GHG Report for CSA Standards GHG CleanProjects Registry · GHG Report Template for CSA Standards GHG CleanProjects® Registry Version 1.0 – September 2009 4 subject of regional

GHG Report for CSA Standards GHG CleanProjects® Registry

Multimodal transport on the Magdalena River by Impala Terminals

Report Version 3, 23 August 2019

1.1. Relevance ............................................................................................................ 2 1.2. Completeness ...................................................................................................... 2 1.3. Consistency ......................................................................................................... 2 1.4. Accuracy ............................................................................................................. 2 1.5. Transparency ....................................................................................................... 3 1.6. Conservativeness................................................................................................. 3

2. Project Description ...................................................................................................... 3

2.1. Project title .......................................................................................................... 3 2.2. The project’s purpose(s) and objective(s) are: .................................................... 3 2.3. Expected lifetime of the project .......................................................................... 4 2.4. Type of greenhouse gas emission reduction or removal project......................... 4 2.5. Legal land description of the project or the unique latitude and longitude ........ 4 2.6. Conditions prior to project initiation................................................................... 7 2.7. Description of how the project will achieve GHG emission reductions or removal enhancements .................................................................................................... 8 2.8. Project technologies, products, services and the expected level of activity ....... 8 2.9. Total GHG emission reductions and removal enhancements, stated in tonnes of CO2 e, likely to occur from the GHG project (GHG Assertion) ................................... 13 2.10. Identification of risks ........................................................................................ 14 2.11. Roles and Responsibilities ................................................................................ 14 2.12. Any information relevant for the eligibility of the GHG project under a GHG program and quantification of emission reductions ...................................................... 15 2.13. Summary environmental impact assessment .................................................... 21 2.14. Relevant outcomes from stakeholder consultations and mechanisms for on-going communication.................................................................................................... 22 2.15. Detailed chronological plan .............................................................................. 23

3. Selection and Justification of the Baseline Scenario ................................................. 24 4. Inventory of sources, sinks and Reservoirs (SSRs) for the project and baseline ...... 27 5. Quantification and calculation of GHG emissions/removals .................................... 29 6. Monitoring the Data information management system and data controls ................. 34 7. Reporting and verification details .............................................................................. 47

GHG Report Template for CSA Standards GHG CleanProjects® Registry

Version 1.0 – September 2009

2

1.1. Relevance

The selected methodology was the Clean Development Mechanism AM0090 - Modal

shift in transportation of cargo from road transportation to water or rail transportation.

Version 01.1.0, supplemented with the Clean Development Mechanism Tool03 – Tool to

calculate project or leakage CO2 emissions from fossil fuel combustion. Version 03.0.

and with the Clean Development Mechanism Tool05 – Baseline, Project and/or leakage

emissions from electricity consumption and monitoring of electricity generation. Version

03.0.

These fit the type of project and are in line with the requirements of Colombian

regulations. (See 2.12 Any information relevant for the eligibility of the GHG project

under a GHG program and quantification of emission reductions). As for the

applicability, see Table 4, Table 5 and Table 6.

Similarly, some deviations to the methodology and tools were presented, they can be seen

in more detail in section 7.3 Methodology deviations.

The sources for this project were selected according to the methodology applied and

deviations from it, and they are the CO2 emissions avoided by the decrease in fuel use for

the transportation of liquid cargo from the production fields to the ocean port and vice

versa. For further details, refer to section 4 Inventory of sources, sinks and Reservoirs

(SSRs) for the project and baseline.

1.2. Completeness

This document quantifies the different sources controlled and affected by project

activities. All sources of emissions identified by the methodology are considered and no

further relevant sources were identified. For further details, refer to section 4 Inventory of

sources, sinks and Reservoirs (SSRs) for the project and baseline.

1.3. Consistency

The baseline definition demonstrates consistency with the baseline guidelines for sectoral

GHG mitigation projects in Resolution 1447 of 2018, Article 35. In addition, the

calculations are shown to be in line with the CDM methodology for energy efficiency

projects for cargo transport. It also demonstrated that the service level of the baseline is

equivalent to the service level of the project scenario.

1.4. Accuracy

The measurement methods used to obtain information related to fuel consumption,

transported cargo and distance traveled are traceable and reliable, reducing the

propagation of uncertainty in the calculation. Country-specific fuel emission factors were

applied, which also reduces uncertainty.

However, some of the variables used are not measured, but are estimated, which

increases the uncertainty of the data. This is offset by conservative assumptions that

avoid overestimating reductions.



3

1.5. Transparency

An example calculation is provided in this report (See numeral 5.5). Further detail of the

calculations for the years in which the project has been operated is reported in an Excel

document available to verifiers, with the description of the sources of the emission

factors, the project operational data and the formulas used. In addition, the assumptions

applied are described.

The information contained in this report is of public status.

1.6. Conservativeness

In the calculations of the baseline and the project scenario, data, default factors and

assumptions are applied with a conservative attitude, for example, as to the performance

of transport vehicles on complementary routes, information was collected from different

sources in order to capture the variability associated with the different operating

conditions and a performance assumption was applied so it would not lead to

overestimating emission reduction.

2. Project Description

2.1. Project title

Multimodal transport on the Magdalena River by Impala Terminals

2.2. The project’s purpose(s) and objective(s) are:

Impala Terminals Barrancabermeja S.A. and Impala Terminals Colombia SAS ("Impala

Terminals") are two companies operating in Colombia, subsidiaries of the multinational

Trafigura. Impala Terminals' business is the transfer and transport of cargo, mainly from

the oil industry.

The purpose of the project developed by Impala Terminals is the implementation of a

single integral and efficient multimodal system that connects the inland industry with

ocean ports in a regular and reliable way and that drives the development of riverside

municipalities. In addition, the project aims to make transport more efficient, which

allows more cargo to be transported with lower fuel consumption, thus reducing

greenhouse gas emissions per unit of cargo transported.

The project involves transporting the liquid cargo by tanker trucks only from the wells to

the new river port terminal in Barrancabermeja, so that from this point it is transported on

the barges driven by tugboats along the Magdalena River to the ocean ports. As of

December 2017, 18 tugs and about 60 barges were in operation for the transport of liquid

cargo.

The project's emission reduction accreditation period provides for 10 years of operation

and a total reduction of 943,375 tCO2 is estimated in that period.

In addition to the benefits of GHG mitigation, the project has positive effects in a number

of areas, for example, contributes to the development of local industry, promotes the

formation of small and medium-sized enterprises, gives training to adults and, on the



4

subject of regional management, professionalizes jobs and has agreements with the

National Learning Service (SENA).

Impala seeks to verify the emission reductions of its project Multimodal transport on the

Magdalena River by Impala Terminals and to use the reductions to become carbon-

neutral against the national carbon tax. Any GHG emission reduction unit that applies to

the non-causation of the national carbon tax will not be used in another context as a

compensation for GHG emissions, which will be evidenced by proof that they are

previously cancelled within the certification program or source carbon standard.

2.3. Expected lifetime of the project

The total emission reduction accreditation period is 10 years, starting on June 19 of 2015

and ending on June 18 of 2025.

The total accreditation period of the project is less than the service life (20 years) of the

river equipment of Impala Terminals. The service life of the river terminal is 30 years,

evidenced by the port concession for usufruct of a public good.

2.4. Type of greenhouse gas emission reduction or removal project

The project pertains to sectoral scope 7 (Transport).

2.5. Legal land description of the project or the unique latitude and longitude

2.5.1. Project location

- Port terminal in Barrancabermeja, ITBSA on maps presented after coordinate tables.

Latitude Longitude

7,098653 -73,892951

- Port Society Puerto Bahia, Cartagena.

Latitude Longitude

10,286578 -75,52845

- River route: Magdalena River route from Barrancabermeja to Calamar and Canal del Dique route from Calamar to Cartagena.

- Extraction fields.

Origin Coordinates Origin Coordinates

Castilla 3.825833, -73.687222 Coyote 6.889451, -73.666725

Chacharo 4.409121, -72.96609 Cuerva 5.663120, -70.683960

Cohembi 0.349028, -76.493972 Curucucu 4.371697, -72.663406

Cpe-6 3.495378, -72.111866 Glauca 6.066469, -74.492128

Dorotea 5.452906, -71.026691 Iraca 3.595018, -73.663235

Llanos34 (caribayona) 4.498596, -72.752459 Itbb 7.100000, -73.891151

Moriche 4.920053, -72.017409 Jacamar 4.371388, -72.66250



5

Origin Coordinates Origin Coordinates

Vasconia 6.056676, -74.554962 Jacana 4.384020, -72.724213

Barrancabermeja 7.100000, -73.891151 Juglar 7.697402, -73.705278

Bullerengue 10.6367397, -74.939920 Llanos 58 3.886894, -72.642027

Corrales 5.805007, -72.865450 Los ángeles 8.080343, -73.581685

Platanillo 0.446259,-76.289844 Max 4.494457, -72.550224

Rubiales 3.786387, -71.453393 Mono araña 8.132602, -73.619489

Caramelo 8.333228, -73.672156 Paz de ariporo 5.880681, -71.893384

El difícil 9.916043, -74.11886 Pendare 3.736258, -71.860897

Fenix 7.508567, -73.380607 Pore 5.728208, -71.991893

La punta 4.813055, -72.08028 Potrillo 5.57667, -71.75129

Oso pardo 8.166004, -73.719161 Pozo bolívar 5.771134,-72.852522

Puerto umbría mirto 0.860203, -76.580530 Puertoasis 0.504902, -76.501082

Aguas blancas 6.835, -73.771944 Querubin 8.081769,-73.578859

Aguazul 5.170679, -72.550903 Quillacinga 0.261083, -76.546736

Akira 4.342604,-72.715315 Rionegro 7.267275, -73.151372

Atarraya 4.225277, -71.823055 Santana 0.592960, -76.568748

Begonia 5.78778,-71.38831 Tarotaro 4.446822, -72.610562

Bonga 9.5047, -75.069862 Tigana 4.491077, -72.714547

Cabuyaro 4.284443, -72.792399 Tilo 4.484681,-72.625993

Calona 4.531508, -72.614618 Tua 4.409323, -72.648725

Carmentea 4.575926,-72.615490 Villa garzón 1.028421, -76.617989

Carupana 5.575421, -71.749614 Yamu 5.648501,-71.737298

Chiricoca 4.492222,-72.664722 Zoe 7.8052528,-73.5912025

Chuira 8.171601, -73.544684 San martin 8.002488, -73.513075

Colon 7.700889, -73.733602

Maps of the location of the relevant places of the mitigation project are presented below.



6



7

2.5.2. Ownership of the project

The new river port terminal and river fleet are owned by Impala Terminals. The cargo

generator is Trafigura, through Trafigura Energy Colombia S.A.S. and C.I. Trafigura

Petroleum Colombia S.A.S., who buy the liquid cargo products and transport them with

Impala's services, which in turn outsources the road transport services, so the road fleet of

tanker trucks is owned by third parties. The cargo generator is one of the project

participants.

2.6. Conditions prior to project initiation

The Colombian oil reserve is mainly made up of heavy crude oil, for which transportation

to ports on the Atlantic coast is a major challenge, since even the most efficient pipelines

have capacity restrictions to move such a viscous product. So, usually in the events of

high-demand in pipelines or contingencies, it is necessary to use tankers to evacuate

production and maintain the operation of the fields. This transport service has been

offered by Impala since the start of its operation in 2013. Until the first quarter of 2015,

heavy crude oil was transported from the extraction wells to the port of Barranquilla by

road in tankers trucks. On average, the routes were about 1,500 km long and took 5 days

on the one-way route. Trips were also made from Barranquilla to the wells for the

transport of naphtha, a product used as a crude oil solvent.

This transport by tanker trucks was outsourced, i.e. it was carried out by transport

companies that travel the routes established by Impala. Although at one time Impala also

had its own fleet, it did not operate as expected, so the operation was maintained with the

outsourced fleet. The average capacity of these tanker trucks is 210 barrels of crude oil



8

and 240 barrels of naphtha. One of the conditions of the operation is that the vehicles

could not be of models more than 10 years old.

As for the river operation, an average of 8 million barrels were transported by the river

annually between different transport companies prior to the entry of the project, but with

the start of Impala's operations the sector was boosted and this number was increased to

15 million barrels, of which Impala is responsible for transporting 44%.

2.7. Description of how the project will achieve GHG emission reductions or removal enhancements

The river route is on the order of 700 km length from Barrancabermeja to the port of

Cartagena and it takes 6 days; the route of the complementary routes, from the wells to

the port of Barrancabermeja is on the order of 750 km length and takes about 3 days. The

river route replaces about half the average distance of the land routes. While the time to

destination is longer, the load capacity is much higher in river transport, so a convoy

carries between 4 and 6 barges and each barge carries the equivalent of 33 tankers. This

allows to transport the same amount of cargo with lower fuel consumption.

In the following figures, the routes prior the project operation vs. the multimodal

transport route are schematically compared.

Figure 1 Diagram of the scenario prior to project

execution. Land routes in purple.

Figure 2 Diagram of the project scenario. Multimodal

route. Land routes in green. Note: This image

corresponds to a report prepared in 2014. In the final

design, the destination is Cartagena.

Prior to the multimodal operation, the destination of the land transport by tanker truck

was a seaport in Barranquilla. In the original design of the project, it had been envisaged

that the destination of the river transport also would be a seaport in Barranquilla, where

the mouth of the Magdalena River is located. To this end, the construction of a new

deepwater port in Barranquilla was contemplated; however, the shallow depth of the



9

access channel became an obstacle to the development of this port. So a capacity-use

contract was concluded with the Port Society of Puerto Bahia, Cartagena, a new seaport,

inaugurated in 2015, which is connected to the Magdalena River via the Canal del Dique,

which has a length of 115 km from Calamar to Puerto Bahia.

Figure 3 Canal del Dique. Adjusted from Catorce 6 Revista Ambiental.

2.8. Project technologies, products, services and the expected level of activity

2.8.1. Technologies implemented by the project

From March 24, 2015, the multimodal transport project began in its early stages, and

from February 1, 2018 the official commercial operation of the river port began.

The features of the river terminal built in Barrancabermeja on the Magdalena River are an

area of 500,000 m2, storage of 850 kbbl, 1,200 m of dock line and an annual capacity of

190,000 TEU (Twenty-foot Equivalent Unit, the load capacity of a 20-foot standardized

container).

Export, import and re-embarkation operations are carried out at the port through the

following transport operations: customs transit declarations, cabotage, multimodal

transport operations and combined transport. It is also suitable for liquid loading and dry

cargo operations.

The port concession has effect from 2014 to 2044, granted by the local environmental

authority, CORMAGDALENA.



10

Figure 4 Port of Impala Terminals Barrancabermeja

This is the composition of the river fleet and its characteristics:

Equipment Amount Type

TRATANK CROATA 27 Barge

TRATANK ARGENTINA 22 Barge

MAGBIT 12 Barge

BIG PUSHER 10 Tugboat

SMALL PUSHER 6 Tugboat

GAS 3 Gas tanker

TRATANK ARGENTINA TRATANK CROATA MAGBIT

Gen

eral

cla

ssif

icat

ion

Hull Naval Steel Naval Steel Naval Steel

Length overall (m) 59,48 59,48 59,48

Beam Max (m) 16 16 16

Side depth (m) 3,66 3,65 4,6

Freeboard (m) 0,3 0,3 0,3

Useful tip (m) 2,71 2,69 3,4

Empty draft (m) 0,65 0,65 0,9

Empty Displ. (t) 572 570 624

Useful Displ. (t) 2503,6 2503 2450

Total Displ. (t) 3075,6 3073,2 3074

Ca

pa

citi

es

Conveyor (t) 2503,6 2503 2450



11

TRATANK ARGENTINA TRATANK CROATA MAGBIT

Towing (t) N/A 2503 2450

Cellars 5 4 4

Void space 10 10 10

Cottage 2 2 4

Small Pusher Large Pusher G

ener

al c

lass

ific

atio

n

Hull Naval Steel Naval Steel

Length overall (m) 29,5 33,7

Beam Max (m) 11,2 11,2

Side depth (m) 2,76 2,76

Freeboard (m) 0,81 0,3

Useful tip (m) 0,6 0,83

Empty draft (m) 1,35 1,63

Empty Displ. (t) 308,7 438,96

Useful Displ. (t) 193,87 310,2

Total Displ. (t) 502,57 749,16

Cap

acit

ies

Conveyor (t) 0,194 0,31

Towing (t) 10965 28755

Exploitation (t) 11158 29065

Number of propellants 2 3

Brand Propellants Caterpillar Caterpillar

Power (HP) 1700 3825

R.P.M 1800 1800

Rudder control Hidráulico Hidráulico

Height (m) 4,65 11,7

Staterooms 5 7

Cellars 3 3

Void space 14 6

Cottage 4 2

The crew of the tugboats consists of: Captain, Pilot, Helmsman, Petty Officer, Machinist,

Machine Assistant, Chef and three Sailors.

Tugs are fueled with liquid fuel stored on barges called MAGfuel. However, at the start

of the operation, they were fueled from tanker trucks.

The volume of cargo transported is variable and is expected to change according to

Impala's commercial operation and the oil sector activity, for example, the amount of

cargo carried is expected to rise, mainly because it is likely that crude oil production will

increase in 2018. Since 2017 Impala transports Fuel Oil to the coast, which also



12

contributes. In addition, since June 2018, the import of crude for refining began in

Colombia, which would increase the cargo transported on return trips.

The Port Society of Puerto Bahia is located in Cartagena, of which Trafigura is a

shareholder. Impala has a buoy inside the port where they have a platform that allows

mooring of the barges. The process of loading ships is jointly between Trafigura and the

Port.

The complementary routes shown schematically in Figure 2 are contracted with third

parties, using the command model, in which a contract is signed between the transporters

and Trafigura, but the one who defines the conditions of the operation is Impala. As

noted, complementary routes go only from the extraction fields and there are no

complementary routes at the destination.

For complementary routes, the vehicles used in the operation are two- and three-axle

tractor-trailers, mostly Kenworth brand. Taking a sample of 1109 vehicles used during

Impala's operation in July 2018, it is found that the fleet used corresponds to models

between 2007 and 2017, of which 67% of the fleet used corresponds to models from 2012

and 2013 years, as shown in the following table:

Model N° Tanker truck

2007 47

2008 89

2009 28

2010 30

2011 99

2012 542

2013 201

2014 34

2015 35

2016 2

2017 2

TOTAL 1109

The capacities of these vehicles range from 9,000 to 13,000 gallons, where most of the

units used are in the range of 11,000 to 12,000 gallons, i.e. between 260 to 285 barrels of

capacity.

Capacity (gal) N° Tanker truck

9000-10000 47

10000-11000 436

11000-12000 621

12000-13000 5

Total 1109



13

As for the classification according to the number of axles, there is a sample of 684 units

mobilized in the month of June 2018, of which 56% correspond to 3-axle tractor-trailers

and 44% of 2 axles, showing that both types of vehicles have an important stake in the

operation.

The expected level of activity for the years to come from the project is presented in

Figure 5.

Figure 5 Projection of volumes to be transported until 2023. Taken from the file “Proyección Volumenes Proyecto

Bonos.xlsx”

2.9. Total GHG emission reductions and removal enhancements, stated in tonnes of CO2 e, likely to occur from the GHG project (GHG Assertion)

The following table shows the estimated reductions, based on the 2015 to May 2018

operation and an estimate of each parameter (based on the activity projections to 2023

and the ratio of the parameter to the cargo of 2017), as shown in the following formula.

The information was used for 2017 only, because this is the year of commercial operation

in which the activity was already stabilized and the relationship between each parameter

and the transported cargo is expected to behave similarly.

𝑃𝑎𝑟𝑎𝑚𝑒𝑡𝑒𝑟𝑦 =𝑃𝑎𝑟𝑎𝑚𝑒𝑡𝑒𝑟2017

𝐶𝑎𝑟𝑔𝑜2017∗ 𝐶𝑎𝑟𝑔𝑜𝑦

Table 1 Project emissions reductions

Year Estimated net GHG emission reductions or removals (tCO2)

19/06/2015-31/12/2015 1,351

2016 19,675

2017 45,340

-

5.00

10.00

15.00

20.00

25.00

2019 2020 2021 2022 2023

MB

bl

Transport projection

Crudo, Fuel oil Nafta, Light Crude



14

2018 46,758

2019 58,959

2020 72,190

2021 113,171

2022 154,753

2023 174,802

2024 174,802

01/01/2025-18/06/2025 81,574

Total 943,375

2.10. Identification of risks

The main risks of the operation are the conditions of navigability of the river, as there are

certain restrictions for the operation, such as radius of curvatures, depths and widths of

the channel that have led to stop the operation, causing routes that in optimal conditions

take 6 days, take up to 10 days. This risk would be mitigated by the project, which is the

responsibility of the national government, related to the river navigability that includes,

among others, the dredging of the river.

2.11. Roles and Responsibilities

Organization name Impala Terminals Group (Impala Terminals Colombia SAS y

Impala Terminals Barrancabermeja S.A.)

Role in the project Project Manager

Owner of the river fleet and river port infrastructure

Contact person Alexander Higuera

Title Chief Operating Officer

Address Carrera 55 No. 100 – 51 Piso 8, Barranquilla, Colombia

Telephone +57 5 3850537

Email [email protected]

Organization name Trafigura (Trafigura Energy Colombia S.A.S. y C.I. Trafigura

Petroleum Colombia S.A.S.)

Role in the project Cargo owner

Contact person Susana Dennis

Title Lawyer

Address Carrera 11 No. 82 – 01 Piso 7, Bogotá, Colombia

Telephone +57 1 7420910

Email [email protected]

Organization name CAIA Ingeniería SAS

Role in the project Document preparation, reduction assertion and review of the GHG

Report.



15

Contact person Alexander Valencia Cruz /Jessica Wade-Murphy de Jiménez

Title Consultants

Address Calle 67 7-94 Of. 404, Bogotá, Colombia

Telephone +57 300 216 2406 / +57 310 782 7017

Email [email protected] / [email protected]

2.12. Any information relevant for the eligibility of the GHG project under a GHG program and quantification of emission reductions

Compliance with the requirements of the GHG CleanProjects Registry

The project complies with the requirements of the GHG CleanProjects Registry and

demonstrates compliance with ISO 14064-2, as described in sections 1.1 to 1.6 and

throughout this report. The validation and verification report that accompanies the current

report will demonstrate further the conformity of the project with the requirements of the

GHG CleanProjects registry.

Context of the mitigation project

The Nationally Determined Contribution (NDC) of Colombia, presented in 2015,

envisages a unilateral and unconditional goal of mitigation of 20% of GHG emissions

from the business-as-usual (BAU) scenario in 2030. The goal was defined against the

BAU scenario that was projected based on the national GHG Inventory of 2010, applying

economic and other assumptions. In this way, the year 2010 was defined as the "baseline

year" of the country, therefore, any activity that was implemented in previous years and

reduced emissions, is already embodied in the baseline and cannot be considered as

"mitigation" action for verification. This situation is confirmed in decree 926 of 2017,

Chapter 2, article 2.2.11.2.1, paragraph 1, "Only reductions of GHG emissions and

removals generated from 1 January 2010 may be submitted.".

Measures by sector have been prioritized from the Ministry of Environment and

Sustainable Development to contribute to the national commitment made in the NDC.

Among the goals defined for the Ministry of Transport is the "Navigability of the

Magdalena and the Intermodal Strategic Plan". In this line is the Plan of Action 2018-

2020, of CORMAGDALENA (Regional Autonomous Corporation of the Great River of

Magdalena), which contemplates the Strategic Navigation Plan, which aims to recover

the navigability of the Magdalena River up to 908 km upstream responding to the

country's need to establish intermodality, as set out in Resolution 0000164 of 5 February

2015 of the Ministry of Transport. In this sense, this project is aligned with national

priorities for mitigation in the transport sector.

Resolution 1447 of 2018 of the Ministry of Environment and Sustainable Development

(MADS) also defines the additionality criteria for sectoral GHG mitigation projects in

article 37. Particularly:

Table 2 Compliance Analysis: Requirements of resolution 1447 of 2018

Criterion of 2018 resolution 1447 article 37 Project Compliance

GHG emissions reductions or removals are Section 3 Selection and



16


considered additional when the head of the

sectoral mitigation project demonstrates that

they would not have occurred in the absence of

the GHG Mitigation initiative and which

generate a net benefit to the atmosphere with

respect to their baseline.

Justification of the Baseline

Scenario presents the choice and

justification of baseline, which is

different from the activity of the

initiative, and section

5Quantification and calculation of

GHG emissions/removals

evidences the net benefit to the

atmosphere generated compared to

the baseline.

Likewise, GHG removals are considered to be

additional when they result from the

implementation of forestry GHG removal

activities, which are developed in areas other

than natural forest and that demonstrate the

positive net change of carbon deposits in the

area of development of the activity and other

criteria of additionality defined by the Ministry

of Environment and Sustainable development.

Not applicable

Reductions in emissions or removals of GHG

resulting from compensation activities of the

biotic component resulting from the impacts of

projects, works or activities within the

framework of environmental licenses,

concessions, applications for single-use permits

of forest resources for land use change, and the

application for definitive extractions of national

and regional forest reserves, are not considered

additional.

Not applicable

Emissions reductions or GHG removals are not

considered to be additional when they are the

product of preservation and restoration activities

in strategic areas and ecosystems that access

payments for environmental services of GHG

reduction and capture according to what is

established in chapter 8 of title 9 of Part 2 of

Book 2 of Decree 1076 of 2015.

Not applicable

The reductions or removals of GHG generated

from the date of completion of the legal terms of

the compensations referred to in this article, or

the termination of payments for environmental

services of GHG reduction and capture, shall be

deemed to be additional.

Not applicable

The owners of sectoral GHG mitigation projects

must apply in all their actions and procedures the

The GHG CleanProjects Registry

certification program establishes



17


additionality criteria set out in this article, in

complement to the additionality criteria

established by the GHG certification program or

carbon standard to which it is subscribed.

the use of the analysis of

alternatives and barriers to justify

the selection of the baseline

scenario. In section 3 Selection and

Justification of the Baseline

Scenario, we present the

identification and selection of

baseline, meeting the criteria

established by the GHG

certification program.

Article 221 of Law 1819 of 2016 established the national carbon tax which began validity

from 1 January 2017. According to its regulation in Sole Statutory Tax Decree 1625 of

2016, the tax is charged to the purchaser of fuel in proportion to its equivalence in tonnes

of CO2e generated from combustion. The rate is fixed per tonne of CO2e according to

the carbon content of the fossil fuel.

Since the dispatch of Decree 926 of 2017, a non-causation procedure for the national

carbon tax exists. It is possible to avoid the payment of the tax by means of the

neutralization of the GHG emissions associated with the use of the fuel, by verified GHG

emissions reductions. To avoid the payment of the tax, the purchaser of the fuel must

inter alia show the declaration of verification of the emissions reductions, issued by a

verification body accredited under the standard ISO 14065, equivalent to the quantity of

fuel in question.

The requirements described by the decree for the characteristics of the emission

reductions that are valid for the non-causation of the tax, include:

Table 3 Compliance Analysis: Requirements of decree 926 of 2017

Requirement of decree 926 of 2017 Project Compliance

The mitigation initiative must be

developed in the national territory.

The project takes place in the national

territory: Route of the Magdalena River,

between Barrancabermeja, Santander and

Calamar, and by Canal del Dique between

Calamar and Cartagena, Bolívar.

The initiative must be formulated and

implemented through a certification

program or carbon standard that has a

public registration platform.

The project is formulated through the

GHG CleanProjects Registry certification

program, which has a public registry.

Have been implemented following a

methodology, either from a certification

program or carbon standard, or from the

clean development mechanism.

The project is implemented from a clean

development mechanism methodology

(details below).

Do not come from activities that are

developed by the mandate of an

The project is a voluntary activity.

https://www.csaregistries.ca/cleanprojects/masterprojects_e.cfm



18

environmental authority.

Be certified by the certification program

or carbon standard and duly cancelled

within it.

The project will request certification by

GHG CleanProjects Registry and cancel

any reduction unit prior to use for non-

causation of the national carbon tax.

Impala Terminals is not subject to GHG emissions trading. There are no mandatory limits

or ceilings on their emissions level, either.

As for the methodology selected, AM0090 – Modal shift in transportation of cargo from

road transportation to water or rail transportation. Version 0.1.1.0, the following table

of applicability is presented:

Table 4 Applicability Analysis AM0090 – Modal shift in transportation of cargo from road transportation to water or

rail transportation. Version 0.1.1.0

Applicability

This methodology is applicable to project activities

that result in modal shift in transportation of a

specific cargo (excluding passengers) from road

transportation using trucks to water transportation

using barges or ships or rail transportation.

Achieved, the project consists

of the operation of a

multimodal liquid cargo

transportation system

involving a significant section

of barge transport along the

Magdalena River and the

Canal del Dique.

The methodology is applicable under the following

conditions:

a) The owner of the cargo is one of the project participants. If the entity investing in the CDM

project activity is not the owner of the cargo, it

should also be a project participant;

b) The project participants should have made at least one of the below listed new investments:

o Direct investment in new infrastructure, including facilities (new ports, handling

areas) and/or equipment (ships, barges, etc.)

for water transportation;

o Direct investment in new infrastructure, including facilities (new ports, handling

areas, railway track) and/or equipment

(trains, wagons, etc) for rail transportation;

o Refurbishment/replacement of existing water and rail transportation infrastructure

or equipment, with transport capacity

expansion.

a. Achieved, Trafigura is the cargo generator and

Impala, who is the project

owner and the cargo

transporter, is part of the

Trafigura group. Both

Impala and Trafigura

participate in the project.

b. Achieved, direct investment was made in

the construction of the

new river port and in the

purchase of barges and

tugboats.

The transport infrastructure/equipment in which

these new investments are made is at least 50%

Achieved, Impala Terminals

is a private port for public



19

used by the cargo transported under the project

activity, i.e. the cargo transported under the project

activity constitutes at least 50% of the cargo

transported annually by/with this

infrastructure/equipment;

use. However, there is

currently no significant

activity of other transport

companies in the port. While

the main transport is the

liquid cargo, a smaller

volume of dry cargo,

corresponding to 2.1% of the

total cargo mobilized by river

transport between 2016 and

2017, has also been

transported.

With respect to fuels, the following conditions

apply:

• In the case of gaseous fossil fuels, the methodology is applicable if it can be

demonstrated that equal or more gaseous fossil

fuels are used in the baseline scenario than in

the project activity. The methodology is not

applicable in its current form if more gaseous

fossil fuels are used in the project activity

compared to the baseline scenario;

• In the case of biofuels, the methodology is applicable if it can be demonstrated that equal

or more biofuels are used in the baseline

scenario than in the project activity. The

methodology is not applicable in its current

form if more biofuels are used in the project

activity compared to the baseline scenario.

Achieved, more biofuel is

used in the baseline than in

the project operation because

tanker trucks use a

commercial blended diesel

with 10% biodiesel, while

tugs use marine diesel

without biodiesel content.

The project transportation mode is defined in the

CDM-PDD at the validation of the project activity

and no change of transportation mode is allowed

thereafter;

Achieved, the project that is

presented corresponds only to

the change from transport by

tanker trucks to multimodal

transport by the river

The cargo is transported from the same origin (point

A) to the same destination (point B) throughout the

whole crediting period. These two points and

transportation routes are defined in the CDM-PDD

at the validation of the project activity and are fixed

along the crediting period;

Achieved, the river transport

originates in Barrancabermeja

and its destination is

Cartagena.

Under the project activity, the route from origin to

destination may combine the different

transportation modes: Trucks, ships, barges and/or

rail but a part of the route must consist of either

ships, barges or rail;

Achieved, the project consists

of multimodal transport,

combining transport by tanker

trucks and barges.

Both in the baseline and project activity, only one Achieved, the product



20

type of cargo, owned by the project participants, is

transported and no mix of cargo is permitted (this

condition does not apply to the return trip cargo).

The cargo type of the project activity is defined in

the CDM-PDD at the validation of the project

activity and is fixed along the crediting period;

transported corresponds to

liquid petroleum products

(e.g. heavy crude, Fuel Oil,

Nafta).

The railway infrastructure or waterway has enough

capacity to accommodate new transportation

demand under the project activity and will not

displace other existing transportation demand due to

limited capacity of infrastructure.

Achieved, the entry into

operation of the project does

not limit the capabilities for

the operation of other

transport offers. See section

2.6.

Table 5 Applicability analysis: Tool03 – Tool to calculate project or leakage CO2 emissions from fossil fuel

combustion. Version 03.0.

Scope and applicability

This tool provides procedures to calculate project

and/or leakage CO2 emissions from the combustion

of fossil fuels. It can be used in cases where CO2

emissions from fossil fuel combustion are

calculated based on the quantity of fuel combusted

and its properties. Methodologies using this tool

should specify to which combustion process j this

tool is being applied.

Achieved; the project

calculates project emissions

according to the amount of

fuel used and its properties.

Table 6 Applicability análisis: Tool05 – Tool to calculate baseline, project and/or leakage emissions from electricity

consumption and monitoring of electricity generation. Version 03.0

Applicability

If emissions are calculated for electricity

consumption, the tool is only applicable if one out

of the following three scenarios applies to the

sources of electricity consumption:

- Scenario A: Electricity consumption from the grid. The electricity is purchased from the grid

only, and either no captive power plant(s) is/are

installed at the site of electricity consumption

or, if any captive power plant exists on site, it is

either not operating or it is not physically able

to provide electricity to the electricity

consumer;

- Scenario B: Electricity consumption from (an) off-grid fossil fuel fired captive power plant(s).

One or more fossil fuel fired captive power

plants are installed at the site of the electricity

Achieved, the project

contemplates scenario A, as

the electricity consumed in

the port corresponds to

power delivered by the grid.



21

consumer and supply the consumer with

electricity. The captive power plant(s) is/are not

connected to the electricity grid; or

- Scenario C: Electricity consumption from the grid and (a) fossil fuel fired captive power

plant(s). One or more fossil fuel fired captive

power plants operate at the site of the electricity

consumer. The captive power plant(s) can

provide electricity to the electricity consumer.

The captive power plant(s) is/are also

connected to the electricity grid. Hence, the

electricity consumer can be provided with

electricity from the captive power plant(s) and

the grid.

This tool can be referred to in methodologies to

provide procedures to monitor amount of electricity

generated in the project scenario, only if one out of

the following three project scenarios applies to the

recipient of the electricity generated:

- Scenario I: Electricity is supplied to the grid;

- Scenario II: Electricity is supplied to

consumers/electricity consuming facilities; or

- Scenario III: Electricity is supplied to the grid and

consumers/electricity consuming facilities.

Not applicable, Tool05 is

applied to calculate

emissions corresponding to

energy consumed from the

grid.

This tool is not applicable in cases where captive

renewable power generation technologies are

installed to provide electricity in the project

activity, in the baseline scenario or to sources of

leakage. The tool only accounts for CO2 emissions.

Not applicable

2.13. Summary environmental impact assessment

The environmental permits in force and relevant to the operation of the river port consist

of:

• Environmental License and Environmental Management Plan, approved by Resolution 690 of 2013 of the Regional Autonomous Corporation of Santander

(CAS).

This is the summary of the impacts and measures identified in the Environmental

Management Plan requested by the Colombian environmental authorities.

Table 7 Summary of the results of the environmental impact assessment and the measures designed for each.

Impact Measure

Soil loss and alteration Storage of organic soil removed for use in the formation

of slopes.



22

Generation of instability and

erosion.

Training on appropriate collection and management of

surface and sub-surface water and confinement of

materials.

Generation of sterile material

and debris, alteration of water

quality, alteration of air quality

and noise, visual involvement

of the landscape.

Debris will be transported to temporary collection sites,

well located and protected, for final disposal in a place

authorized by the environmental authority.

Alteration of the

physicochemical

characteristics of water,

alteration of aquatic

ecosystems.

Treatment plant for the management of domestic

wastewater from offices.

Fat trap and API separator for water used for washing

vehicles and barges and runoff of the liquid terminal.

Sedimentation tanks for the runoff waters of the coal

terminal.

Alteration of air quality,

alteration of sound pressure

levels.

Wind barrier, water spray on the piles and carbon

conveyor belts.

Proper maintenance to equipment, ban of whistle and

sirens, location of the loudest equipment away from

human settlements.

Generation of domestic and

hazardous solid waste,

pollution of water quality and

air quality, impact of

perception and enjoyment of

the landscape and soil

pollution.

Management of domestic solid waste: Separation at the

source, gathering and collection of waste systems for

incineration, disposal in landfill or exploitation.

Hazardous waste will be handled by an authorized

external manager.

Special waste will also be taken to landfill or

incineration.

Alteration of hydrobiological

communities and alteration of

the physicochemical quality of

water.

Separation of sediments removed during dredging is

made. Reduction of movement of cables or anchors to

avoid resuspension of sediments. Environmental

education and community information actions.

Loss of plant coverage and

terrestrial habitat, alteration of

terrestrial fauna, alteration of

hydrobiological communities.

Specific to the construction process.

- Delimitation of the work fronts - Environmental awareness workshops - Rescue of plant material and mulch - Management of plant material during intervention - Compensation: Purchase of land for conservation by

the environmental authority.

Conservation of endangered

plant and fauna species.

Transfer of vulnerable plant species and planting of new

individuals.

Continuous study of vulnerable animal populations.

2.14. Relevant outcomes from stakeholder consultations and mechanisms for on-going communication.

In the phase before operation, Impala conducted a broad consultation and reporting

process to stakeholders. From March 2013, the process of socializing the project began



23

with four surrounding communities, the municipal government, the national government

and the fishing guilds. Then, six-monthly meetings regarding construction progress were

held. In 2018, the closing meeting of the construction stage was held.

Consultation with stakeholders in surrounding communities prior to the operation raised

an interest in employment opportunities. A policy for the recruitment of labour was

implemented, through which percentages of participation of local labour, both unskilled

and skilled, were established. The percentages were met and the goals were even

exceeded.

In addition, after demonstrations by some members of surrounding communities, in

October 2014 two commitments were established with the surrounding communities. The

first was that Impala would continue with voluntary social interventions, and the second

was that Impala established priority tendering processes for local entrepreneurs and that it

would ensure the recruitment of local labour by its contractors. To meet these

commitments, Impala has voluntarily conducted training and empowerment of local

entrepreneurs to bring them to a better standard of service and also internal management

with the procurement area to train about benefits of hiring locally.

In terms of mechanisms for permanent communication with stakeholders, there are four

mechanisms for permanent communication:

• Citizen Service Point (PAC) – office in Barrancabermeja.

• To-use care phone ("01800041769")

• Email, [email protected]

• "Request, Complaint, Claim, Suggestion" (PQRS) system, which is administered from the PAC.

Further ongoing communication actions have been undertaken with communities and

other stakeholders, such as river and road safety campaigns.

2.15. Detailed chronological plan

Table 8 Relevant project activities

Date Activity Evidence

November

2013

Construction of the terminal begins in

Barrancabermeja First intervention report.

2014

ERM assessment of the GHG

emission reduction potential of

Impala Terminals multimodal

transport in Colombia

Brochure “Multimodalismo-

Reduciendo las Emisiones de

Carbono en Colombia”

24 March 2015

Early-stage operation of the terminal

in Barrancabermeja begins, with river

transport to Barranquilla

Letter of notification to

CORMAGDALENA

19 June 2015 First river trip with Puerto Bahia

origin and start of mitigation activity

Certificate of inspection

house



24

1 April 2017

Starts the operation in the commercial

phase of the terminal in

Barrancabermeja.

Logs on TMS1 and TMS2 of

loading and unloading from

ITBB.

June 2017 Fuel Oil transport start Transportation guide

1 February

2018

Starts the full operation of the

terminal in Barrancabermeja

Letter of notification to

CORMAGDALENA

2018

Consulting is contracted to formulate

the project to certify the reduction of

GHG achieved

Email from Susana Dennis

3. Selection and Justification of the Baseline Scenario

Due to Colombia's national circumstances in relation to its mitigation target and national

baseline (see section 2.12) the baseline is considered to be the practices prior to the

project operation.

However, since the destination of the project operation is the port in Cartagena and not in

Barranquilla, as was the case in the ground operation in the years prior to the project, the

baseline was defined based on the information of the trips made by tanker truck to

Barranquilla (number of trips and volumes transported), but each trip was assigned a

distance in km according to its respective origin with destination Cartagena.

In the operation before the project, the transport of liquid petroleum products was done

by tanker trucks. Crude oil was the liquid petroleum product most transported. Fuel Oil is

also transported in the project. Even though this service was not previously provided by

Impala, it is important to highlight the incidence of several factors:

a) Crude oil production, and consequently its transportation, showed sharp fluctuations in the first years of operation of the project, due to international price variability,

which prompted Impala to look for other liquid petroleum products for transport.



25

Figure 6 Historic crude oil production in Colombia.1 Thousands of barrels per calendar day (KBDC)

b) A process was opened to contract the transport of Fuel Oil by Ecopetrol. Even if the multi-modal transport project had not existed, Impala would also have made an offer

in the process, offering transportation by tanker trucks.

As a baseline scenario, transport through the pipeline system is ruled out. Before the port

operation, transport was carried out by tanker trucks, because pipeline use is restricted to

the transport of products whose API is between 18 and 50 for most of the country

pipelines2. In addition, according to the magazine Energía 16, in its article of February

27, 2018, Oil infrastructure and industry in Colombia, business competition for access to

pipelines is growing, as the current infrastructure is not sufficient to cope with the recent

increase in production.

Therefore, the alternative would be the construction of a new pipeline, however, this

represents a big economic investment and would not solve the technical barriers to the

transport of products whose API is not between 18 and 50.

Similarly, multimodal transport with barges along a section of the Magdalena River also

faces barriers because there was a need to build a new river port and acquire the right

river fleet to achieve large-scale transport, which represents a large economic investment.

The operation presents challenges due to the low navigability of the Magdalena River,

which does not allow the river transport to operate at full capacity. In addition, despite

the Strategic Navigation Plan, which aims to restore the navigability of the Magdalena

River, there is uncertainty about the date of implementation of the plan. It was also

necessary to overcome the perception that Barrancabermeja is not a logistics city, to be

considered as a river transport port.

None of the above barriers affect the operation with tanker trucks transportation. The

analysis of the barriers of alternatives to the mitigation project is presented below.

1 Adapted from

http://www.upme.gov.co/generadorconsultas/Consulta_Series.aspx?idModulo=3&tipoSerie=138 2 Pipeline Conveyor Manual. Ecopetrol. (2014) https://www.ecopetrol.com.co/documentos/Manual-

Transportador-Oleoductos-Ecopetrol.pdf

750

800

850

900

950

1,000

1,050

Jan-14 Jun-14 Nov-14 Apr-15 Oct-15 Mar-16 Aug-16 Jan-17 Jul-17

KB

DC

Historic crude production



26

Table 9 Analysis of barriers to project alternatives

Alternative Economic

Barrier

Operational

Barrier /

Maintenance

Sociocultural

barrier

Environmental

Barrier

Barrier

Present

and future

conditions

Transport by

tanker trucks

(previous

practice)

Not

applicable Not applicable

Not

applicable Not applicable

Not

applicable

Pipeline

transport Exists

(in case of

new

pipeline)

Exists Not

applicable Exists

Not

applicable

Multimodal

transport along

the Magdalena

River

Exists Exists Exists Exists Exists

The additionality of the project is evident from the table above. Also, following the

AM0090 and in accordance with the above, the baseline scenario is selected as the M1:

Road transportation.

Consistency with Resolution 1447 of 2018, article 35

Article 35 of the resolution states that the baseline must be established according to the

reference scenario published by the MADS or approved by the Intersectoral Commission

of Climate Change. However, no such relevant reference scenario has been established.

The next option is to define the baseline pursuant to the methods of the national GHG

inventory in case there is information available at the higher methodological level

according to IPCC guidelines. For the inventory category regarding this project emission

sources, 1A3b, the Tier 2 methodologies for CO2 were applied and the source of

information is the FECOC, a database elaborated by the UPME and MADS. However,

Tier 3 methods are not applied.

In this regard, the Project's baseline should be "developed with the information available

to it ensuring compliance with the principles of the MRV System of mitigation actions,

so that the project baseline does not lead to an overestimation of the mitigation results

with respect to national information." In this sense, the baseline is determined according

to the specific information available taking into account the fuel consumption of the

vehicles for equivalent transport in the baseline scenario and it is considered that the

result does not lead to an overestimation of project mitigation results.

Equivalence in the service level

From the perspective of the liquid petroleum producer, the level of service for transport is

equal to or better in multimodal transport with a segment by river, versus tanker trucks

transport. Some of the advantages and improvements that are obtained in the service

thanks to multimodal transport are:



27

- Increased efficiency in evacuation by tanker trucks in the oilfields, using fewer vehicles transiting between the production field to the point of unloading and return.

This helps to have a better availability of vehicles for the evacuation of the product,

avoiding risks that affect the production of the field.

- Flexibility for producers when handling production peaks or variations in crude oil chemical conditions, as, given the high storage capacity of the Impala Terminal and

its technological level, they would not need to look for alternative unloaders,

incurring additional costs.

- Decrease in the use of solvent, avoiding the cost of dilution, since the Impala terminal receives more viscous crudes than the pipelines.

- Temporary storage as an alternative to manage production, according to customer requirements.

- Cargo consolidation on the barge, allowing partial delivery of higher volume of product. To exemplify this point, the convoy of 6 barges can carry between 42 and 60

Kbbls (depending on the levels of the river, related to the time of year), equivalent to

200-286 vehicles.

4. Inventory of sources, sinks and Reservoirs (SSRs) 3 for the project and baseline

The scope of the project is the river port terminal in Barrancabermeja, all trips made on

barges transporting liquid petroleum products and road travel by complementary routes.

Table 10 Emissions sources within the scope of the project

Source Gas Included? Justification/Explanation

Bas

elin

e

Fuel consumption for cargo

transportation

CO2 Yes Main emission source

CH4 No Excluded for simplification. This is

conservative

N2O No Excluded for simplification. This is

conservative

Pro

ject

Fuel and/or electricity

consumption

for cargo transportation

CO2 Yes Main emission source

CH4 No Excluded for simplification.

N2O No Excluded for simplification.

Table 11 Controlled, affected and related emission sources within the Project boundary

3 Definitions are extracted from the ISO 14064-2 standard:

Controlled greenhouse gas source, sink or reservoir: GHG source, sink or reservoir whose operation is under the direction and influence of the greenhouse gas project proponent through financial, policy, management or other instruments

Related greenhouse gas source, sink or reservoir: GHG source, sink or reservoir that has material or energy flows into, out of, or within the project

Affected greenhouse gas source, sink or reservoir: GHG source, sink or reservoir influenced by a project activity, through changes in market demand or supply for associated products or services, or through physical displacement



28

Source Gas

How the GHG SSR change from the baseline

scenario to the project?

Controlled

Fuel from the river

mode of

transporting cargo CO2

With the execution of the project, more

efficient transport is made, resulting in a lower

fuel consumption to mobilize the same amount

of cargo between the same origin and

destination. Emissions are generated due to

river transport.

Electricity

consumed at the

port CO2

With the execution of the project, a new

electricity consumption of the grid is generated

by the permanent operation of the port facilities

in Barrancabermeja.

Fuel consumption

at ITBB CO2

With the execution of the project a new fuel

consumption is generated for the permanent

operation of the port facilities in

Barrancabermeja.

Affected

Fuel from the

ground transport

mode of

transporting the

cargo

CO2

With the implementation of the project, a modal

change is made to a more efficient way of

transport, resulting in lower fuel consumptions

of the road transportation offered by contracted

operators.

Related Not relevant.

N/A There are no related sources that are relevant to

the development of the project.

These are the flowcharts for the baseline scenario and the project scenario.

Figure 7 Baseline flowchart



29

Figure 8 Project flowchart

5. Quantification and calculation of GHG emissions/removals

5.1. Baseline emissions calculation

Baseline emissions are generated according to equation 2 of the AM0090 methodology.

𝐵𝐸𝑦 = 𝑇𝑦 ∗ 𝐴𝐷 ∗ 𝐸𝐹𝐵𝐿 ∗ 10−6

Where:

𝑇𝑦 = Amount of cargo transported by the project transportation mode in year y (tonne)

𝐴𝐷 = Distance of the baseline trip route (km) 𝐸𝐹𝐵𝐿 = Baseline emission factor for transportation of cargo (g CO2/ tonne.km)

To determine the emission factor, it is determined that the type of cargo transported is

liquid petroleum products and would fall into the category Solid mineral fuels and

petroleum products in Table 2 of the AM0090, from which the default factor CO2/

ton.km is taken.

However, as in Colombia commercial Diesel (B10) corresponds to a mixture of 90%

Diesel fossil and 10% palm biodiesel by volume, this factor is corrected as follows,

according to the AM0090 page 7:

𝐸𝐹𝐵𝐿 = 76𝑔𝐶𝑂2

𝑡𝑜𝑛. 𝑘𝑚∗

𝐸𝑛𝑒𝑟𝑔𝑦 𝑐𝑜𝑛𝑡𝑒𝑛𝑡𝑓𝑜𝑠𝑠𝑖𝑙

𝐸𝑛𝑒𝑟𝑔𝑦 𝑐𝑜𝑛𝑡𝑒𝑛𝑡𝐵10 = 68.99

𝑔𝐶𝑂2𝑡𝑜𝑛. 𝑘𝑚

5.2. Project emissions calculation

Project emissions are calculated according to the AM0090 equation 5.

𝑃𝐸𝑦 = (𝑃𝐸𝐹𝐶,𝑦 + 𝑃𝐸𝐸𝐶,𝑦) ∗ 𝐹𝑅𝑇,𝑃𝐽,𝑦 + 𝑃𝐸𝐶𝑅,𝑦



30

Where:

𝑃𝐸𝐹𝐶,𝑦 = Project emissions from fossil fuel combustion in the project activity in year y (tCO2)

𝑃𝐸𝐸𝐶,𝑦 = Project emissions from electricity consumption in the project activity in year y (tCO2)

𝐹𝑅𝑇,𝑃𝐽,𝑦 = The factor to account for non-empty return trips in the project scenario in year y (%)

𝑃𝐸𝐶𝑅,𝑦 = Project emissions from transportation of cargo in complementary routes in trucks in year y (tCO2)

The factor 𝑃𝐸𝐹𝐶,𝑦 is equivalent to the term 𝑃𝐸𝐹𝐶,𝑗,𝑦 of Tool03 and is quantified according

to Equation 1 of Tool03:

𝑃𝐸𝐹𝐶,𝑗,𝑦 = ∑ 𝐹𝐶𝑖,𝑗,𝑦 ∗ 𝐶𝑂𝐸𝐹𝑖,𝑦𝑖

Where:

FCi,j,y = Quantity of fuel type i combusted in process j during the year y (Nm3)

COEFi,y = CO2 emission coefficient of fuel type i in yeary (tCO2 /Nm3)

The CO2 emission coefficient of the fuel is calculated according to option B based on

calorific value and an emission factor, according to Tool03 equation 4:

𝐶𝑂𝐸𝐹𝑖,𝑦 = 𝑁𝐶𝑉𝑖,𝑦 ∗ 𝐸𝐹𝐶𝑂2,𝑖,𝑦

Where:

𝑁𝐶𝑉𝑖,𝑦 = Weighted average net calorific value of the fuel type i in year y (GJ/ Nm3)

𝐸𝐹𝐶𝑂2,𝑖,𝑦 = Weighted average CO2 emission factor of fuel type i in year y (tCO2/GJ)

This applies to the following processes j: Fuel of the tugs of the river route,

corresponding to Marine Diesel, and fuel consumption for the operation of ITBB, which

corresponds to both commercial Diesel, 90% ACPM and 10% palm biodiesel, as well as

gasoline (E10). Therefore, since this is a mitigation project, adjustments are made to the

reported emission factors, so that the percentage of biodiesel or ethanol present in the

mixture has a contribution of zero (0) tCO2/GJ.

To determine the factor 𝑃𝐸𝐸𝐶,𝑦 is quantified according to equation 1 of Tool05:

𝑃𝐸𝐸𝐶,𝑦 = ∑ 𝐸𝐶𝑃𝑗,𝑗,𝑦 ∗ 𝐸𝐹𝐸𝐹,𝑗,𝑦 ∗ (1 + 𝑇𝐷𝐿𝑗,𝑦)

𝑗

Where:

𝐸𝐶𝑃𝑗,𝑗,𝑦 = Quantity of electricity consumed by the project electricity consumption source j in year y (MWh/año)

𝐸𝐹𝐸𝐹,𝑗,𝑦 = Emission factor for electricity generation for source j in year y (tCO2/GJ)

𝑇𝐷𝐿𝑗,𝑦 = Average technical transmission and distribution losses for providing electricity to source j in year y (%)



31

To determine the term 𝐸𝐹𝐸𝐹,𝑗,𝑦 scenario A, option A1 of the Tool05 is selected. The

values of the marginal greenhouse gas emission factor for the National Interconnected

System (SIN) are taken from those reported by the Energy-Mining Planning Unit

(UPME). For the term 𝑇𝐷𝐿𝑗,𝑦 the value recommended by the Tool05 in Table 3 of 20% is

used.

The term 𝐹𝑅𝑇,𝑃𝐽,𝑦 is calculated according to equation 6 of AM0090:

𝐹𝑅𝑇,𝑃𝐽,𝑦 =𝑇𝑦

𝑇𝑦 + 𝑇𝑅𝑇,𝑦

Where:

𝑇𝑦 = Amount of cargo transported by the project transportation mode in year y (tonne)

𝑇𝑅𝑇,𝑦 = Amount of cargo transported by the project transportation mode in the return trips in year y (tonne)

The term 𝑃𝐸𝐶𝑅,𝑦 is calculated according to the Tool03 and is equivalent to the term

𝑃𝐸𝐹𝐶,𝑗,𝑦 of Tool03. This is quantified according to equation 1 of the tool.

𝑃𝐸𝐹𝐶,𝑗,𝑦 = 𝐹𝐶𝑖,𝑗,𝑦 ∗ 𝐶𝑂𝐸𝐹𝑖,𝑦

Where:

FCi,j,y = Quantity of fuel type i combusted in process j during the year y (Nm3)

COEFi,y = CO2 emission coefficient of fuel type i in year y (tCO2 /Nm3)

In this case, process (j) corresponds to the fuel consumption by the trucks on the

complementary routes. The amount of fuel is reconstructed from (i) the number of trips

made on each of the complementary routes, recorded by Impala; (ii) the distance of each

route, as determined by the Impala Land Transport team, and (iii) the average efficiency

of the vehicles, applying a conservative assumption based on the performance reported

by three route operators. To obtain the volume of fuel, we multiply the number of trips on

the route by the kilometers of the route; the results of all routes are summed; and

multiplied by vehicle efficiency in terms of consumption of gallons per kilometer.

The CO2 emission coefficient of the fuel is calculated according to option B based on

calorific value and an emission factor, according to Tool03 equation 4:

𝐶𝑂𝐸𝐹𝑖,𝑦 = 𝑁𝐶𝑉𝑖,𝑦 ∗ 𝐸𝐹𝐶𝑂2,𝑖,𝑦

Where:

𝑁𝐶𝑉𝑖,𝑦 = Weighted average net calorific value of the fuel type i in year y (GJ/ Nm3)

𝐸𝐹𝐶𝑂2,𝑖,𝑦 = Weighted average CO2 emission factor of fuel type i in year y (tCO2/GJ)

The specific values for the commercial mixture with which the tanker trucks are fueled

are adjusted 90% ACPM and 10% palm biodiesel.

5.3. Leakage

According to the methodology, these emissions are negligible and are counted as zero.



32

5.4. Net emission reductions calculation

The project's emission reduction is calculated in accordance with AM0090, equation 1:

𝐸𝑅𝑦 = 𝐵𝐸𝑦 − 𝑃𝐸𝑦

Where:

ERy = Emission reductions in year y, tCO2

5.5. Example of calculation

I. Baseline emissions

Baseline emissions, road transportation

Description Parameter Units 2016

Amount of cargo transported by the project in year

y Ty Ton 578,204.95

Distance of the baseline trip route AD km 1,557.87

Baseline emission factor for transportation of cargo EFBL gCO2/Ton.km 68.99

𝐵𝐸2016 = 578,204.95 Ton ∗ 1,557.87km ∗ 68.99gCO2

Ton. km∗ 10−6 = 62,143 tCO2

II. Project emissions

Fuel consumption by project activity, i.e. river transport on barges and ITBB operation.

Project emissions, fuel consumption at ITBB


Quantity of fuel type i (Commercial gasoline) combusted

in process j during the year y FCgasoline,ITBB,y m3 3.79

Quantity of fuel type i (Commercial Diesel) combusted in

process j during the year y FCdiesel,ITBB,y m3 558.44

Weighted average net calorific value of the fuel type i

(Commercial gasoline) in year y NCVgasoline,y GJ/m3 32.0550


(Commercial Diesel) in year y NCVdiesel,y GJ/m3 35.9592

Weighted average CO2 emission factor of fuel type i

(Commercial gasoline) in year y EFCO2,gasoline,ITBB,y tCO2/GJ 0.0653


(Commercial Diesel) in year y EFCO2,diesel,ITBB,y tCO2/GJ 0.0680



33

𝑃𝐸𝐹𝐶_𝐼𝑇𝐵𝐵,2016 = 3.79𝑚3 ∗ 32.0550

𝐺𝐽

𝑚3∗ 0.0653

𝑡𝐶𝑂2

𝐺𝐽+ 558.44𝑚3 ∗ 35.9592

𝐺𝐽

𝑚3

∗ 0.0680𝑡𝐶𝑂2

𝐺𝐽= 1,372.69 𝑡𝐶𝑂2

Project emissions, fuel consumption, river transport


Quantity of fuel type i (marine diesel) combusted in

process j during the year y Fcmarino,river,y m3 12,966


(marine diesel) in year y NCVmarino,y GJ/m3 35.91


(marine diesel) in year y EFCO2,marino,river,y tCO2/GJ 0.0652

𝑃𝐸𝐹𝐶_𝑟𝑖𝑣𝑒𝑟,2016 = 12,966𝑚3 ∗ 35.91

𝐺𝐽

𝑚3∗ 0.0652

𝑡𝐶𝑂2

𝐺𝐽= 30,358.96 𝑡𝐶𝑂2

𝑃𝐸𝐹𝐶 , 2016 = 1,372.69 𝑡𝐶𝑂2 + 30,358.96 𝑡𝐶𝑂2 = 31,731.64 𝑡𝐶𝑂2

Fuel consumption emissions from tankers that travel through complementary routes.

Project emissions, fuel consumption complementary routes


Quantity of fuel type i (Commercial Diesel)

combusted by trucks in the year x FCBL,CR,x m3 8,701.8

Weighted average net calorific value of the fuel

type i (Commercial Diesel) combusted by trucks in

the year x

NCVi,x GJ/m3 35.9592

Weighted average CO2 emission factor of fuel type

i (Commercial Diesel) in year y EFCO2,i,CR,x tCO2/GJ 0.0680

𝑃𝐸𝐶𝑅,2016 = 8,701.8𝑚3 ∗ 35.9592

𝐺𝐽

𝑚3∗ 0.0680

𝑡𝐶𝑂2

𝐺𝐽= 21,265.93 𝑡𝐶𝑂2

Emissions from electricity consumption at ITBB.

Project emissions, electricity consumption at ITBB


Quantity of electricity consumed by the project

electricity consumption source j in year y ECPj,ITBB,y MWh 3,846.26

Average technical transmission and distribution losses TDLj,y % 20

Emission factor for electricity generation for source j in

year y EFEF,j,y

tCO2/

MWh 0.401

𝑃𝐸𝐸𝐶,2016 = 3,846.26 𝑀𝑊ℎ ∗ 0.401𝑡𝐶𝑂2

𝑀𝑊ℎ ∗ (1 + 20%) = 1,850.82 𝑡𝐶𝑂2

Factor for accounting for non-empty return trips.



34

Project emissions, return trips factor


Amount of cargo transported by the project in year y Ty Ton 578,205.0

Amount of cargo transported by the project in the return trips in

year y TRT,y Ton 337,624.5

The factor to account for non-empty return trips in the project

scenario in year y FRT,PJ,y % 63%

𝐹𝑅𝑇,𝑃𝐽,2016 =578,205.0 𝑇𝑜𝑛

578,205.0 𝑇𝑜𝑛 + 337,624.5 𝑇𝑜𝑛= 63%

The project's emissions are:

𝑃𝐸𝑦 = ( 31,731.64 𝑡𝐶𝑂2 + 1,850.82 𝑡𝐶𝑂2 ) ∗ 63% + 21,265.93 𝑡𝐶𝑂2 = 42,468 𝑡𝐶𝑂2

Emission reductions are:

ER2016 = 62,143 tCO2 − 42,468 tCO2 = 19,675 tCO2

6. Monitoring the Data information management system and data controls

6.1. Data and parameters available in validation

Data / Parameter: 𝐴𝐷

Data unit: km

Description: Distance of the baseline trip route

Source of data:

Measurements from Ground Transport, Impala Terminals

of the land routes that would have been used in the

absence of the project.

Value applied: 1,557.87

Justification of choice of

data or description of

measurement methods and

procedures applied:

Weighted average of the distances of the baseline routes

from the year before the start of the project, but with

Cartagena as the destination. Weighting is done by the

cargo carried by each route.

Purpose of Data: Baseline emission calculation

Comments:

Data / Parameter: 𝑁𝐶𝑉𝑖,𝑦

Data unit: GJ/m3

Description: Weighted average net calorific value of the fuel type i in

year y

Source of data: All fuels except for ACPM: Colombian Fuel Emission

Factors – FECOC 2016 (UPME)



35

ACPM: Colombian Fuel Emission Factors – FECOC 2015

(UPME)

Value applied:

Process j Fuel i 𝑵𝑪𝑽

ITBB operation Commercial gasoline 32.0550

ITBB operation Commercial Blended Diesel 35.9592

Tugboats Diesel Marino 35.91

Complementary

routes Commercial Blended Diesel 35.9592

The same value is taken for all years of the project.




procedures applied:

Official data of national validity.

Weighting is made by volumetric biofuel percentages

(%𝑏𝑐𝑖), this requires considering density (𝜌𝑖) and calorific value per unit of mass (𝐿𝐻𝑉𝑚𝑖).

𝑁𝐶𝑉𝑖 = 𝜌1 ∗ 𝐿𝐻𝑉𝑚1 ∗ %𝑏𝑐1 + 𝜌2 ∗ 𝐿𝐻𝑉𝑚2 ∗ %𝑏𝑐2 The volumetric percentages are:

- Commercial gasoline (E10): 90% Gasoline Motor, 10% Ethanol

- Commercial blended Diesel: 90% ACPM, 10% Palm Biodiesel

Purpose of Data: Calculation of project emissions

Comments:

Data / Parameter: 𝐸𝐹𝐶𝑂2,𝑖,𝑗,𝑦

Data unit: tCO2/GJ

Description: weighted average CO2 emission factor of fuel type i in

year y

Source of data:

All fuels except for ACPM: Colombian Fuel Emission

Factors – FECOC 2016 (UPME)

ACPM: Colombian Fuel Emission Factors – FECOC 2015

(UPME)

Value applied:

Process j Fuel i 𝑬𝑭𝑪𝑶𝟐

ITBB operation Commercial gasoline 0.0653

ITBB operation Commercial Blended Diesel 0.0680

Tugboats Diesel Marino 0.0652

Complementary

routes

Commercial Blended Diesel 0.0680

The same value is taken for all years of the project.

Justification of choice of Official data of national validity.



36



procedures applied:

A volume emission factor is calculated (𝐸𝐹𝑣𝑖) from density (𝜌𝑖), low heating value (𝐿𝐻𝑉𝑖) emission factor per unit of mass (𝐸𝐹𝑚𝑖).

𝐿𝐻𝑉𝑖 ∗ 𝜌𝑖 ∗ 𝐸𝐹𝑚𝑖 = 𝐸𝐹𝑣𝑖 The corresponding volumetric percentages are applied to

this factor, considering that the contribution of biofuels is

zero as it is a mitigation project:

- Commercial gasoline (E10): 90% Gasoline Motor, 10% Ethanol

- Commercial blended Diesel: 90% ACPM, 10% Palm Biodiesel

Subsequently, it is returned to an energy base, as indicated

by the methodology.


Comments:

Data / Parameter: 𝑇𝐷𝐿𝑗,𝑦

Data unit: %

Description: Average technical transmission and distribution losses for

providing electricity to source j in year y

Source of data: AM-Tool05- v3.0 – Clean Development Mechanism

Value applied: 20%




procedures applied:

Selecting Scenario A, option A1 of the tool. No up-to-date

country data are available.


Comments:

6.2. Monitored data and parameters

Data / Parameter: 𝐹𝐶𝑔𝑎𝑠𝑜𝑙𝑖𝑛𝑒,𝐼𝑇𝐵𝐵,𝑦

Data unit: m3

Description: Quantity of fuel type i = gasoline, combusted in the

ITBB operation during the year y

Source of data Gasoline purchase invoices.

Values applied:

Year Fuel i (m3)

Gasoline (E10)

19/06/2015-31/12/2015 4.14

2016 3.79

2017 5.22



37

2018 5.43

2019 8.58

2020 11.13

2021 15.42

2022 20.53

2023 23.22

2024 23.22

01/01/2025-18/06/2025 10.83

Measurement methods and

procedures:

Tankers delivering fuel have a meter that records the

value in gallons. They issue a strip with which the

purchase order is generated. The fuel seller oversees

the tanker trucks.

Evidence is in Navitrans software and invoices, stored

in the “Accounts payable” area.

Monitoring frequency: Every time a purchase is made.

QA/QC procedures:

In the accounting area, a review of the consistency of

the value is made, to detect gaps in the fuel

measurement process.


Any comment:

This data is considered to be of low uncertainty, being

measured directly by the fuel seller and being part of

the company's accounting management.

Data / Parameter: 𝐹𝐶𝑑𝑖𝑒𝑠𝑒𝑙,𝐼𝑇𝐵𝐵,𝑦

Data unit: m3

Description: Quantity of fuel type i = diesel, combusted in the ITBB

operation during the year y

Source of data: Diesel purchase invoices.

Values applied:

Year

Fuel i (m3)

ACPM (Commercial

blended Diesel)

19/06/2015-31/12/2015 147.92

2016 558.44

2017 519.60

2018 541.03

2019 854.34

2020 1107.97

2021 1534.87

2022 2044.44

2023 2311.65

2024 2311.65

01/01/2025-18/06/2025 1078.77


procedures:

Tankers delivering fuel have a meter that records the

value in gallons. They issue a strip with which the



38

purchase order is generated. The fuel seller oversees

the tanker trucks.

Monitoring frequency Evidence is shown in Navitrans software and invoices

stored in the "Accounts Payable" area.

QA/QC procedures: Every time a purchase is made.

Purpose of Data

In the accounting area, a review of the consistency of

the value is made, to detect gaps in the fuel

measurement process.

Any comment: Calculation of project emissions

Data / Parameter: 𝐹𝐶𝑚𝑎𝑟𝑖𝑛𝑜,𝑟𝑖𝑣𝑒𝑟,𝑦

Data unit: m3

Description: Quantity of fuel type i = marine diesel, combusted in

the river operation during the year y

Source of data: Fuel purchase invoices by tanker trucks and barges

(MAGfuel)

Values applied:

Year Fuel i (m3)

Marine Diesel

19/06/2015-31/12/2015 5,650.51

2016 12,966.11

2017 14,489.24

2018 15,086.85

2019 23,823.78

2020 30,896.52

2021 42,800.71

2022 57,010.38

2023 64,461.81

2024 64,461.81

01/01/2025-18/06/2025 30,082.18


procedures:

When the purchase is made in tankers trucks, the fuel

seller is in charge of the measureme

GHG Report for CSA Standards GHG CleanProjects Registry · GHG Report Template for CSA Standards GHG CleanProjects® Registry Version 1.0 – September 2009 4 subject of regional

Documents