Alberta Harmonises its GHG Reporting Program with Federal Program

Alberta has harmonized its GHG reporting program with the federal program

Alberta has harmonised its GHG reporting program with the federal program. Accordingly, the reporting threshold under the Specified Gas Reporting Regulation and the Specified Gas Reporting Standard has been lowered from 100,000 tonnes of CO2 equivalent (CO2e) to 50,000 tonnes CO2e. Also, the reporting deadline is now June 1, 2010.

Starting with 2009 emissions data, Alberta facilities will only have to report their GHG emissions once through a single national reporting system to satisfy both provincial and federal reporting requirements. Alberta facilities that exceed the reporting threshold must report their GHG emissions to Alberta Environment via this national system in accordance with the Climate Change and Emissions Management Act, the Specified Gas Reporting Regulation and the Specified Gas Reporting Standard.

Lower Reporting Threshold for Federal June 1, 2010 GHG Reporting

The next reporting deadline for the 2009 GHG emissions data is June 1, 2010. At the national level, all facilities with annual GHG emissions of 50,000 tonnes CO2 equivalent (CO2e) or more must report their GHG emissions to Environment Canada

Pursuant to a Canada Gazette notice published on July 11, 2009, the federal government has lowered the reporting threshold from 100,000 tonnes CO2 equivalent (CO2e) to 50,000 tonnes CO2e. In addition, two separate reporting categories for (i) venting and flaring and (ii) waste and wastewater have now been established. These changes will allow Environment Canada to obtain a better understanding of GHG emissions across Canada.

The next reporting deadline for the 2009 GHG emissions data is June 1, 2010. At the national level, all facilities with annual GHG emissions of 50,000 tonnes CO2 equivalent (CO2e) or more must report their GHG emissions to Environment Canada in accordance with the requirements under the Canadian Environmental Protection Act, 1999. This reporting is completed through the National Mandatory Reporting System for GHGs, operated by Statistics Canada on behalf of Environment Canada.

An important change in the reporting process is the transfer of the GHG data collection from Statistics Canada to Environment Canada, starting March 2010.  This change will advance Environment Canada’s plan to harmonize reporting requirements into one system.

LULUCF

LULUCF is the acronym widely used to refer to “Land Use, Land Use Change and Forestry”.

LULUCF is the acronym widely used to refer to “Land Use, Land Use Change and Forestry”. LULUCF is a sector under the Kyoto Protocol that covers emissions resulting from direct human-induced land use, land-use change and forestry activities. In particular, LULUCF covers cropland and grazing land management, land clearing and forest management in developed countries.

Several Articles of the Kyoto Protocol make provisions for the inclusion of land use, land-use change and forestry activities by Parties as part of their efforts to implement the Kyoto Protocol. However the exact GHG accounting standards and considerations relating to national inventories continue to evolve and are still subject to debate in COP negotiations.

Website: http://unfccc.int/

SEC Issues New Guidance on Disclosure of Climate Change Risk

U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) issued new guidance on what publicly traded companies must disclose to investors in terms of material climate change risks.

On January 27, 2010, the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) issued new guidance on what publicly traded companies must disclose to investors in terms of material climate change risks. The SEC’s guidance is an interpretive release and does not create new legal requirements or modify existing ones. Rather, the guidance is intended to help public companies determine what climate change-related disclosures need to be made pursuant to existing disclosure rules relating to a company’s risk factors, business description, legal proceedings, and management’s discussion and analysis (MD&A). The SEC highlighted the following areas as examples of where climate change and its consequences, if material to a company’s business, may trigger disclosure requirements:

– costs of compliance associated with pending laws and regulations;

– impacts on business of climate change-related international accords and treaties;

– physical impacts of changing weather on assets and operations;

– opportunities for trading in new carbon markets;

– changes in demand for products or services resulting from climate change impacts.

Previously, the SEC required that public companies disclose legal and financial risks posed by environmental challenges; climate change was not specifically named. Given the lack of clarity around climate change-specific disclosure, it was difficult for investors to make well-informed decisions because of inconsistent disclosure of climate change-related risks. As a result, stakeholder groups petitioned the SEC to require full corporate disclosure of climate-related business impacts in financial filings. The objective of the new guidance is to facilitate more accurate and consistent reporting of bottom-line risks posed by climate change to shareholders.

For further details, please see the SEC’s press release: www.sec.gov/news/

or refer to the SEC’s guidance document: http://www.sec.gov/rules/interp/2010/33-9106.pdf.

REDD

REDD is the acronym widely used to refer to the UN program for “Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation” in developing countries. REDD program specifics are still under discussion, but an agreement may be finalised in 2010. It is anticipated that the REDD program will begin in 2013. During the COP-15 conference in Copenhagen, a number of countries committed US $3.5 billion to the REDD program over the next three years.

REDD is a program aimed at reducing emissions from deforestation and forest degradation and incentivising re-forestation, which can boost carbon sinks and create financial value for the carbon stored in standing forests and soil. Direct financial assistance (fund-based) from developed countries or indirect financing through REDD credits (market-based) will be offered for developing countries to monitor forest loss, build institutions for avoiding deforestation and help finance reforestation projects. Further co-benefits such as increasing biodiversity, conservation and poverty alleviation are also intended. Participation is program-specific.

Website: www.un-redd.org

COP15 concluded with the Copenhagen Accord

 

From Dec. 7 to 19th 2009, the much anticipated United Nations fifteenth Conference of the Parties (COP 15) to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) took place in Copenhagen, Denmark. Concurrently, the fifth Conference of the Parties serving as the Meeting of the Parties to the Kyoto Protocol (COP/MOP 5) and Kyoto Protocol ad hoc working groups met in Copenhagen. The goal of the conference was to conclude a fair, ambitious and binding post-2012 international agreement on climate change, including agreement on (i) mid-term emission reductions by developed countries; (ii) clarity on mitigation actions by developed countries; (iii) short- and long-term finance; and (iv) governing structures as laid out in the under the Bali Road Map, which was launched by COP 13 in December 2007.

 

The outcome was the Copenhagen Accord, a non-binding political statement which acknowledges that “climate change is one of the greatest challenges of our time” and emphasizes the parties’ “strong political will to urgently combat climate change”.

 

Key elements of the Copenhagen Accord include:

 

–   a goal of limiting global temperature increase to 2 degrees Celsius;

–  a process for countries to enter their specific mitigation pledges by January 31, 2010;

–  action and cooperation on adaptation, with urgent attention given to the least developed countries, small island developing states and Africa;

–  broad terms for the reporting and verification of developing country actions;

–  an explicit acknowledgment to act on deforestation and forest degradation;

–  establishment of four new bodies: (i) a mechanism to support reducing emissions from deforestation and forest degradation in developing countries (REDD); (ii) a high level panel to study the implementation of financing provisions; (iii) the Copenhagen Green Climate Fund to support the mitigation and adaptation efforts of developing countries as well as capacity building and technology transfer; and (iv) a technology mechanism to accelerate technology development and transfer;

–  a commitment by developed countries to provide $30 billion in “new and additional” funding in the period 2010-2012 to help developing countries reduce emissions, preserve forests, and adapt to climate change; and

–  a commitment by developed countries to mobilize $100 billion a year in public and private finance by 2020 to address the needs of developing countries.

 

By 2015, the Copenhagen Accord calls for an assessment of the implementation of the accord, including strengthening of the long-term target.

 

The Copenhagen Accord was brokered by President Obama and a handful of key developing countries including China, India, Brazil and South Africa. The terms of the Copenhagen Accord were negotiated on the final day of the conference, topping off two weeks of high rhetoric and bitter procedural fights. It then took another day of tense negotiations to arrive at a procedural compromise that would allow the formalization of the accord over the objections of several governments who complained about an “untransparent and “undemocratic” negotiation process.

 

At the end of COP 15, the parties adopted parallel decisions under the UNFCCC and the Kyoto Protocol that “take note” of the accord and open the way for governments to individually sign on. In separate decisions, parties extended the mandate of the ad hoc working groups under both the UNFCCC and the Kyoto Protocol to continue negotiations toward a more comprehensive agreement in Mexico City at the next COP. This unprecedented outcome leaves uncertainty about the formal standing of the Copenhagen Accord under the United Nations climate process and about the nature of any future agreement. The aim of a “legally binding instrument,” which appeared part of the deal when President Obama first announced it, was later taken out.

The text of the Copenhagen Accord can be found in the link section on the right.

Ontario Issues GHG Reporting Regulation

On December 1, Ontario issued O. Reg. 452/09 (the “Regulation”) under the Ontario Environmental Protection Act, which requires large emitters to report their greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions to the Ministry of Environment (MOE). The purpose of the regulation is to provide MOE with better data about the province’s emissions levels, while supporting the implementation of a cap-and-trade program in Ontario that will eventually link to other North American trading systems. The Regulation, which applies to 26 types of facilities, requires the following:

reporting of specified GHG data by all facilities that emit 25,000 tonnes of carbon dioxide equivalent (CO2e) or more per year;

annual reporting of GHG emissions, starting with 2010 emissions;

mandatory use of identified standard quantification methods to quantify emissions starting with 2011 emissions;

flexibility to use the best alternative quantification methods for 2010 emissions;

annual third-party verification of emissions, beginning with 2011 emissions;

emission reports to be submitted on June 1 starting with 2010 emissions in 2011; and

verification to be completed by September 1 starting with 2011 emissions in 2012.

The delay of third party verification until the 2011 reporting year is intended to allow the required professional services capacity to grow in order to meet demand in the province. The flexibility to use best alternative verification methods in 2010 is also intended to smooth the transition to standardized reporting requirements in 2011.

The Regulation was based significantly on the approach set out by the Western Climate Initiative and the September 22, 2009 EPA ruling on GHG reporting. With respect to biomass, the Regulation allows regulated emitters to deduct up to 15,000 tonnes of carbon dioxide generated from a facility through the combustion of biomass based on the theory that the combustion of biomass, which draws CO2 from the atmosphere as it grows, is carbon neutral. In contrast, BC’s new reporting regulation provides that all carbon dioxide from wood biomass, or the wood biomass component of mixed fuels, is not to be included in the calculation of GHG inventories.

The MOE has also issued a technical Guideline for Greenhouse Gas Emissions Reporting, which details standard quantification methods and best alternative quantification methods.

A copy of the Regulation is available in the Links on this site.

ISO 14069

 

ISO 14069 refers to an ISO standard specifying the quantification and reporting of GHG emissions for organizations (Carbonfootprint of organization) — Guidance for the Application of ISO 14064-1. ISO/TR 14069:2013 describes the principles, concepts and methods relating to the quantification and reporting of direct and indirect greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions for an organization. It provides guidance for the application of ISO 14064-1 to greenhouse gas inventories at the organization level, for the quantification and reporting of direct emissions, energy indirect emissions and other indirect emissions.

ISO 14067

 

ISO 14067 refers to a set of ISO standards currently under development specifying quantification and other relevant activities in relation to the carbon footprint of products. In particular, part one – ISO 14067-1 – specifies the quantification of the carbon footprint of products.

Until such time as it has been adopted and published, ISO 14067 is not an actual standard.