PECHAN Development of a Regional Greenhouse Gas Inventory and Forecast Including Direct and Consumption-Based/Energy-Cycle Emissions Holly Lindquist, Stephen M. Roe, Jim Wilson, Maureen Mullen, Brad Strode, Jackson Schreiber E H Pechan & Associates E.H. Pechan & Associates Hillel Hammer, Jelena Matic, Teresa Lin AKRF I AKRF, Inc. Jeffrey Perlman 1 North Jersey Transportation Planning Authority
20
Embed
Development of a Regional Greenhouse Gas Inventoryyg and ...Microsoft PowerPoint - 6 -NJTPA EI Conference Presentation9-27-10.ppt [Compatibility Mode] Author: KPAYLOR Created Date:
This document is posted to help you gain knowledge. Please leave a comment to let me know what you think about it! Share it to your friends and learn new things together.
Transcript
PECHAN
Development of a Regional Greenhouse Gas Inventory and Forecast Including Direct and y g
Consumption-Based/Energy-Cycle Emissions
Holly Lindquist, Stephen M. Roe, Jim Wilson, Maureen Mullen, Brad Strode, Jackson Schreiber
E H Pechan & AssociatesE.H. Pechan & Associates
Hillel Hammer, Jelena Matic, Teresa Lin
AKRF IAKRF, Inc.
Jeffrey Perlman
11
North Jersey Transportation Planning Authority
Outline
• Objective
• Inventory Approach
• Sample Methods and ResultsSample Methods and Results
– Solid Waste Management
– Onroad Transportation
2
Objective
• Create region-wide Inventory & Forecast for North Jersey Transportation PlanningNorth Jersey Transportation Planning Authority
13 ti d 350 i i liti• 13 counties and over 350 municipalities
• Allow counties and municipalities to begin GHG mitigation planning
• Clearly inform planners of relative merits ofClearly inform planners of relative merits of mitigation actions
3
NJTPA Region
4
Inventory Approach: Accounting Methods
• Direct and Consumption-Based GHG emissionsemissions– Direct: emissions at the source (e.g., of fuel
combustion process etc )combustion, process, etc.)
– Consumption-Based: emissions attributed to the point of some GHG emitting activity (e.g., trip p g y ( g , porigin/destination, waste or wastewater generation)
• Energy-cycle emissions– Emissions from upstream fuel cycle (extraction, p y (
transport, processing/refining, distribution)5
Inventory Approach: Accounting Methods – Pros and ConsAccounting Methods – Pros and Cons
• Direct emissions are only basis for addingDirect emissions are only basis for adding emissions cumulatively without double-counting
• National State and other local inventories• National, State, and other local inventories primarily developed on direct emissions basis
C ti b d l l i i• Consumption-based plus energy-cycle emissions may best fit needs of mitigation planners
6
Example of Direct vs. Energy-cycle Emissions
New Jersey 2005 Inventory & Forecast
50.0
60.0
70.0
tCO2e)
Direct Emissions
Lifecycle Emissions
20.0
30.0
40.0
G Emissions (M
Mt
0.0
10.0GHG
77
Solid Waste Management Inventory• Includes solid waste landfills, composting,
recycling, and residential open burning
• Direct Emissions– Landfill and composting facility data provided by p g y p y
NJDEP– Residential open burning based on per capita burning
– Solid waste management profile developed for each countyW t t d i t th t i t t l dfill– Waste generated in county that is sent to landfill or composting facility regardless of facility location
– WARM transportation emission factor used for landfilling, li d tirecycling, and composting
• Energy-cycle EmissionsEnergy cycle Emissions– Emissions factors for embedded emissions from WARM– Process energy, non-energy process emissions,
transportation of raw materials and manufactured goodstransportation of raw materials and manufactured goods– Dependent on waste composition
9
Ocean County Waste Management Profile
12%
MSW Landfil l Disposal atCounty Landfil ls
MSW Disposal Export to
57%
27%
Landfil ls
MSW Disposal ‐Residential Open Burning
MSW R li57% MSW Recycling
MSW Composting
2%
2%
10
Solid Waste Management Forecast• Direct Emissions
– Assumed constant waste emplacement at landfills until anticipated year of closureanticipated year of closure
– Composting based on state annual average growth rate for 2000-2006O b i f t b d l ti th– Open burning forecast based on population growth
• Consumption and Energy-Cycle Emissions– Based on each county’s per-capita waste generation growthBased on each county s per capita waste generation growth
rate for 1995-2006
11
Sample Draft Results
0.35
Ocean County Municipal Solid Waste Management Direct GHG Emissions
0.25
0.30
0.15
0.20
CO
2e
0.05
0.10MM
tC
0.00
1212
MSW Landfill - Disposal Composting - CH4 and N2O Residential Open Burning
Sample Draft Results
0.40
Ocean County Municipal Solid Waste Management Consumption-based GHG Emissions
0 25
0.30
0.35
0.15
0.20
0.25
MM
tCO
2e
0.05
0.10
M
0.00
Residential Open Burning Composting - Transportation
Example of Direct vs. Consumption-based/Energy-cycle Emissions
3.00
Municipal Solid Waste Sector Emissions by Accounting Method
2.50
1.50
2.00
tCO
2e
0.50
1.00MM
t
0.00
2006
2008
2010
2012
2014
2016
2018
2020
2022
2024
2026
2028
2030
2032
2034
2036
2038
2040
2042
2044
2046
2048
2050
1414
Energy-Cycle Emissions Consumption Emissions Direct Emissions
Highway Transportation
• Includes all onroad vehiclesA ti it d t f NJTPA• Activity data from NJTPA Transportation Model
Li k d l l t t ti d t• Link and zone level transportation data
• Emission factors calculated using EPA’s MOVES2010 d lMOVES2010 model– CO2, CH4, N2O
• Emissions calculated within customized software (PPSUITE)
15
Highway Transportation
• Direct Emissions– Includes emissions for travel occurring withinIncludes emissions for travel occurring within
municipality/county– Excludes portion of trip occurring outside region– EPA’s MOVES modelEPA s MOVES model
• Consumption-based Emissions– Includes half of emissions from any trip originating or y p g g
ending within the municipality– Trips over which the county or municipality has some
controlcontrol
16
Direct versus Consumption-Based VMT
MCD
DD
Internal Trip: Direct VMT = Consumption VMT
O Through Trip: Direct VMT = portion in MCD; Consumption VMT = 0
Origin Trip: Direct VMT = portion within MCD;
O
Origin Trip: Direct VMT = portion within MCD; Consumption VMT = 50% of total trip VMT
O
D
17
Example of Direct vs. Consumption-based Emissions
North Jersey Highway Vehicle Emissions
5
6
Direct Estimate
3
4
5
tCO
2e
1
2
3
MM
t
Consumption Estimate
02006 2020 2035 2050
1818
Example of Direct vs. Consumption-based Emissions
Municipal Highway Vehicle Emissions
300,000
350,000
O2e
Direct Estimate
150,000
200,000
250,000
met
ric to
ns C
O
Consumption Estimate
50,000
100,000
Estimate
0East
RutherfordHackensack Paramus Fort Lee
1919
Summary
• Pros and cons to different accounting th dmethods.
– Direct emissions can be added cumulatively without double counting and are used by most other Nationaldouble-counting and are used by most other National, State, and local inventories
– Consumption-based plus energy-cycle emissions may p p gy y ybetter inform planners for some sectors
• Estimating emissions for direct, consumption-g , pbased, and energy-cycle emissions provides more flexibility to mitigation plannersmore flexibility to mitigation planners