prism farms biomass heating project - csa registries · prism farms ltd. – prism farms biomass...

1

Prism Farms Biomass Heating Project Verification Report

May 2, 2017

This page intentionally blank

Brightspot Climate Inc. – Verification Report Prism Farms Ltd. – Prism Farms Biomass Heating Project

1

1 Verification Objective and Details

The objective of the verification is to confirm data, controls and processes supporting the emission

reduction or removal calculations as presented in the GHG Report and corresponding GHG Assertion

according to the procedures set out in ISO 14064-3.

Additional objectives include confirming that the GHG Report and corresponding GHG Assertion

conformed to the requirements and principles of ISO 14064-2 and are without material discrepancies.

ISO 14064-2 defines the following terms used in the context of a GHG verification:

GHG Assertion: a declaration or factual and objective statement made by the Responsible

Party.

Project: activity or activities that alter the conditions identified in the baseline scenario which

cause greenhouse gas emission reductions or greenhouse gas removal enhancements.

9ISO 14064-2 defines the following parties associated with the verification:

Responsible Party: person or persons responsible for the provision of the greenhouse gas

assertion and supporting GHG information.

The Responsible Party for this verification is Prism Farms Ltd. (Prism Farms).

Intended User: individual or organization identified by those reporting GHG-related information

as being the one who relies on that information to make decisions.

The Intended User for this verification is the CSA CleanProjects® Registry and its users.

Verifier: competent and independent person, or persons, with the responsibility of performing

and reporting on the verification process.

The Verifier for this verification is Brightspot Climate Inc. (Brightspot). The verification team

members are described in Section 1.11 of this report.

1.1 Project Title

Prism Farms Biomass Heating Project.

1.2 Project Start Date

The project start date was February 14, 2006, which was confirmed by the Responsible Party during

the site visit.

1.3 Verification Site Visit (date)

A site visit to the project site was conducted by Aaron Schroeder on April 25, 2017. During the site visit

opening meeting, the Responsible Party’s representative, Ryan Tiessen, provided an overview of the

facility and answered questions related to ownership, additionality, data collection and data integrity.

The site visit also included a tour of the facility with observations of the biomass combustion equipment

and biomass handling systems.


2

1.4 Expected Lifetime of the Project

The credit duration period of the Project is February 14, 2006 to February 14, 2021. This aligns with

Prism Farms anticipation of the biomass boiler’s operational life of fifteen years, minimum.

1.5 Type of Greenhouse Gas Emission Reduction or Removal Project

Prism Farms Biomass Heating Project is a biomass diversion project, which utilizes biomass for energy.

1.6 Methodology Appropriateness

The quantification methodology applied to the Project is the Alberta Environment Specified Gas Emitters

Regulation’s Quantification Protocol for Diversion of Biomass to Energy from Biomass to Energy from

Biomass Combustion Facilities, Version 1.0, September 2007.

This methodology has been confirmed as appropriate for the Project based on a review of the following:

• The energy is produced from biomass is offsetting fossil fuel generated energy;

• Evidence has been provided to demonstrate that the baseline condition of landfilling biomass

was the most likely alternative to combustion and that waste is converted to energy at the

facility.

• Evidence has been provided to demonstrate that the biomass would have undergone anaerobic

decomposition in a landfill as confirmed by an affirmation from the biomass supplier.

• The Project is not reporting under the Alberta Emissions Offset Program and therefore is not

required to meet the eligibility requirements.

Version 2.0 of the Protocol was published in January 2014 with an expanded scope of eligible projects

and a revised quantification methodology for reductions from landfill diversion. Version 1.0 (2007) has

remained the Project Protocol for consistency; however, the updated quantification methodology for

reductions from landfill diversion has been applied. This updated methodology is published in Alberta

Environment’s Carbon Offset Emission Factors Handbook (March 2015).

1.7 Legal Land Description

This is an Ontario-based project. Prism Farms is located at:

Street Address:

731 Mersea Road 7

Leamington, ON N0P 2J0

Geographic Location:

Latitude: 42.109658

Longitude: -82.591341


3

1.8 Ownership Verification

Prism Farms holds sole ownership of the facility and the Project, including all associated environmental

attributes. Prism Farms is the Responsible Party making the GHG Assertion.

1.9 Reporting, Monitoring, and Verification Details

The GHG reporting period covered by this verification is January 1, 2016 to December 31, 2016,

consisting solely of 2016 vintage credits.

Prism Farms anticipates that the Project will report on an annual basis for subsequent emission

reduction assertions.

The Responsible Party has developed a monitoring plan for each of the project parameters, including

the quantification variables used to calculate the emission reduction. The monitoring plan was reviewed

during the verification – see Section 3.5 for the verification results.

This Verification Report will be posted publically on the GHG CleanProjects® registry along with the

GHG Project and related GHG Report and Assertion (May 1, 2017), to which it pertains.

1.10 Level of Assurance and Verification Summary

The verification was planned and executed to reach a reasonable level of assurance.

There were no discrepancies detected in the final GHG Assertion.

The Responsible Party’s asserted emission reduction is provided in the following table:

Table 1: GHG Assertions by Vintage Year

GHG Emission Reduction 2016: 2,579 tonnes CO2e

Source: Prism Farms Biomass Heating Project – GHG Emissions Reduction Report 2016 (May 1, 2017)

1.11 Roles and Responsibilities

The verification team comprised exclusively of Aaron Schroeder, P.Eng., as Lead Verifier. The Lead

Verifier was responsible for all activities conducted within the verification, including the development of

the Verification and Sampling Plans, as well as the execution of the verification procedures. The Lead

Verifier was the lead author of the Verification Report and executed the Verification Statement.

1.11.1 AUTHORIZED PROJECT CONTACT

Kelsey Lank, AIT.

Carbon Solutions Analyst

Blue Source Canada ULC

[email protected]

+1 (403) 262-3026 ext. 228


4

1.11.2 PROJECT PROPONENT

Prism Farms Ltd.

731 Mersea Road 7


Canada

Contact: Ryan Tiessen

[email protected]

+1 (519) 796-9324

1.11.3 PROJECT DEVELOPER

Prism Farms Ltd.

731 Mersea Road 7


Canada

Contact: Ryan Tiessen

[email protected]

+1 (519) 796-9324

1.11.4 REPORT VERIFIER

Brightspot Climate Inc.

225 West 8th Avenue, Suite 300

Vancouver, BC V5Y 1C3

Canada

Lead Verifier: Aaron Schroeder

[email protected]

+1 (604) 353-0264


5

2 Verification Criteria

As per ISO 14064-3, the verification assessed the project document and all supporting information.

2.1 Scope

Table 2: Verification Scope

Geographic Boundary: Prism Farms Ltd.

731 Mersea Road 7


Geographic Location:

Latitude: 42.109658

Longitude: -82.591341

Physical Operations: • Two biomass boiler

• Two fossil fuel boilers

• Biomass storage and conveyor system

• Hot water (heat) closed-loop distribution piping system

GHG Sources, Sinks and

Reservoirs:

Baseline Emissions:

• Decomposition of biomass in a landfill

• Combustion of fossil fuels for heat production

• Fossil fuel upstream extraction and processing emissions

Project Emissions:

• Combustion of biomass

• Biomass transfer

Verification Criteria: • Alberta Environment Specified Gas Emitters Regulation’s Quantification Protocol for Diversion of Biomass to Energy from Biomass to Energy from Biomass Combustion Facilities, Version 1.0, September 2007

• Requirements of ISO 14064-2

GHG Report Template for CSA CleanProjects® Registry

Type of GHGs: • Carbon Dioxide (CO2)

• Methane (CH4)

• Nitrous Oxide (N2O)

Reporting Period: January 1, 2016 – December 31, 2016


6

2.2 Materiality

The quantitative materiality threshold identifies misstated or omitted information that would significantly

misrepresent the GHG Assertion to the intended user. For this project, the quantitative materiality

threshold is equal to 5% of the asserted greenhouse gas emission reduction. Qualitative discrepancies

will also be evaluated and considered against the needs of the intended user.

3 Verification Plan

3.1 Preliminary Review

The verification team conducted a preliminary review of the project and project documentation. The

review was conducted by reviewing the draft GHG Report and interviewing representatives of the

responsible party. Through this review, the verification team confirmed that the team has the necessary

technical skills and competencies to review the nature, scale and complexity of the project.

A preliminary review of the completeness and appropriateness of the GHG Report and GHG Assertion

and data management systems confirmed that the project is ready for verification.

There were no issues raised through the preliminary review that would have precluded the completion

of the verification.

3.2 Verification Risk Assessment

The Verification Risk Assessment was completed during the verification planning stage. Verification risk

is defined as the risk of an incorrect verification conclusion. It can be calculated as the product of the

Project’s inherent risks, the Responsible Party’s control risks and the Verifier’s detection risks. The

verifier cannot affect the inherent risk or the control risk. Therefore, to reduce the overall verification risk

and reach the agreed level of assurance (defined in the verification scope), the verifier must design

verification procedures that reduce the detection risk.

The following table presents the results of the verification risk assessment. Each inherent and control

risk is described along with the risk evaluation (high/medium/low). The risk evaluation considers both

the magnitude of the activity data or inventory component on the overall GHG assertion as well as the

probability that the risk will result in a discrepancy, as assessed by the verifier.

In instances where a substantive approach is applied in the verification procedure (i.e. the procedure

tests the data, rather than the Responsible Party’s controls), the Responsible Party’s control is not

listed, but is denoted “N/A”; however, this does not imply that the Responsible Party does not have a

control in place.


7

Table 3: Verification Risk Assessment

Activity Data /

Inventory Component

Inherent Risk Control Risk Detection

Risk Design

Description of Verification Procedure

PROTOCOL AND GENERAL APPLICABILITY REQUIREMENTS

The energy produced

from biomass must be

displacing fossil fuel

generated energy.

Relevance – Low

Biomass produced

energy may be used for

purposes other than


energy or the proportion

of natural gas and

heating oil displacement

may not be appropriate.

N/A – verification is not

relying on Responsible

Party Controls.

Low Substantive test – Observe biomass

combustion units during site visit to determine

if use of biomass produced energy is

displacing energy that otherwise would have

been produced using fossil fuels.

The avoided anaerobic

decomposition of

biomass must be

substantiated.

Relevance – High

The biomass may not

have decomposed

anaerobically in a landfill

in the baseline condition.



Party Controls.

Low Substantive test – inquire the source of

biomass through interviews during the site

visit. Observe the biomass composition during

the site visit to determine if it is virgin material

or construction and demolition waste.

Ownership Relevance – Low

Ownership of emission

reduction may not be

clearly defined.



Party Controls.

Low Substantive test – confirm that emission

reduction achieved through biomass

combustion is wholly owned by the

Responsible Party through interviews during

the site visit.


8

Activity Data /

Inventory Component


Risk Design


ISO 14064-2 REQUIREMENTS

Project information Completeness – Medium

Accuracy – Medium

The project information

provided in the GHG

report may not include all

information required by

ISO 14064-2 or may be

inaccurate



Party Controls.

Low Substantive test – review all information

provided in the GHG Report, comparing it to

observations made during the site visit and

data and documentation provided by the

Responsible Party. Confirm that all required

data is included in the report and is accurate.

Definition and selection

of Sources, Sinks and

Reservoirs (SSRs)

Completeness – High

Relevance – High

Conservativeness - High

SSRs identified and

selected for

quantification may be

incomplete or may not

be relevant to the

project.



Party Controls.

Low Substantive test – review the GHG Report

and supporting documentation, comparing

the selection of SSRs described in these

documents to observations made during the

site visit. Evaluate the justifications provided

for excluding SSRs, confirming that a

conservative approach has been applied.


9

Activity Data /

Inventory Component


Risk Design


Data monitoring for each

quantification parameter

Completeness – Low

Relevance – Low

Transparency – Low

Plan for monitoring data

may be incomplete,

inappropriate or may not

provide for sufficient

transparency in data.



Party Controls.

High Substantive test – review the data monitoring

plan for each quantification parameter,

evaluating for completeness and relevance

based on understanding of the overall project.

Review level of transparency in project data to

confirm sufficient transparency to conduct the

verification at a reasonable level of assurance

and meet the needs of the intended user.

QUANTIFICATION DATA

Biomass anaerobic

decomposition factors,

biomass combustion

emission factors,

biomass heating values,

ash content

Accuracy – High

Factors may not be

transcribed correctly

from reference

documents.



Party Controls.

Low Substantive test – review and confirm the

transcription of all emission factors from

reference documents.

Woodchip mass Accuracy – Low

Woodchip mass may not

be correctly transcribed

from supplier invoices

and reports.



Party Controls.

Low Substantive test – Recalculate the emission

reduction using mass of woodchips from

supplier’s invoices.


10

Activity Data /

Inventory Component


Risk Design


Biomass combustion

auxiliary equipment

inventory, nameplate

ratings and hours in

operation

Completeness – Low

Accuracy – Low

Equipment inventory may

be incomplete or

nameplate ratings may

be inaccurately

recorded.



Party Controls.

Low Substantive test: observe biomass

combustion auxiliary equipment during the

site visit to determine the completeness of the

inventory and the accurate recording of the

nameplate readings. Inquire the hours in

operation for each equipment from operations

staff.

EMISSION REDUCTION QUANTIFICATION AND REPORTING

Quantification of

emission reduction

Accuracy (high)

Emission reduction

calculation may contain

arithmetic errors.



Party Controls.

Low Substantive test: Recalculate the emission

reduction using original metered data.

Transcription of final

emission reduction into

GHG Report

Accuracy (high)

Final emission reduction

may not have been

transcribed accurately

from calculation

spreadsheets into the

GHG Report

N/A (controls not

considered for

verification)

Low Substantive test: compare the final emission

reduction quantity reported by the

Responsible Party to the quantity reported in

the GHG Report. Also, compare these

quantities to the recalculated quantity in

previous verification procedures.


11

3.3 Sampling Plan

The verification procedures that could apply sampling of the project data are listed in the following table.

The sampling size, the sampling methodology and their respective justifications are also described in the following table.

Table 4: Sampling Plan

Activity Data /

Inventory

Component

Detection

Risk

Design

Description of Verification

Procedure

Sampling Methodology and

Justification

Sample Size

There was no sampling of datasets required to complete the verification. All verification procedures either reviewed all project data or

sampling was not applicable.


12

3.4 GHG Report

The final GHG Report subject to this verification is dated May 1, 2017.

The asserted emission reduction quantity is shown in 1.10 of this report.

3.5 Verification Findings

The results of the verification risk assessment provided the basis for the verification procedures. Table 5, below, provides a summary of the

verification procedures where discrepancies were detected. Table 6, which follows, provides a description of every verification procedure that

was completed.

Detailed working papers regarding the verification procedures are available on request.

Table 5: Verification Findings Summary

Table 6: Findings of Verification Procedures

Activity Data / Inventory Component Description

Verification Procedures Verification Findings

PROTOCOL AND GENERAL APPLICABILITY REQUIREMENTS

The energy produced

from biomass must be


generated energy.

Substantive test – Observe biomass

combustion units during site visit to

determine if use of biomass produced

energy is displacing energy that otherwise

would have been produced using fossil

fuels.

Biomass is combusted solely to produce hot water, based on

observation made during the site visit. Prior to the installation of the

biomass burner, fossil fuels were used to produce hot water.

No discrepancies were detected in the applicability of biomass

as a fuel to displace fossil fuels.

Activity Data / Inventory

Component Description Discrepancy Description

Discrepancy

Type

Discrepancy

Magnitude

No discrepancies were detected in the final GHG Assertion.


13



The avoided anaerobic

decomposition of biomass

must be substantiated.

Substantive test – inquire the source of

biomass through interviews during the site

visit. Observe the biomass composition

during the site visit to determine if it is

virgin material or construction and

demolition waste.

The site operator stated that biomass is sourced solely from a

supplier that procures construction and demolition waste that is

recovered or diverted from landfill. During the site visit, observation of

the biomass confirmed that it is construction and demolition waste.

The biomass is definitively not virgin wood based on its moisture

content, consistency and odour.

No discrepancies were detected in the applicability of the

application of avoided anaerobic decomposition of biomass.

Ownership Substantive test – confirm that emission

reduction achieved through biomass

combustion is wholly owned by the

Responsible Party through interviews

during the site visit.

The Responsible Party confirmed that it procures the biomass

combusted in the project and it owns all equipment and infrastructure

in the greenhouse operations. The Responsible Party, therefore,

owns the emission reduction associated with the project activity.

No discrepancies were detected in the ownership of the

emission reduction.

ISO 14064-2 REQUIREMENTS

Project information Substantive test – review all information

provided in the GHG Report, comparing it

to observations made during the site visit

and data and documentation provided by

the Responsible Party. Confirm that all

required data is included in the report and

is accurate.

The project information described in the GHG Report accurately

represents the baseline and project conditions and the quantification

of the emission reduction, as observed during the site visit.

No discrepancies were detected in the project information

described in the GHG Report.


14



Definition and selection of

Sources, Sinks and

Reservoirs (SSRs)

Substantive test – review the GHG Report

and supporting documentation, comparing

the selection of SSRs described in these

documents to observations made during

the site visit. Evaluate the justifications

provided for excluding SSRs, confirming

that a conservative approach has been

applied.

The SSRs described in the GHG Report and the selection of SSRs for

quantification appropriately represents the relevant SSRs observed

during the site visit.

No discrepancies were detected in the selection of the SSRs.

Data monitoring for each

quantification parameter

Substantive test – review the data

monitoring plan for each quantification

parameter, evaluating for completeness

and relevance based on understanding of

the overall project. Review level of

transparency in project data to confirm

sufficient transparency to conduct the

verification at a reasonable level of

assurance and meet the needs of the

intended user.

The monitoring plan for each parameter was reviewed and found to

describe the components required to sufficiently monitor the

parameter.

The project data has been provided at a sufficient frequency to

conduct the verification.

No discrepancies were detected in the monitoring plan or the

transparency of the project data.


15



QUANTIFICATION DATA

Biomass anaerobic

decomposition factors,

biomass combustion

emission factors, biomass

heating values, ash

content

Substantive test – review and confirm the

transcription of all emission factors from

reference documents.

The factors used to calculate the biomass anaerobic decomposition

were correctly transcribed from the Alberta Environment and Parks

emission factor handbook and Environment Canada’s National

Inventory Report. The biomass combustion emission factors were

correctly transcribed from Environment Canada. The biomass heating

values and ash contents were provided by the biomass supplier and

correctly transcribed into the emission quantification spreadsheet.

No discrepancies were detected in the factors used to quantify

biomass combustion emissions.

Woodchip mass Substantive test – Recalculate the

emission reduction using mass of

woodchips from supplier’s invoices.

The recalculation of the emission reduction using the woodchip

suppliers’ biomass mass values reasonably matched the Responsible

Party’s quantification.

No discrepancies were detected in the biomass mass data.

Biomass combustion

auxiliary equipment

inventory, nameplate

ratings and hours in

operation

Substantive test: observe biomass

combustion auxiliary equipment during the

site visit to determine the completeness of

the inventory and the accurate recording

of the nameplate readings. Inquire the

hours in operation for each equipment

from operations staff.

The final equipment inventory and nameplate values for the biomass

auxiliary equipment matched the equipment observed during the site

visits.

No discrepancies were detected in the biomass auxiliary

equipment inventory or recorded nameplate ratings.


16



EMISSION REDUCTION QUANTIFICATION AND REPORT

Quantification of emission

reduction

Substantive test: Recalculate the emission

reduction using original metered data.

The recalculation of the emission reduction reasonably matched the

Responsible Party’s quantification.

No discrepancies were detected in the quantification of the

emission reduction.

Transcription of final

emission reduction into

GHG Report

Substantive test: compare the final

emission reduction quantity reported by

the Responsible Party to the quantity

reported in the GHG Report. Also,

compare these quantities to the

recalculated quantity in previous

verification procedures.

The final emission reduction quantities were correctly transcribed into

the GHG Report.

No discrepancies were detected in the final reported emission

reduction quantities in the GHG Report.


17

3.6 Verification Records

All records used to conduct the verification will be maintained by Brightspot for seven years from the

date of this report.

3.7 Facts discovered after the verification

If any facts are discovered after the completion of the verification that may result in a mater

discrepancy, Brightspot will notify the project proponent and GHG CleanProjects® Registry within

seven days.

3.8 Verification Schedule

The verification was completed according to the schedule established between the Responsible Party

and the Verifier in the Verification Plan. The verification reached important milestones on the following

dates:

• Verification Kickoff Meeting: March 27, 2017

• Site Visit: April 25, 2017

• Final GHG Report May 1, 2017

• Draft Verification Report : May 1, 2017

• Peer Review May 1, 2017

• Final Verification Report May 2, 2017


18

4 Verification Statement

CSA CleanProjects® Registry

178 Rexdale Blvd.

Toronto, ON

Canada M9W 1R3

May 2, 2017

Introduction

Prism Farms Ltd. (the “Responsible Party”) engaged Brightspot Climate Inc. (Brightspot Climate) to

review their greenhouse gas (GHG) emission reduction and removal project, Prism Farms Biomass

Heating Project (the Project). The Project was developed in accordance with the Alberta Environment

and Parks Quantification Protocol for Diversion of Biomass to Energy from Biomass Combustion

Facilities (Version 1.0, September 2007) (the Protocol).

The Responsible Party’s “GHG Assertion” is comprised of the GHG Report and supporting

documentation. The GHG Assertion covers the reporting period January 1, 2016 to December 31,

2016, and states an emission reduction and removal claim shown in the table below.

GHG Emission Reduction

CO2:

1,608.4

CH4:

40.0

N2O:

-0.1

CO2e:

-10.7

Total CO2e:

2,579

The emission reduction and removal claim consists exclusively of 2016 vintage credits.

The Responsible Party is responsible for the preparation and presentation of the information within the

GHG Assertion. Our responsibility as the verifier is to express an opinion as to whether the GHG

Assertion is materially correct, in accordance with the requirements of the CSA CleanProjects® Registry

and the requirements of ISO 14064-2: Specification with guidance at the project level for quantification,

monitoring and reporting of greenhouse gas emission reductions or removal enhancements.

Scope

We completed our review in accordance with ISO 14064 Part 3: Greenhouse Gases: Specification with

Guidance for the Validation and Verification of Greenhouse Gas Assertions (ISO, 2006). As such, we

planned and performed our work to provide positive, but not absolute assurance with respect to the

GHG Assertion.

The verification procedures that were performed through the course of the verification were developed

based on the results of a risk assessment that was completed during the verification planning stage.

These verification procedures are described in the Verification Report.


19

Conclusion

I believe our work provides a reasonable basis for my conclusion.

There were no unresolved discrepancies detected in the final GHG Assertion.

Based on our review, it is my opinion at a reasonable level of assurance that the GHG Assertion is

materially correct and presented fairly in accordance with the relevant criteria.

Sincerely,

Aaron Schroeder, P.Eng.


Vancouver, British Columbia


20

5 Conflict of Interest Statement

Brightspot Climate monitored threats to independence throughout the duration of the project. The

following declaration affirms that the following principles were upheld:

Yes No Details

Independence:

The verifying organization remained independent of the activity being

verified, and free from bias and conflict of interest.

The verifying organization maintained objectivity throughout the

verification to ensure that the findings and conclusions are based on

objective evidence generated during the verification,

a N/A

Ethical Conduct:

The verifying organization demonstrated ethical conduct through

trust, integrity, confidentiality and discretion throughout the verification

process.

a N/A

Fair Presentation:

The verifying organization reflected truthfully and accurately

verification activities, findings, conclusions and reports.

The verifying organization reported significant obstacles encountered

during the verification process, as well as unresolved, diverging

opinions among verifiers, the responsible party and the client.

a N/A

Due Professional Care:

The verifying organization exercised due professional care and

judgment in accordance with the importance of the task performed

and the confidence placed by clients and intended users.

Members of the verification team have the necessary skills and

competences to undertake the verification.

a N/A

Date: May 2, 2017

Location: Vancouver, British Columbia

Signed:

Aaron Schroeder

Lead Verifier. Brightspot Climate

21

6 Statement of Qualifications

6.1.1 Lead Verifier Details

Lead Verifier Name: Aaron Schroeder

Professional Designation: Professional Engineer

Email: [email protected]

Phone Number: +1 (604) 353-0264

Verifying Company Name: Brightspot Climate Inc.

6.1.2 Lead Verifier Training

• GHG Verification - ISO 14064-3, Canadian Standards Association, 2012

• CCP 403 - GHG Validation and Verification, University of Toronto, 2016 (Instructor)

6.1.3 Verification Team Biographies

Lead Verifier: Aaron Schroeder, P.Eng. has eleven years of professional experience analyzing,

quantifying and auditing greenhouse gas emissions in North America. Aaron’s hands on experience

conducting over 150 greenhouse gas verifications includes numerous engagements for industrial

facilities in power generation, oil and gas production and processing, natural gas pipelines and a wide

range of emission reduction projects in beef and dairy management, conservation cropping (zero-tillage)

and nitrogen fertilizer management, and renewable energy and waste management. Aaron is a

sessional instructor at the University of Toronto’s School of Environment for professional development.

He instructs the school’s greenhouse gas quantification and verification courses.

Analytical Support: Will Grundling, MSc. will provide analytical support to the verification team through

the completion of the verification procedures and the development of the Verification Report. His

verification experience includes event inventories, Alberta’s SGER compliances, Ontario GHG Reporting

Regulation verifications, and Fed Cattle Aggregation and Vent Gas and Instrument Air offset projects.

Peer Reviewer: Jennifer Packer, P.Eng., will conduct an independent peer review of the verification. Jennifer has completed over 25 greenhouse gas verifications of annual industrial facility reports as Lead Verifier or Technical Expert under Alberta’s Specified Gas Emitters Regulation. Her knowledge of biogas, landfill gas and biomass projects is extensive. I, Aaron Schroeder, meet or exceed the qualifications required for third-party verifiers defined by the CSA Clean Projects Registry.

Aaron Schroeder, P.Eng.


Vancouver, British Columbia

prism farms biomass heating project - csa registries · prism farms ltd. – prism farms biomass...

Documents