Harmonizing the quantification of CCS GHG emission reductions through oil and natural gas industry project guidelines

The challenge of balancing energy supplies to meet growing global demands, while concurrently considering associated environmental impacts, is leading to an increased focus on greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and their potential mitigations. Over the past five years, the American Petroleum Institute (API) and the International Petroleum Industry Environmental Conservation Association (IPIECA) have collaborated on a series of guidelines to promote the credible, consistent, and transparent quantification of GHG emission reductions from projects of interest to the oil and natural gas industry. The Petroleum Industry Guidelines for Greenhouse Gas Emission Reduction Projects (referred to as the Project Guidelines) consists of a series of documents developed to provide oil and natural gas companies with a framework for evaluating, quantifying, documenting, and reporting GHG emission reductions achieved through discreet projects. The Project Guidelines address the selection of appropriate baseline candidates and boundaries for scenario assessment. The documents also address potential emission sources to be incorporated for the selected scenarios, along with compatible monitoring considerations. The guidelines focus on technical considerations and provide flexibility to adapt the approach in accordance with applicable public policy mandates. This paper highlights a recent addition to the series - the Flare Reduction Guidance Document - that addresses GHG emission reductions associated with reduced flaring activities from oil and natural gas operations. Although flaring occurs along the oil and natural gas value chain, the document focuses on exploration and production operations, where the best opportunities for flare reductions reside. Case studies are used to demonstrate the application of the emission reduction principles for two categories of GHG emission reduction projects: (1) recovery of associated gas for processing and sale, and (2) utilizing a small flared gas stream for on-site power generation. Although the concepts for quantifying GHG emission reductions are illustrated through project examples relevant to the oil and natural gas industry, the information is applicable to a variety of project types and establishes the foundation for assessing GHG emission reductions from a myriad of project activities.

Carbon Capture and Geological Storage (CCS) may play a significant role in mitigating greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. This paper presents an overview of a recent collaborative effort between the American Petroleum Institute (API) and the International Petroleum Industry Environmental Conservation Association (IPIECA) to develop guidelines for accounting and reporting of GHG emission reductions from CCS projects. The focus of the CCS guidelines is on specific technical considerations and the assessment of project emission reductions over the entire CCS chain – capture, transport, injection and storage. The guidelines address potential baseline candidates and scenario assessment, potential emission sources, and monitoring considerations. Case studies for potential applications are provided to demonstrate the application of emission reduction principles. Key messages include: • Growing industry experience with CCS can be used to develop an overall approach to managing geological storage and reducing the risk of unintended physical leakage. Comprehensive examination of possible sites, with appropriate site selection for geological storage, as well as operation and monitoring, are all components of a risk management approach. • Good practices in monitoring are especially important for CCS to be a safe and secure GHG emission reduction option. • Monitoring should be based on a site-specific risk assessment, with monitoring methods appropriate for the identified risks and to assure the long-term environmental integrity of the storage formation. Oil industry experience and expertise provide confidence in CCS as an effective GHG emission mitigation option. Through these guidelines, API and IPIECA aim to assist the petroleum industry in identifying, assessing, and developing CCS projects with the potential for producing credible GHG emission reductions.

Carbon Capture and Geological Storage (CCS) may play a significant role in mitigating greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. Oil and natural gas companies are actively pursuing innovative research and new technology initiatives to answer the technical and policy questions surrounding CCS. This paper presents an overview of a recent collaborative effort between the International Petroleum Industry Environmental Conservation Association (IPIECA) and the American Petroleum Institute (API) to develop guidelines for accounting and reporting of GHG emission reductions from CCS projects.1 The focus of the CCS guidelines is on specific technical considerations and the assessment of project emission reductions over the entire CCS chain – capture, transport, injection and storage. The guidelines address potential baseline candidates and scenario assessment, potential emission sources, and monitoring considerations. Case studies for three potential applications are provided to demonstrate the application of emission reduction principles. Key messages include:Growing industry experience with CCS can be used to develop an overall approach to managing geological storage and reducing the risk of unintended physical leakage. Comprehensive examination of possible sites, with appropriate site selection for geological storage, as well as operation and monitoring, are all components of a risk management approach.Good practices in monitoring are especially important for CCS to be a safe and secure GHG emission reduction option.Monitoring should be based on a site-specific risk assessment, with monitoring methods appropriate for the identified risks and to assure the long-term environmental integrity of the storage. Oil industry experience and expertise provide confidence in CCS as an effective emissions mitigation option. Through these guidelines, API and IPIECA aim to assist the petroleum industry in identifying, assessing, and developing CCS projects with the potential for producing credible GHG emission reductions.

As petroleum companies throughout the world work to improve their understanding of potential contributions to human induced climate change, developing an inventory of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions is an important step for each company. In order to achieve consistent, meaningful data, it is important that petroleum companies have consistent definitions of what is included in the inventory, and use consistent methodologies for calculating the emissions. The International Petroleum Industry Environmental Conservation Association (IPIECA), the International Association of Oil and Gas Producers (OGP) and the American Petroleum Institute (API) have taken the lead in developing guidance for reporting of GHG emissions. A recently-completed IPIECA-led effort has led to the development of the Petroleum Industry Guidelines for Reporting Greenhouse Gas Emissions, which focuses on petroleum industry accounting and reporting of GHG emissions at the facility through the corporate level. The Guidelines were coordinated with API's Compendium of Greenhouse Gas Emissions Estimation Methodologies for the Oil and Gas Industry. The API Compendium has been developed to provide a consistent set of emission estimation methodologies for the petroleum industry. API is also providing a tool for estimating emissions, the SANGEA™ Energy and Emissions Estimating System. This paper will describe highlights of the Guidelines, the Compendium, and provide examples of how these documents can be used with the SANGEA™ software tool to develop a meaningful estimate of emissions from petroleum industry operations. Results, Observations and Conclusions: A credible, systematic approach, as embodied in the Petroleum Industry Guidelines and the API Compendium, provides strategic value to the petroleum industry as we address the climate change issue. By working towards a consistent standard for greenhouse gas emissions estimating, our industry improves its credibility and provides a foundation for future cooperative efforts among petroleum industry companies, regulators and other industries to address this important issue.

Market potential for Kyoto mechanisms—estimation of global market potential for co-operative greenhouse gas emission reduction policies

Alternative methodologies for the reduction of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from crude palm oil (CPO) production by a wet extraction mill in Thailand were developed. The production of 1 t of CPO from mills with biogas capture (four mills) and without biogas capture (two mills) in 2010 produced GHG emissions of 935 kg carbon dioxide equivalent (CO2eq), on average. Wastewater treatment plants with and without biogas capture produced GHG emissions of 64 and 47% of total GHG emission, respectively. The rest of the emissions mostly originated from the acquisition of fresh fruit bunches. The establishment of a biogas recovery system must be the first step in the reduction of GHG emissions. It could reduce GHG emissions by 373 kgCO2eq/t of CPO. The main source of GHG emission of 163 kgCO2eq/t of CPO from the mills with biogas capture was the open pond used for cooling of wastewater before it enters the biogas recovery system. The reduction of GHG emissions could be accomplished by (i) using a wastewater-dispersed unit for cooling, (ii) using a covered pond, (iii) enhancing the performance of the biogas recovery system, and (iv) changing the stabilization pond to an aerated lagoon. By using options i-iv, reductions of GHG emissions of 216, 208, 92.2, and 87.6 kgCO2eq/t of CPO, respectively, can be achieved.

Greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions reduction in the electricity sector: Implications of increasing renewable energy penetration in Ghana's electricity generation mix

For all its cachet, you might think that hybrid drivetrain technology is inherently green. But only 13 of 34 hybrid vehicles assessed achieve better than a 25% reduction in greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, and just 3 exceed a 40% reduction, according to an evaluation by the Union of Concerned Scientists (UCS).1 Moreover, reductions in GHG emissions do not necessarily correlate with reductions in other toxic emissions. Like any engine output–improving technology, hybrid technology can boost both fuel efficiency and power—but the more you boost one, the less you can boost the other. That dichotomy spurred the UCS to develop its “hybrid scorecard,” which rates each hybrid according to how well it lives up to its promise of reducing air pollution.2 All the vehicles were from model year 2011 except for one, the 2012 Infiniti M Hybrid. First the UCS scored each hybrid on how much it reduced its GHG emissions relative to its conventional counterpart, on a scale of zero (least reduction) to 10 (greatest reduction). These scores reflect the percentage in fuel efficiency gain. For example, the Toyota Prius gets 50 mpg3 compared with 28 mpg for the comparable Toyota Matrix. This represents a 44.0% reduction in GHG emissions, earning the Prius a GHG score of 9.4. At the bottom of the scale, the 21-mpg hybrid VW Touareg reduces GHG emissions only 10% over the 19-mpg conventional Toureg, for a score of 0.0. With a 46% improvement, the luxury Lincoln MKZ Hybrid had the greatest reduction over its conventional counterpart. The UCS also scored hybrids for absolute emissions (rather than relative to the conventional model) of air pollutants including particulate matter, carbon monoxide, hydrocarbons, and nitrogen oxides. These scores, on a scale of zero (dirtiest) to 10 (cleanest), are based on California certifications for tailpipe emissions. As the scorecard showed, a vehicle that emits less heat-trapping gases may not necessarily emit less of other air pollutants. For example, the Mercedes Benz S400 Hybrid scored 9 on air pollution reduction, alongside the Prius and the Lincoln MKZ, but only 1.3 on GHG emissions. HYBRID SCORECARD: Top 10 Nonluxury Hybrids by Total Environmental Improvement Score “Hybrid technology doesn’t add additional challenges [to reducing exhaust pollutants] that can’t be addressed through design of the vehicle’s emission controls,” says Don Anair, senior vehicles analyst at the UCS. “Numerous manufacturers of hybrids are meeting the lowest emissions levels. Hybrid manufacturers who aren’t delivering the lowest smog-forming emissions have chosen not to do so.” Each vehicle’s air pollution and GHG scores were averaged into a total “environmental improvement score,” again with the MKZ and the Prius leading the pack, and the Touareg scraping bottom. The UCS also scored “hybrid value” (the cost of reducing GHG emissions in dollars per percent reduction) and “forced features” (options you must buy with the hybrid whether you want them or not). HYBRID SCORECARD: Top 10 Luxury Hybrids by Total Environmental Improvement Score Luke Tonachel, vehicles analyst with the Natural Resources Defense Council, compliments the scorecard for illustrating that hybrid technology is not automatically green. He says, “We should improve the efficiency of all vehicles, and [hybrid technology] is just one technology that can get us there if applied with that goal in mind.” Nonetheless, Jamie Kitman, the New York bureau chief for Automobile Magazine, questions the wisdom of emphasizing percentage improvement in gas mileage rather than absolute miles per gallon. At 21 mpg, the hybrid Cadillac Escalade 4WD represents a 29% improvement over the 15-mpg conventional model, saving nearly 2 gallons per 100 miles. But the hybrid Escalade is still a gas guzzler, and Kitman says he wishes people would see through the marketing that encourages them to buy SUVs and “crossovers” rather than ordinary cars, which are more efficient than either. Says Anair, “The scorecard shows that automakers can pair hybrid technology with advanced emission controls to help tackle climate change while reducing the health impacts from breathing polluted air.” However, he adds, alluding to the stark variation in how much hybrid technology boosted fuel efficiency, “Not all automakers are delivering on the full promise of this technology.”

Greenhouse gas contribution and emission reduction potential prediction of China's aluminum industry

Indonesia has targeted 29 % Greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions reduction in 2030 and Industry is one of the big two contributors for GHG emissions. As an industry, mining is an energy-intensive industry, and reducing energy consumption is one of the strategies to improve mining environmental performance. The aim of this paper is to estimate the GHG emission reduction in a mining project through energy reduction initiatives. A copper mine in Indonesia with processing plant capacity of 120,000 t/d and operate 111 Caterpillar 793C Haul Truck was taken as a case study. This mine site has two sources of an electricity namely coal-fired power plant with 112 MW output and diesel power plant with 45 MW output. The analysis method for calculating CO2 emission is using IPCC method where fuel consumption and emission factor are two main variables for GHG emissions. Business as usual scenario (TIER 1) showed that the average of diesel fuel consumption for fleets operation generated 294,006 t CO2-eq/y. A coal-fired power plant with average coal consumption of 350 t/d/unit generated 1.15 Mt CO2-eq/y and diesel power plant consumed 4.35 ML/y produced 11,632 t CO2-eq/y. Two energy initiative programs were identified namely fuel conversion and used oil utilisation program. The initiative scenario focused on substituting, reducing and reusing of fossil fuels including coal, diesel fuel, and used oil. This scenario was estimated to contribute the carbon emission reduction (t CO2-eq) of 258,381 annually. The involvement of mining industry in carbon emission reduction is not only helping Indonesia in achieving its GHG emissions reduction target but also increases mine site environmental performance and company image.

The purpose of this research is to empirically reveal the effect of external technology R&D cooperation network diversity (ETRDCND) on the greenhouse gas (GHG) emission reduction and energy saving of small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs). Besides this, this study aims at analyzing the roles of production time reduction and absorptive capacity in the relationship between SMEs’ ETRDCND and their GHG emission reduction and energy saving. GHG emission and energy usage have been playing a crucial role in aggravating global warming. Global warming results in big problems such as worldwide unusual weather and health disorders. SMEs play a substantial role in the industrial growth of the global economy, which increases GHG emission and energy consumption. By performing the ordinary least squares regression with the data of 3300 South Korean SMEs, this research reveals four points. First, ETRDCND positively influences SMEs’ GHG emission reduction and energy saving. Second, production time reduction perfectly mediates the relationship between SMEs’ ETRDCND and their GHG emission reduction and energy saving. Third, the mediating role of production time reduction in this relationship is moderated by SMEs’ absorptive capacity. Fourth, ETRDCND significantly influences SMEs’ GHG emission reduction and their energy saving only if SMEs possess their own absorptive capacity.

Energy-related activities are a major contributor of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. A growing body of knowledge clearly depicts the links between human activities and climate change. Over the last century the burning of fossil fuels such as coal and oil and other human activities has released carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions and other heat-trapping GHG emissions into the atmosphere and thus increased the concentration of atmospheric CO2 emissions. The main human activities that emit CO2 emissions are (1) the combustion of fossil fuels to generate electricity, accounting for about 37% of total U.S. CO2 emissions and 31% of total U.S. GHG emissions in 2013, (2) the combustion of fossil fuels such as gasoline and diesel to transport people and goods, accounting for about 31% of total U.S. CO2 emissions and 26% of total U.S. GHG emissions in 2013, and (3) industrial processes such as the production and consumption of minerals and chemicals, accounting for about 15% of total U.S. CO2 emissions and 12% of total ...

In persuasion of global commitment of the country on reduction of Greenhouse Gas (GHG) emission, India’s ‘National Mission on Sustainable Habitat’ has included promotion of energy efficiency in residential and commercial sector and has envisaged that energy use in buildings varies significantly across income groups, building construction typology, climate and several other factors. Though substantial energy savings can be achieved in the housing sector through implementation of various carbon mitigation options, it was stated that the incremental cost of implementing energy efficient measures is estimated to vary between 3 and 5% for residential houses. The challenge before the engineers, architects and other professionals associated with building construction sector is to find out appropriate technologies that will ensure reduction of GHG emission without increasing cost of construction. As majority of construction in government sector will come from construction of small residential house belonging to Economically Weaker Sections (EWS) as part of government’s commitment to provide housing for all by 2020, assessment of GHG reduction potential of various cost-effective construction technologies is very essential to provide guidance to the stakeholders. This paper has surveyed various prevalent construction technologies in different parts of the country, analyzed the cost and embodied GHG emission for construction of the building envelope by collecting data through extensive search of literature and information obtained from construction sites. It has been found that there is ample scope of adoption of location-specific, cost-effective and eco-friendly construction technologies for construction of houses for EWS which are capable of reduction of GHG emission without any increase in cost of construction. The technologies can meet the commitment of the country at international level on reduction of GHG emission without any extra burden to state exchequer.

As part of the Net Zero Carbon Water Cycle Program (NZCWCP) for Victoria state in Australia, we have sought to understand the potential to reduce household energy consumption and related Greenhouse Gas (GHG) emissions by influencing water use. Digital metering data disaggregated into 57 million discrete water usage events across 105 households at a resolution of 10 millilitres at 10 second intervals from June 2017 to March 2020, from a previous Yarra Valley Water (Melbourne, Australia) study, was analysed, together with the dynamic relationship between the multiple energy sources (natural gas, grid electricity, solar) used to heat water for showers in each hour of the day. Water-related energy (WRE) use, including water desalination and treatment, pumping, heating, wastewater collection and treatment, comprised 12.6% of Australia’s primary energy use in 2019. Water heating (by natural gas and electricity) comprised the largest component of WRE use for across residential, commercial, and industrial sectors. Furthermore, 69% of Victoria’s total water usage was by residential customers in 2020-2021. WRE GHG emissions were around 3.8% of Victoria’s total GHG emissions in 2018. Showers (~50% of residential WRE), system losses (~27% of residential WRE), and clothes washers (~9% of residential WRE) are the three largest components of WRE consumption. The main objective of this work is the creation of industry-accessible tools to improve knowledge and management options from the understanding of reductions in cost and GHG emissions from household showering WRE use. Potential options considered, to reduce water and energy use, as well as associated GHG emissions and customer utility bills, include (a) behaviour management such as water and energy pricing to change time of use behaviours, and (b) the adoption of efficient shower head improvements. Shower WRE and GHG emissions were found able to be strongly impacted by small changes in daily routines. GHG emissions reduction from showering could be reduced up to 20 (in summer) - 22% (in winter) by shifting demand time of showering or replacing residential showerheads. Extrapolated to state and Australian scales, reductions in water usage could be up to 14 GL (Victoria) and 144 GL (Australia), and reductions in GHG emissions 1,600 ktCO2eq (Victoria) and 17,300 ktCO2eq (Australia). It provides fundamental new information which could inform a suite of new management options to impact water-related energy from showers, and related GHG emissions and customer water and energy cost.

Major US electric utility climate pledges have the potential to collectively reduce power sector emissions by one-third