tAL.a. Specified Gas Emitters Regulation y QUANTIFIC/ TION P ROTO SC L FOR Innovative Feeding Of Swine / iND Storing And Spreadii ig Of Swii eMai jf e September 2007 Version 1 /fccstla ENVIRONMENT Pork Protocol Disclaimer: The information provided in this document is intended as guidance only and is subject to revisions as learnings and new information comes forward as part of a commitment to continuous improvement. This document is not a substitute for the law. Please consult the Specified Gas Emitters Regulation and the legislation for all purposes of interpreting and applying the law. In the event that there is a difference between this document and the Specified Gas Emitters Regulation or legislation, the Specified Gas Emitters Regulation or the legislation prevail. Acknowledgements: This protocol is largely based on the Greenhouse Gas System Pork Protocol: The Innovative Feeding of Swine and Storing and Spreading of Swine Manure (Draft) dated July 31, 2006. This work was completed under the Pork Technical Working Group (PTWG), a sub-committee of the National Offsets Quantification Team (NOQT). This work represents the culmination of a multi-stakeholder consultation project and reliance on a number of guidance documents. This document represents an abridged and re-formatted version of this work. Therefore, the seed document remains the source of additional detail on any of the technical elements of the protocol. Any comments, questions, or suggestions regarding the content of this document may be directed to: Environmental Monitoring and Evaluation Alberta Environment 1 1th Floor, Oxbridge Place 9820 - 106th Street Edmonton, Alberta, T5K 2J6 E-mail: AENV.GHG@gov.ab.ca ISBN: 978-0-7785-7236-7 (Printed) ISBN: 978-0-7785-7237-4 (On-line) Copyright in this publication, regardless of format, belongs to Her Majesty the Queen in right of the Province of Alberta. Reproduction of this publication, in whole or in part, regardless of purpose, requires the prior written permission of Alberta Environment. © Her Majesty the Queen in right of the Province of Alberta, 2007 Page i Pork Protocol Table of Contents Table of Contents ii List of Figures ii List of Tables ii 1.0 Project and Methodology Scope and Description 1 1.1 Protocol Scope and Description 1 1.2 Glossary of New Terms 5 2.0 Quantification Development and Justification 9 2. 1 Identification of Sources and Sinks (SS’s) for the Project 9 2.2 Identification of Baseline 14 2.3 Identification of SS’s for the Baseline 14 2.4 Selection of Relevant Project and Baseline SS’s 19 2.5 Quantification of Reductions, Removals and Reversals of Relevant SS’s 23 2.5.1 Quantification Approaches 23 2.5.2. Contingent Data Approaches 36 2.6 Management of Data Quality 36 2.6.1 Record Keeping 36 2.6.1 Quality Assurance/Quality Control (QA/QC) 36 APPENDIX A: 39 Relevant Emission Factor 39 List of Figures FIGURE 1 . 1 Process Flow Diagram for Project Condition 2 FIGURE 1 .2 Process Flow Diagram for Baseline Condition 3 FIGURE 2.1 Project Element Life Cycle Chart 10 FIGURE 2.2 Baseline Element Life Cycle Chart 15 List of Tables TABLE 2.1 Project SS’s 11 TABLE 2.2 Baseline SS’s 16 TABLE 2.3 Comparison of SS’s 20 TABLE 2.4 Quantification Procedures 24 TABLE 2.5 Contingent Data Collection Procedures 37 Page ii Pork Protocol 1 .0 Project and Methodology Scope and Description 1.1 Protocol Scope and Description This quantification protocol is applicable to the quantification of direct and indirect reductions of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions resulting from the implementation of two kinds of innovative practices on swine farms. First, the protocol quantifies GHG reductions achieved by feed substituting practices that decrease emissions. In the feeding component of the Pork Protocol, these practices substitute ingredients in the feed to reduce excretion of volatile solids (VS) by increasing energy digestibility and to reduce excretion of nitrogen (N) by optimizing amino acid balance. In the storing and spreading component, these practices substitute the season and frequency of manure spreading to decrease the conversion of VS to CH4 in storage and to decrease emission of N2O after spreading. Second, the protocol quantifies reductions associated with pig husbandry practices that increase efficiency by generating less manure per unit of pigs raised. These practices reduce manure excretion by decreasing the feed and/or by decreasing the time needed to raise the pigs under project conditions. FIGURE 1.1 offers a process flow diagram for a typical project. The Pork Protocol does not prescribe the efficiency-type practices. Rather, this protocol serves as a generic ‘recipe’ for project proponents to follow in order to meet the measurement, monitoring and GHG quantification requirements. As long as the proponent provides the evidence that less VS and/or N is excreted per unit pig raised, the practice fits within the scope of the Pork Protocol. From both kinds of innovative practices (substitution- and efficiency-type innovations), the total amount of VS and N excreted is decreased, resulting in reduction of CH4 emission from stored manure and in reduction of N20 emission from land receiving manure. The Pork Protocol quantifies emissions reductions on the basis of the pigs raised in the project. Thus, the starting point for all quantification is the number and weight of pigs produced in the project. To calculate the VS and N excretions, the Pork ProtocoLuses baseline pig performance (supplied by the project proponent or taken from sector-level standards) and baseline manure storage and spreading practices (set baseline of fall- emptying) to estimate the excretions that would have occurred if the pigs in the project had been raised under baseline conditions. Then, the recorded feed and sales information and the documented manure management strategy are used to calculate the project condition excretions and emissions. This approach (1) ensures the functional equivalence of the project with the baseline scenario, (2) eliminates the potential for attributing offsets for decreased numbers of pigs raised, and (3) emphasizes the efficiency objective of the Pork Protocol; namely, to encourage practices that decrease GHG emissions per unit weight of pigs raised. FIGURE 1.2 offers a process flow diagram for a typical baseline configuration. Page 1 FIGURE 1.1; Process Flow Diagram for Project Condition a o ■-B w 4h O 4-> (DO C c O O g " (DO - .2 c 1 i •2 § « E ON t Q. — O o- 9- 2- H ° 60 c Ph .2 2 |i s | CN 2 E H £ o 'C o P eo 11 1 g & O ao iJ 3 w p O o lO 2 U a. > 2 ^ E * 2 w ®- a* Q E s 60-2 £ g — ► c o 60 £ £ o > £ o C3 c o 2 — ► 3 O 5 gP KS 2 — ► 2 | 1 1 2 t >_h r i x — ► c "O .2 3 1 E 1 a. (N o. | H Uh VO cu 4> o, o 2 2 on Dh & 2P x) g Oh C 2 05 H on "H. a, & u S 3 H w a s- 2 o 3> CO O 3 ~ 55‘ o u> es- P r/i 1 ® 2 to 3 ^ cn' C/1 o o S> 03 tfl ^ XI £ H ►£5 ° 1 | n> 3 3 CTQ FIGURE 1.2: Process Flow Diagram for Baseline Condition Pork Protocol The boundary of the Pork Protocol encompasses the bam where the pigs are raised, the facility where liquid manure is stored, and the land where the liquid manure is spread. The project may include a number of sites, and a variety of enterprises, but all project farms will address the activities within the boundary of the Pork Protocol. The Pork Protocol implements science- and policy-based principles and decisions that are similar to those implemented in the Pork GHG Project Builder Software™ (“Builder”), distributed by the Canadian Pork Council. Users of the Alberta Pork Protocol may choose to user the Builder to assess opportunities for creating offsets, or to complete the calculations of offsets. However, users must ensure that the assumptions and procedures of the “Builder” match the requirements of the Alberta Pork Protocol. To demonstrate that a project meets the requirements under this protocol, the project proponent must supply sufficient evidence to demonstrate that: 1. All farms in the project are currently feeding swine (farrow, farrow to wean, farrow to finish, nursery, feeder operation) as confirmed by an affirmation from the project proponent; 2. All farms in the project are currently storing liquid manure for a minimum of 9 months as confirmed by an affirmation from the project proponent; 3. All farms in the project are currently applying manure or custom applying manure to land as confirmed by an affirmation from the project proponent; 4. All farms in the project can demonstrate a change in practice in at least one of the Feeding, or Storing and Spreading components of the Pork Protocol. The evidence for change in practice varies with the component of the Pork Protocol: o Feeding component — decreased N and/or VS content in the diets and/or decreased feed consumption per unit pigs sold relative to the project-specific or sector-level baseline. Decreased feed consumption per unit pigs raised may be achieved by a range of practices, including, but not limited to: ■ Split-sex or phase feeding; ■ Wet/dry feeders; ■ Improved ventilation/temperature control in the bam; ■ Improved health status of the swine herd; ■ More efficient genetics; or ■ Additives to improve feed efficiency. o Storing & Spreading component — change to spring or spring-and-fall emptying and spreading, where the baseline for all projects is set as fall emptying. 5. The quantification of reductions achieved by the project is based on actual measurement and monitoring (except where indicated in this protocol) as indicated by the proper application of this protocol; and, Page 4 Pork Protocol 6. The project must meet the requirements for offset eligibility as specified in the applicable regulation and guidance documents for the Alberta Offset System. Flexibility in applying the quantification protocol is provided to project developers in three ways: 1. A project proponent may choose to implement only one component, e.g. practices to reduce methane emissions from manure storage, but they would be required to perform the calculations for the other two components to ensure the net balance of GHG emissions is still positive. This must be shown in the project document; 2. If a farm has both solid and liquid swine manure systems, the feed for pig classes under liquid manure can be split out and applied to the Pork Protocol; 3. Site specific emission factors may be substituted for the generic emission factors indicated in this protocol document. The methodology for generation of these emission factors must be sufficiently robust as to ensure reasonable accuracy; and 4. The Pork Protocol promotes a project- specific baseline (based on real historical data), but allows for selection of a sector-level baseline using regional data for feeding (Livestock Feed Requirements Study 2001). All proponents will use fall spreading as the baseline practice for the storage and spreading component of the Pork Protocol. The Quantification Plan of the Pork Protocol specifies the calculations to be used for each option. Farms that were not operating at the Eligibility Start Date (January 2001) may use their start-up feeding data as a project-specific baseline, or they may choose to use the sector-level feeding baseline to participate in Pork Protocol projects. All Baseline and Project calculations could be made using the Pork GHG Project Builder™ (“Builder”) Software, with the condition that the user ensures the Builder is compatible with the Alberta Pork Protocol. If applicable, the proponent must indicate and justify why flexibility provisions have been used. This quantification protocol is written for the swine farm operator or project proponent. Some familiarity with, or general understanding of, the operation of a swine farming practices is expected. 1 .2 Glossary of New Terms Emptying season The time of year that the manure storage is agitated and emptied, and the manure applied to cropland. In most regions of Canada it is illegal to spread manure on frozen crop or forage lands during the late fall and throughout the winter season. Therefore, the emptying season for the majority of Canadian pig farms will be early spring prior to spring planting, throughout the summer on annual crops or perennial Page 5 Pork Protocol Farrow-to-finish Farrow-to-wean Feeder Feed Efficiency Feed wastage Indoor deep pit forage stands, or throughout the fall following the harvest of annual cereal grains and oilseeds. A term used to describe a pig farm on which animals complete their entire life cycle, from birth to market. Term used to describe a pig farm on which the main product is a 5-25kg pig. These young pigs, known as ‘weaners’ are sold off the farrow-to-wean farm to a finishing operation that would grow the weaners from 5-25 kg to an approximate slaughter market weight of 115 kg. The term for a pig which has reached a total weight of 25 kg or more and is in the final stages of development for a slaughter market. A feeder pig will be marketed at roughly 1 15 kg. For any swine enterprise, feed efficiency is calculated as the total weight of pigs sold divided by the total weight of feed used. In the Pork Protocol, increased feed efficiency (less feed needed to grow the same weight of pigs) is accepted as an indicator of increased energy efficiency. The amount of feed that is wasted by the pigs during the rearing period. Feed wastage usually occurs at the feeding station within the pen area. Feed can be wasted as a result of any number of management practice decisions. For example, if the feeding station is not properly adjusted so that animals have access to excessive quantities of feedstuff, rooting in the feed trough may result in excessive feed wastage, or if the feeders are not properly sized and the animals have to step into the feeder to access the feedstuff high levels of feed wastage can be expected. Indoor deep pit bams are constmcted with deep basements to store liquid slurry that passes through a slatted floor system on which pigs are housed. Manure is not removed from these bams to an external storage on a regular basis. Manure is removed directly from these bams/manure storage structures when manure is being applied to cropland only. Deep pit bams require constant ventilation of the manure storage under the animals to avoid the Page 6 Pork Protocol build-up of potentially lethal manure gases in the bam. Nursery A pig bam designed to house animals from the time they are weaned (about 5 kg) until they reach a sufficient age and weight (25 kg) to be moved into a finishing bam. Nurseries are specially designed to allow pigs need to develop immune responses before being transferred to a finishing facility. Outdoor slurry Outdoor slurry is used to describe a manure storage structure that is outside of the pig bam. Outdoor slurry containment systems generally consist of two types: a round concrete manure storage structure or a rectangular, earthen storage structure. Phase feeding Phase feeding is a management system where the composition of a finishing ration is altered throughout the finishing growth cycle to reflect the deceased requirement by the animals for crude protein. The result is a lower cost of finishing pigs to market weight as sources of crude protein such as soybean meal tend to be one of the more expensive feed ingredients. Additional benefits include reduced nitrogen output in urine and faeces when animals are fed closer to their crude protein requirement and are not required to pass excess nitrogen through their digestive systems. Flushing excess protein (nitrogen) is costly in metabolic energy and increases the amount of water consumed by finishing pigs, increasing the volume of slurry produced on the farm. Split sex feeding A management practice used to increase the feed efficiency of finishing hogs. Barrows and gilts (male and female feeder hogs) require slightly different mineral, protein and energy levels in their rations to achieve their genetic potential for efficient growth. By separating males and females (sexing) prior to the animals populating a feeder bam, it is possible to feed a male ration to the barrows and a female ration to the gilts corresponding to the individual needs of the two animal populations in order to achieve a high level of feed conversion efficiency. Volatile solids The undigested organic portion of feed that is excreted by pigs as manure and is potentially Page 7 Pork Protocol available for conversion into methane during manure storage through natural microbiological processes. Non-volatile solids include any dirt, ash or other inorganic materials that may be contained in hog feed and cannot be converted to methane. Page 8 Pork Protocol 2.0 Quantification Development and Justification The following sections outline the quantification development and justification. 2.1 Identification of Sources and Sinks (SS’s) for the Project SS’s were identified for the project by reviewing the seed protocol document and relevant process flow diagram. This process confirmed that the SS’s in the process flow diagrams covered the full scope of eligible project activities under the protocol. Based on the process flow diagrams provided in FIGURE 1.1, the project SS’s were organized into life cycle categories in FIGURE 2.1. Descriptions of each of the SS’s and their classification as controlled, related or affected are provided in TABLE 2.1. Page 9 FIGURE 2.1: Project Element Life Cycle Chart i Page 10 Page 1 1 v: C CO P CTQ ft H ^ co hr) 33 ft O 3 id K> 33 era H 33 era' 53 o Cl 5= 5 co J TO ft S' §.l " o tfl 8 * § 3 3 ^ S' 3 8 ^ I 8* CTQ ^ ct5 3 *6‘ ft "g ►ft 2 3 3- ft H ■9 ^ 33 <: 33 t* 3 3* ft p ft ft *3 ft o p <3. 12 8 3 *-*- 3 a* Ft £ CT* ft* ^ 2 2 £R* O 3\ S' “ *1 TO < 3. 2 ^ 3 g 8* I' | ft S 2 8. 8 2. ft 30 3 ro CT ft CT* P 3 CO 3. ft CT* 3£ ft 00 2 o 3 p & o- 3* 2* « o 33 ^ 3 3 *3 £ o 3 CO • a S s,» P 2* o s. ft 2 £3 CL TO £ TO CD g H ^ 5' SS ” E 3- 3 2 n' n 2 £ ft 0 2 ft p ^ tr £ft o a'| ft ft CT* 2 p £ c o ft ft ,3 --* era p CO 3 $ o o 3 33 £L 3 5 I ^ 2 H-t CD ll 6 era p 3 CT* w> 3* ft b ft o p 2 o c o « '-‘3* 3 era 2 *3 P 3 co CT ft £- D- ft P X 3 2. ft* P p ft- 3 ft ft 3. 5f fT p a- ft ft* ft o ft 3. < V- p • &* ft ° ft < g P ft ft5 3 ° 2 3 £3 p CO 2 ^ 9 ^ £. *3 < p n5 ^ 2 ft ^ m 3 cl 2- 3 3 P 3 'C TO a* r+ ft £0 ft 3 -ft ►SS e.? *ct a. 3 ft ft O- 3 ~ -- o P rf 3 8“ ft 0 *3 3 1—-1 B <— * • to ft ft .ft ft 3 If ft* n *£ 2. 3 ^ 3 ft I 5' 8 ft o O |-+) § ft St s. 3. CO O p 3 3 CL CL ft ft ft ft* co 3 ft' B ft ft* CT* 2 ^ EJ! 3 CO O 00 ^ y> ct* b 2 2 TO ** ft M *0 g; 3 o *3 Z ° p 8 ?' g ft H 1 ft ft O Qj 2 ^ ft p 2 < £. 3 9. g- ft* fT era 2 ^22 < ft era o -t v- E. 3 a- S £■•§ ^ 3. 3 era ft ft ft O B 3 B ft ft &era era 3. 'C § 5‘ 5 • 35 *3 3 3 O 3^ E 3* ft ft O B ft 3 - *3 3 *TC1 p 2 ^ g. 5‘ 3 ft p 3* ^ ft* CT* ft ft 3 ° I 8* CT* O ft ft -» ft- ft £?> M-) ft 2 ^ 3 3 ft 3 era _ CO O 2- ft P < 3 ft. CL 3* ft 3- ?T ft o 3 2. 3^ o ft /O ft B 3 3 8 ft I 3 3. p p 2 p E 3 wa 3- p 1 ft* I 3 3 ft ft p 3 3 2 a* ft <-h •s: '< 3- ft B* co "§ 3 O to O • ft ?a*6 3 2 3 p 2 hQ ft a ■ ft 3 3 p l'| ft* 3- co' P 2 g -ft *3 3. o ^3 3. 3 ft I O* 2 3^ ft ft O *3 P HJ *3 9 3 o ft --- 3- co -■3' “ ” £3 ft ft S-.q* rr 3 p £ S I 5' 8 ft o o o 3* 3 ™ R* 03 " 03 CT* - p 3 g ft ‘3 3 s ^ 9 q o p * tO £• . ft 3 1 CO • ■ o H -n b* o ft p ft a. ft o> era b rt- ft 3 ^3 3£ 3 O ft O B ft 2 & era 3". *c o ~. -B b y. ft ora era 9 ^ o 1 1 co O 3 c 3 p co 3 o P „ Z 3' 3 o §■ 3 £ CL 3 ft £ era CD ^ § 3 3 S- ft p III o g § ft § ►ft 3- ft 3-' 3 ft 8 -3 ft p 3 3 2 ft* ft t— ►- < 2 S.’Td 3* 8 3 O 3 p v: n> -i p ft ft 31 O ■o ft> >• y o © © a a 3 1 TABLE 2.1: Project SS’s Pork Protocol n li If i Page 12 Page 13 Pork Protocol Pork Protocol 2.2 Identification of Baseline The baseline condition for projects applying this protocol are swine operations that were feeding swine, were storing liquid manure for a minimum of 9 months and/or are currently applying the manure to land. The baseline condition defines the operating conditions at the project farm prior to the change in either or both of the feeding and storage and spreading practises. The baseline for all projects is set as fall emptying as this represents typical industry practise. The approach to quantifying the baseline will be primarily projection based as there are suitable models for the applicable baseline condition that can provide reasonable certainty. However, a performance standard based approach has been integrated for areas where data collection requirements may be impractical or uneconomic. The baseline scenario for this protocol is dynamic as the emissions profile for the baseline activities would be expected to change materially relative to the number of pigs at the project farm. The baseline condition is defined, including the relevant SS’s and processes, as shown in FIGURE 1.2. More detail on each of these SS’s is provided in Section 2.3, below. 2.3 Identification of SS’s for the Baseline Based on the process flow diagrams provided in FIGURE 1.2, the project SS’s were organized into life cycle categories in FIGURE 2.2. Descriptions of each of the SS’s and their classification as either ‘controlled’, ‘related’ or ‘affected’ is provided in TABLE 2.2. Page 15 i l FIGURE 2.2: Baseline Element Life Cycle Chart r I 4 Page 17 Pork Protocol Pork Protocol Page 18 Pork Protocol 2.4 Selection of Relevant Project and Baseline SS’s Each of the SS’s from the project and baseline condition were compared and evaluated as to their relevancy using the guidance provided in Annex VI of the “Guide to Quantification Methodologies and Protocols: Draft”, dated March 2006 (Environment Canada). The justification for the exclusion, or conditions upon which SS’s may be excluded is provided below. All other SS’s listed previously are included. This information is summarized in TABLE 2.3, below. Page 19 a a a 10 "3 a g 2 4h CA G .O z 3 J o a C/2 G _o o a CO G _o 0-1 O o VC Z1 c« C3 1/5 C3 C/5 a I! 3 d G X) d ^ 11 03 a _o 3 D > "S Oh >**% 5 s 3 G a z CD © X C/5 2 C/5 cd 30 a X Z D D X C/2 D l-H 1/2 G bX) D D a C/2 D l-H CO G bfl 2 § 13 X u g o -S 3 X cd 3 CD C/5 G 3o CD cd 3 D C/2 G G 3 D CO G © O l-H D O D O © x f *s ;>> o X o X tj £ © g ‘o' ortation are 2 CD ft CO Sh§ .2 3 x ^ g § ortation are 's' ft © a o X G © © l-H bfl X (D C/5 o o. C/2 G G cd > ft o !h ft C/5 G G cd > ft o G G > ft o c 3 a o «* a g CO .S cd a o _o ' l-H cd C H-H & 3 2 3 x G C D .ss ^ X a o _o ft cd G a 3 ^H 3 ft l-i CD X G cd a o o ’1 G D 3 l-H o ft D X G D 3 l-H o ft D X G o P 8 3 X o G G a CD G G G G a 3 X ft t CO O cd H •o 5 c _o ’c/5 C/3 C/5 D C 13 .2 •=> G X P o 2 Oh X P o x (u a o x 3 1/5 G _o ’&3 C/5 C/5 © _G 3 C/2 O C/5 S "S C/5 CO D _G 3 C/5 D l-H G C/5 oo X D l-H D > O D G CO OO X 2 D > o u a a 2 x a o w> £ 2 D 1) cd X D u g I, 6 CD CD cd X © a 00 (U C/5 © CD 2 cd a D D cd X D 43 VI D C/5 D CD D cd V D CO D CD D G © Oh c« X ^ .2 x a X C/2 CD a X CO D a CO D CO ^ SS 3 l C/5 o C/5 C/5 C/5 O C/2 CO CO CO 03 ~0 *J 03 4 r cd , . cd 'X cd , . G X G X a T3 C C u « u X D c D •a g c CD 2 o X id G a X CD CD 2 X D G a X D CD G X D CD G +* x x g x X 3 X ft X 3 X ft X ft a _2 8 > _g > -2 ,2 ^3 J3 > 3 D J3 > 3 D J3 D x tri S’f w ! ? 3 ft D o X ft 3 cr D x & § pq x o 3 X qq 3 cr o 3 X qq C/2 CD X 3 X pq 'g ct1 D 3 X qq CO D X 3 X ft CO D X - ss j- S .2 o o ^ o D d © CD © (D < ft 3 d 3 ft 3 O d on c? tfl 3 3 g | a § 3 » O d 3 ° |3 S' I P ft) 1—1 o- 2. 3 0 cl o" 1 3 f I 3 g § 3 — 3 * ^ U g g & d ^ v; 2. _, CO 42 crq_ £. < •3 ft) d P CTQ o g oo 3 13 H 00 H IS © 00 d H 00 H d 00 d 00 d 00 d o S3 T* » © VO VO 2 oo 3 00 -4 ov OV VO VO B S' ft •n ^ U> O cn O oo 3 CO co d S g ^ C/3 ^ T3 ^ 3 r r p 3 3 ^ CO HL d p g 2 d g S p 2 p d p o d P ft_ d ft ft d ft ft 2. 3 CO p 3 o EL CfQ o 5T O'. CD o r» 13 d o o ft CO P ads ? g: O' CD o’ 3 ^ O o fD CO O P p £ O'. CD 3 y crq o 3 3 § O'. fD o ha 3 -■ crq ft P 3 05 % CL > d o’ p o’ 3 CL > d •o o’ P o’ 3 O 3 a s 3 3 S’ g 3 S3 ° CL d fD §. £ 3 CD 5' § 3 g. d a> 3 £ ft CO o p crq ft 3 3 R ft 00 o •h P 0q ft z o d ft H p o’ 3 z o d ft p o’ 3 CL C CO ft CL C co ft 02 ce to* n’ n’ 5’ b fD i-i fD crq crq O n o o n 70 o o o o o o z £L z 3 z 3 Z 3 z 3 d z 3 z S' > s > 3 > O > 3 > o^ > O > CL CL 3 3 3 3 3 CL CL CL CL CL o o n n o o o o o o 2- Z ft^ Z 3 Z 3 z 3 Z 3 Z 3 > > > 3 > o > 3 > 3 > 3 CL CL 3 3 3 3 3 CL CL CL CL CL tfl tfl tfl tfl tfl tfl tfl tfl tfl tfl X X X X 3 3 X X 3 3 X X X X o o o ft o o o o o O o o_ o o 3 3 3* 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 CL CL CL CL CL CL CL CL CL CL CL CL CL CL ft fD fD fD (D fD o O ft ft ft ft ft ft 3 tfl X fD 42 tfl X z Z fD hO tfl X z Z CD ■S J3 tfl X ft d H ft^ o 3. o > > 3_ o > > £. ^ • o £• 2. « z o' <’ 3 <’ 3 < 2 3 < 3 3- 3 CL P CL P CL C ' CL p w 3 fD 3 fD 3 fD ft D3 ft ft c d 5 CL 3 CL 3 CL 3 C3 CL 3 cr p o p P P d CL P ^ c : ° o' 3 p CO 3* fD O 3 fD CO 3 fD O 3 fD CO 3 fD p CO to c CO d_ Crq' o 3 o 3 ^ ft d 3 Z CD 42 e fD 3 CO CO cr p CO SL fD 3 CO CO cr p CO ft fD 3 55 cza ft 3* 3 ft d >-» o CL 3 d ft Sf ft CL co d o g. n § <’ p o’ 3 CO 5’ fD o' 3 CO 5’ CD o’ £3 CO cr p ft o' « g O 3 3 o 3 O 3 CO CO o fD 3 P 3 o 3 CO o fD 3 p h-H o 3 < O g 3 3 2. c >-• 3 o’ N P o' p 3 3 o 3 ^ fD cr p o crq O' 3 CO d 3 CO d CL d 3' d d ft p 3 CO n 5’ CD CD d O 3- p o’ O 3 P o' <3. ft’ o o o 3 CL O' w n’ 3 a ft ^ ^ 5’ CO o 3 3 o S HH ft) 0 p o’ CD CO CO 5’ '£ “ & g .£ "3 33 g G G ca ’G cd 3 o O' g 2 r£ J>n O 3 Gh O 3 § 2 ^ s* .2 cd OX) .o 13 E; ■c £* - G 1 1 If Gh G -G ^ 0 2 « £ .&1 G CT1 ^ £ £ *8 1 2 Hh Gh 00 G O G JZ § 2 .2 '3 oo cr h-H W 13 ^ 'C ^ G .£ 'G hG g G M 03 "G 3 2h 0 cr G 2 - ^ 0 *3 Gh G 1 ^ Gh 00 G JO G hG "I Td G G G tH .2 ’£ “ g* 13 ^ " Eh Z“ G G3 G .£ G G G G !-h 03 'G 3 a 0 G G 2 rS >> O "3 Gh G a I 5-h ^ 3 O *3 gP g 13 'e- cd cr ■a ® a) *-« td ^ £ 13 G CQ 1 .§ If g § s B £ o .& snt are i >n of eqi G "g s s G p- G DQ 3 g s -a o & j3 oj cd .t5 1 S O 0 3 3 b u a ^ G *H 1 § s £ 0 •& G G 'C G CQ i .3 B cd .2 >> 3 00 3 G £ '£ ^ n g § 'Sh G s 1 cd g <= =, s ST 3 M £ -G Oh 3 ‘£ £ £ | Gh ‘3 G G ■'3 b >» ^ G fi £ (D _0 G cj 2 | cd g G Gh 2 « 3 Gh +H O 0 ^ ® 0X) G G 2 ’53 C xn 2 £ G h-< 3 b G •& G -2 QH O cr S G o G 3 G -G1 G G g M 3 ‘£ 0 3 g g S I £ o G 3 G cr a « ■=i ax) G Td £ r3 . M Gh g o § g a Gh -3 o .£ £ B ‘53 G G .2 O Id "S to rH G 0 s G cr Bh^ • G1 V(H G O £ • B ■S3 ox) .2 .£ 8 0 g ox) £ £ c> c ,2 0 ^ 3 c 3 — i o _ G 3 G — 1 G M cr — h £* G Td 0) c 3 g 3 c£ -d3 03 •G g ^ .£ Gh 3 • 22 0 •G £ > Td •g ® OX) -3 ll 0X)-§ G .S 3 g o ’£ & £ D2 .G G G 0 O jd Q 01 < — 1 G -G G G ^ £ - ® to 00 G G ^ ox) .£ .£ £ G G G a) £ ^3 O cG 1:1 1 s 1) 03 '3 cd rG cd 5| 11 5 (u g ^ G OX) 2 G -1-* O G 3 0 3 0 -3 U 'G cd 1 .§ to G 3 3 O 3 •81 ll £ .1 <§-§ 2 s Gh (U IS Gh •- £ 'g 2 3 Gh ^ £ !■£ O Td * £ £ | 2 s Gh G || -rjv £ ! 2 B Gh G G G O ^ ^4h • rt. £ | 2 s Gh G 1 1 ^+H * (» ^ 09 C^ 03 c£ 03 M 03 hG 03 M 03 0X) 03 G G G +J G G G G ° • G G G G G G G ^ G G O -G • 2 12 O o ° T o 1)3 ■3 c G « -h H ■ 22 13 '3 • 2 "2 .2 -2 .2 V .2 -2 •2 12 .2 -2 xA -H .22 g 1 § xA +2 .52 T3 xA o CD Cfl 3 ’ in .td 52 S § "S ."b .22 T3 ^ 3 03 .tn .22 T3 £ £ tS s § £ '21 £ cfi s 0 £ & 6 g £ 3 £ g PQ oo PQ 33 PQ § PQ Gh PQ rO 2 PQ GC W 0 PQ G PQ G PQ G3 PQ G g g CD G G G G G G G G Td Td t3 T3 T3 Td Td Td -cd Td Td 3 3 J3 ^3 3 Q ^G ^G c c 13 13 13 13 13 13 13 13 13 13 13 X X X X X X X X X X X pq pq PQ PQ PQ PQ PQ PQ PQ PQ PQ T3 T3 T3 G •o < g 2 < G < G Jd < G a <; G a c Z 13 Z 13 z 13 Z 13 z 13 Z oP DP DP DP T3 'G -a Td Td •o G td < (D td < G < G < \ G cd < G td 13 Z 13 z 13 Z 13 z 13 z 13 oP oP Ptp dP OP DP g G G G G 00 G 00 a zb G G 2 G fl '£ 00 G G £ Gh G cr PQ 00 G 2 Gh Gh !/) £ £ £ .O .0 0-1 o § £ Oh o 13 £ Gh 1 pq 00 G i§ O G O Id tn O Gh hh S2 G O G _o Id B | G G O G .O t3 G G O G .O G 2 03 .Gh PQ Gh O 00 .G Gh '£ cr PQ Gh O OX) .G CO 03 i G G Q '3 03 £ £ 0 0 G Q > G '£ ’£ G G 2 £ r2 £ G O G O 03 G to G G G Q PQ PQ H .& H Gh u u H H w 00 oo ON 3 On '3 0 0 H— H CN (N 1-H '— i -h cr -H (N (N (N (N CN CN PQ Dh PQ Dh PQ CQ PQ Oh PQ Dh PQ Dh PQ Page 22 Pork Protocol 2.5 Quantification of Reductions, Removals and Reversals of Relevant SS’s 2.5.1 Quantification Approaches Quantification of the reductions, removals and reversals of relevant SS’s for each of the greenhouse gases will be completed using the methodologies outlined in TABLE 2.4, below. A listing of relevant emission factors is provided in Appendix A. These calculation methodologies serve to complete the following three equations for calculating the emission reductions from the comparison of the baseline and project conditions. Emission Reduction = Emissions Baseline - Emissions project Emissions Baseline Emissions Methane Emissions Direct Nitrous Oxide + Emissions Indirect Volatization Nitrous Oxide + Emissions Indirect Leachate Nitrous Oxide Emissions Project Emissions Methane T Emissions Direct Nitrous Oxide + Emissions Indirect Volatization Nitrous Oxide + Emissions Indirect Leachate Nitrous Oxide Where: Emissions Baseline = sum of the emissions under the baseline condition. Emissions Methane = emissions under SS B7 Manure Storage Emissions Direct Nitrous Oxide = component of emissions under SS B9 Land Application Emissions indirect Volatilization Nitrous Oxide = component of emissions under SS B9 Land Application Emissions indirect Leachate Nitrous Oxide = component of emissions under SS B9 Land Application Emissions project = sum of the emissions under the project condition. Emissions Methane = emissions under SS P7 Manure Storage Emissions Direct Nitrous Oxide = component of emissions under SS P9 Land Application Emissions indirect volatilization Nitrous Oxide = component of emissions under SS P9 Land Application Emissions indirect Leachate Nitrous Oxide = component of emissions under SS P9 Land Application Page 23 TABLE 2.4: Quantification Procedures s s g s E c Q V 3 * S 1 co CJ CO o> Cm 3 <2* a £ P 00 G a) •g O o X > W Oh S CM 3 3 ^ >, P P X) H -g 3 3 p > 3 jjvJ 1 '£ O 3 E E > G O S 3 CM O . cd x ^ T3 G . 3 X ^ *3 § V G I I 00 ’cm t2 ^ ^ G T3 O CD G C/3 G p 3 3 w CM'- c/5 " C/3 cd £ 73 P G oo .5 3 ? _G O 00 E .S CQ T3 >> 3 a> S E *H *£ G ^ 00 c *2 .s s <-• G X * t3 -£2 g ”3 p G 43 G 3 .P 2 P = ■8^1 •3 §>•§•< U .s z .s o ® ^ s >3 E -G ^ ^ E u S c2 00 - « T) P p 00 r a CL 13 2 3 a c fD T3 00 > 3 2.? -■ O -si: O ^ 05 c to cr «> P sr ?s n> P & $ ’QMS 3 O O m cr o < Cl g o^3 C sa C C/3 <""► H— H, ^ P 1 S-g. 3 o 37 3-g.o $> &; 3: c« fo O5 2 2 fD 3* ^ n> o 3* O 3 3 "" > oo cu O ft J> B o w g*? § ^ 2- f® fD Vi' 31 O 2. s’ & -■ o SPfe ll •< CL 2. 5' J» TO < 2 O o 03 3 £ 2 fD <^r W H O 2 3 33 (JQ fD 33 05 - 03 >-* • I— 1 o crq fD o 3 p 5 00 2 W3 3 m O c/a 3“ 3 0^ 33 c/3 CL 3 “ 3 3 1-1 fD v M- 3 3 S' p crq C o ^ r| = o 3- cr gL rr> ™ a 5§& Tl h- m 5’ < 3 ft) Vi V H-t fD 3 ^ cr W Q O & 2 v 2 5/3 fD 2 CL rr) ■o 03 3' o ? < S 00 S 5 1 g 3“ o 33 m 2 fD l“l fD ha cl TO' 00 31 2 3 2 2 W§ g S3 2 < fD O P- 3- 5' Z 5' > §-<8 ►a sr 2 ►a 2 s* 2 cl 2 g. 2 a 3 S [fl * cr 3 >g2- • fD 3 3 OQ C gt- 3 o 2 TO CJ 3 £. «> era fD V! 2 <® fD O CL M, CffC era' m v cr cr. cr 3 3L - V 2 CL °> § III 3 ^ CL O' 3 Pork Protocol Pork Protocol 3D CD o S-H Oh GO > < o u z >> 3 G Oh 3 G G (U g a ^ s 5 CD 'S a ~ | 3 43 m ^ 3 ^ G O cd bfi X tj u fl O s £ 1/5 ^ X « O =3 cd 3 a O 333 a a > o CD 03 3 or ^ "S ^ 3 € G x g g 3 c 3 > O o 3 g 00 >ul£> G X o « g t: *G 3D wa > G g O O 3 U G CD td 3 o 3 cd bX) cd G a 3D 3 a X >H CD CD O l-H Oh {/) > < o u z g 2 o a u -3 CD G W pq G 1 I > i/i X G CD O < O CD CD 2 Oh GO > < o u z 03 3 V II c« s G --> r2 ^ pq ^ _H 0 o 1 s cd < a u z 2 G Id 3 S3 G O. G £3 3 S c/3 E— 1 3D CJO § -9 11 1 s pq m 3 CD Vi -5 2 3 . 03 W cd g s S <3 3 2 o G g ° cd O 3D G 52 03 cd D O 3D Vi bX) cd .2 a r* SPSPg | 3 £ x 3 § <2 § g 3*G W 2 3D J-‘ “ on G G 3D ’ b 5 = S o O H g ! ■ 2 8 (3 3 S g 3D g Cd Q. « a > 3D < H qq G c« 3 cn 3D ~od CD 3 O Vh jj O, 3 GO cD bO G > < ‘53 a X) u z G cd 3D Oh G V a < >> < 3 G z G G < £ 2 4h g cri G < G- cd o a z G 3D a 3 '% o 3 cd CT- PD X G 3 < 3 \ z a 3 pq b£» s CD G cd c X 3 S CZl C3 o a § ^ ’S a pq ^ 3 Oh 3 2 & S £ u s Oh Wi bp £ •S 3 3D SP X Oh C+H X ° Si vi cd 52 -=3 cd tj 2 £ « 3D u bO oo O £ £3 G X 3D X 3D ^ Ph | .a G? G | CD — bo u O .£P Z 3 bt) £ C+H , o bp £ G a JD % a ■3 g > ^ < CD • — .N M X v cd cd |u ^ bfi 3 £ 2 ^3 g 3D 3D S bO G § g .a S O G r-. go o G .2 G G 3£ 0\ Oh 0. Oh Page 26 Page 27 § ^ VO !’ a § a§ CL 2 s ? a- p S- 3 c TO <— o . era P 3 w 5' < cd O e p Rd cr CD gj crq" 05 *-d c o cr p Q P* R 05 O 2 CU 3 g 3* <8 05 O O 3 y OQ 3 ^ 3*§ CD 05 g 7* p o & CD C-T n hj „ . 05 Crq <*> O § ora 5 ^ (t 3 £ 2: a- 3T g 2. ho g crq O ^ cd 2 hj »> CL P h-. OQ S3-S Q § 3 S g 05 1-3 05 o £0 y. o 5? Qrq oJ aq 05 P C/3 f/) 00 os 00 O H.O a "-- a W era' £ <]> ^ ^ 3 £> 2^ £ C2J S M- O O FT <; R ora KaS pr 2 ® era 05 M CD P S3 £3 S<8 P S' II- P Soo «S8 O s q I'B-B. :.?s ''""So CL Mj a cd 05 CD S e o ra. tr 3t« 2 o c- R * 3 9 1 § g g* a ^ cr <5* p ^ 05 M- cd cr CL CD O T3 cr cd CD O O S3 a *<' ^ a a & O 05 x cr 3'^ p p cr. cr o cr Pork Protocol Pork Protocol 11 Ji c cd O « B9 ^ % m a. “ 'S « 11| 5 a £ >> 43 5 S n e O > U | H < .SP c I ^ § * as 43 W) $ O =2 e O o -t3 -ra 5 In *3 -33 Cd *2 -33 o Z > ^ 2 <; v <; a ^22 o . 33 _ g Z 8 Q o GO W < a u z o T3 C/3 < (L> O v M .2 cd O ,g o cd ^ ^ [T, C o C Oh U P a £ ts Q Oh33 cd C2 o cjo .2 .2 C/3 -3 o o „ C ’ T1 ^ 0-H d gi (H £ T3 o (_ > P £ pq < •< o W W O (-H £h 0 .2 1 § O 'Eh ^ "5 < O V z . "O p £ 2 1 OhGi 43 o •§.2 «* E o ai S3 3 .2 'o’ jg O H i-H Oh 5 E o c+3 3 i-H O cd O Q 4 o - P4 .£ < cd Uh O £ O P^h Cd -g ^ *3 £ - 3 o 11 = ~ | .2 (§ “ §> Cd" ^ T3 . S3 S P 43 cd o U O H T3 o -*-* 3 fll --H l—l (D GO > C O .2 § E =2 J -2 • 2 On "Eh S Page 28 Page 29 9% ^ r Z ft — ■ P G" 3 o If <8 FT 3 r |-d o ^ C/3 pa ^ a 5- o ^ 3 o O pj 2 o o a o a _ p S. o — ^ ft o 2 n o- < O jj 03 _ T3 "3 <3 ^ o a o ^ 3 ft ft o 3 o’W 3 O o' 3 3 5- a P a 3 a Cl p a- g 3 ft < 2 p P 3 a §:« *3 o FT a o' 3 O l_t 3 > s » 3 ■§ w Z 5 n < O 3 t 5 < 3 W fD l-r-i “•0 3 o k a> a G 5 >§ z& w I— I 3 *3 S- a < a g ST m W — O 2. N * £ a o- 3- o'1 o 3 3 3 cr rt w < *> Z 3 a a a wa a 3 O E2 £3^ OTQ o 3 o n 3 g a 3 T) G\ ft p O O- 3 3m O o "-h ° O T) 3 8 ?r Z z? a ft FT p5 era g ~~ ft pr ~ crq P Z o © Z O o > < m “3 O < M o p » o fr1 I I. z B- 1 2 | I i-55 S? ® f 3 I 1 §f |I « % s ^ o £ n 3 1 I § | * S' O s J o £ & o' b; * » o' ^ 3 « ^ H C» O 3 P 31 >C |3 o on a ^ z 3 _ e* o o p o a 3 o’ 3 >— b_d a “ a p » a 3 ° ^ i-t w ~ ft o p Vi O ^ a^a 3“ M- ft 3 « > 3 a a a a»2 o' ^ 3 a O' 3- P O B 3 — ; P w 2 35 “3 _ ^ <-i ai 3 S' 3 II 3 W a r 3 V o' k> II 3 o ^ a i = O Cf> x a 3'i P P & □"* Q nT Pork Protocol Pork Protocol CD CD o cL 00 > < O U 2 3 O ,b — 00 3 ^ Q 2 O A £ ® oo z •* oo 44 CD G CD S s cd Uh P ^ C ^ o o H o b - Q * Q E w 3 * « b o 00 g '53 -o 00 s >^co 3 > -o S to co ^ -2 b U 42 oo a s > w D 61 a s c0 T3 JD 3 3 3 > b >> S 11 3 ° CD CO o’ CO a s V 1) O W 05 O- C-W Oh _g 00 'o’ g 'a a o g , hO ^ T3 G CD > 3 3 a P2h OhCm 3 00 ‘Eh c2 ^ ^ G T3 P CD G CO Uh 2 43 45 CD £ » g CD Oh •" T3 $ .8 * 45 £ co < T3 2 8 ° PP c 00 .£ CO H-. § £ £ P > _g O 00 £ .S o 1 T3 3 (D CD CO CD CCS M CQ T3 l/J Vh a> X) s 3 G CD S3 < -2 x ^ -2 "b 3 3. 1 5 | ml 3fl.1 CD ^ 45 ^ M "P _G b ’co c2 p c Q o W << co _c b ^o 3 Uh CD w Q SuU u2 .sp T3 Oh 2 ^ CD CD Pi Oh £ ^ o iH CD CD CD G3 S’ a Oh O (D -o “ 3D CO 00 ‘Eh 3 b= ^ G co O £P 2 Oh O ’g Uh CD as Eh Oh Ph c+h 45 ■J§ 3 5 2 U o g .SP Oh c+h Oh CD g CD a 2? CCS b S O r- co CQ Page 30 Page 3 1 n w o oo 'J | A" § ? < ^0 C/3 3 2 > < > < s o 00 o 8. & O c/a p_ 3* &2 3* 3 a pu £ o5 S * o cr a a o5 rT ©T < < 00 a a « o © a a p ft) "a co p © 3 >-s o © o 5 o» H 3 U < 3 *< o at o cl 3 w 3 p 3 p, © 3 atro o<"| o 3^ r-f. p * a © . S.O B ^ o B a: I> ^ — : fD 3> a ft a o z n o > < oo *3 3 O ft) o 3 p 3 ^ > O C« of1 p § >|!l I a 21- © tn £ p 3- o ST 2 ~ • o © r7 p 8 vT cl 2 n o > < 00 >3 3 o © n cp < 2 P* a 2- O s I s. a © 3 a: ^ ^ a « ■ © a: »» © -■ © o- o* 3 O ^ a1 a a a ” 3 B’g’i 3 3 3 3 3 era p ■ 2 3 3 o 1 "S "3 < crq o’ a £ £ ^ »> © o p 3 fr 3 a o a 3 © & cl < © g r £ 3 o a a- a a^ © r 00 g a a a 3 £« crq O 3 P 33 n o era' g 3. n « y p* s y © « ’O © ^ a ■ °* 2 § 2 ©3 ~ S S crq o- a © P CL *3 3 8 g-l CL a © 3 cl g c«' < l-t p h8 3 2 © © «» C/3 l-t © P 3 3 $ a WQ2 q £ § " “ S* CL 'Tl ^ i-t © S P '-t © a y. r Si*5 o oo hr) 3 O 3 a a a o p o' Hr] W 3 © a O ^ © 2 g&S: a p 3* a: © CD s'lll'g Ilia SaS'S 5 P CD 6 g 3 cl x a 3 »> h> P 3 8 Vi a- ' 01 £ cl 3 09 ©' £ 3* '■* 3 © c r © g a to c P 3 co 8 CL °> crq © o 'C CL© g- 'g p p tzi cz> 3^ a. 3“ p rr " £ CL « 2 cl 3 3 p 2 o p © 2 ^ a 8 ^ Pork Protocol Pork Protocol CD < O u z x g o |2 > ~a (+H a u Cd J2 , G X 3 X § o CD -8.3 03 O ^ CO 73 ^ JSi d c •-3 U S ■5 3 o 12 S S ora > G G O O > U 2 CO £ > X) >% cd G a a> 3 a S- 3 3 I I < a u z >> 3 G G G < G © © a pq < o u z I I 0 ^ r2 * cd o 2 Oh GO > < a u z w (D a -O cd c3 <3 X Oj I I GO E— i a 1=0 a g G P .§ I § & pq u a ^ ca X 2 ta . a ^ w g £ X £ a 52 X X G ° cd O U G “ « fl » ^ U 2 60 a ■$ o t5 O ta _ G p. (S G U i) u .2 a ^ M M G u G > 73 G *i m ■§ C O 2 g I g-S J O Si < "5 a X u >. z G cd o o, G ca a < z < 3 G z G G < •2 | in G < ca o a z ^ a 3 ’> o ^ o G cd O" Oh X T3 0> < 3 z a 3 pq 60 s 60 O cd G a •§ s *c3 ^ ^ o o G ^ CD G 60 •- O » «h i2 CD > pq X U / so ^ £ 60 JD JD X X a a 3 -a ,2 'S > ^ > < D- < C (jo C o cd ca » 6o "G rl 6X5 2 ^ u 2 .-G ^ 60 ,t5 Z 2 £ Z G 73 2 3 •S cd ca OS pH PQ Oh < Page 32 Page 33 PS* W g "2- ^ S'- o' r | e A§a 2 g P rf g 3 2 era ft p 3 tn S' < ft 2 2 era era ' — . tn tn < ft Z < rt p p 0 rm O p p p vS a* ft M n 53 S' R 03 O hP >-. o 3 y. era’ ft q 2 o 2 "o a. 2 ^ 8 ST g a ft g *= a I 2 'S' S p ^3 o S. 1 1 O CL P P o y z S’. era' £ Z a h. L/i O O t © p K) zs U, g2 ** 3 era CL Z3 2. 3: S- o “ ft CL era p s?s sis C/3 *-* C/3 0^0 3? o 3? era —era 03 " era' -- 03 P 03 00 CO 00 O H.O cl cl ft q 2 o 2 73 a § ?* 3 o p g 'S' £ £ Bj p a §• 3" CT 5‘G£ 2 g a <8 3. * £ Si o- s.' 5 2 o era’ to (jq n ft g-9 3 g <8 § p q- 5' ©. 2 § era r> no o' ^ K) p Q crq l/i O g v ' ~ ~ p5 P C/1 O £ 3 o S - o p S’ e° 1PJ a ^00 ^ ^ 3 era - cl Z3§. 3; §- 8 e^ a cl p ^ o z n p.- o o 2 o o era aq era 0 SnSg 5' I- 5' I •n »> ti 2 ft ft p ft \ ft n CL CL a tn o. xs p 3 ft> o „ ra 3 p y o' £ p- ^ _ n o ^ P T3 P c «» 2 g* S gr s CL o ft CL P- 0 tn p 03 i-t ft P P P g? S' s' ►§ g ■73 Q- P p ST. cj- Q riT Pork Protocol Pork Protocol « d 11 2 c Kj O w ca Oh 2 c 3 'S2 5 a ^ >> IS ||u f- < o -5 S z ■S' G u CL, < i < w « 52 .a -s W £ | # W M C < a u z « o Q Oh C -o o a) • 2 .2 -2 rH n! B 2 2 -a s o o < o £ ^ w < O Oh tl W Oh ^ U a> w < a o z c S o h T3 43 2 ^ in 4 C/2 |> £ § W GO T3 £ o 2 'C o a> cs Oh Oh 2 O £.§ is x t/3 O -O Oh S & I— H C3 .2 -S S ^ Oh O .0 3 H- _, M ■s g 3 3 o M fS ,o o a 2 o- £ X) -I cd ^ 2£ * o o S3 h-> 2 p> !? ^ ca1 CTcf £* 3s S’ ?i CD z n o > < C/5 T r z ft) N-- 03 0" £> o S« CD E3 ^ r Tl O l-t W3 tn ^30 O p 2 o o 3 o a _ 3'^ a o fD O 5 O) Q- i — * S o m <*►§ -o' m ^ O 33 O 3 £ w 5' 2 o\ a 3 o* 5' g ^ 3 o> « 8 3 i t^' o' ta ^i rt-' 2 S- fH P) ^ o’ c2. O. 3 3 O ° t! * 3 3 O 3' £L s a 3 a 3 3' < a 3 fa .T &. O n 3 > s “ s ^ on 5J, W Z I. o l< 3 oo § ■s ~ O n o W cd a g- d fa cz) a, « c? o we t}>o I-Sl? T O T & ' M 5- ' S < CO I — I CO L o’ 3 ^ o w 3 sr w w ff ^30^. | ° g-£.8 s a o. s' 3 • 0> g O 3 3 3 cr CD tn w fa o Q- a 3 3 o ■ £$> < tn 5' O Ogt^O ”3 3 r? g. o o 2- 3 ^ 3 O 1-4 s 3. Z °* 3 Z 5= 52 g *S * £ uT CD < a a 0 .2 W T OQ T Z crq N3 tn a CD 3 Crq ^ o z ° . CO ' CD T ~ crq 3 Z o © z O O > < 00 T o CD CD 3 § GO g >T3 p w = °* o £ n 3 1 g §■: Is I i: 2 ° § | - § o 3 3 *c O' 2. 5’ crq o 3 M Z o crq CD 3 > < fa Pork Protocol Pork Protocol 2.5.2. Contingent Data Approaches Contingent means for calculating or estimating the required data for the equations outlined in section 2.5.1 are summarized in TABLE 2.5, below. 2.6 Management of Data Quality In general, data quality management must include sufficient data capture such that the mass and energy balances may be easily performed with the need for minimal assumptions and use of contingency procedures. The data should be of sufficient quality to fulfill the quantification requirements and be substantiated by company records for the purpose of verification. The project proponent shall establish and apply quality management procedures to manage data and information. Written procedures should be established for each measurement task outlining responsibility, timing and record location requirements. The greater the rigour of the management system for the data, the more easily an audit will be to conduct for the project. 2.6.1 Record Keeping Record keeping practises should include: a. Electronic recording of values of logged primary parameters for each measurement interval; b. Printing of monthly back-up hard copies of all logged data; c. Written logs of operations and maintenance of the project system including notation of all shut-downs, start-ups and process adjustments; d. Retention of copies of logs and all logged data for a period of 7 years; and e. Keeping all records available for review by a verification body. 2.6.1 Quality Assurance/Quality Control (QA/QC) QA/QC can also be applied to add confidence that all measurements and calculations have been made correctly. These include, but are not limited to: a Protecting monitoring equipment (sealed meters and data loggers); b Protecting records of monitored data (hard copy and electronic storage); c Checking data integrity on a regular and periodic basis (manual assessment, comparing redundant metered data, and detection of outstanding data/records); d Comparing current estimates with previous estimates as a ‘reality check’; e Provide sufficient training to operators to perform maintenance and calibration of monitoring devices; f Establish minimum experience and requirements for operators in charge of project and monitoring; and g Performing recalculations to make sure no mathematical errors have been made. Page 36 Page 37 CO 00 "j £ 2 s g era 5 cd £ alg 13 CD CD CD *-i cl a ^ « 2 O S' ST" tn cr > g < 0- 2 1- h p c? era l-t CD a p *-t T3 CD g & §s 8 a §• 2 ^ 5. P P£ ^ o g. 2 ? O ft 'C Q. > 13 1-0 13 VO 2 r p p T! O ^3 2 of l_^ IU |_ ■ gat 05 Hd CTQ cn cd o 3 5 2 & S If P3 ^ o g. 2 2 3 ? O ft 9 2 c« S czi Cfl nJ Cfl o ^ o - • O - • CTQ i— (JQ C« P (d S?2 ft CTQ ffl tfl t— ■ 31 CD P & 2* 2- p 03 0 g. 1 1 o ft ^ CL *n O CD H— CD C a- £ n r* ft 1 a s,? y. era S? 2 ft crq tn cr > g ? CD ff. CL « fa 13 I-+) 03 CL 2 CTQ «• ft' 2 0 3 ^35’ % 3 | 2 3 £3 O' CD 8 £ >-t T3 CD 3- p g r wj a p h2 £3 ^ era 2 < 3 £ "a 3 2 era £3 CD 3 2 Vi 2 33. P O Cl ^ CD s.i 3 O rt- Cd /-v. ft n cd p £3 P CL P -2 5* 13 O 2 3 3- gi CD £1 Cl v; p < CD P era CD P bs- n c 3 s « p g o cd Cl CL O P 2> ►3^3 p ^ CD a* « £ CD ■ K- ft 2 tn 13 £-■ a § 5 § era S w 3 Go1? S 2| &n £T C \ ft p ? si- ’s 1 1 ST cr i-h cc. "T3 13 13 era’ tn ?23 ? ^ ^3 TO % ™ < !§ S § S.g P 2 o S3 o ft £ ►Q 2 C Vi § 3 o p ft’ o 5® tr SI 2 era tn O B 3l CD C3. 5- a 2 3 3 3 O 3 2 a* &■ ft S.2 3? || CD 8 g. c K ^ ? o ft f CL P P 13 w r P o Sd CD 13 B! *r 3 P «* e/3 o e/3 =i ^ 5* S? cr so « 3 CD CD 4L tn ^ S3 CD 3 & 3 id 2 ^ 2 n ST O o s & s. s ora CD B CD II o' *5* S 3 I ^ CL cd 9 § 5 3 TABLE 2.5: Contingent Data Collection Procedures Pork Protocol bo U .52 &H § 2 > > cu T3 p3 >> <5 ii i§ s « 04 §9 2 ca Oh ts •a >, - 'i i§ g « c4 m 3 c co T3 a 1 h Oh C_> CO I_ 3 3 .g a Sco DC £ '& C to J O P ■ -t3 G a ^ S 3 a) C >* >> § a, .3 3 ■S 3 ts c £ > 3 -S 3-* \S -3 s o o aj W re cb .g-s w w w 60 g 3 S c 60 o S <+-i hC 3 ° 3 g g O &1 •2 S *2 Wj dj h J2 tfl 5 +3 w £ £ u O
  • U CO a > £ © "O « a> fl *■= fe * a | £ ■3 ^ CO > s| 2 2 £ 2 * 3 « | o W <» Z o TTT M S =3 g u Si s Q - £ 3 S « O £ > ■S 3 U *< s® £ a c ■3 2 OX) a oc Ofl n OO 03 oo 03 03 03 03 03 r~-~ t"- X 03 1/3 (N 1/3 r4 34 h-H — H T— 1 X -H "sT oo oo X 03 03 03 03 03 cn 03 03 03 03 03 03 03 03 03 03 < 3» ox 3 >n Xi DO A Id C s» ox .cd C in o «-■ X r- ed X _G ‘53 .g ‘53 o> s 3 X X H P- & X X X a> £ s o X X H Q s >» X T3 OJ T3 ^ a os a Os o -H {ft 0) -3 bb 13 >> cj x . O -s 1) so &* » s S3 J H Cfl _fH S S I *1 B ru co cd ft x £ ,2 75 £ B T3 D X S *+H .O cd >» ° X 03 'X cd X ^ Q) n _ro ‘to > ra .J2 c o ro E l_ a _c Page 42