GHG Emission Reductions Quantification Report

Transcription

1 GHG Emission Reductions Quantification Report Presented to: Construction GFL Inc , Place Jade Brossard, Quebec, J4Y 3C1 Prepared by: L2i Financial Solutions 2 015, rue Victoria, suite 200 St-Lambert (Québec) J4S 1H1 November 23 rd, 2009

2 Quantification Group Letter Construction GFL Inc., GHG Emission Reductions Report 2

3 Table of Content ABBREVIATIONS... 4 Introduction... 5 Executive Summary... 6 Table 1 - GHG Emission Reductions Summary:...8 Chapter 1: GHG Emissions Reduction Project Historical Basis Construction GFL History Data Collection...10 GHG Project Scenario Construction GFL...11 Construction GFL s recycling activities...11 Baseline Scenario Description and Selection...12 Monitoring Data Management...14 Environmental Impacts...16 Chapter 2: GHG Emissions Reduction Quantification Methodology Selection...17 Table 5 Project scenario GHG emissions...22 Uncertainty...25 Conclusion Construction GFL Inc., GHG Emission Reductions Report 3

4 ABBREVIATIONS BS: Baseline Scenario GHG emission source CH4: methane CO2: carbon dioxide EPA: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) GHG: Greenhouse gas MTCE: Metric ton of carbon equivalent N2O: Nitrous oxide PS: Project Scenario GHG emission source tco2 eq.: metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent VER: Verified Emission Reductions Construction GFL Inc., GHG Emission Reductions Report 4

5 Introduction Introduction of the Editing and Quantification Team Solutions L2i is a firm specialized in non-traditional corporate financing. These past four years, we have developed an expertise in the quantification of carbon credits. In that capacity, we help companies count, quantify and accrue their carbon offsets and ensure their sale. Our expertise consists in selecting, applying and elaborating quantification methodologies to quantify the emissions based on reputable international sources. The reports are drafted in accordance with the following guideline: ISO Mr. Yves Legault (Finance) and Mrs. Melina Valero (Management) are responsible for supervising the carbon credits quantification team. For many years now, they have been on the look-out for their customers needs regarding the quantification of greenhouse gas. They offer GHG quantification services, writing reports and the sale of the carbon credits on the organized markets such as the voluntary carbon market. Construction GFL Inc., GHG Emission Reductions Report 5

6 Executive Summary Project Title Construction GFL concrete Recycling Project Type of GHG Project This is a waste diversion project. This emission reductions report was written according to ISO Specifications Requirements for quantification, monitoring and reporting of greenhouse gas emission reductions and removal enhanced concretes assertions. GHG Project Proponent and Facilities Description: Construction GFL s site is located in Brossard, Province of Quebec, Canada. Construction GFL operates a construction and demolition recovery facility for concrete, asphalt, shale and stone. The facility includes systems of crushers and conveyers for recycling operations. Construction GFL Inc. Jean Métras, General Manager (450) , extension jean.metras@cgfl.ca Head Office 9 700, Place Jade Brossard, Quebec, J4Y 3C1 Site 9 550, Place Jade Brossard, Quebec, J4Y 3C1 Latitude: N Longitude: W Brief Project Description The project consists in quantifying the greenhouse gas emissions reduction attributable to concrete recycling (crushing) recovery. In order to prove the additionality of this reduction project, GHG (Greenhouse Gas) emissions associated with recycling scenarios will be compared to a landfill baseline scenario for the same wastes. In other Construction GFL Inc., GHG Emission Reductions Report 6

7 words, the hypothesis is that if the recycling projects had not been implemented then the most likely scenario would have been landfill for both materials. Project Starting Date The recycling project started in January Offsets Use and Users The target users are the potential offset VER (Verified Emission Reductions) buyers. Programs Presentation The GHG project will be publicly listed on the GHG CleanProjects Registry. A requirement of GHG CleanProjects is that the GHG Report conforms with the ISO standard. GHG Project Protocols and Standards Verified Emission Reductions (VERs) were assessed according the ISO part 2 international standards. Thus, the PDD (Project Design Document) was drafted in accordance with the provisions and guidelines of the ISO Risks and / or Limits of the Report This quantification report was prepared based on several information sources. A site visit was completed on August 29 th Thereafter, some complementary demands were made to complete the document. The risks or limits of the project are closely bound to the baseline scenario selection. For example, the baseline could be altered in a few year s by a law and regulation change on concrete waste. Thus, it will be important to monitor tendencies and regulation on concrete waste management. Compliance with relevant local laws and regulations related to the project There are no specific Canadian or Quebec laws or regulations that stipulate the obligation to manage concrete waste through recycling. In other words, there are no laws that stipulate that Construction GFL Inc. had to apply the project in this report, they could have continued with the baseline scenario instead: landfill (management system). Methodology The present document was drafted in accordance with the provisions and guidelines of ISO international standard. We have opted for the quantification methodology proposed by the Environmental Construction GFL Inc., GHG Emission Reductions Report 7

8 Protection Agency (EPA, USA) titled: Solid Waste Management and Greenhouse Gases, A life-cycle Assessment of Emissions and Sinks, published in September , because we have the supporting documentation related to the company s energy consumption and we are able to estimate the GHG emissions based on the emission factors provided by this methodology. Therefore, the present document was drafted in accordance with the provisions and guidelines of the EPA Solid Waste Management and Greenhouse Gases, A life-cycle Assessment of Emissions and Sinks, published in September The National Inventory Report from Environment Canada was used as the main reference document to obtain GHG emission factors for diesel and electricity consumption for Construction GFL Inc. project. 3 Table 1 - GHG Emission Reductions Summary: Total Project Emission Reductions Year tco2 eq TOTAL Ownership of GHG emissions and removals: Construction GFL Inc. owns the raw materials used in the project. They also own all the equipment and installations needed for the recycling operations proposed in this report. Thus they legally own the CO2 eq emission reductions that are quantified in this report. 1 EPA, (2006). Solid Waste Management and Greenhouse Gases, A life-cycle Assessment of Emissions and Sinks, Internet link: 2 EPA, (2006). Solid Waste Management and Greenhouse Gases, A life-cycle Assessment of Emissions and Sinks, Internet link: 3 National Inventory Report (May 2008), Greenhouse Gas Source and Sinks in Canada, Internet link : Construction GFL Inc., GHG Emission Reductions Report 8

9 Verification notification Initially quantified by L2i Financial Solutions, verification of the VERs will be conducted by the external verification entity GDTS according to the ISO part 3 standard. Construction GFL Inc., GHG Emission Reductions Report 9

10 Chapter 1: GHG Emissions Reduction Project Historical Basis Construction GFL History The following profile of Construction GFL Inc. is available on their Web site: Construction GFL was founded in 1998, and has been a partner company of L.A. Hébert since April Construction GFL Inc. transforms over tons of rocks annually, concrete and coated bituminous into quality foundation material. While clearing up traditional dumping sites, this operation also offers quality material to the south side market of Montreal with very competitive prices as well as some savings on traditional aggregate reserves. Thus, Construction GFL Inc. is one of those enterprises working towards efficient solutions to reduce GHG emissions with their commitment to maximize landfill diversion strategies managing mainly post-industrial hygiene materials. Respecting the "3R" (Reduce - Reuse - Recycle) priorities, concrete, asphalt, shade and stone are recycled. Construction GFL benefits to the community and the environment in terms of their environmentally responsible products, decrease in landfill accumulation and conservation of our natural resources. Data Collection Data collection was completed in January 2009 and April During the site visit on August 29 th 2008, the organization s overall operations were reviewed in order to understand all processes and associated equipment impacting the level of greenhouse gas emissions. Construction GFL Inc., GHG Emission Reductions Report 10

11 Phone conversations with the General Manager, Mr. Jean Métras, were necessary in order to complete the information. GHG Project Scenario Construction GFL The project scenario is based on Construction GFL s current recycling operations with concrete. For the purpose of this report, the project and baseline scenarios are presented from cradle to grave in order to simplify the presentation, although the EPA (US Environmental Protection Agency) methodology proposes a waste generation reference point. All factors, in this report, will reflect the waste generation reference point and only the activities included in the EPA methodology will be described. The concrete recycling project scenario is not based on replace concrete of virgin concrete material. According to EPA, When concrete structures are demolished, the waste concrete can be crushed and reused in place of virgin aggregate. Doing so reduces the GHG emissions associated with producing concrete. 4 Construction GFL s recycling activities The emission factors used in this report are different for the baseline and the project scenario, because the energy consumption is specific to each management method: recycling or landfilling. The emission factors for all the sources are included in the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA, USA) methodology titled: Solid Waste Management and Greenhouse Gases, A life-cycle Assessment of Emissions and Sinks, published in September EPA (2006), Solid Waste Management and Greenhouse Gases, A life-cycle Assessment of Emissions and Sinks,. p. 37. URL address: 5 EPA, (2006). Solid Waste Management and Greenhouse Gases, A life-cycle Assessment of Emissions and Sinks, Internet link: Construction GFL Inc., GHG Emission Reductions Report 11

12 Baseline Scenario Description and Selection Baseline scenario was selected among alternative scenarios representing what would have happened without this project. If this project had not been implemented, the most likely scenario for concrete waste would have been landfilling; landfilling operations cost less than concrete recycling equipments and operations. Thus, the project will be compared to the landfill scenario. With the use of a landfill scenario, waste management process and transportation emissions are accounted. Baseline scenario selection Alternative Economic Baseline barrier Scenarios Project: Concrete recycling Status quo : Concrete sent to landfill Technological barrier Law and regulation barrier Yes No No No No No Identification of the Project and Baseline Emission Sources, Sinks and Reservoirs The GHG emission sources, sinks or reservoirs (SSRs) identified were analyzed following the EPA methodology for a recycling scenario and in conformity with the requirements of the ISO part 2 standards. Construction GFL Inc., GHG Emission Reductions Report 12

13 Figure 2: Project and Baseline Scenario Sources Project Scenario PS1 Concrete landfill diversion (Controlled source) PS2- Reception at the material recovery facility (Controlled source) Baseline Scenario BS1- Transport to Landfill (Controlled source) BS2- Landfill operations (Associated source) PS3 Recycling operations (crushing, magnet, filters) (Controlled source) BS: Baseline Scenario GHG emission source PS: Project Scenario GHG emission source Table 2: Emission sources comparison (metric tons PS1- Concrete landfill diversion PS2- Reception at the material recovery PS3- Recycling operations (crushing, magnet, filters) Project Scenario Recycling Emission factors - Project - (Factors metric tons National Inventory factor: x 10-3 tco2 eq/litre diesel 6 6 x 10-6 tco2 eq/kwh electricity 7 BS1- Transport to Landfill BS2- Landfill operations Baseline Scenario Landfill activities Emission factors - No-project - (Factors metric tons EPA emission factor for landfilling : 0.01 MTCE/ShortTon of concrete 8 BS: Baseline Scenario GHG emission source PS: Project Scenario GHG emission source 6 National Inventory Report (May 2008), Greenhouse Gas Source and Sinks in Canada, p.597 Internet link : 7 National Inventory Report (May 2008), Greenhouse Gas Source and Sinks in Canada, p.512 Internet link : 8 EPA (2006), Solid Waste Management and Greenhouse Gases, A life-cycle Assessment of Emissions and Sinks, exhibit 6-8, p.93, URL address: Construction GFL Inc., GHG Emission Reductions Report 13

14 Monitoring Data Management The plant has a computer system to compile pertinent data for quantification on an Excel spreadsheet. System backups are done systematically on a regular basis. Figure 4. Computer system backup Monitoring procedures also include monthly reports on the construction and demolition waste materials. Energy consumption data is also monitored for recycling operations (diesel and electricity). Mr. Jean Métras, General Manager of Construction GFL, is responsible for the data monitoring. Basic inputs and outputs of Construction GFL are handled by weighing all loads entering the receiving area and all loads leaving the shipping area. Figure 5. Weight data collected on balance Construction GFL Inc., GHG Emission Reductions Report 14

15 The following tables present the monitored parameters: Production data Data / Parameters Concrete Data unit : Metric ton Description : Concrete recycled Source of data to be used : Weight collected on balance Value of data applied for the EPA GHG emission factor for concrete purpose of calculating expected landfilling: 0.01 MTCE/ShortTon of concrete 9 emission reductions : Description of measurement Weight data are transferred onto an excel methods and procedures to be spreadsheet file. applied : QA/QC procedures to be applied : The balance should be subject to a regular maintenance and testing regime to ensure accuracy Any comment: N/A Energy consumption data Data / Parameters Data unit : Description : Source of data to be used : Value of data applied for the purpose of calculating expected emission reductions : Description of measurement methods and procedures to be applied : QA/QC procedures to be applied : N/A Any comment : N/A Diesel Litre (L) Energy consumption for the recycling operations; Energy bills GHG Emission factor used for Diesel: x 10-3 tco2 eq/litre 10 Diesel bills are entered monthly into an electronic spreadsheet file. The data is accountant-verified annually. Data / Parameters Data unit : Description : Source of data to be used : Value of data applied for the purpose of calculating expected Electricity consumption kwh Electricity consumption for the recycling operations; Hydro-Québec energy bills GHG Emission factor used for electricity in Quebec: 9 EPA (2006), Solid Waste Management and Greenhouse Gases, A life-cycle Assessment of Emissions and Sinks, exhibit 6-8, p.93, URL address: 10 National Inventory Report (May 2008), Greenhouse Gas Source and Sinks in Canada, p.597 Internet link : Construction GFL Inc., GHG Emission Reductions Report 15

16 emission reductions : 6 x 10-3 tco2 eq/kwh 11 Description of measurement methods and procedures to be applied : Electricity bills are entered into an electronic spreadsheet file. QA/QC procedures to be applied : Section 5.10 of ISO Any comment : N/A Environmental Impacts The project s recycling activities achieved by Construction GFL are beneficial for the environment since these materials are diverted from landfills. The company s goal is to reduce the percentage of inputs sent to dry material disposal sites and to find new markets for their recycled concrete. That way, the negative environmental impacts will be lowered. 11 National Inventory Report (May 2008), Greenhouse Gas Source and Sinks in Canada, p.512 Internet link : 12 International Standards ISO : 2006(F), Section 5.10, p.13 Construction GFL Inc., GHG Emission Reductions Report 16

17 Chapter 2: GHG Emissions Reduction Quantification Methodology Selection The choice of the quantification methodology has been made through several internationally recognized sources such as the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Environment Canada and recognized quantification protocol sources. The selected methodology is based on the EPA s report: Solid Waste Management and Greenhouse Gases, A Life-Cycle Assessment of Emissions and Sinks. 13 This report adopts the perspective of waste management for different materials, permitting us to understand what life-cycle stages should be considered to reduce emissions. GHG emission factors and equations were obtained from the EPA s 2006 methodology entitled: Solid Waste Management and Greenhouse Gases, A life-cycle Assessment of Emissions and Sinks, published in September The formulas for the emission factors come from EPA methodology for landfill of concrete. The GHG emission factors are expressed in Metric Tonnes of Carbon Equivalent (MTCE) per Wet Short ton; the materials are on a wet weight basis (see p.93 of the EPA methodology 15 ). The EPA Solid Waste Management and Greenhouse Gases, A life-cycle Assessment of Emissions and Sinks contains well research and established emission factors for landfilling that makes it a relevant document. 16 The GHG emission factor for concrete recycling is estimated to be 0.01 MTCE per short ton in the EPA methodology, exhibit 2-2 p.24 of the Solid Waste Management and Greenhouse Gases, A life-cycle Assessment of Emissions and Sinks report. We opted for a more conservative approach by taking the energy (diesel and electricity) consumption of Construction GFL s concrete recycling operations which are x 10-3 MTCE per diesel litre and 6 x 10-3 MTCE per electricity kwh. The National Inventory Report from Environment Canada was used as the main reference document to 13 EPA (2006), Solid Waste Management and Greenhouse Gases, A Life-Cycle Assessment of Emissions and Sinks, page 24, Internet link: 14 EPA, (2006). Solid Waste Management and Greenhouse Gases, A life-cycle Assessment of Emissions and Sinks, Internet link: 15 EPA, (2006). Solid Waste Management and Greenhouse Gases, A life-cycle Assessment of Emissions and Sinks, p.24, 93, Internet link: 16 EPA, (2006). Solid Waste Management and Greenhouse Gases, A life-cycle Assessment of Emissions and Sinks, p.93 landfilling and p.61 composting emission factors, Internet link: Construction GFL Inc., GHG Emission Reductions Report 17

18 obtain GHG Emission factors for diesel consumption. 17 They were use in the quantification for the following reasons: - Choosing the emission factors from the National Inventory remain the most appropriate choice for the project since Construction GFL installations and activities are in Canada. - Emission factors reflect the Canadian energy consumption; Quantified GHG s and Units The major greenhouse gases responsible for global warming, as per the EPA, are: carbon dioxide (CO2), methane (CH4), nitrous oxide (N2O), hydro-fluorocarbons (HFC), perfluorocarbon (PFC) and sulphur hexafluoride (SF6). The EPA methodology considers CO2, CH4 and N2O for each of their GHG emission factors. 18 See p.114 of the EPA Solid Waste Management and Greenhouse Gases, A life-cycle Assessment of Emissions and Sinks: All of the exhibits presented so far in this report have expressed GHG emissions in units of MTCE, calculated as the sum of the individual gases (CO2, CH4, N2O, and PFCs) weighted by their global warming potential. Among them, gases involved in this project are CO2 and CH4, based essentially on recycling and landfill activities. 19 See p.es-9 of the EPA Solid Waste Management and Greenhouse Gases, A life-cycle Assessment of Emissions and Sinks: Waste management (CO2 emissions associated with composting, nonbiogenic CO2 and N2O emissions from combustion, and CH4 emissions from landfills); these emissions are offset to some degree by carbon storage in soil and landfills, as well as avoided utility emissions from energy recovery at combustors and landfills. In the EPA methodology, conversion from MTCE to tco2 eq is equal to 44/12. So, for each emission factor in MTCE, we must make the conversion to Metric Tonnes of Carbon Dioxide equivalent. 20 See p.5 of the EPA Solid Waste Management and Greenhouse Gases, A life-cycle Assessment of Emissions and Sinks: In this report, emissions of CO2, CH4, N2O, and PFCs have been converted to their carbon equivalents. Because CO2 is 12/44 carbon by weight, 1 metric ton of CO2 is equal to 12/44 or 0.27 metric tons of carbon equivalent (MTCE). The MTCE value for 1 metric ton of each of the other gases is determined by multiplying its GWP by a factor of 12/44. (All data provided here are from the IPCC, Climate Change 1995: The Science of Climate Change, 1996, p. 121) 17 National Inventory Report (May 2008), Greenhouse Gas Source and Sinks in Canada, Internet link : 18 EPA, (2006). Solid Waste Management and Greenhouse Gases, A life-cycle Assessment of Emissions and Sinks, p.114, Internet link: 19 EPA (2006), Solid Waste Management and Greenhouse Gases, A Life-Cycle Assessment of Emissions and Sinks, page ES-9, Internet link: 20 EPA (2006), Solid Waste Management and Greenhouse Gases, A life-cycle Assessment of Emissions and Sinks, p.5, URL address: Construction GFL Inc., GHG Emission Reductions Report 18

19 The standard unit used for quantification in this section is tco2 eq (i.e.: GHG s equivalent to one ton of carbon dioxide). Each gas has a specific Global Warming Potential (ex.: methane is GWPCH4 = 21), which is an index that converts gas emission s impact into emissions of an equivalent mass of CO2 impact. Total Emission Reductions Equation: Without the recycling activities of Construction GFL, concrete waste would have continued to be managed through landfill. In this case s project, recycled concrete is sold and used as road base and fill. The project scenario is one of concrete recycling. 21 TPER = LE Concrete RE Concrete TPER = Total Project Emission Reductions (tco2 eq.); REConcrete = Net GHG Emissions for concrete recycling (tco2 eq.); LEConcrete = Net GHG Emissions for concrete landfilling (tco2 eq.); Project Scenario: Recycling Equation The net GHG emissions generated by Construction GFL concrete recycling operations were calculated by using their diesel and electricity consumptions per year. Net GHG emissions were calculated by multiplying them by their emission factors. RE Concrete = (QDiesel,y * EFDiesel) + (QElectricity,y * EFElectricity) QDiesel,y = EFDiesel = QElectricity,y= EFElectricity= Annual Diesel consumption (liter); Diesel GHG emission factor per Litre consumed; x 10-3 tco2 eq/l diesel 22 ; Annual electricity consumption (kwh); Electricity GHG emission factor per kwh consumed; 6 x 10-6 tco2 eq/ kwh electricity EPA (2006), Solid Waste Management and Greenhouse Gases, A life-cycle Assessment of Emissions and Sinks, URL address: 22National Inventory Report (May 2008), Greenhouse Gas Source and Sinks in Canada, p.597 Internet link : 23 National Inventory Report (May 2008), Greenhouse Gas Source and Sinks in Canada, p. 512 Internet link : Construction GFL Inc., GHG Emission Reductions Report 19

20 Baseline Scenario: Landfill Equation LE Concrete = (Q Concrete * ) * (EF Concrete Landfilling * 44/12) = A constant for conversion of the factors expressed as metric tons to short tons. EFConcrete Landfilling = Net GHG Emission Factor for Concrete Landfill = 0.01 MTCE / short ton of material 24 ; 44/12 = Conversion from MTCE to tco2 eq. Additionality for this project is calculated based on the recycling Scenario net GHG Emissions (tco2 eq) compared to Landfilling net GHG Emissions. Total emission reductions are obtained by subtracting the emissions in the project scenario from the baseline scenario (See table below). Table 3 GHG emission factors Type of energy GHG type GWP Global Warming Potential Energy Emission Factors Total Emission Factors (metric ton Diesel (L)* Electricity (kwh)** CO 2 1 0, , CH , , N 2O 310 0, , Total 0, CO 2 1 0, , *National Inventory Report (May 2008), Greenhouse Gas Source and Sinks in Canada, p.597 Internet link : **National Inventory Report (May 2008), Greenhouse Gas Source and Sinks in Canada, p. 512 Internet link: 24 EPA (2006), Solid Waste Management and Greenhouse Gases, A life-cycle Assessment of Emissions and Sinks, exhibit 6-8, p.93, URL address: Construction GFL Inc., GHG Emission Reductions Report 20

21 Table 4 Baseline scenario GHG emissions Product Year Concrete (metric ton) Concrete (short ton) Landfilling Baseline scenario emission factor (MTCE/wet short ton) 1 Landfilling Baseline scenario emission factor (t CO2 eq./wet short ton) Baseline Net GHG Emissions (t CO2 eq.) A B = A * 1,1023 C D = C * 44/12 E = B * D Recycled Concrete ,01 0, ,01 0, ,01 0, ,01 0, ,01 0, ,01 0, EPA, Solid Waste Management and Greenhouse Gases, a life-cycle assessment of emissions and sinks, exhibit 6-8 p.93. conversion factor metric ton - short ton : 1, Construction GFL Inc., GHG Emission Reductions Report 21

22 Table 5 Project scenario GHG emissions Year 2003 Total Diesel Consumption (litre) Diesel Consumption GHG type Fuel Emission Factor (metric tons Emissions (metric tons Total Electricity Consumption (kwh) Electricity Consumption GHG type Electricity Emission Factor (metric tons Emissions (metric tons Total Project Emission (metric tons CO 2 0, CO 2 0, CH 4 0, CH N 2O 0, N 2O , , Year 2004 Total Diesel Consumption (litre) GHG type Diesel Consumption Fuel Emission Factor (metric tons Emissions (metric tons Total Electricity Consumption (kwh) Electricity Consumption GHG type Electricity Emission Factor (metric tons Emissions (metric tons Total Project Emission (metric tons CO 2 0, CO 2 0, CH 4 0, CH N 2O 0, N 2O , , Construction GFL Inc., GHG Emission Reductions Report 22

23 Year 2005 Total Diesel Consumption (litre) GHG type Diesel Consumption Fuel Emission Factor (metric tons Emissions (metric tons Total Electricity Consumption (kwh) Electricity Consumption GHG type Electricity Emission Factor (metric tons Emissions (metric tons Total Project Emission (metric tons CO 2 0, CO 2 0, CH 4 0, CH N 2O 0, N 2O , , Year 2006 Total Diesel Consumption (litre) Diesel Consumption GHG type Fuel Emission Factor (metric tons Emissions (metric tons Total Electricity Consumption (kwh) Electricity Consumption GHG type Electricity Emission Factor (metric tons CO 2 eq) Emissions (metric tons Total Project Emission (metric tons CO 2 0, CO 2 0, CH 4 0, CH N 2O 0, N 2O , , Year 2007 Total Diesel Consumption (litre) Diesel Consumption Electricity Consumption Total Project Fuel Emission Total Electricity Electricity Emissions Emission Factor (metric tons Emissions (metric Consumption GHG type Emission Factor (metric tons tons (kwh) (metric tons CO 2 (metric tons eq) CO 2 0, CO 2 0, GHG type CH 4 0, CH N 2O 0, N 2O , , Construction GFL Inc., GHG Emission Reductions Report 23

24 Year Total Diesel Consumption (litre) Diesel Consumption GHG type Fuel Emission Factor (metric tons Emissions (metric tons Total Electricity Consumption (kwh) Electricity Consumption GHG type Electricity Emission Factor (metric tons Emissions (metric tons Total Project Emission (metric tons CO 2 0, CO 2 0, CH 4 0, CH N 2O 0, N 2O , , Construction GFL Inc., GHG Emission Reductions Report 24

25 Table 6 Total GHG Emission Reductions Summary Year Project Net GHG emissions (tco 2 eq.) Baseline Net GHG emissions (tco 2 eq.) Total GHG emission reductions (tco 2 eq.) Total Uncertainty Uncertainty is associated with the project, in regards to data accuracy and variables used in the quantification of the GHG emissions. Production data is based on delivery and is accountant-verified annually. Other activity data such as fossil fuels and electricity are also closely monitored and controlled. The overall level of uncertainty is rather low since the methodology and all emission factors are provided by the National Inventory Report from Environment Canada 25 and the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). 26 Conclusion Construction GFL Inc. is one of those enterprises working towards efficient solutions to reduce GHG emissions through their commitment to maximize landfill diversion strategies managing mainly concrete from construction and demolition waste. Respecting the "3R" (Reduce - Reuse - Recycle) priorities, those materials are recycled. 25 National Inventory Report (May 2008), Greenhouse Gas Source and Sinks in Canada, Internet link : 26 EPA (2006), Solid Waste Management and Greenhouse Gases, A life-cycle Assessment of Emissions and Sinks, URL address: Construction GFL Inc., GHG Emission Reductions Report 25