workshop on ghg calculation and calculation tools · fossil fuel based on a functional unit...
Post on 26-Apr-2020
14 Views
Preview:
TRANSCRIPT
1 15. – 16.04.2014 Author: Susanne Köppen
ifeu - Institut für Energie- und Umweltforschung Heidelberg GmbH
Susanne Köppen
15 – 16 April 2014 / Indonesia susanne.köppen@ifeu.de
Workshop on
GHG calculation and
calculation tools
2 15. – 16.04.2014 Author: Susanne Köppen
ifeu - Institut für Energie- und Umweltforschung Heidelberg GmbH
1. Introduction to GHG
calculations
3 15. – 16.04.2014 Author: Susanne Köppen
ifeu - Institut für Energie- und Umweltforschung Heidelberg GmbH
Content
1 Principles of GHG calculation
2 GHG calculation under the EU RED
3 Overview on GHG calculation tools
4 Introduction to BioGrace
4 15. – 16.04.2014 Author: Susanne Köppen
ifeu - Institut für Energie- und Umweltforschung Heidelberg GmbH
Important driver for bioenergy implementation: saving of
greenhouse gas emissions and fossil energy carriers
save emissions by replacing fossil fuels and producing co-products
cause emissions during production and use
Impact of bioenergy project can be assessed with life
cycle assessment (LCA) methodology
internationally standardized (ISO 14040 / 14044)
Introduction
Principles of GHG calculation 1
5 15. – 16.04.2014 Author: Susanne Köppen
ifeu - Institut für Energie- und Umweltforschung Heidelberg GmbH
takes into account the whole life cycle of a product
(„cradle-to-grave“)
takes into account all inputs into the system and all
outputs
compares the emissions of a biofuel with those from a
fossil fuel based on a functional unit
Principles of LCAs
Principles of GHG calculation 1
6 15. – 16.04.2014 Author: Susanne Köppen
ifeu - Institut für Energie- und Umweltforschung Heidelberg GmbH
Raw material
Biofuel
Fertiliser
Diesel Pesticides
Cultivation
Co-products
Fallow / land
use change
Production
raw material
Use
Transport
Production
Principles of GHG calculation 1
Fossil fuel
7 15. – 16.04.2014 Author: Susanne Köppen
ifeu - Institut für Energie- und Umweltforschung Heidelberg GmbH
Outputs
Inputs
Natural gas
Raw oil
Lignite
Hard coal
Carbon dioxide
(CO2)
Methane (CH4)
Nitrous oxide
(N2O)
Conversion into CO2 equivalents (GWPs)
Raw material
Biofuel
Fertilizer
Diesel Pesticides
Cultivation
Co-products
Fallow / land
use change
Production
raw material
Use
Transport
Production
Fossil fuel
Inventory analysis
Principles of GHG calculation 1
8 15. – 16.04.2014 Author: Susanne Köppen
ifeu - Institut für Energie- und Umweltforschung Heidelberg GmbH
Data from the
process
(e.g. yields, fertiliser)
Data for conversion
(e.g. heating values,
emission factors)
X Greenhouse gas
emissions =
Direct emissions: occur during the use of a product
(e.g. combustion of a fossil fuel)
Indirect emissions: occur during the production of a
product (e.g. production of a fossil fuel)
Also called ‚upstream emissions‘
How to calculate GHG emissions
Principles of GHG calculation 1
9 15. – 16.04.2014 Author: Susanne Köppen
ifeu - Institut für Energie- und Umweltforschung Heidelberg GmbH
FIELD WORK &
HARVEST Diesel fuel
[l diesel per ha per year]
Diesel [g CO2eq per l diesel]
PESTICIDES Pesticides
[l pesticides per ha per year] Pesticides
[g CO2eq per l pesticides]
IRRIGATION &
FEEDSTOCK
DRYING
Diesel fuel or electricity [l diesel per ha per year] or [kWh
electricity per ha per year]
Organic and mineral
fertiliser [kg fertiliser per ha per year]
Diesel or electricity [g CO2eq per l diesel] or
[g CO2eq per kWh electricity]
Fertiliser production [g CO2eq per kg fertilizer]
FERTILISER
Nitrogen fertiliser
field emissions [g CO2eq per kg fertiliser]
Total annual GHG
emissions [g CO2eq per ha per
year]
Background data
Provided by the GHG
calculator
Annual amount of Emission factor for
Total greenhouse
gas emissions
Feedstock yield [kg feedstock per ha
per year]
Annual GHG
emissions from
cultivation [g CO2eq per kg
feedstock]
=
÷
x
x
x
x
x
Data from
process
Data for
conversion Emissions
Principles of GHG calculation 1
10 15. – 16.04.2014 Author: Susanne Köppen
ifeu - Institut für Energie- und Umweltforschung Heidelberg GmbH
-60 -40 -20 0 20 40 60 80 100
Rapeseed biodiesel
Fossil diesel
Saldo (biodiesel minus diesel)
g CO2 equ. / MJ fuel
Rapeseed biodiesel emits less greenhouse gases than fossil
diesel
Results for rapeseed biodiesel
Principles of GHG calculation 1
11 15. – 16.04.2014 Author: Susanne Köppen
ifeu - Institut für Energie- und Umweltforschung Heidelberg GmbH
Example palm oil biodiesel
Introduction to GHG calculation 1
12 15. – 16.04.2014 Author: Susanne Köppen
ifeu - Institut für Energie- und Umweltforschung Heidelberg GmbH Introdcution to GHG calculation 1
Palm oil
Utilisation in passenger car
Diesel PME
Oil palm plantation
Transport
Ferti - liser
Pesti - cides
Seed - lings
Diesel fuel
Product Process
Extraction , Refining
Natural forest Alternative land use
Palm kernel oil
Press cake
Tensides Tensides
Fodder Soy meal
Fibres & Shells Power Power mix
Empty fruit bunches
Mulch Min.
fertiliser
Reference system
Waste water Biogas Power mix
Utilisation in passenger car
Transport
Convent . Diesel
Refining
Crude oil extraction and
processing
Trans - esterification
Raw Glycerine Chemicals
Palm oil biodiesel
Glycerine
13 15. – 16.04.2014 Author: Susanne Köppen
ifeu - Institut für Energie- und Umweltforschung Heidelberg GmbH
IFEU 2007
Introduction to GHG calculation 1
Greenhouse effect
** Natural forest + typical cultivation
** PME = Palm oil methyl ester = Palm oil biodiesel
-10 -5 0 5 10 15
Convent. diesel
Palm oil biodiesel*
t CO2 equiv. / (ha*a)
Credits Expenditures
Advantage Disadvantage for PME**
Greenhouse effect
Balance
Expenditures: Credits: Fossil equivalent:
Biomass tractor + power
Biomass seedlings
Biomass N-fertiliser
Biomass other auxiliaries
Transport kernels
Credit soy meal
Credit tensides Transport ocean
Process refining
Process transesterification
Foss. equivalent provision
Transport palm oil
Credit chemicals
Foss. equivalent usage
Reference system
N2O field emissions
POME CH4 emissions
Utilisation palm oil
14 15. – 16.04.2014 Author: Susanne Köppen
ifeu - Institut für Energie- und Umweltforschung Heidelberg GmbH Introduction to GHG calculation 1
Source: IFEU 2007
Greenhouse effect
Greenhouse effect
** Natural forest + typical cultivation
** PME = Palm oil methyl ester = Palm oil biodiesel
-10 -5 0 5 10 15
Convent. diesel
Palm oil biodiesel*
t CO2 equiv. / (ha*a)
Credits Expenditures
Advantage Disadvantage for PME**
Balance
Expenditures: Credits: Fossil equivalent:
Biomass tractor + power
Biomass seedlings
Biomass N-fertiliser
Biomass other auxiliaries
Transport kernels
Credit soy meal
Credit tensidesTransport ocean
Process refining
Process transesterification
Foss. equivalent provision
Transport palm oil
Credit chemicals
Foss. equivalent usage
Reference system
N2O field emissions
POME CH4 emissions
Utilisation palm oil
Greenhouse effect
** Natural forest + typical cultivation
** PME = Palm oil methyl ester = Palm oil biodiesel
-10 -5 0 5 10 15
Convent. diesel
Palm oil biodiesel*
t CO2 equiv. / (ha*a)
Credits Credits Expenditures Expenditures
Advantage Advantage Disadvantage for PME** Disadvantage for PME**
Balance
Expenditures: Credits: Fossil equivalent:
Biomass tractor + power
Biomass seedlings
Biomass N-fertiliser
Biomass other auxiliaries
Transport kernels
Credit soy meal
Credit tensidesTransport ocean
Process refining
Process transesterification
Foss. equivalent provision
Transport palm oil
Credit chemicals
Foss. equivalent usage
Reference system
N2O field emissions
POME CH4 emissions
Utilisation palm oil
Expenditures: Credits: Fossil equivalent:
Biomass tractor + powerBiomass tractor + power
Biomass seedlingsBiomass seedlings
Biomass N-fertiliserBiomass N-fertiliser
Biomass other auxiliariesBiomass other auxiliaries
Transport kernelsTransport kernels
Credit soy mealCredit soy meal
Credit tensidesCredit tensidesTransport oceanTransport ocean
Process refiningProcess refining
Process transesterificationProcess transesterification
Foss. equivalent provisionFoss. equivalent provision
Transport palm oilTransport palm oil
Credit chemicalsCredit chemicals
Foss. equivalent usageFoss. equivalent usage
Reference systemReference system
N2O field emissionsN2O field emissions
POME CH4 emissionsPOME CH4 emissions
Utilisation palm oilUtilisation palm oil
CO2
CH4
Large influence of land use change and palm oil
production (plantation / palm oil mill management)
15 15. – 16.04.2014 Author: Susanne Köppen
ifeu - Institut für Energie- und Umweltforschung Heidelberg GmbH
Advantages Disadvan-
tages
Large bandwidths of
results:
Different production
systems
Different methods
GHG balances of
different biofuels
Principles of GHG calculation 1
16 15. – 16.04.2014 Author: Susanne Köppen
ifeu - Institut für Energie- und Umweltforschung Heidelberg GmbH
Basis for the comparison of bioenergy and fossil energy
carrier
Different units are possible:
One hectare; tonne biomass; MJ energy carrier
Choice depends on the research goal
E.g. optimised use of land ( hectare)
Optimised use of biomass (e.g. waste; t biomass)
Specifications – functional unit
Principles of GHG calculation 1
17 15. – 16.04.2014 Author: Susanne Köppen
ifeu - Institut für Energie- und Umweltforschung Heidelberg GmbH
RED suggests to take into account: CO2, N2O, CH4
However, many more greenhouse gases exist
(e.g. HFCs, PFCs,..)
Greenhouse gases are converted into CO2 equivalents
based on the global warming potentials (GWPs)
different GWPs suggested by IPCC:
IPCC 2001: 296 (N2O), 23 (CH4)
IPCC 1995: 310 (N2O), 21 (CH4)
IPCC 2007: 298 (N2O), 25 (CH4)
Specifications – greenhouse gases to be considered
Principles of GHG calculation 1
18 15. – 16.04.2014 Author: Susanne Köppen
ifeu - Institut für Energie- und Umweltforschung Heidelberg GmbH
Technical
System to be studied
Specification of main products, co-products, waste
Cut off criteria (e.g. infrastructure)
Geographical
National production versus imports
Global effects of carbon emissions
Time horizon
Reference year for emission balancing
Specifications – system boundaries
Principles of GHG calculation 1
19 15. – 16.04.2014 Author: Susanne Köppen
ifeu - Institut für Energie- und Umweltforschung Heidelberg GmbH
It has to be differentiated between waste and
co- / by-product!
No consistent definition worldwide
Most bioenergy pathways produce by-products:
Rapeseed meal
Palm kernels; palm kernel meal
Molasse
Surplus electricity
Co-/by-products have to be taken into account in LCAs
Specifications – dealing with by-products
Principles of GHG calculation 1
20 15. – 16.04.2014 Author: Susanne Köppen
ifeu - Institut für Energie- und Umweltforschung Heidelberg GmbH Principles of GHG calculation 1
Raw oil
production
Use
Biodiesel
Use
Diesel
Fertiliser
Fuel Pestici.
Cultivation
Transport Extraction
Raffination Processing Glycerine
Convent.
products
Substitution
Chemicals
Rape meal Soy meal
Fallow
Honey
Chem.
glycerine
Thermal
use
Raw oil Rape oil
Diesel Biodiesel
Glycerine
Honey
Allocation
Rapeseed
Rape oil
Biodiesel
Raps -
schrot
Rape meal
%
%
%
Product Equivalent
system Process
Substitution versus allocation
21 15. – 16.04.2014 Author: Susanne Köppen
ifeu - Institut für Energie- und Umweltforschung Heidelberg GmbH
Use of by-products replaces other products and thus save
GHG emissions
E.g. rapeseed meal replaces soy meal; glycerine replaces
chemicals
By-products can be used in different ways and thus lead
to different savings:
Rapeseed meal as animal feed (replaces soy beans) or for
electricity production (replaces fossil grid electricity)
Interesting from a scientific point of view as it shows the
influences on system
Difficult to use for regulatory purpose as hard to
supervise and leads to very different results
Substitution method
Introduction to GHG calculation 1
22 15. – 16.04.2014 Author: Susanne Köppen
ifeu - Institut für Energie- und Umweltforschung Heidelberg GmbH
GHG emissions are divided between the main product and
co-products
Part of the emissions „leave“ the system
Different references possible: lower heating value, prices,
mass
Easier to be implemented in regulatory purposes
Allocation
Introduction to GHG calculation 1
23 15. – 16.04.2014 Author: Susanne Köppen
ifeu - Institut für Energie- und Umweltforschung Heidelberg GmbH
Example on allocation
Introduction to GHG calculation 1
Cultivation
Product 1
Processing
Product
2
Co-
product
1 g CO2eq
5 g CO2eq
Processing
Final
product
Co-
product 6 g CO2eq
2 MJ/kg = 67%
1 MJ/kg = 33 %
2 MJ/kg =33%
4 MJ/kg = 67 %
2 g CO2eq
4 g CO2eq
3.31 g CO2eq
6.71g CO2eq
6 g
10 g CO2eq
24 15. – 16.04.2014 Author: Susanne Köppen
ifeu - Institut für Energie- und Umweltforschung Heidelberg GmbH
-3,5 -3,0 -2,5 -2,0 -1,5 -1,0 -0,5 0,0
Substitution
- Techn. glycerine
- Chemicals
- Thermal use
Allocation
- Lower heating value
- Mass
- Market price
t CO2 equ / (ha*a)
Advantages for biodiesel
Bandwidth
IFEU 2007
Allocation versus substitution
Introduction to GHG calculation 1
Greenhouse effect
25 15. – 16.04.2014 Author: Susanne Köppen
ifeu - Institut für Energie- und Umweltforschung Heidelberg GmbH
Content
1 Principles of GHG calculation
2 GHG calculation under the EU RED
3 Overview on GHG calculation tools
4 Introduction to BioGrace
26 15. – 16.04.2014 Author: Susanne Köppen
ifeu - Institut für Energie- und Umweltforschung Heidelberg GmbH
Entered into force in 2009
Renewable energy objectives until 2020:
20 % overall share of renewable energy
10 % renewable energy in transport sector
Objectives:
Mitigation of greenhouse gas emissions
Security of energy supply
Promoting technological development and innovation
Providing opportunities for employment and regional development
Includes sustainability requirements for liquid biofuels
The EU Renewable Energy Directive (RED)
GHG calculation under the EU RED 2
27 15. – 16.04.2014 Author: Susanne Köppen
ifeu - Institut für Energie- und Umweltforschung Heidelberg GmbH
Mandatory for biofuels / bioliquids used for compliance
with 2020 target and benefiting from national support
schemes
Apply to ALL feedstocks entering the EU market (produced
inside and outside the Community)
Mainly covering environmental aspects
Implementation:
Independent auditors must check information
Can be part of voluntary certification schemes (to be approved by
Commission)
The RED sustainability requirements
GHG calculation under the EU RED 2
28 15. – 16.04.2014 Author: Susanne Köppen
ifeu - Institut für Energie- und Umweltforschung Heidelberg GmbH
The RED sustainability requirements
GHG calculation under the EU RED 2
Mandatory criteria
- Greenhouse gas emission
saving shall be at least 35 %
(50 % after 2017)
- Not from areas with high
biodiversity value (e.g.
grassland, primary forests)
- Not from areas with high
carbon stocks (forests,
peatland)
Criteria to be reported
- Availability of food at
affordable prices (in
particular in developing
countries)
- Land use rights
- Implementation of ILO criteria
- Cartagena Protocol on
Biosafety
- Convention on International
Trade in Endangered Species
of Wild Fauna and Flora
29 15. – 16.04.2014 Author: Susanne Köppen
ifeu - Institut für Energie- und Umweltforschung Heidelberg GmbH
RED Annex V provides
default values (overall and disaggregated) and
methodological rules for own calculations
(„actual values“)
Economic operators may use
default values or
actual values calculated according to Annex V or
the sum of actual value and disaggregated default values.
Rules on whether default values may be used
e.g. land use change
The RED sustainability requirements
GHG calculation under the EU RED 2
30 15. – 16.04.2014 Author: Susanne Köppen
ifeu - Institut für Energie- und Umweltforschung Heidelberg GmbH GHG calculation under the EU RED 2
Rules for using
actual and
default values
31 15. – 16.04.2014 Author: Susanne Köppen
ifeu - Institut für Energie- und Umweltforschung Heidelberg GmbH
For making actual GHG calculations, you need:
1. A methodology / rules
2. Data from the process,
such as yield of feedstock, input of fertilisers, efficiency of
conversion plant, natural gas and electricity input etc. etc.
3. Numbers/coefficients to convert data into GHG emissions
4. Data/numbers for the reference process
Important to understand:
LCA studies can be complicated and time-consuming
GHG calculations under RED are to some extend pragmatic, a
number of assumptions have been made
Making actual calculations
GHG calculation under the EU RED 2
32 15. – 16.04.2014 Author: Susanne Köppen
ifeu - Institut für Energie- und Umweltforschung Heidelberg GmbH
eee: combined with ep
1. The methodology (Annex V.C)
GHG calculations under the EU RED 2
eu: zero for biofuels and bioliquids (V.C.13)
eec, ep, etd = basic „disaggregated default values“
el and esca : following the decision 2010/335/EU
eeccs/ccr: very scarcely applied
33 15. – 16.04.2014 Author: Susanne Köppen
ifeu - Institut für Energie- und Umweltforschung Heidelberg GmbH
Cultivation
Processing step 1
Transport raw material
Direct land-use change
Processing step 2
Transport intermediate product
Filling station
Transport biofuel
el
eec
eep
eep
etd
etd
etd
etd
eep
etd
el
eec
esca
1. The methodology (Annex V.C)
GHG calculations under the EU RED 2
34 15. – 16.04.2014 Author: Susanne Köppen
ifeu - Institut für Energie- und Umweltforschung Heidelberg GmbH
Functional unit: gram CO2eq per MJbiofuel
Emissions from cultivation (eec) include emissions from
Cultivation, collection of raw material, waste / leakages
Production of chemicals or products used in extraction or
cultivation
Gives an approach how to calculate el
Application of a bonus (29 g CO2eq /MJ ) if production took
place on degraded or contaminated land
Up to now no criteria / definitions for this type of land usually
not applied in practice
1. The methodology (Annex V.C)
GHG calculations under the EU RED
2
35 15. – 16.04.2014 Author: Susanne Köppen
ifeu - Institut für Energie- und Umweltforschung Heidelberg GmbH
1. The methodology (Annex V.C)
Emissions from processing (ep) include emissions from
Processing itself, waste / leakages
Production of chemicals or products used in processing
GHG emission intensity for external electricity has to be
taken into account
Emissions from infrastructure is not taken into account
Emissions from transport (etd) include emissions from
Transport and storage of semi-finished material
Storage and distribution of final material
Emissions from fuel in use (eu) shall be zero for biofuels /
bioliquids
GHG calculations under the EU RED
2
36 15. – 16.04.2014 Author: Susanne Köppen
ifeu - Institut für Energie- und Umweltforschung Heidelberg GmbH
1. The methodology (Annex V.C)
Emission savings from excess electricity from
cogeneration (eee)
When co-products occur (e.g. palm kernels), allocation
based on lower heating value shall be applied
Wastes and residues are assumed to have zero GHG
emissions up to their point of collection
Provides GWPs for N2O (296) and CH4 (23)
Fossil fuel comparators:
83.8 g CO2eq / MJ for transport fuels
91 / 77 g CO2eq / MJ for electricity / heat production
GHG calculations under the EU RED
2
37 15. – 16.04.2014 Author: Susanne Köppen
ifeu - Institut für Energie- und Umweltforschung Heidelberg GmbH
For making GHG calculations, you need:
1. A methodology / rules
2. Data from the process,
such as yield of feedstock, input of fertilisers, efficiency of
conversion plant, natural gas and electricity input etc. etc.
3. Numbers/coefficients to convert data into GHG emissions
4. Data/numbers for the reference process
Important to understand:
LCA studies can be complicated and time-consuming
GHG calculations under RED are to some extend pragmatic, a
number of assumptions have been made
Making actual calculations
GHG calculations under the EU RED 2
38 15. – 16.04.2014 Author: Susanne Köppen
ifeu - Institut für Energie- und Umweltforschung Heidelberg GmbH
Data for actual calculation
Data from process
(e.g. yields, fertiliser)
Data for conversion
(e.g. heating values,
emission factors)
X Greenhouse gas
emissions =
GHG calculations under the EU RED
2
39 15. – 16.04.2014 Author: Susanne Köppen
ifeu - Institut für Energie- und Umweltforschung Heidelberg GmbH
2. Data from the process
In this workshop further called “input data”
For example
amount of natural gas and electricity consumed in a biofuel
production plant over a given time span
Yield of a crop and input of fertilisers, pesticides etc over a given
time span
GHG calculations under the EU RED
2
40 15. – 16.04.2014 Author: Susanne Köppen
ifeu - Institut für Energie- und Umweltforschung Heidelberg GmbH
3. Numbers/coefficients to convert data into GHG
emissions
For instance:
Emission coefficients (eg gram CO2/CH4/N2O per MJ natural gas)
Lower heating values (MJ/kg)
Densities (kg/litre)
Transport efficiencies (MJ fuel per ton per km)
Emissions of CH4 and N2O for boilers, CHP’s (gram per
MJ steam), trucks and ships (gram per ton per km)
In GHG calculation tools these numbers/coefficients
are assumed to be “fixed” or “standard”
In this workshop further called “standard values”
GHG calculations under the EU RED
2
41 15. – 16.04.2014 Author: Susanne Köppen
ifeu - Institut für Energie- und Umweltforschung Heidelberg GmbH
4. Data/numbers for the reference process
Are defined in RED Annex V.C.19
83.8 g CO2eq / MJ for transport fuels
91 / 77 g CO2eq / MJ for electricity / heat production
Reference values will change when the RED Annex is
updated (in the course of 2014)
GHG calculations under the EU RED
2
42 15. – 16.04.2014 Author: Susanne Köppen
ifeu - Institut für Energie- und Umweltforschung Heidelberg GmbH
Content
1 Principles of GHG calculation
2 GHG calculation under the EU RED
3 Overview on GHG calculation tools
4 Introduction to BioGrace
43 15. – 16.04.2014 Author: Susanne Köppen
ifeu - Institut für Energie- und Umweltforschung Heidelberg GmbH
Must lead to transparent and unambiguous results
RED provides methodology
But:
RED methodology leaves room for interpretation
No background data
Functional unit is difficult to be put into practice
Biofuel operators are no scientists!
GHG calculations for regulative purpose
Overview on GHG calculation tools
3
44 15. – 16.04.2014 Author: Susanne Köppen
ifeu - Institut für Energie- und Umweltforschung Heidelberg GmbH
Lack of background data
Overview on GHG calculation tools
3
Input data
(e.g. yields, fertiliser)
Standard values
(e.g. heating values,
emission factors)
X Greenhouse gas
emissions =
Different factors may lead to different results!
This causes a problem using actual GHG values
Auditors can not check if standard values are correct
Economic operations can enhance the GHG performance of their
biofuel without decreasing actual GHG emissions
45 15. – 16.04.2014 Author: Susanne Köppen
ifeu - Institut für Energie- und Umweltforschung Heidelberg GmbH
Calculations with two different tools (BioGrace, RSB) Both apply the RED methodology
Calculation of 4 pathways Ethanol from wheat
Ethanol from sugar cane
Biodiesel from rapeseed
Biodiesel from pam oil
Same input data have been used in both tools
Biofuel greenhouse gas calculations under the European Renewable Energy Directive – A comparison of the BioGrace tool vs. the tool of the Roundtable on Sustainable Biofuels Applied Energy, In Press, Corrected Proof, Available online 12 May 2012 Anna M. Hennecke, Mireille Faist, Jürgen Reinhardt, Victoria Junquera, John Neeft, Horst Fehrenbach
Comparison of GHG calculations
Overview on GHG calculation tools
3
46 15. – 16.04.2014 Author: Susanne Köppen
ifeu - Institut für Energie- und Umweltforschung Heidelberg GmbH
Hennecke et al. 2012
Comparison of GHG calculation
Overview on GHG calculation tools
3
Reason for
deviation:
• Different emission
factors
• Different
methodologies (N2O
field emissions)
• Different
interpretation of
land use categories
47 15. – 16.04.2014 Author: Susanne Köppen
ifeu - Institut für Energie- und Umweltforschung Heidelberg GmbH
Different results from same biofuel (same input values but
different standard values)
Why harmonisation of GHG calculations?
3
Standard values Unit Source
EC (RED Netherlands UK Germany
Annex V) (Ecofys / CE) RFA IFEU
Nitrogen Fertilizer g CO 2eq /kg 5917,2 6367,0 6800,0 6410
P fertilizer g CO 2eq /kg 1013,5 700,0 354 for TSP, 95 for
rock phosphate,
596 for MAP
1180
K fertilizer g CO 2eq /kg 579,2 453,0 333,0 663
CaO fertilizer (85%CaCO3+15%CaO,Ca(OH)2) g CO 2eq /kg 130,0 179,0 124,0 297
Pesticides g CO 2eq /kg 11025,7 17256,8 17300,0 1240
Diesel (direct plus indirect emissions) g CO 2eq /MJ 87,6 76,7 86,4 89,1
Natural gas (direct plus indirect emissions) g CO 2eq /MJ 68,0 53,9 62,0 62,8
Methanol (direct plus indirect emissions) g CO 2eq /MJ 98,1 137,5 138,5 62,5
Overview on GHG calculation tools
48 15. – 16.04.2014 Author: Susanne Köppen
ifeu - Institut für Energie- und Umweltforschung Heidelberg GmbH
Biofuel Greenhouse Gas emissions:
alignment of calculations in Europe
Aim of project:
Harmonise calculations of biofuel greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions
performed in EU-27 under legislation implementing
the Renewable Energy and Fuel Quality directives
Project BioGrace
3 Overview on GHG calculation tools
49 15. – 16.04.2014 Author: Susanne Köppen
ifeu - Institut für Energie- und Umweltforschung Heidelberg GmbH
Cause transparency
Reproduce biofuel default GHG values (Annex V RED)
Cause harmonization
Cause that GHG calculation tools give the same results
Facilitate stakeholders
Allow relevant stakeholders to calculate actual values
Disseminate results
Make our results public to all relevant stakeholders
Key objectives
3 Overview on GHG calculation tools
50 15. – 16.04.2014 Author: Susanne Köppen
ifeu - Institut für Energie- und Umweltforschung Heidelberg GmbH
Excel-based calculation sheet
User manual
Calculation rules
BioGrace has been recognized by the European
Commission
only recognized GHG calculation tool at European level
can be used by certification systems
Outcomes of the BioGrace project
3 Overview on GHG calculation tools
51 15. – 16.04.2014 Author: Susanne Köppen
ifeu - Institut für Energie- und Umweltforschung Heidelberg GmbH
Harmonisation – One list of standard values
Overview on GHG calculation tools
3
Version 3 - Public
Condensed list of standard values, version 3 - Public
This file gives the standard values as published on www.biograce.net in Word format.
Two Word versions of this list exist:
1. A complete list of standard values, containing all the values as listed in the Excel version
2. A condensed list showing the most important standard values
This file contains the condensed list.
Abbreviations and definitions used can be found in the Excel file on the web page
http://www.biograce.net/content/ghgcalculationtools/standardvalues.
1 Global Warming potentials
CO2 1 g CO2,eq / g CO2
CH4 23 g CO2,eq / g CH4
N2O 296 g CO2,eq / g N2O
2 GHG emission coefficients
N-fertiliser 5880,6 g CO2,eq/kg N
P2O5-fertiliser 1010,7 g CO2,eq/kg P2O5
K2O-fertiliser 576,1 g CO2,eq/kg K2O
CaO-fertiliser 129,5 g CO2,eq/kg CaO
STANDARD VALUES LHV
parameter: Density MJ/kg
unit: gCO2/kg gCH4/kg gN2O/kg gCO2-eq/kg gCO2/MJ gCH4/MJ gN2O/MJ gCO2-eq/MJ MJfossil/kg MJfossil/MJ kg/m3 (at 0% water) MJ/t.km gCH4/t.km gN2O/t.km
Global Warming Potentials (GWP's)
CO2 1
CH4 23
N2O 296
Agro inputs
N-fertiliser 2827,0 8,68 9,6418 5880,6 48,99
P2O5-fertiliser 964,9 1,33 0,0515 1010,7 15,23
K2O-fertiliser 536,3 1,57 0,0123 576,1 9,68
CaO-fertiliser 119,1 0,22 0,0183 129,5 1,97
Pesticides 9886,5 25,53 1,6814 10971,3 268,40
Seeds- corn - - - - -
Seeds- rapeseed 412,1 0,91 1,0028 729,9 7,87
Seeds- soy bean - - - - -
Seeds- sugarbeet 2187,7 4,60 4,2120 3540,3 36,29
Seeds- sugarcane 1,6 0,00 0,0000 1,6 0,02
Seeds- sunflower 412,1 0,91 1,0028 729,9 7,87
Seeds- wheat 151,1 0,28 0,4003 275,9 2,61
EFB compost (palm oil) 0,0 0,00 0,0000 0,0 0,00
Fuels- gasses
Natural gas (4000 km, Russian NG quality) 61,58 0,1981 0,0002 66,20 1,1281
Natural gas (4000 km, EU Mix qualilty) 62,96 0,1981 0,0002 67,59 1,1281
Fuels- liquids
Diesel 87,64 - - 87,64 1,16 832 43,1
Gasoline 745 43,2
HFO 84,98 - - 84,98 1,088 970 40,5
Ethanol 794 26,81
Methanol 92,80 0,2900 0,0003 99,57 1,6594 793 19,9
FAME 890 37,2
Syn diesel (BtL) 780 44,0
HVO 780 44,0
Fuels / feedstock / byproducts - solids
Hard coal 102,38 0,3835 0,0003 111,28 1,0886 26,5
Lignite 116,76 0,0091 0,0001 116,98 1,0156 9,2
Corn 18,5
FFB 24,0
Rapeseed 26,4
Soybeans 23,5
Sugar beet 16,3
Sugar cane 19,6
Sunflowerseed 26,4
Wheat 17,0
Animal fat 37,1
BioOil (byproduct FAME from waste oil) 21,8
Crude vegetable oil 36,0
DDGS 16,0
Glycerol 16,0
Palm kernel meal 17,0
GHG emission coefficient
Fuel
efficiency
Transport exhaust gas
emissionsFossil energy input
52 15. – 16.04.2014 Author: Susanne Köppen
ifeu - Institut für Energie- und Umweltforschung Heidelberg GmbH
List of standard values
is publicly available
European Commission makes reference to list
Several Member States use the list in national legislation
When motivated, other standard values can be used
Different rules have to be followed
Harmonisation – One list of standard values
3 Overview on GHG calculation tools
53 15. – 16.04.2014 Author: Susanne Köppen
ifeu - Institut für Energie- und Umweltforschung Heidelberg GmbH
Have to be applied when making actual calculations with
BioGrace for compliance with the RED
Fill definition gaps in the RED methodology
Harmonisation – calculation rules
3 Overview on GHG calculation tools
54 15. – 16.04.2014 Author: Susanne Köppen
ifeu - Institut für Energie- und Umweltforschung Heidelberg GmbH
More tools have been published for calculate for RED:
RSB: Link to RSB tool
National calculators
German tool: Link to German tool
Spanish tool: Link to Spanish tool
UK tool: Link to UK tool
Bonsucro and RBSA tools are not public (yet)
RSPO palm oil calculator
Other tools
Overview on GHG calculation tools
3
55 15. – 16.04.2014 Author: Susanne Köppen
ifeu - Institut für Energie- und Umweltforschung Heidelberg GmbH
There are at least three reasons:
Some tools already existed before BioGrace was made with the
aim to harmonise calculations
We could not use one of the existing tools for building the
BioGrace tool:
The owners of the other tools would not have agreed
We wanted a transparent excel-based tool, the other tools were
not Excel based and/or not fully transparent
The other tools serve different uses (next sheet)
Why are there so many tools?
3 Overview on GHG calculation tools
56 15. – 16.04.2014 Author: Susanne Köppen
ifeu - Institut für Energie- und Umweltforschung Heidelberg GmbH
Links to national biofuel regulation and/or reporting
system (German tool, UK tool)
Allows to use detailed agricultural data (NUTS-4) in
calculations (Spanish tool)
Allows calculations under different methodologies (RSB
tool, both RSB methodology and RED methodology)
To become EC voluntary scheme (BioGrace, others might
follow)
Different uses of tools
Overview on GHG calculation tools
3
57 15. – 16.04.2014 Author: Susanne Köppen
ifeu - Institut für Energie- und Umweltforschung Heidelberg GmbH
BioGrace aimed to harmonise the national tools
This harmonisation has been realised by (1) using the same
standard values and (2) updating calculations (see next slide)
Bonsucro, RBSA and RSB tools have not been part of this
harmonisation approach
BioGrace and RSB tools give different results (as shown
above)
Do these tools give the same results?
Overview on GHG calculation tools
3
58 15. – 16.04.2014 Author: Susanne Köppen
ifeu - Institut für Energie- und Umweltforschung Heidelberg GmbH
Results from harmonisation
Table A RED Annex
V/FQD Annex IV Diferences with BIOGRACE tool Diferences with default value
Biofuel production pathways Default value
The
Netherlands
ANL
Germany
IFEU
Spain
CIEMAT UK
The
Netherlands
ANL
Germany
IFEU
Spain
CIEMAT UK
Ethanol wheat lignite 70 0,0 0,0 -0,1 0,0 -0,2 -0,1 -0,3 -0,1
Ethanol wheat (proces fuel not specified) 70 0,0 0,0 -0,1 0,1 -0,2 -0,1 -0,3 0,0
Ethanol wheat (natural gas - steam boiler) 55 0,0 0,0 0,0 0,0 -0,4 -0,1 -0,4 -0,1
Ethanol wheat (natural gas - CHP) 44 0,0 0,2 0,0 0,0 0,1 0,5 0,1 0,3
Ethanol wheat (straw) 26 0,0 0,0 0,0 -0,6 0,0 0,1 0,0 -0,5
Ethanol corn 43 0,0 0,2 0,0 0,0 0,4 0,8 0,4 0,6
Ethanol sugarbeet 40 0,0 0,0 0,6 -0,2 0,1 0,3 0,7 0,1
Ethanol from sugarcane 24 0,0 0,0 -0,2 -0,1 0,0 0,3 -0,2 0,2
Biodiesel rape seed 52 0,0 -0,5 0,0 -0,1 -0,3 -0,5 -0,3 -0,1
Biodiesel palm oil 68 0,0 0,3 -0,1 -0,2 -2,0 1,0 -2,1 0,5
Biodiesel palm oil (methane capture) 37 0,1 0,4 -0,2 -0,1 0,0 0,5 -0,3 0,0
Biodiesel soy 58 0,1 0,0 0,1 -0,2 -1,0 -0,8 -1,0 -1,0
Biodiesel sunflower 41 0,0 -0,4 0,0 -0,1 -0,4 -0,6 -0,4 -0,3
Biodiesel UCO 14 0,0 0,0 7,3 7,3
PVO rape seed 36 0,0 0,0 0,1 -0,1 -0,1 0,1 0,0 0,0
HVO rape seed 44 0,0 0,1 -0,1 0,2 0,3 0,4
HVO palm oil 62 0,0 0,0 -0,1 -3,1 -3,1 -0,5
HVO palm oil (methane capture) 29 0,0 0,0 -0,1 0,0 0,0 0,0
HVO sunflower 32 0,0 0,0 0,0 0,7 0,7 0,9
Biogas - dry manure 15 0,0 0,0 0,0 -2,1 -2,1 -0,8
Biogas - wet manure 16 0,0 -0,2 0,0 -1,6 -1,8 -0,3
Biogas - Municipal organic waste. 23 0,0 0,0 -0,1 -1,6 -1,6 -0,4
Corn-to-Ethanol pathway: JEC has used a different electricity mix for the credit of the NG CHP (EU electricity mix instead of electricity from a NG CCGT )
Waste-Oil-to-FAME pathway: The CO2 from natural gas combustion has been forgotten to insert into the process. In later versions JRC/LBST corrected this.
But in the version used for the RED the wrong number has been used. Therefore it is not possible to get the same number as in RED without making the same error."
Do these tools give the same results?
Overview on GHG calculation tools
3
59 15. – 16.04.2014 Author: Susanne Köppen
ifeu - Institut für Energie- und Umweltforschung Heidelberg GmbH
Content
1 Principles of GHG calculation
2 GHG calculation under the EU RED
3 Overview on GHG calculation tools
4 Introduction to BioGrace
60 15. – 16.04.2014 Author: Susanne Köppen
ifeu - Institut für Energie- und Umweltforschung Heidelberg GmbH
Includes all pathways for which RED-default values exist
One calculation sheet per pathway
Easy directing to other sheets
Directory
Introduction to BioGrace 4
61 15. – 16.04.2014 Author: Susanne Köppen
ifeu - Institut für Energie- und Umweltforschung Heidelberg GmbH
The Biograce rules must be followed
The Global Warming Potentials as given in RED
Track changes must be switched on:
Highlights all changes
Shows editor’s name and old values in the comment field
When actual calculations are done
4
Calculations in this Excel sheet……
As explained in "About" under "Inconsistent use of GWP's"
follow JEC calculations by using GWP
values 25 for CH4 and 298 for N2O
strictly follow the methodology as given in
Directives 2009/28/EC and 2009/30/EC
Introduction to BioGrace
62 15. – 16.04.2014 Author: Susanne Köppen
ifeu - Institut für Energie- und Umweltforschung Heidelberg GmbH
Steps from cultivation to filling station
Introduction to BioGrace
4
The aggregation on top
63 15. – 16.04.2014 Author: Susanne Köppen
ifeu - Institut für Energie- und Umweltforschung Heidelberg GmbH
Indication of actual (A) and default values (D)
4 Introduction to BioGrace
64 15. – 16.04.2014 Author: Susanne Köppen
ifeu - Institut für Energie- und Umweltforschung Heidelberg GmbH
Cultivation eec
Introduction to BioGrace
4
Cultivation of rapeseed Quantity of product Calculated emissions
Yield Yield Emissions per MJ FAME
Rapeseed 3.113 kg ha-1
year-1
73.975 MJRapeseed ha-1
year-1
g CO2 g CH4 g N2O g CO2, eq
Moisture content 10,0% 1,000 MJ / MJRapeseed, input
By-product Straw n/a kg ha-1
year-1
0,073 kgRapeseed/MJFAME
Energy consumption
Diesel 2.963 MJ ha-1
year-1
6,07 0,00 0,00 6,07
Agro chemicals
N-fertiliser (kg N) 137,4 kg N ha-1
year-1
9,08 0,03 0,03 19,00
CaO-fertiliser (kg CaO) 19,0 kg CaO ha-1
year-1
0,05 0,00 0,00 0,06
K2O-fertiliser (kg K2O) 49,5 kg K2O ha-1
year-1
0,62 0,00 0,00 0,67
P2O5-fertiliser (kg P2O5) 33,7 kg P2O5 ha-1
year-1
0,76 0,00 0,00 0,80
Pesticides 1,2 kg ha-1
year-1
0,28 0,00 0,00 0,32
Seeding material
Seeds- rapeseed 6 kg ha-1
year-1
0,06 0,00 0,00 0,10
Field N2O emissions 3,10 kg ha-1
year-1
0,00 0,00 0,07 21,61
Total 16,92 0,03 0,10 48,63
Result g CO2,eq / MJFAME 48,63
fill in actual data
65 15. – 16.04.2014 Author: Susanne Köppen
ifeu - Institut für Energie- und Umweltforschung Heidelberg GmbH Introduction to BioGrace
4
Yield
Rapeseed 3.113 kg ha-1
year-1
Moisture content 10,0%
By-product Straw n/a kg ha-1
year-1
Energy consumption
Diesel 2.963 MJ ha-1
year-1
Agro chemicals
N-fertiliser (kg N) 137,4 kg N ha-1
year-1
CaO-fertiliser (kg CaO) 19,0 kg CaO ha-1
year-1
K2O-fertiliser (kg K2O) 49,5 kg K2O ha-1
year-1
P2O5-fertiliser (kg P2O5) 33,7 kg P2O5 ha-1
year-1
Pesticides 1,2 kg ha-1
year-1
Seeding material
Seeds- rapeseed 6 kg ha-1
year-1
Field N2O emissions 3,10 kg ha-1
year-1
fill in actual data
Separate
calculation sheet
66 15. – 16.04.2014 Author: Susanne Köppen
ifeu - Institut für Energie- und Umweltforschung Heidelberg GmbH
Cultivation eec
Introduction to BioGrace
4
Cultivation of rapeseed Quantity of product Calculated emissions
Yield Yield Emissions per MJ FAME
Rapeseed 3.113 kg ha-1
year-1
73.975 MJRapeseed ha-1
year-1
g CO2 g CH4 g N2O g CO2, eq
Moisture content 10,0% 1,000 MJ / MJRapeseed, input
By-product Straw n/a kg ha-1
year-1
0,073 kgRapeseed/MJFAME
Energy consumption
Diesel 2.963 MJ ha-1
year-1
6,07 0,00 0,00 6,07
Agro chemicals
N-fertiliser (kg N) 137,4 kg N ha-1
year-1
9,08 0,03 0,03 19,00
CaO-fertiliser (kg CaO) 19,0 kg CaO ha-1
year-1
0,05 0,00 0,00 0,06
K2O-fertiliser (kg K2O) 49,5 kg K2O ha-1
year-1
0,62 0,00 0,00 0,67
P2O5-fertiliser (kg P2O5) 33,7 kg P2O5 ha-1
year-1
0,76 0,00 0,00 0,80
Pesticides 1,2 kg ha-1
year-1
0,28 0,00 0,00 0,32
Seeding material
Seeds- rapeseed 6 kg ha-1
year-1
0,06 0,00 0,00 0,10
Field N2O emissions 3,10 kg ha-1
year-1
0,00 0,00 0,07 21,61
Total 16,92 0,03 0,10 48,63
Result g CO2,eq / MJFAME 48,63
fill in actual data
conversion factors
yield related
67 15. – 16.04.2014 Author: Susanne Köppen
ifeu - Institut für Energie- und Umweltforschung Heidelberg GmbH
Cultivation eec
Introduction to BioGrace
4
Cultivation of rapeseed Quantity of product Calculated emissions
Yield Yield Emissions per MJ FAME
Rapeseed 3.113 kg ha-1
year-1
73.975 MJRapeseed ha-1
year-1
g CO2 g CH4 g N2O g CO2, eq
Moisture content 10,0% 1,000 MJ / MJRapeseed, input
By-product Straw n/a kg ha-1
year-1
0,073 kgRapeseed/MJFAME
Energy consumption
Diesel 2.963 MJ ha-1
year-1
6,07 0,00 0,00 6,07
Agro chemicals
N-fertiliser (kg N) 137,4 kg N ha-1
year-1
9,08 0,03 0,03 19,00
CaO-fertiliser (kg CaO) 19,0 kg CaO ha-1
year-1
0,05 0,00 0,00 0,06
K2O-fertiliser (kg K2O) 49,5 kg K2O ha-1
year-1
0,62 0,00 0,00 0,67
P2O5-fertiliser (kg P2O5) 33,7 kg P2O5 ha-1
year-1
0,76 0,00 0,00 0,80
Pesticides 1,2 kg ha-1
year-1
0,28 0,00 0,00 0,32
Seeding material
Seeds- rapeseed 6 kg ha-1
year-1
0,06 0,00 0,00 0,10
Field N2O emissions 3,10 kg ha-1
year-1
0,00 0,00 0,07 21,61
Total 16,92 0,03 0,10 48,63
Result g CO2,eq / MJFAME 48,63
fill in actual data
conversion factors
yield related
multiplying input values
with “standard values“
68 15. – 16.04.2014 Author: Susanne Köppen
ifeu - Institut für Energie- und Umweltforschung Heidelberg GmbH
Cultivation eec
Introduction to BioGrace
4
Info
per kg rapeseed per ha, year
g CO2, eq kg CO2, eq
83,40 259,7
261,19 813,2
0,79 2,5
9,20 28,6
10,96 34,1
4,36 13,6
1,41 4,4
296,99 924,7
668,31 2080,7
g CO2, eq
6,07
19,00
0,06
0,67
0,80
0,32
0,10
21,61
48,63
48,63
Cultivation of rapeseed
Yield
Rapeseed
Moisture content
By-product Straw
Energy consumption
Diesel
Agro chemicals
N-fertiliser (kg N)
CaO-fertiliser (kg CaO)
K2O-fertiliser (kg K2O)
P2O5-fertiliser (kg P2O5)
Pesticides
Seeding material
Seeds- rapeseed
Field N2O emissions
Results related to
raw material or acreage
69 15. – 16.04.2014 Author: Susanne Köppen
ifeu - Institut für Energie- und Umweltforschung Heidelberg GmbH
Processing ep
Introduction to BioGrace
4
Extraction of oil Quantity of product Calculated emissionsYield Emissions per MJ FAME
Crude vegetable oil 0,6125 MJOil / MJRapeseed 44.861 MJOil ha-1
year-1
g CO2 g CH4 g N2O g CO2, eq
By-product Rapeseed cake 0,3875 MJRapeseed cake / MJRapeseed 0,606 MJ / MJRapeseed, input
0,029 kgOil / MJFAME
Energy consumption
Electricity EU mix MV 0,0118 MJ / MJOil 1,47 0,00 0,00 1,58
Steam (from NG boiler) 0,0557 MJ / MJOil
NG Boiler Emissions from NG boiler
CH4 and N2O emissions from NG boiler 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,02
Natural gas input / MJ steam 1,111 MJ / MJSteam
Natural gas (4000 km, EU Mix qualilty)0,062 MJ / MJOil 4,08 0,01 0,00 4,41
Electricity input / MJ steam 0,020 MJ / MJSteam
Electricity EU mix MV 0,001 MJ / MJOil 0,14 0,00 0,00 0,15
Chemicals
n-Hexane 0,0043 MJ / MJOil 0,36 0,00 0,00 0,37
Total 6,06 0,02 0,00 6,53
Result g CO2,eq / MJFAME 6,53
Step 1, oil extraction
fill in actual data
70 15. – 16.04.2014 Author: Susanne Köppen
ifeu - Institut für Energie- und Umweltforschung Heidelberg GmbH
Transport etd
Introduction to BioGrace
4
Transport of FAME to and from depot Quantity of product Calculated emissions
FAME 1,000 MJFAME / MJFAME 42790,9 MJFAME ha-1
year-1
Emissions per MJ FAME
0,578 MJ / MJRapeseed, input g CO2 g CH4 g N2O g CO2, eq
Transport per
Truck for liquids (Diesel) 300 km 0,0047 ton km / MJRapeseed, input 0,71 0,00 0,00 0,71
Fuel Diesel
Energy cons. depot
Electricity EU mix LV 0,00084 MJ / MJFAME 0,10 0,00 0,00 0,11
Result g CO2,eq / MJFAME 0,8225
of FAME
fill in actual data
Filling station Quantity of product
Yield 1,000 MJFAME / MJFAME 42790,9 MJFAME ha-1
year-1
Emissions per MJ FAME
0,578 MJ / MJRapeseed, input g CO2 g CH4 g N2O g CO2, eq
Energy consumption
Electricity EU mix LV 0,0034 MJ / MJFAME 0,41 0,00 0,00 0,44
Result g CO2,eq / MJFAME 0,44
Filling station
71 15. – 16.04.2014 Author: Susanne Köppen
ifeu - Institut für Energie- und Umweltforschung Heidelberg GmbH
Allocation of emissions of product and co-product is done
by energy content (LHV)
Summerised in the overview on top
Allocation
4
Allocation factorsExtraction of oil
61,3% to Rapeseed oil
38,7% to Rapeseed cake
Esterification
95,7% to FAME
4,3% to Refined glycerol
Introduction to BioGrace
72 15. – 16.04.2014 Author: Susanne Köppen
ifeu - Institut für Energie- und Umweltforschung Heidelberg GmbH
Input data
Standard values (“conversion factors”)
Cultivation of rapeseed Calculated emissions
Yield Emissions per MJ FAME
Rapeseed 3.113 kg ha-1
year-1
g CO2 g CH4 g N2O g CO2, eq
Moisture content 10,0%
By-product Straw n/a kg ha-1
year-1
Energy consumption
Diesel 2.963 MJ ha-1
year-1
6,07 0,00 0,00 6,07
Agro chemicals
N-fertiliser 137,4 kg N ha-1
year-1
9,08 0,03 0,03 18,89
CaO-fertiliser 19,0 kg CaO ha-1
year-1
0,05 0,00 0,00 0,06
K2O-fertiliser 49,5 kg K2O ha-1
year-1
0,62 0,00 0,00 0,67
P2O5-fertiliser 33,7 kg P2O5 ha-1
year-1
0,76 0,00 0,00 0,80
Pesticides 1,2 kg ha-1
year-1
0,28 0,00 0,00 0,32
Seeding material
Seeds- rapeseed 6 kg ha-1
year-1
0,06 0,00 0,00 0,10
STANDARD VALUESparameter:
unit: gCO2/kg gCH4/kg gN2O/kg gCO2-eq/kg
N-fertiliser 2827,0 8,68 9,6418 5880,6
GHG emission coefficient
Introduction standard values
Introduction to BioGrace
4
73 15. – 16.04.2014 Author: Susanne Köppen
ifeu - Institut für Energie- und Umweltforschung Heidelberg GmbH
List of standard values
Introduction to BioGrace
4
74 15. – 16.04.2014 Author: Susanne Köppen
ifeu - Institut für Energie- und Umweltforschung Heidelberg GmbH
User defined standard values
4
Fill in user defined standard values in list
Introduction to BioGrace
75 15. – 16.04.2014 Author: Susanne Köppen
ifeu - Institut für Energie- und Umweltforschung Heidelberg GmbH
List of standard values
All values that are needed for calculating the default values
Included in the tool
List of additional standard values
More useful standard values (e.g. mineral fertilizers, conversion
inputs (process chemicals), national electricity grids, solid and
gaseous biomass sources for energy, transport (pipeline))
Available as extra file
Values have to be transferred manually into the BioGrace tool
Lists of standard values
4 Introduction to BioGrace
76 15. – 16.04.2014 Author: Susanne Köppen
ifeu - Institut für Energie- und Umweltforschung Heidelberg GmbH
Rather easy to modify or build new pathways
Own defined standard values and additional standard
values
With track changes on easy to verify
Status
Version 4c has been recognised by EC as Voluntary scheme
Tool is online www.biograce.net
After the updates from EU (with new chains) the tool will be
updated
BioGrace tool - Summary
4 Introduction to BioGrace
77 15. – 16.04.2014 Author: Susanne Köppen
ifeu - Institut für Energie- und Umweltforschung Heidelberg GmbH
LCAs can lead to very different results
Subject to different methodologies used
Subject to different system definitions
Subject to different data used
LCAs used in the regulatory or reporting context require
unambigous results
Methodology has to avoid large bandwidth
Methodology has to be clearly defined
Harmonisation of background data helps in the process
GHG tools exist to assist in calculation
Summary
Introduction to BioGrace
4
78 15. – 16.04.2014 Author: Susanne Köppen
ifeu - Institut für Energie- und Umweltforschung Heidelberg GmbH
Susanne Köppen
ifeu - Institute for energy and
Environmental research Heidelberg GmbH
Wilckensstraße 3
69120 Heidelberg
Germany
Fon: +49 (0) 6221 / 47 67 -0
Fax: +49 (0) 6221 / 47 67 -19
email: susanne.koeppen@ifeu.de
Thank you for your attention
top related