project #1090-6410

ALBERTA REMVUE ENGINE FUEL MANAGEMENT

AND VENT GAS CAPTURE AGGREGATION PROJECT

Greenhouse Gas Emissions Reduction

Offset Project Plan

For The Period: 1 January, 2013 – 31 December, 2020

FINAL REPORT, version 2.3

20 December, 2013

Prepared by: Blue Source Canada ULC (Project Proponent) Suite 700, 717-7

th Avenue SW

Calgary, Alberta T2P 3R5 T: (403) 262-3026 F: (403) 269-3024 www.bluesourceCAN.com

http://www.bluesourcecan.com/

Page i

Prepared by: Blue Source Canada ULC 700, 717 7

th Ave. SW, Calgary, AB, T2P 0Z3 Tel:(403) 262-3026 Fax:(403) 269-3024

Contents Contents ......................................................................................................................................................... i

List of Figures ............................................................................................................................................... iii

List of Tables ................................................................................................................................................ iii

List of Abbreviations .................................................................................................................................... iv

1 Project Scope and Site Description ....................................................................................................... 1

1.1 Contact Information ...................................................................................................................... 3

2 Introduction .......................................................................................................................................... 4

2.1.1 Technology 1a: REMVue Air/fuel Ratio Controller ................................................................ 5

2.1.2 Technology 2: REMVue SlipStream® ............................................................................. 5

2.2 Project Participants and Sub-Projects Included ............................................................................ 6

2.3 Conditions prior to project initiation ............................................................................................ 7

2.3.1 Technology 1a: REMVue Air/fuel Ratio Controller ................................................................ 7

2.3.2 Technology 2: REMVueSlipStream®.............................................................................. 7

2.4 Description of how the project will achieve GHG emission reductions/removals ..................... 10

2.4.1 Technology 1a: REMVue Air/fuel Ratio Controller .............................................................. 10

2.4.2 Technology 2: REMVueSlipStream®............................................................................ 12

2.5 Project eligibility ......................................................................................................................... 12

2.5.1 Flexibility mechanisms ........................................................................................................ 16

2.5.2 Other Methodology Changes Pre-Approved by Alberta Environment ............................... 17

2.6 Subproject technologies, products, services and the expected level of activity ........................ 17

2.6.1 Technology 1 Services ......................................................................................................... 17

2.6.2 Technology 2 Services ......................................................................................................... 18

2.7 Identification of Risks .................................................................................................................. 18

2.7.1 Regulatory Requirements & Project Impacts ...................................................................... 20

3 Inventory of Sources and Sinks ........................................................................................................... 22

3.1 Quantification of estimated GHG emissions/removals .............................................................. 23

3.1.1 Justification for excluding sources and sinks ...................................................................... 23

3.1.2 Quantification of Source and Sinks ..................................................................................... 23

3.1.3 Source/Sink Contingent Data Collection Procedures .......................................................... 24

Page ii



3.2 Estimate of total GHG emission reductions/removals enhancements attributable for the

project 26

4 IDENTIFICATION OF BASELINE ............................................................................................................ 26

4.1 Functional Equivalence ............................................................................................................... 27

5 QUANTIFICATION PLAN ...................................................................................................................... 27

5.1 Baseline Emissions ...................................................................................................................... 28

5.1.1 Technology 1/1b: REMVue AFR Controller/EcoPlug ........................................................... 28

5.1.2 Technology 2: REMVue Slipstream ..................................................................................... 28

5.2 Project Emissions ........................................................................................................................ 29

5.3 Determination of Brake Specific Fuel Consumption ................................................................... 29

5.3.1 The Simple Method ............................................................................................................. 29

5.3.2 The Advanced Method ........................................................................................................ 29

5.3.3 The Flexibility Mechanism................................................................................................... 30

5.3.4 The Master Method ............................................................................................................ 31

5.3.5 Subproject Technology 1b: EcoPlug BSFC Determination .................................................. 32

6 MONITORING PLAN............................................................................................................................. 33

6.1 Technology 1/1b: REMVue AFR/EcoPlug .................................................................................... 33

6.2 Technology 2: REMVue Slipstream ............................................................................................. 34

6.3 Contingent Data Monitoring ....................................................................................................... 36

7 DATA INFORMATION MANAGEMENT SYSTEM AND RECORDS .......................................................... 40

7.1 Data Control ................................................................................................................................ 40

7.2 Data Management ...................................................................................................................... 40

7.3 Data Management and QA/QC at Blue Source ........................................................................... 42

7.3.1 Back-up Procedures at Blue Source .................................................................................... 42

7.3.2 Document Retention Policy at Blue Source ........................................................................ 42

8 PROJECT DEVELOPER SIGNATURES ..................................................................................................... 43

9 STATEMENT OF SENIOR REVIEW ........................................................................................................ 44

10 REFERENCES .................................................................................................................................... 45

Appendix A – IT Backup Procedure for Blue Source ................................................................................... 46

Appendix B – Data Retention Policy at Blue Source ................................................................................... 47

Appendix C – Risk Matrix ............................................................................................................................ 48

Page iii



Appendix D – Subproject List ...................................................................................................................... 50

Appendix E – Confidential Methodology: The Master Map ....................................................................... 54

List of Figures FIGURE 1: OVERVIEW OF LOCATION OF SUB-PROJECTS CURRENTLY INCLUDED IN PROJECT ...................................... 6

FIGURE 2: SIMPLIFIED PFD OF SUBPROJECT TECHNOLOGIES, PRE-PROJECT. DIAMOND SHAPES REPRESENT

SOURCES SPECIFIC TO THE REMVUE SLIPSTREAM SUBPROJECT. ......................................................................... 9

FIGURE 3: COMBUSTION MECHANISM ....................................................................................................................... 10

FIGURE 4: POST-PROJECT REMVUE AFR SYSTEM ........................................................................................................ 11

FIGURE 5: ECOPLUG FULL SECTION VIEW.................................................................................................................... 11

FIGURE 6: POST-PROJECT VENT GAS CAPTURE REMVUE SLIPSTREAM CONFIGURATION ........................................... 12

FIGURE 7: SIMPLIFIED PFD OF SUBPROJECT TECHNOLOGIES, POST-PROJECT. DIAMOND SHAPES REPRESENT

SOURCES SPECIFIC TO THE REMVUE SLIPSTREAM SUBPROJECT ........................................................................ 22

FIGURE 8: IMS FLOW CHART ....................................................................................................................................... 41

List of Tables TABLE 1: SUMMARY OF PROJECT PARTICIPANTS AND SUB-PROJECTS BY TYPE ............................................................ 6

TABLE 2: ELIGIBLE ENGINE TYPES FOR REMVUE AFR INSTALLATION ............................................................................ 7

TABLE 3: RISK MATRIX ................................................................................................................................................. 19

TABLE 4: EMISSION FACTORS USED FOR EFM AND VGC SUBPROJECTS ...................................................................... 25

TABLE 5: OFFSET TONNES ANTICIPATED PER YEAR ..................................................................................................... 26

TABLE 6: PROJECTION BASED BASELINE IDENTIFICATION (ALBERTA ENVIRONMENT, OCTOBER 2009) ..................... 27

TABLE 7: ENGINE CLASSIFICATION ............................................................................................................................... 30

TABLE 8: EFM DATA MONITORING PLAN .................................................................................................................... 33

TABLE 9: VGC DATA MONITORING PLAN ..................................................................................................................... 34

TABLE 10: CONTINGENT DATA MONITORING AND COLLECTION FOR ALL SOURCES .................................................. 36

TABLE 11: METERING MAINTENANCE AND CALIBRATION DETAILS SUGGESTED TABLE LAYOUT ............................... 42

TABLE 12: SUBPROJECT TRACKING LIST – PROJECT TYPE: EFM SYSTEM TYPE: REMVUE AFR ..................................... 51

TABLE 13: SUBPROJECT TRACKING LIST – PROJECT TYPE: VGC SYSTEM TYPE: REMVUE SLIPSTREAM........................ 53

Page iv



List of Abbreviations AEOR Alberta Emissions Offset Registry

AENV Alberta Environment (now Alberta Environment & Sustainable Resource Development)

AER Alberta Energy Regulator

AFR Air/fuel Ratio

ASD Advanced Shut Down

Blue Source Blue Source Canada ULC

BMP Best Management Practice

BSFC Brake Specific Fuel Consumption

CACs Criteria Air Contaminants

CAPP Canadian Association of Petroleum Producers

CH4 Methane

CO2 Carbon Dioxide

CO2e Carbon Dioxide-equivalent

EFM Engine Fuel Management

ESRD Environment & Sustainable Resource Development

GHG Greenhouse gas

GOR Gas to Oil Ratio

GWP Global Warming Potential

HFC Hydrofluorocarbon(s)

IMS Information Management System

LFE Large Final Emitter

N2O Nitrous Oxide

NA Naturally Aspirated

NPV Net Present Value

OPR Offset Project Report

PFC Perfluorocarbon(s)

RECs Renewable Energy Credits

SCADA Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition

SF6 Sulphur Hexafluoride

SGER Specified Gas Emitters Regulation

SS Sources and Sinks

TC Turbocharged

TEG Triethylene Glycol

VGC Vent Gas Capture



1 Project Scope and Site Description

The project title is: Alberta REMVue Engine Fuel Management and Vent Gas Capture Aggregation Project

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

The project objective is two-fold: 1) To increase the fuel efficiency and thus reduce combustion emissions attributed to the operation of both lean burn and rich burn engines, and 2) To capture otherwise vented emissions from engine packing, casing, etc. and re-inject into a natural gas combustion engine. The greenhouse gas reductions will be achieved through the retrofit installation of various engine management technologies on existing or new engine units within Alberta. This can include engine modification in the form of air/fuel ratio (AFR) control, vent gas capture systems and other features to improve engine start performance such as improved spark plug design.

Date when the project began:

The earliest subproject began on 16 July, 2003 and is a result of actions taken on, or after, 1 January, 2002.

Credit start date: 1 January, 2013

Credit duration period: 1 January, 2013 to December 31, 2020

Expected lifetime of the project:

The technology lifetime of the REMVue Air/fuel Controllers and REMVue SlipStream vent gas capture systems will be equivalent to the lifetime of the engine or compressor package to which they are installed and can reasonably be expected to be in excess of 15-20 years. Specific to the REMVue EcoPlug, the expected lifetime can be in excess of two years; however plug replacements typically occur on an annual basis. Subprojects involving the substitution of standard spark plugs with EcoPlugs will be subject to plug performance and site maintenance practice.

Estimated emissions reductions:

The total project emission reductions from this project are estimated to be 188,527 tonnes of CO2e as follows:

2013 23,566

2014 23,566

2015 23,566

2016 23,566

2017 23,566

2018 23,566

2019 23,566



2020 23,566

ALL YEARS 188,527

Applicable Quantification Protocol(s):

The quantification protocol used is the Quantification Protocol for Engine Fuel management and Vent Gas Capture Projects (version 1.0, October 2009) (the “Protocol”) published by Alberta Environment (AENV).

Protocol(s) Justification: The project activities outlined herein are included in the scope of the protocol as they result in the implementation of an improved engine management system that results in the conversion of a rich burn engine to a lean burn engine, the improved combustion efficiency of new spark plugs, or the capture and commercial use of previously vented emissions from engine packing. These retrofits will reduce fuel consumption and vented emissions associated with day to day operations. These actions are considered beyond business as usual as increasing fuel efficiency of operations is not regulated by Alberta Environment and Sustainable Resource Development (ESRD) or by the Alberta Energy Regulator (AER). They are above and beyond current industry practice regarding engine operation and vented emissions.

Other Environmental Attributes:

This project is not generating any other environment credits (such as Renewable Energy Certificates (RECs)). There are no opportunities for potential double counting as this project is only registered with the AEOR.

Legal land description of the project or the unique latitude and longitude:

The subprojects are located in Alberta. Refer to the project registration package (included at time of project submission) for the subproject tracking form for detailed location information.

Ownership: Blue Source Canada is the aggregator and project proponent for this project. Via the agreements with each participating company (i.e. the owners of the technologies that have been installed), Blue Source is given authority to aggregate and register the project's Offset Credits. The ownership model varies with each participating company depending on the respective agreements. In some cases ownership is defined by the Direct Purchase agreement with transfer of title occurring at time of registration, while other agreements follow the Agency model, with title remaining with the subproject owner until time of sale. For each participating company, the respective agreements will be made available at time of verification to define ownership of all subprojects .

Reporting details: The first reporting period for the project will cover the period from 1 January, 2013 to 31 December, 2013. Subsequent reporting is expected to occur annually covering the duration of each calendar year.

Verification details: The verifier will be an independent third-party that meets the requirements outlined in the Specified Gas Emitters Regulation (SGER). An acceptable



verification standard (e.g. ISO14064-3) will be used and the verifier will be vetted to ensure technical competence with this project type.

Project activity & registration:

This project meets the requirements for offset eligibility as outlined in section 3.1 of the Technical Guidance for Offset Project Developers (version 4.0, February 2013). In particular: 1. The project occurs in AB: as outlined above;

2. The project results from actions not otherwise required by law and

beyond business as usual and sector common practices: Offsets being claimed under this project originate from voluntary actions. The project activities (i.e. engine fuel management and vent gas capture) do not occur at SGER regulated facilities and are not required by law. The project uses a government approved quantification protocol, which indicates that the activity is undertaken by less than 40% of the industry and is therefore not considered to be sector common practice;

3. The project results from actions taken on or after January 1, 2002: as

outlined above;

4. The project reductions/removals are real, demonstrable, quantifiable and verifiable: the project is creating real reductions that are not a result of shutdown, cessation of activity or drop in production levels. The emission reductions are demonstrable, quantifiable and verifiable as outlined in the remainder of this plan.

5. The project has clearly established ownership: The program participants

must have superior claim of ownership over any other person or company to the emissions reductions created by the subproject. Ownership will be demonstrated through confidential documents reviewed by Blue Source and made available to the verifier. Title to the offsets will be transferred to Blue Source from the program participants through a contractual agreement.

6. The project will be counted once for compliance purposes: The project

credits will be registered with the Alberta Emissions Offset Registry (AEOR) which tracks the creation, sale and retirement of credits. Credits created from the specified reduction activities have not been, and will not be, created, recorded or registered in more than one trading registry for the same time period.

1.1 Contact Information Project Participant (s) Contact Information

Apache Canada LTD. Steve Flesch Business Financial Advisor

Suite 2800, 421-7th Ave S.W. Calgary, Alberta Canada T2P 4K9



t: 403.531.6540 f: 403.264.7142 e: [email protected]

Web: www.apachecorp.com

Canadian Natural Chris Vander Pyl Greenhouse Gas Advisor t: 403.514.7596 f: 403.514.7677 e: [email protected]

Suite 2500, 855-2 Street S.W. Calgary, Alberta Canada T2P 4J8 Web: www.cnrl.com

Centrica Energy Canada

Travis McKellar

Regulatory Analyst

t: 403.776.2143

e. [email protected]

Suite 1200 525 – 8 Ave S.W.

Calgary, Alberta

Canada T2P 1G1

Web: www.centrica.com

Conoco Philips Canada Adam Schink Carbon Management t: 403.532.5174 e: Adam.Schink@ conocophillips.com

401 9 Ave S.W. Calgary, Alberta Canada T2P 2H7 Web: www.conocophillips.ca

Talisman Energy Inc. Greg Unrau Senior Environmental Specialist t: 403.701.8906 e: [email protected]

Suite 2000, 888 - 3rd Street S.W. Calgary, Alberta Canada T2P 5C5 Web: www.talisman-energy.com

Project Aggregator/ Proponent

Blue Source Canada ULC Kelly Parker Carbon Services Project Analyst t: 403.262.3026 x260 f: 403.269.3024 e: [email protected]

Suite 700 717 - 7th Avenue S.W. Calgary, Alberta Canada T2P 0Z3 Web: www.bluesourcecan.com

2 Introduction In 2008, the Alberta government partnered with the energy industry to encourage the adoption of best

management practices with respect to fuel gas energy consumption. The partnership recognized the

impact of reducing consumption by 10% would equate to 2.1 million tonnes of CO2e reductions per year

or the equivalent removal of 500,000 cars off Alberta roads (CAPP, 2008). As a result, the Canadian

Association of Petroleum Producers (CAPP) developed The Fuel Gas Best Management Practices (BMPs),

a series of 17 modules identifying methods of efficient use of fuel gas in 17 separate upstream oil and

gas applications.

REM Technology Inc., a division of Spartan Controls Ltd, has developed a number of technologies that

address issues discussed in the BMPs. These are:

mailto:[email protected]

http://www.apachecorp.com/


http://www.cnrl.com/


http://www.centrica.com/

mailto:Adam.Schink@%20conocophillips.com

http://www.conocophillips.ca/


http://www.talisman-energy.com/


http://www.bluesourcecan.com/



The REMVue Air/fuel Ratio Controller,

The REMVue Slipstream, and

The REMVue EcoPlug.

Blue Source has therefore developed this aggregation project ('the Project') to quantify and present the

greenhouse gas (GHG) reduction benefits of all three of these technologies as implemented by multiple

project participants. The three technologies all work to achieve increased fuel efficiency in engines and

are eligible to create offsets from the approved Quantification Protocol for Engine Fuel Management

and Vent Gas Capture Projects, version 1.0, October 2009 ('the Protocol') published by Alberta

Environment.

2.1.1 Technology 1a: REMVue Air/fuel Ratio Controller

Module 7 of The Fuel Gas BMPs focuses on the efficient use of fuel gas in engines, and briefly references

the ideal of a lean air/fuel mixture in reducing emissions. However, it dismisses these benefits by

identifying the mixtures as difficult to ignite and the engines costly to maintain (CETAC WEST).

Therefore many engines, especially natural gas compression engines, are still operating as rich-burn

engines.

In recognition of the cleaner operation of lean-burn configurations, REM Technology Inc. has developed

the REMVue suite of technologies to optimize engine control and monitoring. The REMVue Air/fuel Ratio

(AFR) Controller converts existing rich-burn natural gas engines to lean-burn operation by way of

increasing the air to fuel ratio (λ) from stoichiometric conditions of 0.97 to λ = 1.72 (Gibb, Terrel, &

Zahner, 2005).

2.1.1.1 Technology 1b: REMVue EcoPlug

An add-on to the REMVue AFR Controller is the optional REMVue EcoPlug. Its design as a chambered

spark plug increases the ignition lean limit1 of the air/fuel mixture allowing for fuel efficiency

improvements of an additional 5 – 7 % above the reductions achieved through the AFR alone (Malm,

2013). As the EcoPlug improves the engine starting and ignition control at ultra-lean configurations, it is

considered a feature under the Engine Management System as defined in the Protocol, and so is

captured under the improved Engine Fuel Management technologies.

2.1.2 Technology 2: REMVue SlipStream®

The REMVue SlipStream is designed to capture hydrocarbons otherwise vented to atmosphere and

redirect the stream as a supplementary fuel source to natural gas engines. The sources of vent gas for

SlipStream are wide and can include: crankhouse vents and packing seals, triethylene glycol (TEG)

dehydrator flash tank vents, and instrument gas vents. With a Slipstream unit in place, cleaner upstream

operations are achieved by reducing the volume of methane emitted to atmosphere as well as replacing

part of the natural gas fuel stream that otherwise would have been combusted in the engines.

1 The ignition lean limit occurs when the air:fuel ratio becomes too high to allow for reliable combustion from the

initial spark



2.2 Project Participants and Sub-Projects Included At the time of registering this OPP, the project participants and sub-projects included in the Project are

as outlined in Table 1.

Table 1: Summary of project participants and sub-projects by type

Project participant REMVue AFRs REMVue EcoPlugs REMVue Slipstreams

Apache Canada Ltd 11 0 0

Canadian Natural Resources Limited 18 0 0

Centrica 9 0 4

Conoco Phillips Canada 22 0 0

Talisman Energy Inc. 5 0 0

TOTAL 65 0 4

Figure 1 illustrates a general overview of the geographic

locations of these sub-projects in Alberta. Appendix D –

Subproject List includes the details for each sub-project

including full location information.

Note that additional project participants may be added to

expand this aggregated project in future years.

Figure 1: Overview of location of sub-projects currently included in project



2.3 Conditions prior to project initiation


Before retrofit of an engine with the REMVue AFR controller, the natural gas engine runs in a super rich-

burn configuration, with a minimum stoichiometric air-to-fuel ratio (16:1) and exhaust oxygen levels

considerably less than 4%. The engine can be of the following identified make and models as indicated

by REM Technologies Inc2, and presented in Table 2.

Table 2: Eligible Engine Types for REMVue AFR Installation

Engine Make (and Series) Engine Models

Waukesha Rich Burn VHP Series (Note naturally aspirated G Models are limited to 75% load)

P9390GSI

L7044GSI

L7042GSI

L5794GSI

F3524GSI

F3514GSI

F3521GSI

L5108GSI

L5790GSI

F2895GSI

Waukesha ATGL Series 8, 12 and 16 cylinder

White Superior 6, 8, 12, 16 cylinders Models: G, GT, SGT, GTX, GTL, SGTB, GTLA, GTLB, GTLX, SGTX, 24[xx]

x represents the number of cylinders

Caterpillar 3500 Series

8,12,16 cylinder rich burn

Cooper Bessemer 10W-330

LSV Series


Prior to the installation of a unit with the REMVue EcoPlug technology the engine must already have

been retrofit with the AFR controller and operate under lean combustion configurations. In addition, the

sparkplugs previously used in the engine must be of an open electrode design.

Historically, and in the baseline maintenance practices, open electrode spark plugs were replaced

quarterly during engine servicing. Operating life of the EcoPlugs have been observed to be much

greater, with some lasting in excess of two years while other EcoPlugs are being replaced annually as

preventative maintenance.

2.3.2 Technology 2: REMVueSlipStream®

Prior to undergoing REMVue Slipstream installation, the natural gas engines do not have any vent gas

capture system in operation. The vented gases from the unit are therefore released to atmosphere and

not utilized in either a passive or an active manner.

2 In email sent on 12/03/2013 from K.Wilde, Applications Engine at PIC Solutions



Discussed further in section 2.7.1, some subprojects may be subject to the requirements of ERCB

Directive D060 on Upstream Petroleum Industry Flaring, Incinerating and Venting. Should this be the

case, the baseline conditions for these subprojects will be the capture and subsequent combustion

(through flare or incinerator) of the previously vented fuel.



Included Sources/Sinks

B1 Fuel Extraction & Processing

B2 Fuel Delivery

B3 Facility Operation

B4 Unit Operation

B6 Flaring of Process Emissions

B5b Venting of Emissions Captured in

the Project

B5a Venting of Process Emissions

B7 Electricity Usage

B8 Development of Site

B9 Building Equipment

B10 Transportation of Equipment

B11 Construction on Site

B12 Testing of Equipment

B13 Site Decommissioning

Figure 2: Simplified PFD of subproject technologies, pre-project. Diamond shapes represent sources specific to the REMVue SlipStream subproject.



2.4 Description of how the project will achieve GHG emission reductions/removals The ability of the aggregation project to achieve GHG emission reductions presents itself through the

application of the three technology types described in the introduction. It is feasible that for one engine,

all three technologies or any combination thereof could be installed and operational simultaneously.

Therefore any one engine could demonstrate the GHG emission reductions resulting from the

application of any combination of the three technologies.


Without the application of an EFM

system, the engine will continue to

operate under a rich burn

combustion configuration. GHG

emissions from a rich burn engine

arise from the larger volume of fuel

required to obtain combustion at

stoichiometric conditions.

Additional criteria air contaminants (CACs) including carbon monoxide (CO) and Volatile Organic

Compounds (VOCs) arise from incomplete combustion. In addition, thermal dissociation and

subsequent reaction of nitrogen (N2) and oxygen (O2) yield oxides of Nitrogen (NOX).

To facilitate a leaner combustion and reduce the formation of unwanted products, the REMVue AFR

system installation includes the following monitoring and control equipment as illustrated in Figure 4.

Turbo Charger Waste Gate Control Actuator/Positioner – which control the mass of air into the

unit;

Local Operator Interface display – which provides feedback on the unit's performance to the

unit operator;

Micromotion mass flow meter – which measures the fuel consumed by the unit;

Main fuel control valve – which controls the mass of fuel into the unit;

Air manifold pressure and temperature transmitters – for system control purposes; and

Magnetic speed sensor – measures engine speed for system control purposes.

C + H (fuel)

N2 + O2 (air)

CO2 + H2O + N2

+ Heat

NOX + CACs + CO + VOCs

Figure 3: Combustion Mechanism



Figure 4: Post-Project REMVue AFR System

After the installation of the REMVue AFR system, the engine is converted to lean burn operation. The

AFR Controller adds excess air to achieve an air-to-fuel ratio greater than 20:1, and up to 17% excess

oxygen (Environmental Protection Agency, 2009). The engine is operating closer to the lean ignition limit

reducing the amount of air and fuel required for combustion and subsequent release of GHG emissions.

Additionally, the increase in air reduces the exhaust temperature thereby exponentially decreasing NOX

formation.


Considered an add-onto the REMVue AFR Engine Management

System, the REMVue EcoPlug aids in engine starting and ignition

control in ultra-lean combustion conditions. It extends the

ignition lean limit of the air-fuel mixture allowing even greater

air-to fuel ratios of 30:1 or higher (Malm, 2013). The chambered

spark plug has two distinct features:

Small diameter platinum wires fused to the center

electrode lowers voltage required for spark;

Tangential orifices enhance micro-turbulence mixing

Once the mixture is ignited in the chamber, the hot gases expand

from the orifices with much greater energy than initially provided

by the electrode spark thereby igniting the rest of the fuel

mixture. Additional fuel savings of 3 to 7% result from the simple

exchange of open electrode spark plugs with EcoPlugs, which in Figure 5: EcoPlug Full Section View



turn results in even greater GHG emission reductions from more efficient combustion.

2.4.2 Technology 2: REMVueSlipStream®

Irrespective of which source of vent gas will be captured, the SlipStream design configuration is

generally as follows (and as illustrated in Figure 6 below):

Piping – vent gas to the air intake filter of the desired engine;

Thermal mass flow meter – to measure the mass of vent gas being added into the engine as fuel;

Pressure transmitter;

Control valves (hand valve and regulated control valve) – to control the mass of vent gas being

added into the engine, and to enable shut-off of the system for when maintenance must be

completed;

Coalescing filter (demister).

Figure 6: Post-Project Vent Gas Capture REMVue Slipstream configuration

Captured vent gases are redirected into the air intake filter of the engine, pre-turbocharger. The

additional air/fuel mixture supplements the main fuel supply, and in cases where the energy content of

the vent gas is much higher, the volume of fuel needed to achieve the same combustion energy is

greatly offset.

In addition to offsetting combustion emissions, Slipstream also creates greenhouse gas reductions by

converting previously vented CH4 into CO2 via the combustion process.

2.5 Project eligibility The project meets the following protocol requirements as outlined in Section 1.1 of the Protocol:

1. The determination of brake specific fuel consumption and fractional change in fuel consumption

for the quantification of the baseline engine fuel consumption (B4 Unit Operation) has been

Shutoff Valve

Demister

Flow Meter

Control Valve

Air Intake Filter

Engine

Relief Devices

Vent gases

Vent

For meter calibration

Pressure Sensor

HV

HVs Hand Valve (HV)



completed according to the guidelines discussed in Appendix C. During the completion of Pre

and Post-Audits to measure the fractional change in fuel consumption the project proponent

must note any changes made to the engine or the equipment that is powered by the engine

(e.g. compressor) that could impact the measured BSFC. These changes could include the

addition / removal of equipment or other modifications made to the engine or the prime mover

that could impact the load on the engine (i.e. reduced frictional load through compressor

retrofits etc.). Project proponents would have to demonstrate that these changes have not

impacted the validity of the fuel savings calculated from measured data during the Pre and Post-

Audits.

Response: Blue Source has developed an Engine Map of Pre and Post audit values across the Waukesha

VHP series of engines, and may develop further Engine Maps for future deliveries. The Engine Map has

been developed in accordance with the guidance listed in Appendix C of the Protocol and includes data

from over 72 engines within the same make and classification. This Engine Map will be used as the

default calculation approach, as outlined in section 5.3.4.

Application of the Master method ensures a direct comparison of BSFC at the same measured load and

RPM both pre and post audit. For instance, any changes to the engine which affect the engine load and

subsequent BSFC determination would not be captured as the Master method would simply reference

another BSFC measured from a different, equivalent load and RPM set-point recorded from an engine of

the same make, classification and EFM technology. If the simple and advanced methods are used as

described in the protocol, the project proponent will reference the Post-audit performance analysis notes

recorded by Power Ignition and Controls, noting engine modifications and whether the impact on the

engine load is significant.

2. The engine modification must not impair the functionality of the unit, process or overall facility

such that additional energy inputs are required as demonstrated by facility process flow

diagrams and/or unit operational performance data. Unit operational data may include engine

operating hours, records of down time or other records to demonstrate that the engine fuel

management system and/or the combustion of captured vent gases does not de-rate the engine

or cause a significant increase in down time (and potentially increase compressor start gas

emissions). The project proponent would need to show that the use of other units (engines)

and/or supplemental fuels is not needed to compensate for increased parasitic loads, reduced

fuel energy content and/or decreased engine power output. Functional equivalence may be

demonstrated through an affirmation from the project developer or other qualified third party;

Response: No additional energy inputs achieved though the installation of new units, or supplemental

fuel to the engine is needed due to the installation of the REMVue AFR, EcoPlug or Slipstream

Technologies. Specific to the SlipStream technology, the captured vent gas is not an additional source of

energy but rather a replacement fuel source used to supply the main functionality of the engine as a

prime mover.



3. There must not be any regulations requiring the capture and destruction or conservation of vent

gas emissions from the processes and/or units impacted by the project activity that have been

quantified in the baseline as vented GHG emissions under SS B5b Venting of Emissions Captured

in the Project. Project proponents should refer to the November 16, 2006 version of the Alberta

Energy and Resources Conservation Board (ERCB) Directive 60 (D60) Upstream Petroleum

Industry Flaring, Incineration and Venting for further guidance on restrictions on flaring and

venting of solution gas and other types of vent gases. D60 provides sector specific performance

standards for flaring and venting that must be met by operators as well as decision trees to

evaluate whether gas can be economically conserved instead of vented or flared. Conservation

opportunities are evaluated as economic or uneconomic based on the criteria listed in Section

2.8 of D608. It should be noted that D60 does not prescribe any one particular conservation

option and the use of solution gas for supplemental fuel could be compared to re-injection of

the solution gas for reservoir pressure maintenance as a conservation option, each with

significantly different GHG implications.

Response: None of the activities quantified within this aggregated project are a direct result of

regulatory requirements, and all have been undertaken voluntarily as a beyond business as usual

activity.

4. The engine management system implemented as a result of the protocol must comply with all

other air emissions regulations in Alberta, particularly NOX requirements. The following

guidelines are intended to assist project proponents in evaluating whether their project activity

of capturing a vent gas stream may be considered to be surplus to regulation, but should in no

way be seen as an exhaustive list of requirements or a replacement for the guidance in D60 and

other regulations enforced by the ERCB or Alberta Environment.

a. If the ERCB determines that an individual source of vent gas has sufficient flow rate to

sustain stable combustion and must be flared according to D60 Section 8.1, then the

project proponent will not be eligible for offsets from venting in the baseline under SS

B5b.

b. If a project is not covered under criteria 3.a) but involves the recovery and use of

solution gas at levels exceeding the 900 m3/day threshold specified in Section 2.3 of

D60 and is also deemed to be economic to implement one or more conservation

activities as specified in Section 2.8 of D60, then the project may not be eligible for

offsets from venting under SS B5b. If the captured volume of solution gas cannot sustain

stable combustion and is less than the threshold or deemed to be uneconomic to

conserve then the project activity may be eligible for offsets from venting.

c. As stated in Section 8.3 of D60, if the total facility benzene emission limits specified in

Directive 039 Revised Program to Reduce Benzene Emissions from Glycol Dehydrators

are exceeded at the project site then venting may not be permitted and the project may

not be eligible for offsets from venting in the baseline under SS B5b.



Response: Subprojects involving the application of the Vent Gas Capture (VGC) technologies have all

been deemed uneconomic under the D060 guidelines, and as well the captured volume of solution gas is

unable to maintain stable combustion. All VGC activities in this aggregation project have been evaluated

as such and therefore are eligible to create offsets. Specific to VGC applications regarding the capture of

flash gas from glycol dehydrators, all subproject activities go above and beyond reducing benzene

beyond the permitted benzene emission limits. Stationary combustion technology has evolved today such

that from engine combustion alone, over 98% of the benzene is destroyed (Gibb, Terrel, & Zahner, 2005).

The application of VGC is an additional activity effectively reducing the amount of benzene destruction.

5. For projects where the combustion of vent gases is required under D60 (or other applicable

regulation) or where the baseline practice already involved the flaring or incineration of the

waste gas stream, then the baseline condition is the flaring of the waste gas stream. The project

proponent can claim offsets following the Flexibility Mechanism in Appendix A, to quantify GHG

reductions from reduced fuel gas consumption for flaring and engine operation. The project

proponent must demonstrate that the re-direction of the waste gases to the engine actually

results in reduced flare fuel usage as evidenced by metered volumes of waste gas sent to

flare/incinerator and/or volumes of supplemental fuel consumed or through engineering

designs for the flare/incinerator unit;

Response: Where applicable, the quantification of GHG reductions for subprojects required to conserve

solution gas under D060 have been compared against baseline GHG emissions resulting from flaring or

incineration of the gas stream. Project GHG reductions occur through the reduced fuel gas consumption

and reduced flaring emissions where applicable. This is evaluated on an individual subproject basis.

6. The boundary of the project activity must not include the quantification of baseline GHG

emissions from engine fuel combustion and vent gas emissions that are subject to regulation

under the Alberta Specified Gas Emitter Regulation.

Response: None of the subprojects included will be from regulated SGER Large Final Emitter (LFE)

facilities.

7. The quantification of reductions achieved by the project is based on actual measurement and

monitoring (except where indicated in this protocol) as indicated by the proper application of

this protocol; and,

Response: Quantification of reductions achieved by the EFM subproject technologies are based upon the

accumulated pre and post audit data measurements collected in accordance with Appendix C of the

Protocol. Quantification of reductions achieved by the VGC subproject technologies are based upon a

minimum monthly reconciliation of available measurements as indicated by the Protocol.

8. The project must meet the requirements for offset eligibility as specified in the applicable

regulation and guidance documents for the Alberta Offset System. [Of particular note:



a. [The date of equipment installation, operating parameter changes or process

reconfiguration are initiated or have effect on the project on or after January 1, 2002 as

indicated by facility records;]

b. [The project may generate emission reduction offsets for a period of 8 years unless an

extension is granted by Alberta Environment, as indicated by facility and offset system

records. Additional credit duration periods require a reassessment of the baseline

condition; and,]

c. [Ownership of the emission reduction offsets must be established as indicated by facility

records.]

Response: The project meets all of the requirements for offset eligibility as specified in section 3.1 of the

Technical Guidance for Offset Project Developers (version 4.0, February 2013).

2.5.1 Flexibility mechanisms

This aggregation applies the following flexibility mechanisms as outlined on page 9 of the Protocol:

2. For project scenarios where it is not possible to measure the brake specific fuel consumption

before and after the installation of a new engine management system the project proponent

may use fractional fuel savings data from other engines of the same make and classification. The

project proponent should apply the protocol flexibility mechanism under the SS “B4 Unit

Operation” to ensure that the estimation of the baseline fuel consumption is overly conservative

across the full spectrum of engine speeds and loads. The use of this approach is contingent on

there being sufficient data from at least 5 similar engines of the same make and classification

operating with the same type of engine management system. For further details, refer to

Appendix A.

Justification: Occasionally, the Engine Map of Pre and Post audit values does not encompass the

operating conditions of a specific engine. If this should occur, an average of the fractional BSFC savings

will be used to estimate the associated GHG reductions as outlined in Appendix A of the protocol.

3. Engine fuel management systems and vent gas capture systems can be installed on a single

engine or on multiple units at multiple sites. As such, the protocol allows for flexibility in

quantifying offsets from multiple installations

Justification: This project plan allows for the aggregation of three subproject technologies from multiple

engine units and participants. An aggregated subproject tracking sheet has been created in accordance

with the Protocol Requirements and will be uploaded with the project documents at time of registration

and serialization.

5. Site specific emission factors may be substituted for the generic emission factors indicated in

this protocol document. The methodology for generation of these emission factors must be

sufficiently robust to ensure accuracy. In particular, project proponents that conduct site

specific engine exhaust gas emission testing may develop dynamic emission factors for use



under SS “B4 Unit Operation” such that the project and baseline conditions have distinct

emission factors for methane and nitrous oxide. The development of these emission factors

must follow the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) 40 CFR Part 60 Guidelines (i.e.

Method 7E for NOX and Methods 18 or 25A for methane). Exhaust gas analyses must be

completed for each load and RPM set point during the Pre and Post-Audits to ensure that the

baseline and project emission factors are representative of the full range of operating conditions

for the original engine and the modified engine.

Justification: Where available, site specific CO2 emission factors will be used. If no site specific data is

available, the emission factors will be sourced from the most recent published version of Environment

Canada’s National Inventory Report.

2.5.2 Other Methodology Changes Pre-Approved by Alberta Environment

No other methodology changes have occurred that require approval from Alberta Environment.

2.6 Subproject technologies, products, services and the expected level of activity

2.6.1 Technology 1 Services

Uptake of the REMVue AFR controller is expected to be the highest of the included subproject

technologies in this aggregation plan due to the volume of rich burn engines in operation throughout

Alberta’s oil and gas operations. There are also many proven examples of the technology’s field success

increasing engine performance and reliability. However, remote field sites, cost of purchasing,

installation and labour, and logistics are still factors hindering the deployment of REMVue AFR.

The newest technology in REM Technology’s suite of EFM tools, the REMVue EcoPlug still has many

hurdles to overcome before achieving status as an industry standard practice, including increasing

technology awareness, proof of concept in the field, and acceptance as a superior product. Therefore,

the level of activity for this subproject technology is expected to be low.

Once a participant has decided to purchase and install the REMVue AFR Controller and/or REMVue

EcoPlug, they have a few technology and service options to decide upon. The following data monitoring

and control panels can vary between each REMVue installation depending upon the requirements and

preferences of the site manager and project participant.

The following overview is an excerpt from the REM Technology website3:

REMVue 500 – The REMVue 500 is an advanced single system engine/compressor control and

monitoring system. It is capable of monitoring and control of key compressor and engine parameters

including but not limited to:

the Air/fuel Control

3REM Technology Inc (2012) REMVue 500.REM Technology Inc. Retrieved November 27, 2013 from

http://www.remtechnology.com/products/rem/remvue-500.aspx

http://www.remtechnology.com/products/rem/remvue-500.aspx



Governor Control

Process/Load Control

Compressor Flow

Compressor Horsepower

REMVue 500/ASD – In addition to the features included in the REMVue 500 system, the REMVue

500/ASD (Advanced Shut Down) integrates a control and safety shutdown sequence with

remote/local set points.

GHG Data Logger (GHGDL) – A standalone data logging device to the REMVue 500 suite, the

installation of the GHG data logger provides an 18 month data historian, capturing key parameters

at user defined intervals.

In lieu of the REM Technology’s data collection system, some project participants have a pre-established

Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition (SCADA) system preferred by their company, such as

Detechtion Technologies Enalysis™ web-enabled software tool. These robust SCADA systems provide at

a minimum the same service as the GHG Data Logger, or internal panel historian, and often include

additional trending, data manipulation tools, and fleet management capabilities.

2.6.2 Technology 2 Services

The SlipStream technology has the additional flexibility in that the captured vent gas can be from

multiple sources including, but not limited to:

VGC from Flash tanks;

VGC from instrument gas;

VGC from compressor packing seals and crankcase vents.

As the functionality of the SlipStream unit does not change depending on the source captured,

functional equivalence between each subproject application is upheld. Because of the specific

technology application, site performance requirements, and overall cost of the system, the expected

level of activity for SlipStream is expected to remain steady with only a few installations each year.

REM Emissions Monitor - To capture the success of the SlipStream system, the REM Emissions Monitor:

1) performs all data collection calculations and 2) measures, calculates and records the data for 18

months, thereby minimizing data losses from data capture and storage limitations.

2.7 Identification of Risks Table 3 presents the following risk categories and associated consequences. Risk level analysis is

performed using the aid developed and presented in Appendix C – Risk Matrix.



Table 3: Risk matrix

Risk Category Consequence Severity Probability Mitigation Risk Level

Regulatory Risk

ESRD mandates that each engine require an EFM

system

Low Medium

Many EFM technologies exist for rich

burn as well as lean burn

configurations. Changing the

engine configuration from rich burn

to lean burn would still be

considered additional.

Low

Regulatory Risk

D060 lowers the conservation

requirement of vent gas to 500 m3

or less.

High Low

Subprojects will be screened to

ensure the requirements of

D060 are not applicable

Moderate

Technological Risk

Changes to the engine operating

system have adverse effects on

engine performance

Low Medium

Trained technicians install and

optimize EFM and VGC

systems to their best

performance. Annual

maintenance by project

participant ensures engine

is in prime condition.

Low

Project Risk

Market forces such as low

natural gas prices, or a shift in the

energy efficiency targets, decrease

likelihood of

Medium Low

Many installations are

already deployed and operating. The

energy efficiency

Low



Risk Category Consequence Severity Probability Mitigation Risk Level

project proponents to invest in the

upgrade

targets will likely increase

as time progresses and awareness and

focus on the economy of fuel

savings and impact of social

license heighten.

Project Risk

Sites included in the aggregation

pool may shut-in, negating any benefits from

improved equipment installs

High Moderate

As a normal occurrence in the oil and gas sector, some sites may be

affected during the course of

the project. This is unlikely to

occur in multiple locations

simultaneously.

Moderate

2.7.1 Regulatory Requirements & Project Impacts

Energy Resources Conservation Board (ERCB) Directive D060, revised edition November 3, 2011 has

placed restrictions with respect to venting and flaring activities within the upstream oil and gas industry.

As outlined in section 2.5, paragraph 5, projects which are required to conserve gas under D060 or

another regulation will have an identified baseline of combustion of the waste gas stream.

This regulation requires evaluation on an individual subproject basis. Subprojects will be evaluated for:

3 month rolling average volumetric flow rate >900 m3/day AND an Economic Evaluation yields

Net Present Value (NPV) > $(- 50,000);

The gas:oil ratio (GOR) is greater than 3000 m3/m3; or

Flared volumes are greater than 900 m3/day per site and the flare is within 500 m of an existing

residence, regardless of economics.

If a subproject should display any of the above properties, the project participant will be asked for proof

of ERCB’s approval decision to continue venting before inclusion into the aggregation pool is complete.



In addition, project participants will be required to confirm that no subprojects are within site

boundaries of a Large Final Emitter (LFE) (i.e. a regulated site under the SGER).



3 Inventory of Sources and Sinks The Protocol contains a list of baseline and project sources and sinks (SSs) that were deemed applicable for projects developed according to the

protocol. The SSs for the Project are identified in Figure 7, below.

Included Sources/Sinks

P1 Fuel Extraction & Processing

P2 Fuel Delivery

P3 Facility Operation

P4 Unit Operation

P6 Flaring of Process Emissions

P5b Venting of Emissions Captured in

the Project

P5a Venting of Process Emissions

P7 Electricity Usage

P8 Development of Site

P9 Building Equipment

P10 Transportation of Equipment

P11 Construction on Site

P12 Testing of Equipment

P13 Site Decommissioning

Figure 7: Simplified PFD of subproject technologies, post-project. Diamond shapes represent sources specific to the REMVue SlipStream subproject



3.1 Quantification of estimated GHG emissions/removals The following equations serve as the basis for calculating the emission reductions from the comparison

of the baseline and project conditions as per the Protocol:

Emissions Baseline= sum of the emissions under the baseline condition = Emissions Fuel Extraction / Processing = emissions under SS B1 Fuel Extraction and Processing

Emissions Unit Operation = emissions under SS B4 Unit Operation

Emissions Venting of Emissions Captured in Project = emissions under SS B5b Venting of Emissions Captured in Project

Emissions Project = sum of the emissions under the project condition =

Emissions Fuel Extraction / Processing = emissions under SS P1 Fuel Extraction and Processing

Emissions Unit Operation = emissions under SS P4 Unit Operation

Emissions Capture of Vent Gases = emissions under SS P5b Capture of Vent Gases

3.1.1 Justification for excluding sources and sinks

As stated in the Protocol not all parameters are applicable to all EFM or VGC systems. Those sources and

sinks (SSs) that are not applicable will be excluded as the input variables will be zeroes. As such, the

project developer can exclude sources and sinks that are not applicable to their project with reasonable

justification.

The following SSs have been excluded from quantification for subprojects employing EFM systems:

Emissions under SS (B5b) Venting of Emissions Captured in Project

Emissions under SS (P5b) Capture of Vent Gases

These SSs have been excluded from Technology 1 quantification as there is no capture of vent gases for

subprojects employing EFM systems such as the REMVue AFR controller. However, for quantification of

VGC subprojects these two sources will be included.

3.1.2 Quantification of Source and Sinks

The general methods of quantification (as listed in the Protocol) for the required greenhouse gas

calculations are as follows. Table 5 includes the emission factors relevant to the Project.

SS B1/P1 Fuel Extraction and Processing– The fuel avoided from the implementation of the EFM

technology like REMVue AFR or VGC system such as Slipstream would have otherwise been extracted

and processed in the baseline configuration. Note that this value is obtained from SS B4 and is equal to

the metered fuel consumption in the project condition multiplied by the Fractional Change in fuel

consumption from the baseline to the project.



SS B4/P4 Unit Operation- Calculated based on the continuous measurement of mass flow rate of fuel

into the engine in the Project Condition. In project configurations where vent gases are captured and fed

back into the engine for supplemental fuel, the total fuel consumption is the sum of the main fuel gas

stream and the supplemental vent gas fuel, expressed as an energy equivalent quantity of the primary

fuel (e.g. natural gas).

SS B5b/P5b Venting – Continuous measurement of the vent gas flow rate into the unit on a mass basis

in the project condition.

Note SSs B4/P4 and B5b/P5b can also be calculated using contingent data collection methods (see

section 3.1.3).

3.1.3 Source/Sink Contingent Data Collection Procedures

The following contingent data collection procedures are adapted from table 2.6 of the Protocol:

SS B4 Unit Operation – Calculation of average fuel consumption per hour of operation over previous

and following months where fuel consumption measurements are available. Total fuel consumption is

calculated based on reconciliation of unit operating hours from facility records multiplied by the average

hourly fuel consumption.

SSB5b Venting of Emissions Captured in Project – Reconciliation of vent gas consumption on an hourly

basis where consistent flow rates can be demonstrated. Total vent gas consumption can also be

calculated based on reconciliation of unit operating hours from facility records multiplied by the average

hourly vent gas consumption, for vent gas streams with consistent flow rates. Project proponents may

need to demonstrate that vent gas sources are consistent in flow rate as intermittent vent sources may

not be fully measurable at this frequency.



Table 4: Emission factors used for EFM and VGC subprojects

Parameter Relevant

SS

CO2 Emission

Factor

CO2 Emission

Factor Source

CH4 Emission

Factor

CH4 Emission

Factor Source

N2O Emission

Factor

N2O Emission

Factor Source

Natural gas

combustion

B4/P4,

B5b, P5b 1.916 kg/m

3

National

Inventory Report,

Pt 2 1990-

2011.Environmen

t Canada (2013)

0.000037 kg/m3

National

Inventory Report,

Pt 2 1990-2011.

Environment

Canada (2013)

0.00003 kg/m3

National

Inventory Report,

Pt 2 1990-2011.

Environment

Canada (2013)

Natural Gas

Extraction B1/P1 0.0427 t/e

3m

3

CAPP, 2004. A

National

Inventory of GHG,

Criteria Air

Contaminant

(CAC) and

Hydrogen

Sulphide (H2S)

Emissions by the

Upstream Oil and

Gas Industry, Vol

1, Overview of

the GHG

Emissions

Inventory. Table

4.

0.00234

t/e3m

3

CAPP, 2004. A

National

Inventory of GHG,

Criteria Air

Contaminant

(CAC) and

Hydrogen

Sulphide (H2S)

Emissions by the

Upstream Oil and

Gas Industry, Vol

1, Overview of

the GHG

Emissions

Inventory. Table

4.

0.000004 t/e3m

3

CAPP, 2004. A

National

Inventory of GHG,

Criteria Air

Contaminant

(CAC) and

Hydrogen

Sulphide (H2S)

Emissions by the

Upstream Oil and

Gas Industry, Vol

1, Overview of

the GHG

Emissions

Inventory. Table

4.

Natural Gas

Processing B1/P1 0.0904 t/e

3m

3 0.000029 t/e

3m

3 0.0000032 t/e

3m

3

Where available site specific emission factors will be substituted for those listed in Table 4.

Should the literature source be updated to a new emission factor, the latest published value should be used.

Sample project calculations are included in Section 5.



3.2 Estimate of total GHG emission reductions/removals enhancements

attributable for the project The greenhouse gas assertion is a statement of the number of offset tonnes achieved during the

reporting period. The assertion identifies emissions reductions per vintage year and includes a breakout

of individual greenhouse gas types (CO2, CH4, N2O, SF6, HFCs, and PFCs) applicable to the project and

total emissions reported as CO2e. The total in units of tonnes of carbon dioxide equivalent (CO2e) is

calculated using the global warming potentials (GWPs) referenced in the SGER.

Table 5 identifies the anticipated greenhouse gas assertion for the REMVue AFR Controller4, containing

the calculated number of offset tonnes achieved, separated by each unique vintage year.

Table 5: Offset tonnes anticipated per year

Year CO2

(tonnes)

CH4

(tonnes)

N2O

(tonnes)

CO2e

(tonnes)

2013 23,454 0.38 0.33 23,566

2014 23,454 0.38 0.33 23,566

2015 23,454 0.38 0.33 23,566

2016 23,454 0.38 0.33 23,566

2017 23,454 0.38 0.33 23,566

2018 23,454 0.38 0.33 23,566

2019 23,454 0.38 0.33 23,566

2020 23,454 0.38 0.33 23,566

ALL YEARS 187,634 3.0 2.7 188,527

No emissions of HFCs, PFCs or SF6 are expected from the project.

This GHG assertion is expected to increase as more engines are added to the aggregation pool, and

additional subproject technologies such as VGC are included.

4 IDENTIFICATION OF BASELINE In Section 2.2 of The Protocol, it is established that the baseline scenario be dynamic, projection based

baseline for both Technology 1 and 2.

4 Based upon an initial 64 AFR subprojects and 4 VGC subprojects assuming an average of 371 tonnes of CO2e

reductions per year per engine for EFM and 1,000 tonnes CO2e for VGC based upon initial data collection.



Table 6: Projection Based Baseline Identification (Alberta Environment, October 2009)

Subproject Technology

Baseline Scenario Justification

Technology 1: EFM

Assessment of the baseline GHG emissions from unit / engine operation using a model to project fuel consumption and the GHG intensity of unit operation into the future. This could include a projection of the GHG intensity based on past trends or expected future trends.

Dynamic. This approach is applicable for determining emissions from fuel consumption given that appropriate models exist to model the change in fuel consumption from the project to the baseline scenarios. Further, unlike the other baseline options this approach uses site-specific data of unit fuel consumption at different RPMs and loads obtained from direct measurement.

Technology

2: VGC

Assessment of baseline GHG

emissions from venting using a model

to project the quantity and

composition of gases vented into the

future.

Dynamic. This approach is applicable for quantifying the GHG emissions from vent gas capture given that the quantity and composition of gases captured and combusted in the project condition can be used to estimate emissions in the baseline. Further, unlike the other baseline options this approach is based on direct measurement of the characteristics of vent gases that would have been emitted in the absence of the project.

For REMVue AFR and EcoPlug subproject applications, the baseline would be the continued operation of

the engine under original engine specifications as designated by the manufacture.

For the REMVue Slipstream there are two possible baseline scenarios:

1) The vented source gas is not conserved or flared;

2) The vented source gas is combusted in a flare or incinerator as stipulated by ERCB Directive

D060.

4.1 Functional Equivalence Functional equivalence is introduced through the desired output of the technology. For both

subprojects, the desired objective is to run the engine to power a compressor. The make/model,

runtime, or level of output of the compressor does not change from the implementation of the

subproject activity.

5 QUANTIFICATION PLAN This project quantifies GHG emission reductions according the Protocol. Descriptions of the project

specific details are provided in Section 2.6 “Subproject technologies, products, services and the



expected level of activity”. Detailed calculations for the project will be provided to the verifier. The

following section lists all relevant equations for quantifying GHG emission reductions from the project.

Emission Reduction = Emissions Baseline – Emissions Project

Emissions Baseline = sum of the emissions under the baseline condition.

1. Emissions Fuel Extraction/Processing = emissions under SS (B1) Fuel Extraction and Processing

2. Emissions Unit Operation = emissions under SS B4 Unit Operation

3. Emissions Capture of Vent Gases = emissions under SS B5b Venting of Emissions Captured in

Project

Emissions Project = sum of the emissions under the project condition.

4. Emissions Fuel Extraction and Processing = emissions under SS (P1) Fuel Extraction / Processing

5. Emissions Unit Operation = emissions under SS (P4) Unit Operation

6. Emissions Capture of Vent Gases = emissions under SS (P5b) Capture of Vent Gases

5.1 Baseline Emissions

5.1.1 Technology 1/1b: REMVue AFR Controller/EcoPlug

SS B4 Emissions Unit Operation

∑

∑ ∑

(1)

Where:

)

(2)

5.1.2 Technology 2: REMVue Slipstream

SS B4 Emissions Unit Operation

∑{ ) } ∑{

) } ∑{

) } (3)

Where:

(

) {(

) (

)} (4)

(

) (

) (5)



SS B5b Venting of Emissions Captured in Project

(

) ∑(

)

⁄ ) (6)

5.2 Project Emissions Project emissions from SS P1 Fuel Extraction and Processing, SS P4 Unit Operation and SS P5b Capture of

Vent Gases have all been quantified under their respective baseline equivalent SS.

5.3 Determination of Brake Specific Fuel Consumption The GHG emission reduction assertion is based upon the determination of the engine’s brake specific

fuel consumption at the operating load and RPM prior to the installation of the REMVue AFR controller,

and the reduction that occurs in brake specific fuel consumption (BSFC) at the same load and RPM after

the engine is retrofit. The use of BSFC to analyze engine fuel performance allows for the aggregation of

the AFR installations independent of engine type and size.

Appendix C in the protocol provides guidance on the calculation of BSFC. For a specified engine speed

and load:

)

) (7)

The Protocol outlines three methodologies that can be used for the majority of projects, based upon

data availability:

1) The Simple Method;

2) The Advanced Method;

3) The Flexibility Mechanism.

5.3.1 The Simple Method

For engines where the measured load changes <5% between pre and post audits and the project

condition, the simple method can be employed. This involves the determination of BSFC at three

different RPMs and one load as it is assumed that the fractional change in BSFC is dependent upon RPM

only. In this method, linear interpolation or least squares best fit of the audit data can be followed.

If the load noticeably changes >5%, then normalization of the pre-audit BSFC and recalculation of the

post-audit BSFC is required as outlined in the Protocol Appendix C-1.

5.3.2 The Advanced Method

Rarely is load expected to change <5% throughout the duration of the engine life. Therefore, in most

cases the advanced method is required. To apply this methodology, three BSFC values at three distinct

RPMs should be collected in the pre and post audit to obtain two full load maps of BSFC vs. Load before

and after the engine modification. Each three point curve theoretically could then be fit with a second



order polynomial trend line, used to calculate the BSFC at a specified load. For occasions where the

monthly average RPM differs significantly from the pre and post RPM set-points, linear interpolation or

least squares of best fit is recommended to determine the fractional change.

5.3.3 The Flexibility Mechanism

The first flexibility mechanism in Appendix A of the Protocol recognizes that many sites may not have

collected the pre and post audit data as outlined in the simple and advanced method due to operating

restrictions, lack of methodology awareness at time of install, or sites that experienced significant

changes in engine loading.

As stated in Appendix A of the Protocol, the flexibility mechanism “…is intended to provide an alternate

method to estimate fuel savings across a range of engine loads for specific classes of engines and types

of engine management systems once sufficient data is available to characterize the performance of these

systems in a generic way.” (Alberta Environment, October 2009).

The Protocol specifies five installations of the same EFM system on the same make and classification of

engine as a sufficient data set. Appendix C-1 outlines typical engine classifications, as seen in Table 7

below:

Table 7: Engine Classification5

The average fractional change in fuel

consumption from a minimum of five engines

of the same classification can be used in

project configurations where no metered

data is available.

Employing the flexibility mechanism, emissions from Source B4 Unit Operation are calculated by the

following equation:

∑ )

∑ )

∑ )

5 NA = Naturally Aspirated; TC = Turbo-charged

Medium = 4.5” to 6”bore size; Large = 6.5” to 10”bore size

Engine Type Example

Medium NA Stoichiometric Waukesha VGF Series CAT 3300, 3400 Series

Large NA Stoichiometric Waukesha VHP Series CAT 3500 Series

Medium TC Stoichiometric Waukesha VGF Series CAT 3300, 3400 Series

Large TC Stoichiometric Waukesha VHP GSI Series CAT 3500 Series

Large TC Lean Waukesha VHP-GL Series CAT 3500 LE



Where: AF = the standard deviation of Fractional Change in Fuel Consumption determined from the five

engine data sets, used to account for variability in site operating conditions and maintenance practices.

Blue Source Canada has developed a proprietary methodology to characterize the BSFC performance of

specific engine classes for the EFM system: REMVue AFR Controllers.

5.3.4 The Master Method

Often subprojects are faced only with historic data limitations but have robust data collection methods

for the project conditions. To address this specific case, Blue Source has followed the Protocol guidance

to develop an improved estimation model. The improved methodology recognizes the accuracy of using

metered project data as outlined in the Advanced Method, with provisions allowing for generic

characterization of engine performance described in the flexibility mechanism. By combining the two

approaches, Blue Source has the ability to create a Master Map, performing a type of mathematical

interpolation of BSFC based upon a much more robust data set of measured engine performance.

This methodology, referred to as the Master Method, collects all available pre and post installation

performance tests for a defined engine make and classification creating two BSFC maps for a full range

of engine load and speeds, before and after the engine retrofit. The details of this approach, and the

master engine performance maps themselves are considered proprietary and so are only included in the

confidential Appendix E, which is not publicly available. However, full details of both the maps and the

methodology will be made available to the third-party verifier.

For the first project reporting period, two Master Maps (one pre-condition, one post-condition) have

been created for the large, turbocharged engines manufactured by Waukesha and classified as the VHP

GSI series. This includes the following six engine models:

F2895 GSI

F3521 GSI

L7042 GSI

L5108 GSI

L5790 GSI

P9390 GSI

Note that the Waukesha VHP GSI Series 4 engines underwent a series of enhancements to the cylinder

head components and valves, air/fuel ratio control, cam tappet rollers, piston and cylinder liners.

Therefore Series 4 engines are deemed to operate significantly different than the original VHP GSI series

and have been excluded from the creation of this Map.

For future reporting periods, with the available pre and post audit data new Master Maps can be

created, capturing the performance of different engine makes and classifications.



5.3.5 Subproject Technology 1b: EcoPlug BSFC Determination

Subprojects that apply technology 1b EcoPlugs, are required to collect post-installation performance

results and use the data collected to either apply an adjustment factor to the post BSFC value obtained

from the Master Map, or to recalculate the post BSFC from the newly sourced data. Once sufficient data

has been collected (from a minimum of 5 engines of the same make and classification) it is feasible that

a new Master Map could be created to capture the post installation BSFC at specific load and RPM set-

points. Further explanation of the methodology employed will be required in the Offset Project Report

once this AFR add on is included in the aggregation.



6 MONITORING PLAN

6.1 Technology 1/1b: REMVue AFR/EcoPlug Table 8: EFM Data monitoring plan

Source/sink identifier or name:

B1 Fuel Extraction and Processing

B4 Unit Operation B4 Unit Operation

Data parameter: Volume of Natural Gas Combusted for B4

Total Fuel Consumption in Project Condition

Fractional Change in Fuel Consumption from Baseline to Project due to Implementation of an Air-Fuel Ratio Controller

Estimation, modeling, measurement or calculation approaches:

direct metering direct metering and monthly aggregation of values

Estimated

Data unit: e3m3 e3m3 %

Source/origin: Direct metering of fuel consumption of unit. Note that this value is obtained from B4 and is equal to the metered fuel consumption in the project condition multiplied by the Fractional Change in fuel consumption from the baseline to the project.

Calculated based on the continuous measurement of mass flow rate of fuel into the engine in the Project Condition. In project configurations where vent gases are captured and fed back into the engine for supplemental fuel, the total fuel consumption is the sum of the main fuel gas stream and the supplemental vent gas fuel, expressed as an energy equivalent quantity of the primary fuel (e.g. natural gas).

Fractional Change in fuel consumption from the baseline to the project condition is calculated based on measured BSFC values from pre and post installation, corrected for actual project loads and engine RPMs on a monthly basis. Fractional Change = (BSFC Pre-Audit – BSFC Post-Audit)/ BSFC Post-Audit. Refer to Appendix C for a step by step procedure to determine the fractional change in fuel consumption. Refer to Table C.3 in Appendix C (page 62) for a summary of monitoring requirements in the project




B1 Fuel Extraction and Processing

B4 Unit Operation B4 Unit Operation

condition.

Monitoring frequency:

Continuous Continuous BSFC Values determined from recorded load and RPM values at a minimum of monthly monitored readings.

Description and justification of monitoring method:

Most accurate method for determining parameter



Uncertainty: Stated Meter Manufacturer’s Tolerance

Stated Meter Manufacturer’s Tolerance n/a

6.2 Technology 2: REMVue Slipstream Table 9: VGC Data Monitoring Plan


B4 Unit Operation

B4 Unit Operation

B4 Unit Operation

B4 Unit Operation

B4 Unit Operation

B4 Unit Operation

B4 Unit Operation

Data parameter:

Total Quantity of Fuel Displaced Through Use of Vent Gases as Supplemental Fuel in Project

Mass of Fuel Gas Fed into the Engine from the Main Fuel Supply

Density of Fuel Gas

Mass of Vent as Consumed in the Engine as a Supplemental Fuel Source

Density of Vent Gas

Lower Heating Value of Vent Gas

Lower Heating Value of Fuel Gas

Estimation, modeling, measurement

Calculation Continuous Metering

Measurement

Measurement Measurement

3rd Party Measurement, or Calculation

3rd Party Measurement, or Calculation




B4 Unit Operation

B4 Unit Operation

B4 Unit Operation

B4 Unit Operation

B4 Unit Operation

B4 Unit Operation

B4 Unit Operation

or calculation approaches:

based upon gas composition

based upon gas composition

Data unit: e3m3 Kg/month Kg/m3 Kg/month Kg/m3 GJ/m3 GJ/m3

Source/origin: Calculated based on the energy content, composition and mass flow rate of vent gas input into the engine to determine the equivalent quantity of fuel displaced.

Quantity being Calculated. This quantity represents the incremental fuel savings from the use of a waste vent gas stream as a supplemental fuel (these fuel savings would be in addition to the fuel savings from the implementation of an air-fuel ratio controller).

Continuous measurement of the fuel flow rate on a mass basis for the primary fuel meter. Note that the primary fuel meter will be the only fuel meter for project configurations that do not capture vent gas.

Frequency of metering is highest level possible. For the purposes of this protocol, continuous monitoring means collecting one data point at least every fifteen minutes

Calculated based on the molar composition of the fuel gas at 15°C and 101.3kPa, the standard reference conditions used by the fuel gas

Continuous measurement of the vent gas flow rate into the unit on a mass basis in the project condition.

Measured by a third party gas analysis or calculated based on gas composition. See Appendix C-3 for further detail.

Monitoring frequency:

Continuous Continuous Annual Fuel Gas Sampling

Continuous metering and monthly aggregation of values

Annual Vent Gas Sampling

Annual or semi-annual vent gas sampling

Annual or semi-annual fuel gas sampling

Description and justification of monitoring











B4 Unit Operation

B4 Unit Operation

B4 Unit Operation

B4 Unit Operation

B4 Unit Operation

B4 Unit Operation

B4 Unit Operation

method:

Uncertainty: n/a Stated Meter Manufacturer’s Tolerance

Stated Lab Analysis’ Tolerance

Stated Meter Manufacturer’s Tolerance




Provide the details for any deviations for the protocol including the justification and rationale:

n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a

6.3 Contingent Data Monitoring For data where measurements are unavailable, the data monitoring will follow the contingent procedures as outlined in Appendix B of the

Protocol and pasted below for ease of reference:

Table 10: Contingent Data Monitoring and Collection for all sources

Project/ Baseline

SS Parameter Unit Measurement/Estimation Contingency Method Frequency Justification

B4 Unit Operation

Total Fuel Consumption in project Condition/Fuel Consumption

m3 Measurement Interpolation of previous and following measurements

Continuous metering and monthly average of values

Frequency of metering is highest level possible

P6 Flaring of Process Emissions

Volume of Fuel used to Supplement Flaring Of process Emissions

m3 Estimated Calculated based on flare design specifications (flare tip diameter and flare stack diameter), flow rate of gases flared, typical heat value of gas stream

Monthly Method represents reasonable diligence when more accurate method is unachievable. If metered data is unavailable project



Project/ Baseline


sent to flare and heat value of fuel used to supplement flaring. Fuel Gas usage is the sum of pilot gas, purge gas and makeup gas.

proponents should refer to the Fuel Gas Best Management Practices series of documents Module 4 Efficient Use of Fuel Gas for Flaring Operations for reference tables and formulas to estimate typical purge gas, pilot gas and makeup gas usage for flares.

Volume of Process Emissions Flared in Project / Volume Flared Gases

m3 Estimation Estimated based on facility operating records (upsets) and historical monthly flared volumes. If metered data and facility records are unavailable project proponents should use the highest monthly volume of gas flared in the past year as a conservative value.

Monthly Reconciliation

Method represents reasonable diligence when more accurate method is unachievable.

Volume of Each Hydrocarbon Contained in the Process Emissions Stream/ %CnHm

% Volume

Estimation Estimation of gas stream composition based on typical industry compositions at relevant upstream oil and gas facilities.

Annual Method represents reasonable diligence when more accurate method is unachievable.



Project/ Baseline


B6 Flaring of Process Emissions

Volume of Fuel Used to Supplement Flaring of Process Emissions / Vol. Flare Fuel

m3 Estimation For conservativeness, project proponents may assume that no fuel is required to supplement flaring.

Annual Represents a conservative approach to quantification of baseline emissions

Mass of Process Emissions Combusted in Unit in Project / Mass Captured Gases

kg Estimation Interpolation of previous and following measurements. Project proponents should provide records of unit operating hours to ensure that process emissions were being used as supplemental fuel.

Monthly Reconciliation

Method represents reasonable diligence when more accurate method is unachievable.

Density of Process Emissions in Project Condition / Density Captured Gases

Kg/m3 Estimation Estimation of gas stream composition based on typical industry compositions at relevant upstream oil and gas facilities.


% Volume of Each Hydrocarbon Contained in the Process

% Volume

Estimation Estimation of gas stream composition based on typical industry compositions at relevant upstream oil and gas




Project/ Baseline


Emissions Stream/ %CnHm

facilities.



7 DATA INFORMATION MANAGEMENT SYSTEM AND RECORDS The Information Management System (IMS) created for this aggregation is intended to direct and collect

GHG data monitoring activities for both the project and baseline data monitoring requirements. The

system outlined below will describe the robustness, transparency and automation that have been built

to reflect a reasonable level of assurance with respect to the following objectives outlined in Section 5.1

of the Technical Guidance for Offset Project Developers, version 4.0, February 2013:

Completeness

Accuracy

Validity

Restricted Access

7.1 Data Control Controls exist throughout the data management system, but are essential whenever there is a transfer or exchange of data or information. Examples of data controls used consistently throughout the aggregation include:

passwords on computers; read access requirements on files; Management review of reports.

7.2 Data Management Data management procedures will vary depending on the type and format of data received. Manually

sourced data will be scanned and electronically saved to an identified folder within the project

information file. Manual data will be checked for completeness, reasonableness and transcription errors

with any findings identified and discussed with the project participant.

Other data is sourced directly from project participants’ online SCADA systems. Information obtained

from these systems are often directly downloaded into an excel file and copied into the Blue Source

excel based quantification calculator and Map Modeller input files. Copies of the downloaded content

will be saved in a unique project folder under the date it was downloaded from the online system.

All data gathered for the project will be stored at Blue Source for a period of seven years after the end of

the project crediting period.

Figure 8 on the following page illustrates the data flow and origin from project participants and third

parties to Blue Source.



Figure 8: IMS Flow Chart

For subprojects with metering in place, a metering maintenance and calibration details table must be

included in the Offset Project Report (OPR). Suggested table format is below:



Table 11: Metering maintenance and calibration details suggested table layout

Project Specific Data

Meter ID Meter Model

Maintenance Schedule

Calibration Schedule

Accuracy Rating

Volume of vent gas captured

FT-160 Rosemount3051

S/N 1631264 Every 12 months

Every 12 months

+/-0.25%

7.3 Data Management and QA/QC at Blue Source Blue Source Canada holds itself to the highest professional and ethical standards. All staff have

experience in working on GHG projects and/or training in the use of ISO14064-2. Junior staff members

are mentored closely until their level of competence is deemed sufficient for them to work more

independently. This experience and training helps to ensure that errors and omissions are minimised

and that project documentation is compiled in accordance with the principles of relevance,

completeness, consistency, accuracy, transparency and conservativeness.

Blue Source Canada operates a rigorous internal QA/QC process that is built around the principle of

senior review (i.e. calculations and reports are checked by experienced staff members prior to being

released).The quantification calculator, for example, will be checked for:

Transcription errors/omissions

Correctly functioning links/formulas in spreadsheets

Correct and transparent referencing of data sources

Justification of assumptions

Use of, and compliance with, most up-to-date versions of protocols, technical guidance, etc.

In addition, the Offset Project Plan and Offset Project Report will also be senior-reviewed for errors,

omissions, clarity, etc.

Issues are recorded in Blue Source’s QA/QC checklist for the project (and, as necessary, embedded into

the reviewed version of the documents and/or calculator) and these will be corrected before these are

sent to the third-party verifier. Staff sign an “Attestation of Quality Assurance and Quality Control” to

document that the QA/QC process was followed. This QA/QC process is kept under constant review.

7.3.1 Back-up Procedures at Blue Source

Electronic data is backed up by Blue Source’s IT service provider, TheWebMarket.com. A copy of this

back-up procedure is provided as Appendix A.

7.3.2 Document Retention Policy at Blue Source

Blue Source operates a documentation retention policy, which all staff must abide by as a condition of

their employment. A copy of this document retention policy is provided as Appendix B.



9 STATEMENT OF SENIOR REVIEW This offset project plan was prepared by Kelly Parker, Carbon Services Project Analyst, Blue Source

Canada and senior reviewed by Graham Harris, Vice President Technical Services, Blue Source Canada.

Although care has been taken in preparing this document, it cannot be guaranteed to be free of errors

or omissions.

Prepared by: Senior reviewed by:

Kelly Parker Graham Harris 17/12/2013 20/12/2013



10 REFERENCES Alberta Environment. (2013). Technical Guidance for Offset Project Developers, Version 4.0. Edmonton:

Alberta Environment.

Alberta Environment. (October 2009). Quantification Protocol for Engine Fuel Management and Vent

Gas Capture, version 1.0. Edmonton: Alberta Environment.

CAPP. (2004). A National Inventory of GHG, Criteria Air Contaminant and Hydrogen Sulphide Emissions

by the Upstream Oil and Gas Industry Volume 1. CAPP.

CAPP. (2008, May 30). Energy Industry Shares Strategies for Efficiency and Reduced Emissions. Retrieved

October 09, 2013, from CAPP:

http://www.capp.ca/aboutUs/mediaCentre/NewsReleases/Pages/Energyindustrysharesstrategi

esforefficiencyandreducedemissions.aspx

CETAC WEST. (n.d.). Fuel Gas Best Management. Retrieved October 09, 2013, from CAPP:

http://www.capp.ca/GetDoc.aspx?DocId=137314

Environmental Protection Agency. (2009, 12 31). Ap 42, Fifth Edition, Volume I Chapter 3: Stationary

Internal Combustion Sources. Retrieved 11 01, 2013, from U.S Environmental Protection Agency:

http://www.epa.gov/ttnchie1/ap42/ch03/

GE-Energy. (n.d.). Waukesha VHP Engine SS. Retrieved 12 16, 2013, from GE Distributed Power:

https://www.ge-distributedpower.com/images/medias/image/641/_thumb2/vhp_engine_ss.jpg

Gibb, B., Terrel, K., & Zahner, F. (2005). Emissions and Efficiency Enhancements with REM AFR Systems.

PTAC.

Malm, H. (2013). White Paper: Chambered Ignition - The REMVUe EcoPlug. Spartan Controls.

Appendix A – IT Backup Procedure for Blue Source

Backup Procedure Prepared For: Blue Source

© TheWebMarket.com

W:\Current Clients\BlueSource\1_Documentation\14_Guides and Checklists\Backup Solution\Backup Procedure.docx

Last Updated By: Jan 8, 2013 by AG

Objective

To minimize interruptions to business by insuring that operation can be restored in case of

• Loss of any amount of information due to accidental or malicious deletion;

• Failure of one or more computers or components such as a hard disk drive; or

• A disaster resulting in loss of the entire infrastructure, or loss of access to it.

Backup Procedure

1. Backup Rotation

• There are 4 external drives in rotation – 2 x Weekly drives and 2 x Monthly

drives.

• 3 out of 4 drives are stored off site at any time

• Monthly drive is on site every first Monday of every month

2. Retention

• 2 weeks of continues data change, Email and Server system state is stored on

2 Weekly Drives

• Data can be restored as far as 2 months back from 2 Monthly drives

3. Backup Schedule

• Data backup

� Full backup is scheduled to run every week day at 8:00PM

• Image Backup (Entire server backup) – Disaster Recovery Backup

� Scheduled to run every week end at 5AM

Off site storage

• Drives are stored off site

Appendix B – Data Retention Policy at Blue Source

Last Revision: January 8, 2013

Document Retention Policy, version 1.3.

1. All documents relevant to Offset Projects will be kept, in at least

electronic format, and where possible, in hardcopy format, for

a. At least 10 years beyond the last year in which credits are created

(e.g. a project that creates credits between 2000-2008 will have

all records kept until at least 2018), or

b. As required by the Offset Project Program

whichever period is longer.

2. Hard copy documents will be kept in project folders in our Blue Source

head office location, which is currently Suite 700, 717 – 7th Av SW,

Calgary, AB, T2P 0Z3. All electronic documents will be saved to the

appropriate project folder on the Calgary Server (“S:\ drive”).

3. The S:\ drive will be backed up in accordance with Blue Source’s IT

Backup Procedure, which may change from time to time.

4. Blue Source’s preference is to keep all documents in electronic form,

wherever possible.

5. All employees will comply with this policy as a condition of their

employment.

Yvan Champagne

President, Blue Source Canada ULC

Appendix C – Risk Matrix

Pro

bab

ility

High Low Moderate Severe

Medium Low Moderate Moderate

Low Low Low Low

Low Medium High

Severity Probability

High – Event likely to happen within the next two to five years

Medium – Event likely to happen within the next five to ten years

Low – Event unlikely to happen within the lifetime of the project

Severity

High – Event would result in termination of Protocol or Project

Medium – Event would impact the number of subprojects included in the aggregation, but reductions

would still occur

Low – Event would not impact aggregation

Appendix D – Subproject List

Table 12: Subproject Tracking List – Project Type: EFM System Type: REMVue AFR

Project Participant Company Name

Legal Land Location Facility Unique Spartan

Identifier Waukesha VHP Series

Engine Model

Apache Canada Ltd 4-11-34-8W5 D-Battery (Planned Install 2Q 2013)

Ricinus Unit #3 5235 P9390GSI

4-22-34-8W5 D-Battery Ricinus 4-11 Unit #2 11771 P9390GSI

12-18-36-8W5 Field Ricinus12-18 Unit #1 12319 P9390GSI

10-29-67-10W6 South Chinook

Wapiti 13732 L7042GSI

06-08-65-09W6 South Chinook

Wapiti 13737 L7042GSI

13-05-39-08W4 Kessler Provost Unit #K200 13840 L7042GSI

LSD Confirmation Required WEST PEMBINA 14649 L5108GSI

03-20-34-04W5 South Caroline 09183-AA L7042GSI

03-20-34-04W5 South Caroline 09183-AB L7042GSI

01-11-35-06W5 North Caroline - North and South Units 9449-AA P9390GSI

01-11-35-06W5 North Caroline - North and South Units 9499-AB P9390GSI

Canadian Natural 09-28-14-11-W4M Alderson 09-28 15763 L7042GSI

LSD Confirmation Required Bellis 15705 F3521GSI

10-15-59-16-W4M Bellis 10-15 #3 15118 P9390GSI

11-17-97-06-W6M Chinchaga 11-17 C-200 20134 F3521GSI

01-24-96-05-W6M Chinchaga C-100 Progas 20135 L5108GSI

01-24-96-05-W6M Chinchaga C2000 or C2100 20133 P9390GSI

LSD Confirmation Required Crooked Lake 10-22 14673 L7042GSI

01-24-52-20-W5M Edson W.01-24 #1 24404 L5790GSI

01-24-52-20-W5M Edson W.01-24 #3 13638 L7042GSI

08-05-53-21-W5M Galloway 08-05 14976-AA F3521GSI

06-07-78-01-W5M Mistahae 06-07 26415 L7042GSI

LSD Confirmation Required Mitsue 13330 L7042GSI

12-30-72-04W5M Mitsue 17204 L7042GSI

14-29-38-22-W4M Nevis 14-29 14464-AA F3521GSI

LSD Confirmation Required Nipisi 14518 P9390GSI




Engine Model

LSD Confirmation Required Nipisi Operating Center 12516 P9390GSI

LSD Confirmation Required Slave Lake 13947 L7042GSI

LSD Confirmation Required Slave Lake Field Office 14909 F3521GSI

Centrica Energy Canada 12-01-016-10W4 Medicine Hat 11447 L7042GSI

13-33-051-08W5 Medicine Hat, Project 3 9018 L7042GSI

13-33-051-08W5 Medicine Hat-PROJECT 3 13690 L7042GSI

13-33-051-08W5 Medicine Hat, Project 3 28843 L7042GSI

15-22-040-03W5 Gilby 12307 P9390GSI

02-27-015-04W4 PROJECT 3A 15123 L7042GSI

09-10-018-03W4 PROJECT 4 15126 L7042GSI

15-22-040-03W5 GILBY FIELD OFFICE 15341 P9390GSI

15-22-040-03W5 GILBY FIELD OFFICE 15342 P9390GSI

Conoco Phillips Canada 10-09-Y045-08W5 Alder Flats PN18979 L7042GSI

10-09-045-08W5 Alder Flats PN18980 L7042GSI

01-15-047-08W5 Alder Flats 01-15 PN16680 L7042GSI

14-15-059-24W5 Berland Plant PN25690 L7042GSI

04-07-044-03W5 Buck Lake 04-07 PN20125 Model Confirmation

11-20-041-04W5 Gilby Gas Plant PN20124/28288 L7042GSI

11-26-049-11W5 Lodgepole 11-26 Comp Stn PN27779 L7042GSI

12-36-060-09W6 Lovett 12-36-060-9W6 PN20126/20502 Model Confirmation

08-11-031-21W4 Morrin Plant PN21188 L7042GSI



11-12-049-17W5 Peco 11-12 PN20127/15089 L7042GSI

11-27-047-15W5 Peco 11-27 PN20128/11992 F3521GSI

14-07-048-15W5 Peco 14-07 Compressor PN20121/24314 L7042GSI

12-01-049-16W5 Peco Gas Plant PN25489 L7042GSI

12-01-049-16W5 Peco Sweet Gas Plant PN10719 L5108GSI

06-09-046-08W5 Pembina Comp Stn 06-09 PN25561 L7042GSI

06-12-043-08W5 South Clearwater PN30843 L7042GSI

07-19-034-25W4 Three Hills 07-19 Field Booster PN21238 L7042GSI




Engine Model

11-18-066-10W6 Wapiti 11-18 PN25467 F3521GSI

04-23-066-08W6 Wapiti South Block Comp Stn C-330 PN20129/RM-01838-

AA P9390GSI

04-23-066-08W6 Wapiti South Block Comp Stn C-331 PN20130/RM-13213-

AA P9390GSI

Talisman Energy Inc. LSD Confirmation Required Pass Creek 11229 L7042GSI LSD Confirmation Required Tony Creek 11231 L7042GSI LSD Confirmation Required Saxon 11232 P9390GSI

03-29-062-20 W5 Bigstone 18303 P9390GSI

14-20-56-23W5 Wild River 27247 F3521GSI Table 13: Subproject Tracking List – Project Type: VGC System Type: REMVue SlipStream

Project Participant

Company Name Legal Land Location Facility

Unique Spartan Identifier

Engine Make Engine Model

Centrica Energy Canada

09-08-016-04W4 Medicine Hat ID Confirmation Waukesha 3524 GSI


09-20-016-04W4 Medicine Hat RM-15902-AB Waukesha 3524 GSI




13-33-051-08W5 Medicine Hat, Project 3

ID Confirmation Waukesha 7042 GSI

13-33-051-08W5 Medicine Hat, Project 3

ID Confirmation Waukesha 7042 GSI LSD Confirmation Required Ferrier ID Confirmation White Superior 8GTL-825 LSD Confirmation Required Gilby ID Confirmation Waukesha 9390 GSI LSD Confirmation Required Gilby Field Office ID Confirmation Waukesha 9390 GSI LSD Confirmation Required Gilby Field Office ID Confirmation Waukesha 9390 GSI LSD Confirmation Required Ferrier ID Confirmation White Superior 8GTL-825 LSD Confirmation Required Ferrier ID Confirmation White Superior 8GTL-825

Appendix E – Confidential Methodology: The Master Map Made available to Third- Party Verifiers

project #1090-6410

Documents