This Protocol provides the requirements and procedures for the calculation of net CO2e removal from the atmosphere via the processing of biomass and storage in the shallow subsurface for long term sequestration of atmospheric CO2. Storage of biomass in the shallow subsurface Storage is considered a subsector of Biomass Carbon Removal and Storage (BiCRS). The shallow subsurface shall include biomass placed at depths of not more than 100 meters below the ground surface. This Protocol applies to biomass storage technologies or Projects, which typically consist of activities associated with the following sub-processes: biomass growth, processing of biomass prior to storage, emplacement in the shallow subsurface and storage.
The Protocol accounts for quantification of the gross amount of CO2 removed via storage in the shallow subsurface, as well as the accounting for all net greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions associated with the process, including emissions associated with the biomass feedstock, biomass storage processes, all transportation and embodied emissions emissions associated with the process, and emissions associated with leakage. The GHG Statement is considered as a cradle-to-grave analysis.
This Protocol is developed to adhere to the requirements of ISO 14064-2: 2019 – Greenhouse Gases – Part 2: Specification with guidance at the project level for quantification, monitoring, and reporting of greenhouse gas emission reductions or removal enhancements. The Protocol ensures:
Specific Standards and Protocols 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 storage. Because biomass 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 storage or other Protocols related to biomass utilization for CDR.
This approach, notably when specifying requirements for demonstrating biomass subsurface storage durability, will likely be altered in future versions of the Protocol as the stability of biomass in the subsurface becomes well demonstrated and documented, reversal risks are proven to be limited or non-existent, and the overall body of knowledge and data regarding all processes, from feedstock supply, to processing, and to durable 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 Project must consider environmental and social impacts at all Project locations, including the biomass sourcing, processing and burial sites as well as during biomass transportation.
Appropriate measures must be implemented to identify and eliminate potential risks to terrestrial and aquatic ecosystems and biodiversity.
Where risks cannot be eliminated, the Project Design Document (PDD) must identify measures to monitor ecosystem health and mitigate adverse effects through a project-specific mitigation plan. Mitigation plans must be carried out by subject matter experts, in consultation with Isometric. Refer to the relevant section of the Isometric Standard for further guidelines on environmental and social impacts.
Following the Isometric Standard, Credits issued under this Protocol are contingent on the implementation, transparent reporting and independent verification of comprehensive safeguards. These safeguards encompass a wide range of considerations, including environmental protection, social equity, community engagement and respect for cultural values. The process mandates that safeguard plans be incorporated into all major project phases, with detailed reports made accessible to stakeholders. Adherence to and verification of environmental and social safeguards is a condition for all Crediting Projects.
Project Proponents must comply with all national and local laws, regulations and policies. Where relevant, projects must comply with international conventions and standards governing human rights and uses of the environment, when conducted within or foreseeably impacting Party jurisdictions.
[/R-MFRA-0]Project Proponents must document activities conducted under the Project that would require it to obtain environmental permits.
[/G-5XNH-0]Environmental and social risk assessment in adherence with the relevant section of the Isometric Standard must be completed to identify potential risks, followed by the development of tailored mitigation plans. These plans must encompass specific actions to avoid, minimize or rectify identified impacts. Effective implementation of these measures must also be accompanied by a robust monitoring plan to detect negative impacts and stop projects when necessary.
The Project Proponent must conduct an environmental risk assessment which adheres to the relevant section of the Isometric Standard. Potential additional environmental risks associated with biomass storage in the shallow subsurface are listed below. The severity of these risks vary based on site specifics and the intensity and duration of activities. Environmental and social risk identification, assessment, avoidance, and mitigation planning will be unique to each Project’s technical, environmental, and social contexts. This list contains minimum considerations; Isometric and the Project Proponent may add risks on a case by case basis in the PDD.
Projects may utilize synthetic material, such as storage liners or biomass wrappers, to increase the durability of biomass stored in the shallow subsurface. These synthetic materials may be required by Isometric in relevant storage Modules and/or utilized under the discretion of the Project Proponent.
The composition of any synthetic material used in a Project must be reported in the PDD. This must include:
The environmental risk assessment must also consider these synthetic liners and wrappers.
[/R-84KZ-0]The Project Proponent must conduct a social risk assessment which adheres to the relevant section of the Isometric Standard on Social Impacts.
Per the Isometric Standard, Project Proponents must demonstrate active stakeholder engagement throughout Project planning and operation, ensuring that all risk mitigation strategies contribute to sustainable project outcomes. Local stakeholders situated in the vicinity of the project site may contribute an in-depth understanding of the local system and provide invaluable insights and recommendations on the potential risks, necessary safeguards and specific monitoring needs. The Stakeholder input process must adhere to requirements outlined in the relevant section of the Isometric Standard, and evidence of these meetings must be submitted in the PDD.
Project Proponents must include in the PDD a plan for information sharing, emergency response and conditions for stopping or pausing a deployment. Plans for pausing or stopping a deployment must be in place in instances where:
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 Project to be evaluated under this Protocol, the Project Proponent must document Project characteristics in a Project Design Document (PDD) as outlined in the relevant section of the Isometric Standard. The PDD will form the basis for Project validation 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 the Isometric Standard.
The Validation and Verification Body (VVB) must consider following requisite components:
The threshold for Materiality, considering the totality of all omissions, errors and mis-statements, is 5%, in accordance with the Isometric Standard.
Verifiers should also verify the documentation of uncertainty of the GHG Statement as required by the Isometric Standard. Qualitative Materiality issues may also be identified and documented, such as 1:
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 storage site. Validators should, whenever possible, observe operation of the biomass processing and burial to ensure full documentation of process inputs and outputs through visual observation.
A site visit must occur at least once every 2 years at each location.
Verifiers and validators must comply with the requirements defined in 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 terrestrial storage.
Competency must be demonstrated in accordance with Isometric's VVB policy, for example based on the relevant sectoral scope accreditations in IAF MD 14, or another demonstration of relevant expertise for this protocol and the selected storage module(s).
CDR via biomass storage is often a result of a multi-step process (such as biomass growth, harvesting, transport, processing, burial, 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 burial site operator), and to avoid double counting of net CO2e removals, a single Project Proponent must be specified contractually as the sole owner of the Credits in order to avoid double counting of net CO2e removals. Contracts must comply with all requirements defined in the relevant section of the Isometric Standard.
The Project Proponent must be able to demonstrate additionality through compliance with the Isometric Standard. The baseline scenario and counterfactual 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 carbon finance and carbon Credits for the current or past Crediting Periods, but, if the review indicates the Project has become non-additional, this shall make the Project ineligible for future Credits2.
The uncertainty in the overall estimate of the net CO2e removal as a result of the Project must be accounted for. The total net CO2e removed, ([math: CO_2e_{Removal}]), for a specific batch ([math: n]) must be conservatively determined based on the requirements outlined in 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 the Isometric Standard.
In addition, a sensitivity analysis 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 uncertanty 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. That includes:
The Project Proponent can request certain information to be restricted (only available to authorized buyers, the Registry 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, sinks, and reservoirs (SSRs) associated with a biomass burial CDR project.
A cradle-to-grave GHG Statement must be prepared encompassing the GHG emissions relating to the activities outlined within the system boundary (Figure 1).
GHG emissions and removals associated with The Project may be direct emissions from a process, or indirect emissions from combustion of fuels, electricity generation, or other sources. Emissions must include all GHG SSRs within the system boundary, 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, including embodied emissions of equipment and consumables used in the project. 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 CDR Project must be fully considered in the system boundary. Any activity that ultimately leads to the issuance of Credits should be included in the system boundary.
The system boundary must include all relevant GHG SSRs controlled and related to The Project, including but not limited to the SSRs set out in Table 1 and Figure 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 burial projects
[Image: System boundary diagrams (20)]
Table 1 GHG SSRs for Biomass Carbon Removal and Storage
Activity | GHG source, sink or reservoir | GHG | Scope | Timescale |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Establishment of project | Equipment and materials manufacture | All GHGs | Embodied emissions associated with establishment of the project site(s) (lifecycle Modules A1-3). To include product manufacture emissions for equipment, buildings, infrastructure and temporary structures. | Before project operations start - must be accounted for in the first Reporting Period or amortized in line with allocation rules (See Section 8.5.1) |
als transport to site | All GHGs | Transport emissions associated with transporting materials and equipment to the project site(s) (lifecycle Module A4). | ||
Construction site emissions | All GHGs | Emissions related to construction and installation of the project site(s) (lifecycle Module A5). To include energy use for construction, installation and groundworks, as well as waste processing activities and emissions associated with land use change. | ||
Initial surveys and feasibility studies | All GHGs | Any embodied, energy and transport emissions associated with surveys or feasibility studies required for establishment of the project site. | ||
Misc. | All GHGs | Any SSRs not captured by categories above, for example staff transport. | ||
Operations | Biomass feedstock sourcing | All GHGs | Any embodied, energy and transport emissions associated with eligible feedstocks. | Over each Reporting Period - must be accounted for in the relevant Reporting Period (See Section 8.5.2) |
Biomass transport | All GHGs | Transport of biomass including transport of biomass feedstock to biomass processing site and all other transport until biomass reaches the storage site. | ||
Biomass processing | All GHGs | Emissions associated with biomass processing including:
| ||
Biomass characterization | All GHGs | Emissions associated with biomass processing including:
| ||
Biomass storage | All GHGs | Emissions associated with biomass processing including:
| ||
CO₂ stored | CO₂ | The gross amount of CO₂ removed from the atmosphere and durably stored. | ||
Sampling required for MRV | All GHGs | Pre-deployment, deployment and post-deployment monitoring, including transportation to collect samples, laboratory analysis and sample processing. | ||
Surveys | All GHGs | Embodied, energy and transport emissions associated with undertaking required surveys e.g. ecological surveys. | ||
Misc. | All GHGs | Any SSRs not captured by categories above, for example staff travel. | ||
End-of-Life | End-of-life of project facilities | All GHGs | To include anticipated end-of-life emissions (lifecycle Modules C1-4) associated with deconstruction and demolition, transport, waste processing and disposal of any equipment, buildings or infrastructure. | After Reporting Period - must be accounted for in the first Reporting Period or amortized in line with allocation rules (See Section 8.5.3) |
Closure of biomass storage site | All GHGs | Closure of biomass storage site, including embodied emissions associated with equipment and materials manufacture, transport of equipment and materials to site and emissions associated with energy use and consumables use for closure operations including installation and groundworks, as well as waste processing activities and emissions associated with land use change. | ||
Ongoing sampling and monitoring required for MRV | All GHGs | Embodied, energy and transport emissions related to ongoing sampling and monitoring requirements for MRV. To include routine gas monitoring, site inspection and maintenance. | ||
Misc. | All GHGs | Any emissions source, sink or reservoir not captured by categories ab |
Miscellaneous GHG emissions are those that cannot be categorized by the GHG SSR categories provided in Table 1. 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 in Section 8.5.4.
In line with the GHG Accounting Module v1.1, the Project must:
In some instances, biomass burial CDR project activities may be integrated into existing activities. Activities or portions of activities that were already occurring in the baseline and would have continued to occur without the biomass burial CDR project may be omitted from the system boundary, subject to the conditions set below.
For the purpose of this provision, an "activity" may refer to an operational sub-unit, such as an individual trip leg, a single pass of field equipment, or a discrete processing step, where such sub-units can be cleanly delineated by equipment, timing, and physical scope. Where a pre-existing activity is partially modified by the project (for example, a transport trip whose route is extended to include project-specific stops, or a field operation whose pass is lengthened to include project inputs), the activity must be partitioned into:
An activity, or portion of an activity, may only be excluded where the Project Proponent can demonstrate all of the following:
Evidence supporting these conditions must be provided in the PDD. This must include either:
And the following:
Where these conditions are met, only the emissions associated with the activity as it would have occurred in the baseline may be excluded. Any incremental emissions attributable to the project must remain within the system boundary and be accounted for in the relevant emissions sub-section.
The baseline scenario for biomass storage projects assumes the activities associated with the Project 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 the Project. 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 v1.34 sets out requirements for establishing ineligible biomass as part of the Counterfactual Storage Eligibility criteria. The Biomass Feedstock Accounting Module v1.34 includes details for quantification of [math: CO_2e_{Counterfactual}].
See Section 3 of the Biomass Feedstock Accounting Module for requirements.
The biomass storage process typically involves a processing step followed by a burial step. The processing step may operate on a continual or batch basis and may involve single or mixed forms of biomass. Irrespective of whether the processing step is operated continually or batch wise or whether it involves single or mixed forms of biomass, the processing step yields a known amount of biomass containing a known amount of carbon. A 'Production Batch', [math: p], is then a an amount of processed biomass, produced over a specific time period to be mutually agreed between Isometric and Project Proponent (e.g., a day, week, or month).
An ‘Burial Batch’, [math: n], is a single burial activity where a quantity of biomass is buried at an approved storage site. The Burial Batch consists of the biomass from the processing step which is buried for durable storage.
The approach for emissions calculations here is based on Burial Batches and the specific calculation of net CO2e removal for each Burial Batch. The following sections outline the process for calculating the net CO2e removed for each specific Burial Batch of biomass processed and associated biomass burial, defined as a Removal.
The Reporting Period for shallow subsurface biomass 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 the relevant section of the Isometric Standard for further information.
Net CO2e removal for a process biomass storage Project can be calculated as follows. Note that the calculation is completed for a discrete batch, [math: n], of biomass that is buried (‘Burial 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
[math: CO_2e_{Stored}] represents the amount of CO2 (stored as organic carbon, C) that is buried and stored in the shallow subsurface. This is the gross amount stored for each batch burial and does not account for reversals of storage from the storage formation.
The total amount of CO2 contained in the buried biomass can be calculated as follows.
Where all biomass production batches are composited prior to burial:
[math: CO_2e_{Stored,\ n} = \frac{C_{Biomass,\ n}\cdot m_{Bur,\ n}}{C_{CO_{2}}}]
(Equation 3)
Where biomass production batches are not blended prior to burial:
[math: CO_2e_{Stored,\ n} = \sum_{p=1}^{j} \bigg(\frac{C_{Biomass,\ p}\cdot m_{Bur,\ 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 processed biomass for either a blended biomass in a Burial Batch [math: n], or for individual Production Batches [math: p], is determined via the analysis of samples of processed biomass for total carbon content. This must be assessed via test method ASTM 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.
Analysis must be completed directly by the Project Proponent or by a qualified laboratory, as evidenced by accreditation to ISO 17025 or equivalent standards for laboratory quality management for the specific test method (ASTM D5291).
[/R-FEB9-0]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 carbon 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 carbon content of unsampled batches.
[/R-336Y-0]Method A: Measure every Batch
Using this method, the carbon content of every Burial 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 carbon 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 carbon 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, carbon 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 carbon 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 carbon 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 a 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 carbon 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 carbon 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.
[/G-MH45-0]The mass of buried biomass, [math: m_{Bur}], is measured via determination of weight of delivered processed biomass to the burial site using a calibrated scale. The total mass buried may be determined by the difference in biomass delivery truck weight measured upon arrival at the burial facility and at departure, after offloading of biomass, either into storage or directly to burial.
[/R-PR2K-0]Any 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 specifications2, and scale testing and calibration must be performed by a state certified entity.
The total mass buried 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 buried biomass:
Records of all carbon analyses and burial masses (e.g. weigh scale tickets) must be maintained by the burial 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, burial 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 of the project 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 burial batch of biomass.
[/R-Y1SX-0]The calculation of [math: CO_2e_{Counterfactual,\ n}], is determined by the requirements of the Biomass Feedstock Accounting Module 1.34.
See Section 3 of the Biomass Feedstock Accounting Module
[math: {CO}_{2}^{}e_{Emissions,\ RP}^{}] is the total quantity of GHG emissions associated with a Reporting Period [math: RP]. This can be calculated as:
[math: {CO}_{2}^{}e_{Emissions,\ RP}^{}\ = \ {CO}_{2}^{}e_{Establishment,\ RP}^{}\ + \ {CO}_{2}^{}e_{Operations,\ RP}^{} + \ {CO}_{2}^{}e_{End-of-life,\ RP}^{}+ \ {CO}_{2}^{}e_{Leakage,\ RP}^{}]
(Equation 7)
Where:
The following sections set out specific quantification requirements for each variable.
GHG emissions associated with project establishment 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 to the moment 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. Requirements for amortization are outlined in Section 7 of the GHG Accounting Module v1.1.
Refer to Section 7 for guidance on amortization rules.
GHG emissions associated with [math: CO_2e_{Operations, RP}] should include all emissions associated with operational activities including but not limited to the SSRs set out in Table 1.
[math: CO_2e_{Operations, RP}] emissions occur over the Reporting Period for the period being credited and are applicable to that Reporting Period only. [math: CO_2e_{Operations, RP}] emissions must be attributed to the Reporting Period in which they occur. Allocation may be permitted in certain instances, on a case by case basis in agreement with Isometric.
[math: CO_2e_{End-of-Life, RP}] 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_2e_{End-of-Life, RP}] must be estimated upfront and allocated in the same way as set out for calculation of [math: CO_2e_{Establishment, RP}].
Given the uncertain nature of [math: CO_2e_{End-of-Life, RP}] emissions, assumptions must be revisited at each Reporting Period and any necessary adjustments made.
[math: CO_2e_{Leakage, RP}] includes emissions associated with a project's impact on activities that fall outside of the system boundary of a project.
It includes increases in GHG emissions as a result of the Project displacing emissions or causing a knock on effect that increases emissions elsewhere. This includes emissions associated with activity-shifting, market leakage and ecological leakage.
It is the Project Proponent's responsibility to identify potential sources of leakage emissions.
[math: CO_2e_{Leakage, RP}] emissions must be attributed to the Reporting Period in which they occur. Allocation may be permitted in certain instances, on a case by case basis in agreement with Isometric.
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 or fuel usage. Examples of electricity usage may include, but are not limited to:
Examples of fuel consumption may include, but are not limited to:
Refer to the Energy Use Accounting Module for guidance on fuel and energy emissions calculations.
The ++GHG Accounting Module v1.1++ provides requirements on how transportation and embodied emissions must be calculated for The Project so that they can be subtracted in the net CO₂e removal calculation.
Embodied emissions are those related to the life cycle impact of equipment and consumables. They may include, but are not limited to:
Transportation emissions are those related to transportation of products and equipment. They may include, but are not limited to:
Refer to Section 4.1 and Section 4.2 of the GHG Accounting Module for guidance on embodied and transportation emissions calculations.
This Protocol may provide the following 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 the storage of biomass CO₂e in subsurface mines.
Durability and monitoring requirements for subsurface storage.
Isometric would like to thank following contributors to this Protocol:
Isometric would like to thank following reviewers of this Protocol:
NREL and LLNL were supported by the DOE Office of Technology Transitions in collaboration with the Office of Clean Energy Demonstrations (OCED), Office of Fossil Energy and Carbon Management (FECM), Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy (EERE), and the Bioenergy Technology Office (BETO).
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:
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.
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.
Projects using this Protocol and associated Storage Modules are typically deemed to have a Medium Risk of Reversal. This results in a 7% buffer pool for Projects using this Storage Module. This reversal risk will be reassessed at the renewal of the Crediting Period, or when new scientific research and knowledge are produced.
The Risk of Reversal Questionnaire questions that pertain to this protocol, drawn from the programme-level Risk of Reversal Questionnaire in the Isometric Standard, include the following:
No. in Isometric Standard Questionnaire | Question | If answered “Yes” | If answered “No” |
|---|---|---|---|
1 | Is a reversal directly observable with a physical or chemical measurement as opposed to a modelled result? | Proceed to questions 2-10 | Proceed to questions 8-10 |
2 | Is the carbon being stored in an impermeable geologic system? (e.g., salt cavern) | Proceed to questions 8-10 | Add 1 to Risk Score and proceed to questions 3-10 |
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
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 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. (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
Isometric. (n.d.). Isometric — Glossary: Defining the terms that appear regularly in our work. Isometric. https://isometric.com/glossary
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
ISO 14064-3: 2019, Section 5.1.7 ↩
https://www.nist.gov/pml/owm/publications/nist-handbooks/handbook-44-current-edition↩↩2