1 / 11

Task 2 Report Background on Scope + Path Forward

This report provides a technical review of emissions quantification methods for critical field sources to inform the development of mandatory reporting requirements in the Western Climate Initiative. It prioritizes sources for reporting, evaluates existing GHG accounting strategies, identifies deficiencies, and proposes alternative methodologies for improving emissions data quality.

mearls
Download Presentation

Task 2 Report Background on Scope + Path Forward

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Task 2 ReportBackground on Scope + Path Forward May 4, 2009 O&G GHG Technical WorkGroup

  2. Beginning of 835 AM – 5/4/09 session

  3. Task 2 Scope Overview • The contractor will prepare a technical review of emissions quantification methods for critical field sources identified in the background and scoping paper, specifically designed to inform and guide the process of developing mandatory reporting requirements by partner jurisdictions in the Western Climate Initiative. For the significant land-based and offshore GHG sources identified in Task 1, this paper will:

  4. Task 2 Scope Overview, continued • Prioritize sources for mandatory reporting, considering the magnitude of known or projected emissions. • Evaluate existing GHG accounting strategies and available data and emission factors. Discuss limitations inherent in currently available accounting methodologies, emission factors and data, focusing on the largest GHG sources. • Identify current methodological deficiencies for these high-priority sources; propose and discuss high-tier alternative sampling and/or analytical methodologies designed to address these deficiencies and improve emissions data quality.

  5. End of 835 AM - 5/4/09 session

  6. Proposed path forward to finish Task 2 report • From Santa Fe meeting • Used available data – thanks to all TWG members contributing time and effort • Available time and resources • Basin level • By production type (heavy oil, CBM, tight gas, et cetera) used • Rankings presented in this way because of confidentiality, variation in data completeness and quality, etc. – CO2e presented to utilize these data • Next step is fixing inaccuracies, addressing technical comments

  7. Proposed path forward to move beyond Task 2 report • Carefully craft response to the comments and concerns • Use discussion of methods for Reporting at this meeting • Build from spreadsheet • Ongoing “living document” with methods • Supported by WRAP staff

  8. 1045 AM – 5/4/09 session

  9. Clean Air Act Statutory Factors Oil & Gas doesn’t fit neatly into CAA mold What do you use to evaluate methods? • Cost of compliance • Time necessary for compliance • Energy and non-air quality environmental impacts of compliance • Remaining useful life of any existing source subject to such requirements

  10. Possible Criteria to Evaluate Methods • Accurate (can be verified) • Bias • Contractor-supplied? • Cost • Feasibility (i.e. technical and practical) • Method/measurement device availability • Precision • Reliability

  11. Using criteria in the discussion • Strengths and weaknesses of method under discussion • Self-defined • “I think this criterion is important because:” • Handout

More Related