car livestock methane protocol & project case study
DESCRIPTION
CAR Livestock Methane Protocol & Project Case Study. Scott Subler, Ph.D. Environmental Credit Corp . CAR Offsets Workshop Houston, Texas, June 14, 2011. Environmental Credit Corp. Leading US carbon offset project developer and ”aggregator” - PowerPoint PPT PresentationTRANSCRIPT
CAR Livestock Methane Protocol & Project Case Study
Scott Subler, Ph.D.Environmental Credit Corp.
CAR Offsets WorkshopHouston, Texas, June 14, 2011
Environmental Credit Corp.
• Leading US carbon offset project developer and ”aggregator”
• ~ 65 projects listed through programs including the Climate Action Reserve (CAR), the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM), and the Chicago Climate Exchange (CCX)
• Project types include:– destruction of ozone depleting substances – agricultural methane destruction– composting– landfill and waste water methane capture– renewable energy production
ECC’s Offset Projects in the US
Livestock methane captureLandfill methane captureCompostingDestruction of Ozone Depleting Substances
ECC ranked as #1 US offset project developer in 2009(PointCarbon)
Case Study: Fessenden Family Dairy• King Ferry, New York (Finger Lakes Region)• 1,100 dairy cows• Liquid manure management (flush system)• Open-air anaerobic manure lagoon
manure lagoon
dairy barns
Dairy Farming
Manure collection
Photos: USEPA AgStar
Animal manure storage is a widespread source of methane emissions
anaerobic decomposition(bacteria)
VOC, NH3, H2S, N2O, CO2, CH4
Odor Greenhouse gases
Open-air manure lagoon
Air Quality Concerns:• Greenhouse gas emissions (Fessenden Farm ~200 metric tons methane/year)• Odor• Ammonia
Covered manure lagoon
Biogas collection system
Generator/flare
Benefits:• Reduced GHG emissions (Fessenden Farm > 4,000 metric tons CO2e/year)• Reduced odor• Improved stormwater management• Potential for biogas use (renewable electricity, heat)
Air-tight membrane cover
anaerobic digestion
biogasCH4
Simple covers can capture methane from lagoons and reduce GHG emissions
• Simple, low-cost technology• U.S. supplier, local jobs• Rapid installation• Reliable operation• Farmer friendly
Lagoon Cover Design & Implementation
Methane Emission Reductions
• Established protocols
• Independently audited
• Formal registration
Renewable Energy Production
Methane Combustion
2nd Stage Effluent Storage
1st Stage Heated Covered Lagoon Digester
Genset & Heat Exchange
Manure &Food waste
Fessenden Dairy -- Anaerobic Digestion to Energy
Anaerobic digesters in US (livestock)Number of operating digesters (Nov. 2010): AgStar Database
Source: USEPA AgStar
(129 Dairy)
Common Technologies for Dairy AD• Ambient Temperature
“Lagoon Covers”
• Plug Flow/Mixed Plug Flow
• Complete Mix
• Other…
Photo: RCM International
Photo: Fair Oaks Farms
ECC Lagoon Cover Program
Rob HilaridesLindsay, CA
• ECC Build/Own/Operate– Permits, insurance, major
maintenance– Carbon monitoring, verification,
registration• Routine oversight by farmer• Farmer compensated with share of
carbon credit value• Farmer can buy out lagoon
cover/biogas collection system to own/operate for a larger share of carbon value
Plug Flow Manure Digester
Mixed Plug Flow Manure Digester
Huckabay Ridge, Texas
Centralized Complete Mix Digester
Typical Livestock Digester Economics• Capital requirements
– High ($1,000 – $1,600) per milk cow– AD systems not always ‘farmer-friendly’
• Electricity prices– Mostly low ($0.04 - $0.06/kWh)
• Renewable energy value– Significant in some states ($0.02 - $0.07/kWh)
• Carbon prices– Have been significant for some projects; uncertain market
• Tipping fees for off-farm organic materials (food waste)– Site specific, but in some cases equal to or greater than
electricity revenues• Separated solids value (nutrients, compost, bedding)
– Variable; often high value for bedding
CAR U.S. Livestock Project Protocol (v3.0)
• Project Definition– The installation of a biogas control system (BCS) that captures and
destroys methane (CH4) gas from manure treatment and/or storage facilities on livestock operations.
• Eligible technologies– Centralized digesters– Co-digestion of organic waste (greenhouse gas [GHG] benefits not
quantified for non-manure waste streams)– Methane destruction onsite (enclosed flare, open flare, electricity
generation, thermal energy production)– Methane destruction offsite (direct use via pipeline)– Methane destroyed as fuel for vehicles (onsite or offsite)– Biogas destruction in fuel cells
CAR Project Eligibility Requirements
• Location– U.S., territories, U.S. tribal lands
• Start Date– Project must be submitted within six months of becoming
operational
• Performance Standard– Installation of one of the technologies accepted in the protocol
• Legal Requirement Test– Project must not be required by law
• Regulatory Compliance– Project must be in compliance with all federal, state and local laws
or regulations
CAR Project Quantification Methodology• Methane emission reductions relative to ‘Baseline’
– Baseline represents “business as usual” or what would have occurred without the BCS installation
– Calculated monthly for each year of the project– For new livestock operations (greenfield sites), baseline is based on
prevailing system type for their region, animal type and farm size
• Monitoring of methane production, destruction and emissions – Biogas flow and methane concentration– Destruction device operation and efficiency– Project equipment and vehicle emissions
• Annual reporting and verification
• Crediting Period– Project is eligible to receive credits for 10 years from start date.
Project may apply for a second 10-year crediting period
Livestock Methane Project Profile
Project Duration Long 10 – 30 years
Relative Credit Yield Low 1,000 – 25,000 per year
Total Available Market Large, stable Thousands of suitable livestock operations;20+ million tons per year
Capital Requirements High Relative to carbon yield
Additional Revenues/Benefits
Many Renewable energy,RECs,Compost/bedding,Environmental benefits
CAR Livestock Methane Projects
2007 2008 2009 2010 20110
20,000
40,000
60,000
80,000
100,000
120,000
140,000
Vintage
CR
Ts
*As of June 2, 2011
CRT Issuances 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011
Number 2 7 14 11 0
Avg. Quantity 18,000 4,700 7,600 11,100 0
Livestock Project Issues/Risks
• Carbon credit value tends to be small compared to other project revenues and benefits– Carbon credits are an important driver for carbon-specific ‘lagoon
cover’ projects– Less important for renewable energy projects (although may ‘tip’
economics favorably)
• Carbon credit certification is currently only feasible for very large livestock operations– Relatively small quantity of emission reductions per project means
that CAR listing and verification expenses, along with required monitoring and sampling costs, tend to exceed the value of the CRTs for all but the largest farms
ARB Implementation of CAR Protocol• Similar in approach and quantification methodologies• Except: 1 CAR CRT is worth only 0.87 ARB offsets?
– Reflects project (biogenic) CO2 emissions from combusted methane• Additional costs for conversion of registered CAR CRTs
– A “desk review” may be possible for some project verification transitions, but the cost of even a “desk review” is likely to be substantial on a per-credit basis
• Future program design changes that could reduce costs– Bundling of projects – CDM-style “small scale” project designation with different
requirements and costs– Allowing conservative default factors in place of direct measurements– Use of electrical production data in lieu of gas flows and gas
composition
27
Keys to Success
• Ownership– 3rd party build, own, operate– Farmer focus on area of expertise:
on farm manure management• ‘Bundled’ projects
– Reduced capital costs– More efficient, coordinated O&M
• Supplemental feed stocks– Readily available organic waste sources for enhanced performance– Additional revenues from organic waste tipping fees, compost sales
• Aggressive incentives– New state and federal incentives for renewable energy from dairy
digesters provide attractive project economics
CONFIDENTIAL