SHV Energy s Carbon Count

Transcription

1 SHV Energy s Carbon Count Corporate Carbon Footprint, 2012

2 2

3 1. introduction: A BENCHMARK IS SET IN Key Numbers & Figures approach TO THE SHV ENERGY S FOOTPRINT 4. SHV ENERGY S ROLE IN THE LPG LIFE-CYCLE SHV ENERGY S CARBON FOOTPRINT, IN WBCSD FORMAT 28 Contents 3

4 Contents INTRODUCTION: A BENCHMARK IS SET IN Key Numbers & Figures 2.1 Carbon footprint, by function 2.2 Carbon footprint, by business type 2.3 Carbon footprint, by energy type 2.4 Carbon footprint, by distribution scope and scale 2.5 Carbon footprint, by region 3 APPROACH TO THE SHV ENERGY S FOOTPRINT 3.1 Introduction, and review of relevant guidance 3.2 Definition of carbon footprint 3.3 Principles of footprint estimation 3.4 Organisational boundaries: operational control Currency 3.6 Scope 3.7 Sources of emissions: which are in, which are out 3.8 Capital goods and infrastructure 3.7 Base year is Calculation method: emission factors 4 SHV ENERGY S ROLE IN THE LPG LIFE-CYCLE 5 SHV ENERGY S CARBON FOOTPRINT, IN WBCSD FORMAT 4

5 Tables Table 1: Estimated carbon footprint, per business type, kg CO 2 per tonne LPG Table 2: Non-CO 2 GHGs significance, data availability and reason for exclusion Table 3: Corporate carbon footprint, 2012, WBCSD format Figures Figure 1: Corporate carbon footprint, by main function Figure 2: Corporate carbon footprint, product transport only Figure 3: Corporate carbon footprint, transport and storage disaggregated Figure 4: Corporate carbon footprint, complete disaggregation by function Figure 5: Bulk and cylinder footprints, per tonne, for random selection of BUs Figure 6: Corporate carbon footprint, by production (S&RM), wholesale, bulk and cylinder Figure 7: Corporate carbon footprint, by energy type Figure 8: Corporate carbon footprint, by region Figure 9: LPG lifetime footprint, with distribution by bulk and cylinder 5

6 01 Introduction: A benchmark is set in 2012 For the first time, SHV Energy has measured its corporate carbon footprint. Within the LPG distribution industry, it is probably the largest footprint-exercise ever conducted 1. Hundreds of people were involved in a process that took some nine months. Some 1,500 data for 2012 operations were collected from more than 20 business units spread over three continents; these were compiled and computed centrally to ensure consistency. The results will serve as a benchmark a baseline against which future years will be compared. The 2012 carbon footprint of SHV Energy is calculated to be 876 thousand tonnes of carbon dioxide (CO 2 ). This equates to 125 kilogrammes of CO 2 per tonne of LPG sold. It is very important to understand that operations from our Business Units, which are measured in this report, only make up 2 % of the total LPG CO 2 footprint. We can and will make a real difference by improving the footprint of our customers and suppliers, that represents respectively 90% and 8 %. Management is measurement carbon accounts allow management to make more intelligent decisions about carbon emissions. The following subsections of this chapter present the carbon footprint in five ways: by function, by business type, by energy type, by distribution scope and scale, and by region. This footprint is part of SHV Energy s sustainability strategy based on three pillars: Better Cleaner Together. We believe that by focusing our combined strengths, we can deliver: A Better performing business - help achieve a Cleaner planet and unite one big team of SHV Energy people working Together to achieve these goals. Better Cleaner Together will guide us in reaching our ambition to become a leading, global, sustainable brand within the off grid energy market. 1 Carbon footprints have been measured for the LPG operations of some integrated oil & gas companies. However, the LPG-only parts of such footprints have never been made public. 6

7 Introduction: A Benchmark Is Set In

8 Key Numbers 02 & Figures Emissions related to maritime transport were reported by SHV Gas Supply & Risk Management. TINY FEET & BIG FEET Operations from our Business Units only make up 2 % of the total LPG CO 2 footprint. We can and will make a real difference by improving the footprint of our customers and suppliers, that represents respectively 90% and 8 %. Business units of the following countries are included in this footprint Austria, Belgium, Bosnia Herzogovina, Brazil, China, Croatia, Czech Republic, Denmark, France, Germany, Hungary, Ireland, India, Italy, Malta, Norway, The Netherlands, The Philippines, Poland, Slovenia, Slovakia, Spain, Sweden, Turkey, United Kingdom as well as SHV Supply & Risk Management and our corporate Headquarters in Hoofddorp (The Netherlands) Because of the long distances covered by the delivery vehicles, the large volumes, and the cylinders intensive market, emissions generated in Latin America are as high as Europe and Asia combined 8

9 Key Numbers & Figures 2.1 Carbon footprint, by function As might be expected for a logistics company, about nine-tenths of SHV Energy s footprint is caused by product transport emissions, with the other tenth split about equally between storage, filling and overheads. Figure 1: Corporate carbon footprint, by main function 4% 3% 3% Transport Storage Filling Transport Overheads Overheads Filling Storage 89% 9

10 Those product-transport emissions are split 55/45 between road vehicles and ocean-going ships. Emissions from barge and rail transport, by contrast, are almost negligible. Figure 2: Corporate carbon footprint, product transport only 0,2% 0,1% Road 45% Ship Rail Road: 54% Barge Ship: 45% Rail: 0,2% Barge: 0,1% 54% 10

11 Key Numbers & Figures Looked at more closely, it can be seen the single largest component, 40%, is production transport, i.e. shipment primarily by ocean-going ship operated by SHV Energy s Supply & Risk Management (S&RM) business unit. S&RM s is a different business to that of the other regions: production transport (moving LPG from production terminals to distribution terminals), as opposed to conventional LPG distribution to end-users.transport of bulk LPG accounts for one-fifth of the footprint. Transport of cylinders adds up to nearly one-third. The footprint of storage at terminals and depots is about equal to that of filling cylinders 2. Figure 3: Corporate carbon footprint, transport and storage disaggregated 4% 3% 2% 1% Production transport Cylinder transport 40% Bulk transport 20% Production transport Cylinder transport Bulk transport Overheads Filling Terminals Depots Overheads Filling Terminals Depots 29% 2 Filling also includes reconditioning and disposal of cylinders, to the extent it is carried out internally. This varies by BU, with some doing it internally, and others outsourcing this function. 11

12 In its finest granularity, the relative contributions of primary and secondary transport of bulk LPG and cylinders can be seen more clearly. Data reported in 2012 are not disentangled enough to give absolutely precise figures, but nonetheless it can be estimated that the average footprint per tonne of cylinder LPG is about three times that per tonne of bulk LPG. Delivering cylinders rather than bulk LPG is more carbon intensive because the quantity of LPG delivered per customer is substantially smaller. It was of course expected that the cylinder footprint would be higher than bulk one, but the 3 x ratio was not previously known, and should be explored more precisely in subsequent years. Figure 4: Corporate carbon footprint, complete disaggregation by function 4% 3% 2% 0,3% Production transport 11% 8% Production transport Cylinder transport Bulk transport Cylinder transport Bulk transport Overheads Filling 40% Cylinder transport - Secondary Bulk transport - Primary Cylinder transport - Primary Bulk transport - Secondary Overheads Filling 12% Terminals Cylinder Depots Bulk Depots Terminals Cylinder Depots Bulk Depots (0%) 18% 12

13 Key Numbers & Figures That 3 x ratio, LPG delivered in cylinders is three times more carbon intensive than bulk LPG, is an approximation for all of SHV Energy. The general relationship does hold consistently across the business units. However, as specific figures for a random sampling of BUs shows, individual figures for a given BU can vary widely from this central tendency. Figure 5: Bulk and cylinder footprints, per tonne, for random selection of BUs Bulk Cylinder kg CO 2 /t LPG Business Unit Due to complexities of the data compilation, these figures might be inaccurate by about 5% at most. This level of error will not change the basic relationship shown. For this reason, because the figure is meant to show an overall phenomenon, and because the differences do not necessarily suggest efficiency or inefficiency, the business unit names have been omitted. 13

14 2.2 Carbon footprint, by business type In the supply chain (or product life cycle) of LPG, SHV Energy occupies four links (or boxes): production (as performed by S&RM), wholesale (to other LPG distributors), bulk (including Autogas), and cylinder. The production and cylinder businesses dominate the corporate footprint, each accounting for about 45% of the total. The bulk business accounts for another tenth, while the wholesale footprint is very minor. Figure 6: Corporate carbon footprint, by production (S&RM), wholesale, bulk and cylinder 11% 1% Production transport Cylinder Bulk (including Autogas) Production transport 42% Wholesale Cylinder Bulk (including Autogas) Wholesale 46% 14

15 Key Numbers & Figures The administrative footprint is negligible Hoofddorp headquarters come in at 292 tonnes of CO 2, less than 0.01% of the corporate total. Footprints of Hoofddorp and other offices (which are mostly operational) have been allocated to the business types in proportion to corporate sales volumes of LPG. This analysis of course raises the question of normalised footprints by business, i.e. what is the footprint per unit of LPG. Due to the nature of the data collection, these could not be calculated precisely, but they have been estimated. Table 1: Estimated carbon footprint, per business type, kg CO 2 per tonne LPG Business type Footprint Comment Production transport 292 S&RM operations, based not on sales but on transported volume, i.e million tonnes of LPG. Cylinder 143 Approximate value, based on sales volume. Includes allocated overheads. Bulk 49 Approximate value, based on sales volume. Includes allocated overheads. Wholesale 3 Assumes terminalling only, no transport. Does not include any associate overheads, which are presumed to be minor. 15

16 2.3 Carbon footprint, by energy type SHV Energy s carbon footprint is, by definition, an energy footprint. That is, the footprint consists purely of emissions caused by energy consumption 4. Most of this energy is consumed in transporting LPG, either in heavy-goods vehicles or in ships, therefore the primary energy type responsible for the footprint is fuel oil 5 that drives these forms of transport. It is also consumed, to a lesser extent, in terminals, depots and filling plants. Figure 7: Corporate carbon footprint, by energy 0,005% type 6% 4% 1% 0,4%0,2% Fuel oil (87%) Gasoline (6%) Electricity (4%) Fuel oil LPG (1%) Gasoline Natural gas (0,4%) Electricity Air travel (0,2%) LPG Train travel (0,02%) Natural gas Air travel Train travel 87% 4 This is quite commonly the case in many industrial sectors. Only a few sectors for example, agriculture, chemicals and natural gas production have significant non-energy-caused components in their footprints. 5 Fuel oil consumed is roughly half and half diesel for vehicles and heavy fuel oil for ocean-going ships. The ships also consume a small amount of gasoil. 16

17 Key Numbers & Figures After fuel oil comes gasoline, which powers automobiles and vans for deliveries, sales and administration. Then comes electricity, which powers storage filling operations as well as offices. The footprint of LPG, natural gas and heating oil consumption is very minor. Employee air travel and train travel have been classified as energy types, because direct fuel consumption data for these are not available 6 in any case, together they account for less than 1% of the corporate footprint. 6 For air travel the energy will be jet kerosene, for train either diesel or electricity. Distances-travelled have been measured, and these multiplied by representative emission factors. 17

18 2.4 Carbon footprint, by distribution scope and scale Not surprisingly, business units with larger, sparser customer distributions and greater integration (backward to terminals, forward to cylinders), report higher per-tonne-lpg footprints than those with smaller, denser distributions and less integration. Given the current dataset, these relationships are impossible to quantify precisely, but this will be done in future. A higher or lower per-tonne footprint should not, however, be necessarily interpreted as a less-efficient or more-efficient business unit. These factors scope and scale tend to predominate, and as such are not measures of operational efficiency. 2.5 Carbon footprint, by region By geography, the largest regional footprint comes from S&RM, followed by South America, Europe and Asia. As already noted, S&RM s is a different business to that of the other regions: production transport (moving LPG from production terminals to distribution terminals), as opposed to conventional LPG distribution to end-users. South America s footprint is roughly equal to that of Asia and Europe combined, thanks to significantly greater transport distances and a cylinderheavy business. 18

19 Key Numbers & Figures Figure 8: Corporate carbon footprint, by region 12% S&RM South America 18% S&RM South America 42% 22% Europe Asia Europe Asia (inc. Turkey) South America Europe Asia (inc. Turkey) 48% 28% 29% 19

20 03 Approach to the SHV Energy s footprint This chapter documents the approach taken in compiling the footprint, i.e. how it was put together. It covers: a review of relevant guidance; definition of a corporate carbon footprint; principles of footprint estimation; organisational boundaries; currency; scope; base year; and calculation method. 3.1 Introduction, and review of relevant guidance SHV Energy engaged Atlantic Consulting to review SHV Energy s estimate of its corporate carbon footprint, to document the results and to establish a baseline for such estimates in coming years. This report is that documentation, covering the calendar year A number of organisations offer guidance on how to calculate and report corporate carbon footprints. Most of these are a repetition or a more-detailed interpretation of the grandfather guidance published by the WBCSD in 2004, the GHG Protocol Corporate Accounting and Reporting Standard. WBCSD was selected as the primary source of guidance for several reasons: of the many guidance documents, it is probably most authoritative; it is global, so it fits all of SHV Energy without regional prejudice; it is prescriptive, i.e. it tells not just what to measure but also how to measure it; and it is living guidance, i.e. it is actively expanded and updated. 20

21 Approach to the SHV Energy s footprint 3.2 Definition of carbon footprint The SHV Energy carbon footprint is the net amount of global warmers emitted in a given period by SHV Energy. 3.3 Principles of footprint estimation According to the GHG Protocol Corporate Accounting and Reporting Standard (WBCSD and WRI, 2004), corporate footprints should be estimated in accordance with five principles: Relevance, Completeness, Consistency, Transparency and Accuracy. These have been applied in the estimates presented in this document. 3.4 Organisational boundaries: operational control + The boundaries of the footprint have been defined according to what we call the operational control + method. This is an extension hence the + of what WBCSD calls the operational control method: A company has operational control over an operation if the former or one of its subsidiaries has the full authority to introduce and implement its operating policies at the operation. This criterion is consistent with the current accounting and reporting practice of many companies that report on emissions from facilities, which they operate (i.e., for which they hold the operating license). It is expected that except in very rare circumstances, if the company or one of its subsidiaries is the operator of a facility, it will have the full authority to introduce and implement its operating policies and thus has operational control. Under the operational control approach, a company accounts for 100% of emissions from operations over which it or one of its subsidiaries has operational control. The operational method was adopted, because it is the best way to define SHV Energy s role in the LPG value chain, and this, in turn is the best way to define the LPG value chain overall. Other methods of reporting do not capture the value chain as clearly. We have gone beyond operational control with regard to some indirect emissions caused by transport the single-most important emission source in LPG distribution. Although SHV Energy s business units outsource some transport to varying degrees 7, we think it always should be included. Not including it would significantly lower the relevance, consistency and accuracy of the footprint. 3.5 Currency Just as financial accounts use units such as $ and as their currency, carbon accounts use the currency of carbon dioxide, quantified by weight. 7 Which, according to the WBCSD, means that the BU does not have full authority and operational control. 21

22 3.6 Scope In determining how high, wide and deep to measure, we have applied three criteria: Significance 12 (relevance) to the final answers Control, i.e. can SHV Energy steer it? Data availability These were applied to a range of scoping issues, as discussed in the following subsections Which global warmers? This footprint includes emissions of the most common, most important greenhouse gas: carbon dioxide, CO 2. Other global warmers, whether regulated under the Kyoto Protocol or not, are not included, for reasons of significance and data-availability. Emissions of LPG itself are not included in the footprint. Although propane and butane were at one point classified as greenhouse gases, Kyoto does not classify them as such, and both have since been excluded by most definitions Other Kyoto greenhouse gases Carbon dioxide is of course regulated under the Kyoto Protocol. So, too, are methane, nitrous oxide and about 15 fluoro- and chloro- compounds. However, the latter ones are not included in this footprint, due to a combination of insignificance and data unavailability. The primary sources of emissions at SHV Energy are of combustion: mainly diesel for transport, some natural gas and LPG for heating, plus (indirect) power plant fuels. Using data from the ecoinvent database, their emissions of methane, nitrous oxide and other Kyoto GHGs were benchmarked for significance and data-availability. Table 4: Non-CO 2 GHGs significance, data availability and reason for exclusion Emissions Process Methane Nitrous oxide Other GHGs Why excluded from footprint Diesel-powered transport 9 2% of footprint 1% of footprint Nil <4% impact. Also, non-co 2 emissions are very dependent on the engine type, i.e. very variable, and specific data are not generally available. Natural gas heating 0.1% 0.05% Nil Power generation, European average 10 4% Nil Nil <1% impact. Pipeline and other transport leaks can add about 5-6% to the footprint, but these are out of SHV Energy s control. <5% impact. Also, non- CO 2 emissions are neither consistently nor widely reported for many countries where SHV operates. 8 This word is often used by scientists. Auditors frequently use the word materiality. WBCSD calls it relevance. 9 Well to wheel. 10 UCTE average, from ecoinvent 22

23 Approach to the SHV Energy s footprint 3.7 Sources of emissions: which are in, which are out Included in this footprint are direct emissions from operations, plus indirect emissions from electricity generation and subcontracted transport. Not included are some of what WBCSD calls scope 3 indirect emissions Direct emissions Direct emissions constitute the bulk of SHV Energy s footprint, and all significant ones have been included. The largest contributors are: Mobile combustion for transport of LPG Stationary combustion for heating of facilities, compression of LPG and reconditioning of cylinders and tanks. Some reconditioning is done in-house, some indirectly, that is by subcontractors. Emissions for both have been estimated and included. Vehicle maintenance data was not collected. These emissions are likely to be immaterial and probably indirect 11. Still, it would be sensible to analyse them and perhaps include them in future footprints. At this point, it is unclear how much maintenance is done in-house and how much is done by subcontractors. Fugitive emissions have not been measured. They are believed to be insignificant, not least because leaking LPG is equivalent to leaking revenues there is a powerful incentive to avoid it. Still, in future years, it would be sensible to do some spot checks to confirm this. The footprint does not include direct emissions from water use and waste disposal. These are believed to be immaterial Electricity (indirect) emissions Power consumption has been measured, and then converted to estimated emissions by use of national electricity emission factors Indirect transport emissions are included Significant amounts of LPG transport are outsourced, which by definition makes the resulting emissions indirect. Because they are significant, and effectively under SHV control, these scope 3 emissions have been included. Emissions, direct and indirect, have also been included from staff transport, by car/van, taxi, train and airplane. These are believed to be modestly significant Other indirect emissions not included, for now Two significant sources of scope 3 indirect emissions have not been included in this footprint, but should be considered for inclusion in future footprints. Production of LPG, from well-to-terminal. Emissions data for this are sketchy at best, and would need some serious development work. A credible well-to-terminal dataset would be useful for SHV s carbon management and for maintaining competitiveness against other fuels. LPG in use. For heating and cooking, quality data are available. For Autogas and power generation, more development is needed. 11 Presumably, maintenance emissions are mainly scope 3 indirect, incurred in the production of replacement parts, but this is only inferred, not known for sure. 23

24 3.8 Capital goods and infrastructure Emissions involved in producing capital goods and infrastructure have not been included in the footprint for a variety of reasons Cylinders With limited exceptions, cylinder production is not within SHV s control. Even if it were included, it would make a negligible contribution to the overall footprint, because scrap rates are around only 0.1% (i.e. a cylinder makes 1,000 trips before it is scrapped), and nearly all of that material is recycled Tanks and networks Production of tanks and networks generally is not within SHV s control. Even if it were included, because of their long life (often 30 years or more) and suitability for recycling, emissions would not likely be significant. This was confirmed independently, by footprint work done for Primagas Germany Vehicles According to the ecoinvent database of life cycle assessment, the carbon footprint of a heavy transport vehicle (>32-tonne, Euro 5 emission controls) can be disaggregated into four main subgroups: Operation (fuel combustion) 79% Road construction and maintenance 12% Manufacturing of the vehicle 6% Vehicle maintenance 3% Road construction and vehicle manufacturing are outside of SHV s control, so these capital goods and infrastructure emissions are not included in the footprint Buildings As a rule-of-thumb, building construction emissions are relatively minor in relation to operating emissions. Moveover, buildings emissions are a relatively small portion of SHV s total. So the construction emissions have not been estimated in this footprint. 3.9 Base year is 2012 This is the first year most SHV BUs have collected data, so by default it is the base year Calculation method: emission factors The emission factor method used to calculate SHV Energy s carbon footprint is the most common method of carbon footprinting. Emissions are calculated by multiplying proxies x emission factors, e.g. consumption of diesel in transport x a carbon-emission factor for diesel combustion in transport. 24

25 Approach to the SHV Energy s footprint 25

26 SHV Energy s role 04 in the LPG life-cycle For most fuels, carbon footprints are presented as having two phases: pre-combustion and combustion. In transport, these are often referred to as well-to-tank (WTT) and tank-to-wheel (TTW) footprints; the entire life-cycle footprint is then referred to as well-to-wheel (WTW). Some, more-detailed footprints break down the pre-combustion phase into production and distribution (or even more) components. SHV Energy s operations are in both of these latter areas: production and distribution. How do these fit into the overall footprint of LPG? The answer is that whether or not the LPG is distributed by bulk on in cylinders (Table 1), distribution as such is a minor contributor to the overall footprint (Figure 9). For average bulk deliveries, it amounts to 1% of the total; for average cylinders, it is 4%. In specific cases, these figures of course vary around the averages 12, but even at high extremes, distribution will be well under 10% of the total. Figure 9 LPG lifetime footprint, with distribution by bulk and cylinder 4,000 Combustion Combustion Distribution Distribution Production Production kg CO 2 /t LPG 2,000 0 Bulk Cylinder 12 Within SHV s business units, bulk distribution footprints vary in the range of roughly kg CO2/t LPG, while cylinder ones vary in the range of or so. 26

27 SHV Energy s role in the LPG life-cycle Production footprints, however, are an entirely different story. They can vary enormously, ranging from around 3-23% of the total. Compared to the base case 13 (Figure 9) of 400 kg CO 2 /t LPG, production footprints can be as low as 100 kg CO 2 /t LPG and as high as 900 kg CO 2 /t LPG, according to a pe er-reviewed summary of the literature (Johnson, 2012). Particularly due to the political interest in hydrofracturing ( fracking ) and tight gas, production footprints are the object of numerous new research projects which are also reporting a wide range of values. SHV Energy might explore this research in more detail, for two reasons: 1) it will be useful in benchmarking S&RM s operations; and 2) it could be useful or necessary to consider production footprints when purchasing LPG. 13 This is a representative global figure, that assumes 50/50 LPG production from refining and as a byproduct of oil & gas. 27

28 SHV Energy s carbon footprint, 05 in WBCSD format Many public footprints follow the format recommended by the World Business Council for Sustainable Development (WBCSD) and endorsed by some governments. To allow transparency and comparison, the SHV Energy footprint has also been re-presented in that format. Table 3: Corporate carbon footprint, 2012, WBCSD format Line item Description t CO 2 Gross emissions Scope 1 Fuel for operations, heating and transport Scope 2 Purchased electricity Scope 3 Business travel Subtotal Green tariff credits For electricity Net emissions Gross minus credits Unit net emissions Per tonne of LPG sold These data are exactly the same as those presented in previous chapters, but compiled in a different format. 28

29 SHV Energy s carbon footprint, in WBCSD format 29

30 References ASTM, Standard guide for basic assessment and management of greenhouse gases. Brander, M., Aman Sood, Charlotte Wylie, Amy Haughton, Lovell, J., Electricity-specifc emission factors for grid electricity. econometrica. BSI, Carbon Trust, UK DEFRA, PAS 2050:2008. Specification for the assessment of the life cycle greenhouse gas emissions of goods and services. Publicly available specification 2050:2008. California Air Resources Board, Mandatory Reporting of Greenhouse Gas Emissions: Instructional Guidance for Operators, in: California Air Resources Board (Ed.). Carbon Trust, Carbon Trust Standard Rules. CEFIC, ECTA, Guidelines for Measuring and Managing CO2 Emission from Freight Transport Operations Sponsored by CEFIC, ECTA. DECC, DEFRA,, Guidance on how to measure and report your greenhouse gas emissions, in: UK Department of Climate Change (Ed.), PB Global Reporting Initiative, Sustainability Reporting Guidelines. Int l Civil Aviation Organization, ICAO Carbon Emissions Calculator. ISO, Greenhouse Gases. Johnson, E.P., Carbon footprints of heating oil and LPG heating systems. Environmental Impact Assessment Review 35, Joint Research Centre of the EU Commission, EUCAR, CONCAWE, Well-to-Wheels analysis of future automotive fuels and powertrains in the European context, Version 2b ed. Martensson, L., Emissions from trucks (diesel fuel). Volvo, p. 6. McKinnon, A., Piecyk, M., Measuring and managing CO2 emissions of european chemical transport. Sponsored by CEFIC. Ritter, K., Lev-On, M., Shires, T., Development of a consistent methodology for estimating greenhouse gas emissions from oil and gas industry operations. UK Environment Agency, Guidance on the CRC Energy Efficiency Scheme Footprint Reports, Conversion factors and emission factors: Guidance on the CRC Energy Efficiency Scheme, Environment Agency, Footprint Report, GEHO0310BRZB-E-E. US EPA, Mandatory Reporting of Greenhouse Gases; Final Rule, in: EPA, U. (Ed.), 40 CFR Parts 86, 87, 89 et al., Part II, US Federal Register. US EPA, Emission Factors for Greenhouse Gas Inventories. WBCSD, WRI, GHG Protocol Corporate Accounting and Reporting Standard. World Business Council for Sustainable Development, World Resources Institute. WBCSD, WRI, Indirect CO2 emissions from consumption of purchased electricity, heat and/or steam, Guide to calculation worksheets (January 2007) v 1.2 WBCSD, WRI,,, Scope 3 Accounting and Reporting Standard, Corporate Value Chain. World Business Council for Sustainable Development, World Resources Institute. 30

31 31

32 Annexes Guidance for calculation/reporting of greenhouse-gas emissions Author/Publisher Title Reference American Society for Testing and Materials Standard guide for basic assessment and management of greenhouse gases (ASTM, 2010) BSI/Carbon Trust PAS Specification for the assessment of the life cycle greenhouse gas emissions of goods and services. (BSI et al., 2008) California Air Resources Board Mandatory Reporting of Greenhouse Gas Emissions: Instructional Guidance for Operators (California Air Resources Board, 2008) Carbon Disclosure Project (CDP) Guidance for responding organisations guidance Carbon Trust Carbon Trust Standard Rules (Carbon Trust, 2010) DECC and DEFRA Guidance on how to measure and report your greenhouse gas emissions (DECC, 2009) Global Reporting Initiative Sustainability Reporting Guidelines (Global Reporting Initiative, 2006) International Civil Aviation Organization ICAO Carbon Emissions Calculator. (Int l Civil Aviation Organization, 2009) International Standards Organization ISO Greenhouse Gases 14 (ISO, 2006) Ritter et al Development of a consistent methodology for estimating greenhouse gas emissions from oil and gas industry operations (Ritter et al., 2002) 14 According to ISO, its standard ISO will specify the quantification and reporting of GHG emissions for organizations. As such, it will be guidance for the application of ISO It is still under development, with a reported publication date of summer Until publication, is not a standard. 32

33 Author/Publisher Title Reference UK Environment Agency Guidance on the CRC Energy Efficiency Scheme Footprint Reports (UK Environment Agency, 2010) US EPA Mandatory Reporting of Greenhouse Gases; Final Rule (US EPA, 2009) World Business Council for Sustainable Development GHG Protocol Corporate Accounting and Reporting Standard (WBCSD and WRI, 2004) World Business Council for Sustainable Development Indirect CO 2 emissions from consumption of purchased electricity, heat and/or steam (WBCSD and WRI, 2007) World Business Council for Sustainable Development Scope 3 Accounting and Reporting Standard, Corporate Value Chain (WBCSD, 2011) 33

34 34

35 35

36 SHV Energy N.V Taurusavenue LS Hoofddorp The Netherlands Telephone: +31 (0) Fax: +31 (0) Business units of the following countries are included in this footprint Gas Supply & Risk Management