3: 2019, Section 5.1.7 ↩
Methodology for assessing the quality of carbon credits, Version 3.0. (2022, May). https://carboncreditquality.org/methodology.html↩
NIST. (2023). Specifications, Tolerances, and Other Technical Requirements for Weighing and Measuring Devices - 2023 Edition. NIST. https://www.nist.gov/pml/owm/publications/nist-handbooks/handbook-44-current-edition↩